Opinion
Editor’s Note: There is no official confirmation that what we are seeing is an actual silencer.
The shocking and tragic shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in midtown Manhattan with what appears to be a handgun with a silencer [unconfirmed] is making headlines.
While law enforcement works tirelessly to apprehend the perpetrator, it’s likely only a matter of time before anti-gun organizations and media outlets seize this incident to call for new bans—this time, on firearm suppressors.
Suppressors, also known as silencers, are already tightly regulated under the National Firearms Act (NFA), requiring extensive background checks, federal approval, and steep tax payments before purchase. Despite these regulations, anti-gun politicians and groups like Everytown for Gun Safety are likely to use this tragedy to push legislation like the HEAR Act, which seeks to ban suppressors entirely.
What Do Suppressors Actually Do?
Contrary to Hollywood’s portrayal, suppressors don’t make guns “whisper quiet.” A suppressor reduces the noise of a gunshot by about 20–35 decibels—similar to the protection provided by earmuffs or earplugs. This is an important distinction because their primary use is for hearing protection and safer shooting experiences, especially for hunters, sports shooters, and law-abiding gun owners.
Suppressors can also mitigate recoil and muzzle flinch, helping shooters improve accuracy and ensure ethical, well-placed shots while hunting. Far from being tools for criminals, they’re vital safety devices in many recreational and professional shooting environments.
Debunking Common Claims
The most common argument against suppressors is that they allow shooters to commit crimes undetected. However, there’s little evidence to support this claim:
- Suppressors Aren’t Silent: Even with a suppressor, most firearms are still as loud as a jackhammer. In the Virginia Beach shooting cited by suppressor opponents, survivors described the sound as similar to a nail gun—not silent by any stretch.
- Criminals Rarely Use Suppressors: According to data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), registered suppressors are rarely used in crimes. Criminals prefer unregulated, easily concealed weapons—not suppressors that leave a paper trail.
- Public Safety Devices: Suppressors actually help reduce noise complaints near shooting ranges and hunting grounds, promoting better relationships between firearm enthusiasts and their communities.
The Real Target: Responsible Gun Owners
Suppressor bans, like many gun control proposals, disproportionately affect law-abiding citizens while doing little to curb crime. The misnamed HEAR Act, championed by figures like convicted Felon Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), proposes to ban these devices outright, framing them as tools for mass shooters.
But the reality is different: suppressors are safety devices with legitimate, lawful applications.
For example, the Virginia Beach shooting and other incidents are tragic but rare cases. Most suppressor owners use them for legal purposes, such as reducing hearing damage or improving shooting accuracy. Blanket bans on suppressors would punish millions of responsible gun owners for the actions of a few criminals—who likely bypass the law anyway.
Why We Need Rational Debate
Before jumping on the bandwagon of trending bans, it’s essential to ask: will this legislation actually prevent crime, or is it just another symbolic attack on the Second Amendment? Suppressors are already tightly regulated, and criminals who intend harm won’t be deterred by additional restrictions. Banning suppressors will only harm the millions of Americans who responsibly own and use these tools.
Let’s not allow this tragedy to become a scapegoat for misguided policy proposals. Instead, focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing real solutions to violent crime. It’s time to stop punishing law-abiding citizens for the actions of criminals.
Live Inventory Price Checker
|
Elite Ifm7 Suppressor 7.62 Direct Thread - Elite Ifm7 Suppressor 7.62 Quick Detach Brown | Brownells.com | $ 1899.99 $ 1429.00 |
|
|
Rugged Razor 762 Rifle Suppressor, .30 Cal Quick Detach Suppressor, Black | Bereli | $ 699.00 |
|
|
|
Rugged Suppressors RX Blast Diverter/Brake for Rugged Suppressors - RX001 | Palmetto State Armory | $ 227.99 $ 204.99 |
|
|
Rugged Suppressor OP001 Suppressor Piston .578x28 Copper 17-4 Stainless Steel | Shooters Choice | $ 59.99 |
|
About Tred Law
Tred Law is your everyday patriot with a deep love for this country and a no-compromise approach to the Second Amendment. He does not write articles for Ammoland every week, but when he does write, it is usually about liberals Fing with his right to keep and bear arms.
….But, but, but, it’s illegal to carry a firearm in NYC or even own a suppressor anywhere in NY state. This whole story must be misinformation…..
Yet another example of where infringements do not reduce crime. Disarming the law abiding public actually increases crime, as has been demonstrated time and time again in the cesspools that are today’s Democrat-run cities.
Time for these blue States to reinstate the death penalty and rid society of evil people who commit evil acts of violence against unsuspecting people and murder them . It’s called consequences for their evil actions and it saves tax payer money in the end .
I thought the lib green media would be happy. He didn’t noise pollute and he escaped on a e-bike so…
What keeps me from owning a suppressor is the price. Is the manufacturing process so complex and the materials to make them so expensive that it warrants a price tag of $800 to $1200? Plus there is the $200 permission fee to own one.
So, there’s so much talk about removing suppressors from the NFA these days that SOMEBODY just HAD to use one in a very public murder…
Someone needs to take a deep dive into those Brady Center accounts…
What are the chances this was a legally purchased can on a legally purchased pistol, being fired by the original legal owner, who brought them into the people’s republic of NY?
My guess is zilch point squat on the richter scale.
“it’s essential to ask: will this legislation actually prevent crime,” The problem is that politicians think differently. To them the question is, will this help me get re-elected. While I am sure some actually care, my feeling is that Most could care less about people being gunned down in the street. As we see over and over, they themselves are often gun owners. Legislation is not about protecting the public, but about protecting the politicians time in office. Write a law that protects our food supply, and you get no media attention. Write a law that says ban those scary… Read more »
I dunno; my money is on a disposessed stockholder.
Big time CEO gets shot in NYC… I wonder random, or targeted? Who did he piss off…
Interesting timing of the video being released just after that ENT group comes out with that statement on suppressors being a health device…
Read elsewhere that gun used was B&T-something, which is an uncommon manual action pistol with a rather long barrel. They stated that there was no suppressor but that the long barrel makes the gun nearly silent (yeah right!). Only way that is quite is if it shoots some custom, extremely low power load. In any case I’m not sure if this works for us or not… Helps that we can use this to combat efforts to exploit the tragedy to attack our rights. Hurts in that they may start believing long-barrels BAD. Helps in that we can point out absurdity… Read more »