Suppressors have a chance...

[SupressYourself]

Guys, we've never been this close to getting suppressors removed from the NFA. It passed the House and is on to the Senate.

​

If this is passed, all the government BS around suppressor acquisition and ownership is gone. They'll likely become a lot cheaper too.

Please contact your senators to make sure they understand how important this is to the people of ND.

Hoven: https://www.hoeven.senate.gov/contact/email-the-senator/form

Cramer: https://www.cramer.senate.gov/contact/contact-kevin

 

[riverview]

ive always wondered why they were a special permit option. I have always wanted on but didnt want to the paperwork

 

[Allen]

It would appear silencers are about to get cheaper and far more common!




Republicans Sneak Terrifying Gun Law Change Into Trump’s Budget Bill
Edith Olmsted
Thu, May 22, 2025 at 9:37 AM CDT2 min read


1.3k

Republicans narrowly passed Donald Trump’s sweeping budget reconciliation bill through the House Wednesday night, including a last-minute provision that would not require gun owners to register the purchase of silencers.

Georgia Representative Andrew Clyde had already ensured the elimination of a $200 transfer tax on gun silencers. But during negotiations Wednesday, he was able to add another provision altogether removing silencers from the regulatory purview of the National Firearms Act, which imposes taxes on the manufacture, distribution, and import of weapons, according to Politico.

The last-minute addition would strike another $200 tax on the manufacture of gun silencers. But by removing silencers from the purview of the National Firearms Act, lawmakers said that the change also had eliminated the NFA’s registration requirement with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives.

Advertisement

“The question I have is, this was not in the bill that we were marking up. So, whose vote was bought with this provision that silencers will no longer need to be registered with the ATF or subject to background check purchasers?” asked Colorado Representative Joe Neguse on the House floor Wednesday night.

“What member was on the fence about this bill, and then went to Republican leadership and said, ‘I know you’re eliminating the tax on silencers but if you can just eliminate all regulation on silencers, I will vote for this bill?’”

Georgia Representative Austin Scott claimed that silencers’ exception from ATF registry did not mean that purchasers would not be subject to background checks. Scott, who argued in support of the provision, seemed confused about what it was actually about. He said it was about suppressors, rather than silencers—but that was incorrect.

When a person attempts to buy a firearm, they must complete an ATF form, and the seller then relays information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation website. The NICS staff then performs a check to see whether the buyer has a criminal record or is in any way ineligible to purchase the firearm.

Advertisement

If the purchaser is not required to fill out a form with the ATF to purchase a silencer, it’s not clear how a background check would still be completed.

“Quite frankly, what is in the reconciliation bill does more to support assassins than it does American families,” said Massachusetts Representative Jim McGovern.

There was some laughter in the hall.

“Yeah, well you know what? Talk to law enforcement, talk to people who have been victims of gun violence,” McGovern continued. “I know you think it’s funny, but I don’t.”

 

[Kurtr]

That guy is a moron...supporting assassins

 

[Allen]

That guy is a moron...supporting assassins

Yeah, one kind of needs to ignore that aspect of the article. The point is simply that silencers/suppressors have just had a lot of red tape eliminated.

 

[Obi-Wan]

People need to keep this on the hush so anti gun nuts don't get wind of it and try to take it out of the senate bill

 

[Fester]

Guys, we've never been this close to getting suppressors removed from the NFA. It passed the House and is on to the Senate.

​

If this is passed, all the government BS around suppressor acquisition and ownership is gone. They'll likely become a lot cheaper too.

Please contact your senators to make sure they understand how important this is to the people of ND.

Hoven: https://www.hoeven.senate.gov/contact/email-the-senator/form

Cramer: https://www.cramer.senate.gov/contact/contact-kevin

These stooges could give a shit less what we say...now if you have a bag full of cash that could be donated to their re election they may listen...

 

[SupressYourself]

That guy is a moron...supporting assassins

Yeah, it's that kind of idiocy that has kept suppressors on the NFA for decades.
That, and morons in the media that print retardation like in the article above:

"Scott, who argued in support of the provision, seemed confused about what it was actually about. He said it was about suppressors, rather than silencers—but that was incorrect."

No, you're confused, you f-ing dufus. Those are two words for the same thing. We prefer to use the term "suppressor" because it's more accurate, and we're trying to change the false narrative that these devices somehow make a gun "silent", so that pearl-clutching shitbags like you might finally get a clue.

 

[SDMF]

Until it’s passed and signed, here’s how I feel about the de-listing of suppressors:

 

[SDMF]

When suppressors were included in the NFA of 1934, the $200 tax stamp was effectively a de-facto ban. The general public couldn't afford the $200 fee. Inflation adjusted, the $200 Tax Stamp from 1934 equals about $4800 today. Or, in today's dollars, the $200 fee adjusted for 1934, would've been $8.35, about a week's pay in those days as average income was ~$1400/yr.

I'm all for ditching the pseudo-ban, tax stamp, and hoops.

 

[Kentucky Windage]

I wish I had a picture of my facial expression while I was being escorted out of scheels with the first suppressor I bought through them. Those things sure are dangerous……………