In a closely contested 215-214 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a federal budget package that includes a significant Second Amendment-related provision: the removal of suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA).
This legislative development marks what some gun rights advocates are calling the most substantial pro-Second Amendment advancement in recent years.
The budget bill’s inclusion of suppressor deregulation is viewed by supporters as a key step toward passing the Hearing Protection Act, a long-advocated piece of legislation that would treat suppressors like standard firearms rather than heavily regulated accessories.
While the measure does not include every proposal Second Amendment supporters hoped for—specifically, the Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today (SHORT) Act which was not part of the final House package—it represents progress in a legislative landscape that has seen numerous firearm restrictions proposed and enacted over the years.
The delisting of suppressors from the NFA, if signed into law, would remove the current federal requirements that suppressor purchasers go through a months-long application process, pay a $200 tax stamp and submit fingerprints and photos to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Suppressors, also referred to as silencers, have been regulated under the NFA since 1934.
Proponents argue that suppressors do not make firearms “silent,” as often depicted in popular media. Instead, they reduce the noise of gunfire to safer levels for the shooter and those nearby.
Advocates note that suppressors are particularly helpful in protecting hearing, especially when shooting outdoors or during prolonged training exercises.
Military and law enforcement agencies have already recognized these benefits.
Bearing Arms (BR) reported that U.S. troops are receiving suppressors as part of the rollout of the new XM7 rifle, and the ATF recently acquired suppressors for its agents, citing concerns over agent safety and hearing protection.
Supporters of deregulation say these developments further justify civilian access to the same technology.
Opponents of the measure, including some gun control advocates, argue that individuals can use earplugs or earmuffs instead.
Critics of that position, however, point out that the same argument was rejected by government agencies when deciding to equip their personnel with suppressors, despite cheaper alternatives being available.
The legislative path forward remains uncertain.
The Senate is expected to present a greater challenge for the inclusion of suppressor deregulation in the final version of the budget bill, per BR.
Advocates like BR are urging gun owners and Second Amendment supporters to immediately contact their senators to express support for the Hearing Protection Act and the inclusion of suppressor delisting in the final reconciled bill.
If suppressor delisting survives Senate negotiations and is signed into law, it would mark a significant shift in federal firearms policy.
While the SHORT Act’s absence is a setback for some, supporters like BR are emphasizing the importance of incremental victories.
The act, which aims to remove short-barreled rifles from the NFA’s purview, remains a legislative goal, but one that may require separate or future action.
