In a massive win for gun owners, the U.S. House of Representatives passed President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill—which includes the complete removal of suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA).
If enacted, this bill would strip away the $200 tax, lengthy application process, and intrusive registry currently required to own a suppressor. Suppressors would be regulated under the Gun Control Act like standard firearms—not as NFA-regulated items.
According to NRA-ILA, the bill puts suppressors back where they belong: in the hands of responsible gun owners without the red tape.
Naturally, the anti-gun crowd didn’t take it well.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the suppressor deregulation “beyond comprehension.” That’s right—she’s baffled that lawmakers would want to make it easier for Americans to protect their hearing while exercising a constitutional right.
SEE ALSO: The Rise of Autonomous Weapons May End Private Gun Ownership
But Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) took the prize for the week’s most out-of-touch take. During a House Rules Committee meeting, Dean melted down over the number of suppressors sold annually—she calculated it to be 700,000 per year—and openly complained about how many Americans are enjoying their Second Amendment rights.
Even worse, Dean proposed raising the tax to $400 to choke off sales. “If we tripled it, you might actually discourage some sales of silencers,” she said. “Wouldn’t that be a good thing for us to be doing in this committee?”
So there it is in plain English: anti-gunners aren’t interested in safety, they’re interested in control. If they can’t outright ban something, they’ll tax it into oblivion.
Prohibition is the endgame, as NRA-ILA noted—and if this bill passes the Senate and becomes law, it’ll be a hard blow to that agenda.
Gun owners should celebrate this moment—but also stay sharp. The fight’s not over yet.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Available on GunsAmerica Now
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
IHollywood is the main reason people are against “silencers”. They see the “pfftt” sound that a silenced 9mm has, or an AR. Gun people know that’s false! To get a really silent gun you have to use small caliber subsonic ammo. The Beretta .22LR with subsonic and a silencer would probably do it — but you need to place that bullet carefully and close. A REASONABLE ruling might be that a suppressor not be able to reduce the sound under a certain decible rating. In other words it can REDUCE the sound to a level not destructive to hearing but not “silent” — you know, what they actually do now. But if that was required it would make the unknowing masses happy.
What use are suppressors in states that ban everything?
And this is WHY we have a national debt so high ! We should triple it to $400, from the $200 that is costs now … Simple math escapes her it seems…
To adjust for Constitutionality, the NFA should never have existed in the first place.
Unsurprisingly out of touch legislator from the same pile moving us towards a wheelbarrow of fiat currency to buy a loaf of bread.
Idea from worthless politician: “Wouldn’t it just be great if everyone had oppressive taxes for constitutionally protected arms so more people would suffer permanent hearing loss?”
Do people actually give a shit what that dried up prune Nancy Pelosi thinks anymore? Even the other ‘demoncrats’ have ostracized her. She had power at one time, now not so much. There are quite a few old farts from the Peoples Republic Of Kalifornistan that need to retire.
Silencers should have never been classified as NFA items to begin with.
From what i have read, they wanted pistols to be included in the NFA as well, but were warned that it would be deemed unconstitutional and kill the law when it was challenged !
To adjust for inflation since the NFA of 1934
the $200 “tax” would be $4,800 today.
There should be a tax on anti gunners.
so how would that tax work for the criminal element, would you tack that on after they shoot/kill someone?
Call it a pile-on charge, where they have to pay the taxes and fees after the fact.