To our readers: Your generosity and commitment have made it possible to offer The Patriot Post without a subscription fee to military personnel, students and those with limited means — for over 23 years! Please support The Patriot Fund’s 2019 Year-End Campaign today.
Second Amendment

The SCOTUS Suppressor Decision

The firearm accessories are not "silencers" as the Leftmedia insist on reporting.

Nate Jackson · Jun. 11, 2019

The Supreme Court declined to take up an interesting gun case on Monday, and the Leftmedia, as usual, is peddling fake news about it.

More on that in a minute. But first, this was not exactly the best case for any gun-rights proponent to push to the level of the Supreme Court. National Review reports the details: “The appeal came from Shane Cox, who owns a military-surplus store in Kansas, and Jeremy Kettler, who purchased a gun suppressor from him. The men were convicted under the [1934] National Firearms Act of failing to register the device but appealed the decision, saying the law infringes on their Second Amendment rights. The appeals court then ruled that a suppressor is not a ‘bearable’ weapon protected under the Second Amendment.”

However, the specifics are a bit murkier: “Kettler said he bought the suppressor to avoid further harm to his hearing, which was damaged while he served in the military. He said Cox had led him to believe that suppressors made and sold in the same state were not required to be registered.”

Now, we’d be the first to agree with Justice Clarence Thomas, who has in recent years complained that SCOTUS has ignored Second Amendment jurisprudence to the point of making it a second-class right. But breaking the law and then demanding it be overturned by the courts is not the strongest approach. Moreover, this is about accessories, not the firearms themselves, which makes it less than an airtight case. (To be clear, we absolutely oppose any ban on suppressors.)

The better and more fundamental case SCOTUS did agree to hear is one challenging a New York City law governing transport of firearms outside the home, so stay tuned.

Now, back to the media misinformation. Leftmedia outlets (and some conservative ones that should know better) insist on referring to suppressors as “silencers.” While these devices do attach to a gun barrel and slightly muffle the sound of a shot, they are a far cry from the fantasy fiction in Hollywood movies. You cannot attach a “silencer” to a gun and shoot another person in the next room without anyone hearing it. But by reminding people that the murderer in Virginia Beach last month used a firearm with a suppressor, the Leftmedia lead the ignorant to think a gun with a suppressor is somehow more deadly. That’s a lie.

It’s akin to the mendacious misnaming of semiautomatic rifles as “assault weapons.” Beware the Left’s manipulation of language.

On a final note, Virginia Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam wiped off his black face long enough to propose a ban on suppressors and “high-capacity” magazines (another leftist misnomer) after the Virginia Beach attack. And even President Donald Trump said last week that he will “seriously look at” a ban on “silencers” (his word) because “I don’t like them at all.” Maybe he should talk to his son, Don Jr., an advocate of the Hearing Protection Act to ease restrictions on suppressors.

Click here to show comments

It's Right. It's Free.