Why Gun Suppressors Are Good

Why Gun Suppressors Are Good
DoD Photo.
DoD Photo.
DoD Photo.

Suppressed can be a tricky word by its definition and in most uses connotates something that is a negative, such as “the team of lawyers suppressed the evidence” or “the government suppressed the people’s rights.” But I am here to tell you that suppression, provided by gun suppressors, is a very good thing.

I recently enjoyed the opportunity to host a group of friends, mostly women, all of whom either had little experience with firearms or were all-out first time shooters. To help with the instruction and join in on the fun was Oceana Pawn & Gun gunsmith, Kurt Derwort, a former Naval armorer who worked out of Dam Neck in Virginia Beach, Va.

To get the new shooters more comfortable with guns in general and ease them into the experience, after a safety briefing, Kurt pulled out a Ruger .22 with an integrally suppressed barrel. He then guided the newest shooter in the group in how to shoot a gun that reduced the already fairly quiet rimfire to all of the noise of a pellet gun. Not distracted by a loud bang or any type of recoil, she chewed the target up.

Before the afternoon was over, Kurt pulled out a suppressed .223, which tricked out with a bipod, suppressor and variable magnification optic, looks like a pit bull, but as the group of shooters quickly realized, shoots with the gentleness of a golden retriever. Without a doubt, the suppressed guns were the highlight of the day, and for good reason.

Not only did they make the guns less intimidating to the less experienced shooters, but they made shooting in a group much more enjoyable. Hearing protection wasn’t as critical, people could stand in the background and still carry on conversations, Kurt could deliver instruction much more easily, and the neighbors down the street probably appreciated the reduced sound as well.

In Europe, it’s considered impolite to shoot a gun without a suppressor. America would do well to follow their example.

What are your thoughts? Log in and leave a comment below.


Next Step: Get your FREE Printable Target Pack

Enhance your shooting precision with our 62 MOA Targets, perfect for rifles and handguns. Crafted in collaboration with Storm Tactical for accuracy and versatility.

Subscribe to the Gun Digest email newsletter and get your downloadable target pack sent straight to your inbox. Stay updated with the latest firearms info in the industry.


  1. Here In Idaho the state passed a law 3 years ago that supersedes federal law requiring you to pay the $200 tax and register your can/suppressor.
    It says that the unit has to be MADE IN IDAHO by an Idaho resident and NOT taken across any state border, if you do cross the border then you are under federal law and will go to prison if caught.
    Silencers should be legal in all states , like guns they are not dangerous unless in the hands of a criminal, the silencer in itself is not dangerous in any way shape or form–it only muffles the sound.
    I guess the Democrat controlled states on East and West coasts and a few in the middle would argue that they are dangerous and probably say you could BEAT someone with one but just like all their other anti-gun rhetoric is just plain stupid.
    The last line of your article about Europe is redundant–we already have a part time president/golfer and liar-in- chief that wants to turn the U.S. into a combination of Europe, china and muslimland.
    if those places are so great why doesn’t he resign and move there maybe we could salvage what’s left of our once great country before he finishes destroying it.
    Back to cans. If you own one in another state by fed law you can NOT let anyone else shoot the weapon it is on–the can is only registered to YOU–period.
    There is a way around that and its called a GUN TRUST and the can must be registered to the TRUST and since the trust is not a person you can put anyone into that trust and they can use the can/suppressor.
    It just a matter of having an attorney fill out a trust and paying him his fee and there you go.

    • Just to clarify something that you wrote. You CAN let other people shoot the weapon that the can is on. You physically have to be there. That is all. Plus I don’t know if it is how you worded it or not but the weapon is not registered, just the can. Hell, you can put the can on any other person’s weapon that you want, just as long as you are there. The trust comes in handy if you and any other family member wants to shoot it without the named person being there..

  2. We all put or own values on different things, but nobody here seems to have experienced or seriously considered shooting at threats in their own homes, within any close walls elsewhere or while trapped inside their cars. That puts the proper value on the use of supperessors (they’re not “silencers”) – for those who appreciate functional ear-drums. While having a properly muted gun immediately accessible in our cars presents some problems, however, there should be no excuse not to have a suppressor on your home-defense gun(s) because you’ll need your best hearing before, during and after you fire, making any sound-deadening device (ear-muffs or plugs) more of a hinderance than help. Has your legislator explained to you the reason a BATF&E tax-stamp should be needed at all for a device that protects your health – in several ways, or why it should be $200.00 rather than the $5.00 charged for a pistol gripped, short-barreled, pump- shotgun (Serbu for one) they classify as “Any Other Weapon”?

  3. Hmmm, am I wrong, but doesn’t a “suppressor/silencer” require a fed permit to own? I would like one for my .308, but don’t have any intentions in applying for a permit to own one.

    • Well, in a word, No. When you “apply” to purchase a suppressor a US$200 “tax stamp” is required before you take possession of the device. It is not a “permit” it is a “tax”.

  4. And this final thought:
    Neophyte shooters, be they female or male, if serious about shooting for personal protection, must “graduate” to unsuppressed shooting. But, perhaps you said as much in the remainder of your article.
    And this really final thought:
    I’ve been trained extensively, and still train, toward “target suppression.”

  5. Any suggestions that we become “more like Europe are simply” incoherent.
    Sorry again Doug, but that last line should simply be retracted.

  6. About that last line of your article:
    Uh, in Europe, isn’t it considered impolite to shoot a gun, period?
    Sorry Doug, but the last thing I want is the gun grabbers requiring me to suppress my guns.
    I would consider that to be suppression of my 2A rights! (Pun intended for emphasis, not humor.)


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.