The Truth About silencers/Suppressors: Debunking the Myths of “Spy Weapons”

Phoenix, AZ—Here in Arizona, where gun laws are few and liberty thrives, firearms enthusiasts have the rare privilege of legally owning suppressors. These misunderstood devices, often sensationalized as “silencers,” have a reputation steeped in Hollywood drama and misconceptions. But what’s the real story behind these so-called “spy weapons”? Let’s pull back the curtain.

The Birth of a Legend

The suppressor, commonly referred to as a silencer, was the brainchild of Hiram Percy Maxim, a brilliant inventor and son of the legendary machine gun designer Hiram Stevens Maxim. In 1909, he patented the “Maxim Silencer,” marketing it as a revolutionary tool to reduce firearm noise. But Maxim wasn’t just thinking about guns—he also adapted his sound-dampening principles to create automobile mufflers, another enduring invention.

While clever, Maxim’s marketing stretched the truth. His device didn’t “silence” firearms; it merely dampened the explosive roar. Until 1934, suppressors were widely available and even sold at local hardware stores. Then came the National Firearms Act, which slapped a $200 tax on them—a staggering sum at the time. The once-accessible tool became a tightly controlled curiosity.

Myth vs. Reality

Suppressors don’t render firearms whisper-quiet. That Hollywood trope? Pure fantasy. The crack of a supersonic bullet—traveling faster than the speed of sound (1,125 feet per second)—cannot be silenced. What suppressors can do is reduce the decibel level of a gunshot, making it less ear-shattering. They’re most effective with subsonic ammunition, which travels slower and avoids that supersonic “crack.”

Another often-overlooked benefit is reduced recoil. With less kick, shooters gain better accuracy and control. Yet, for decades, suppressors weren’t particularly popular. They were tools for hunters and recreational shooters—not the shadowy assassins Hollywood would have you believe.

Hollywood’s Love Affair with Suppressors

By the mid-20th century, the silver screen had discovered suppressors. No spy thriller or action flick was complete without a sleek silencer, hissing like a whisper into the void. Foley artists exaggerated their capabilities, making them seem like magical noise-canceling devices that left no trace of their user.

Even revolvers—a firearm that mechanically exposes the gap between the cylinder and barrel—were portrayed as “silencer-ready.” In reality? Suppressors are useless on most revolvers. But Hollywood never let facts get in the way of a good story.

The Real Purpose: Hearing Protection

Beyond the myths and cinematic flair, suppressors serve a practical purpose: protecting hearing. Gunfire produces sounds loud enough to cause instant, permanent hearing damage. Suppressors reduce this risk, making shooting safer for everyone involved.

Consider this: The Department of Veterans Affairs issues more hearing aids than any other organization in the world. Why? Because generations of soldiers were exposed to deafening gunfire without adequate hearing protection. The military didn’t even issue earplugs until 1969, and even those were often ineffective. Suppressors could have prevented untold cases of hearing loss, but restrictive laws and misconceptions kept them out of reach.

Forbidden Fruit

Today, suppressors carry an air of forbidden allure. Their scarcity fuels their desirability. The more something is restricted, the more people want it. But let’s be clear: suppressors are not tools of stealthy assassins; they are safety devices—ones that reduce noise pollution, protect hearing, and improve shooting accuracy.

The real danger lies in letting Hollywood fantasies and outdated laws cloud our judgment. It’s time to separate fact from fiction and recognize suppressors for what they truly are: practical tools, not “spy weapons.”

One more thing to say about suppressors.   Today’s technology allows them to be manufactured with simple 3-D printers.  That means you can make your own effective suppressors and not rely on third-party manufacturers.  It will make things much more difficult for government to regulate.    Yes, the forbidden fruit can be in your own hands.