> Suppressors are regulated heavily under the NFA. You have to receive explicit permission from the Feds for each one.
You make it sound far worse than it actually is. But everybody legally able to own a firearm, is also legally able to own any NFA item (if they are legal in their state of residence).
All you have to do is pay $200, submit your fingerprints, file an application and wait. You don't even need to provide them with a reason. And as long as the application is in order, and you're legally able to possess a firearm, there's no reason at all to refuse the application.
Also, Texas no longer cares about the NFA as far as suppressors are concerned.
It doesn't have anything to do with liking things. Blanket rules that apply to incompatible scenarios are just dumb, and not reasonable in any form.
The endless 'defence' for bad rules makes no sense either, it's okay to say "it isn't perfect and when we find a better way we might adopt it". Rules are just constructs that can be changed.
Tyrannical states tend to remove weapons and armor from the population early in their campaign. Some countries realized this in their founding and made sure that would be rather difficult to enforce.
Yet somehow in actual tyrannical states it doesn't solve anything, and in states where there are more guns than population it mostly just costs the lives of childen and citizens who were going about their day.
Life also doesn't revolve around states and guns, and countries that do seem to have a partial culture revolving around just that are generally very young countries that seem to be stuck in a vicious circle.
Instead of blindly deferring reality to an amendment to a man-made rule you could also engage in proactive betterment of society.
The US, like it or not, has specific carve out allowances for firearm ownership by the mass civilian population. You may not find it reasonable.