Trump Administration Fixes Policy Concerning Suppressors

by
posted on August 13, 2020
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
aac-lifestyle_mg_0241.jpg

Last month, the Trump Administration fixed a U.S. Department of State policy on suppressors that had kept American suppressor makers out of the international market for these hearing-safety devices.

According to the NRA-ILA: “The Department of State has rescinded its April 18, 2002, firearms sound suppressor policy. This policy … restricted their export to only official end users such as government or military entities…. The old policy completely excluded American suppressor manufacturers from competing in foreign markets where firearm suppressors are perfectly legal. It was also based on the misguided idea that suppressors completely silence firearms and that similar suppressor technology isn’t already available in the rest of the world.”

NRA-ILA also said, “This policy reversal is long overdue and just one more step the Trump administration has taken to help law-abiding gun owners and American manufacturers.” 

“I see this as pro-business and pro-America,” said Brandon Maddox, MBA and the founder of Silencer Central. “Now, the reality is that U.S. silencer makers are so highly regulated, it may be difficult for them to price competitively in the international marketplace; however, this change might increase manufacturing and sales volumes and reduce overall costs, which manufacturers could pass on to American consumers.”

Never a group to pass up a chance to mis-represent anything to do with the Second Amendment, the gun-control group Brady: United Against Gun Violence used the change in policy as part of its recent fund-raising efforts. As an article in Townhall noted, a Brady fund-raising email claimed that this Trump administration change could lead to the deaths of U.S. troop stationed overseas: “The harm is clear: This [suppressor] repeal will increase the risk that U.S. service members will be shot or killed with American-made guns and accessories. This repeal is immoral. It’s unpatriotic. It’s lethal.”

“It’s also complete BS,” wrote Mark Oliva, director of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. “Brady should learn to conduct a basic fact check. Even checking Wikipedia would suffice.”

It is true, Oliva confirmed to A1F.com, that the original Department of State policy banning suppressor exports cited—among other things—that U.S.-made suppressors might be used against U.S. servicemen and women. 

“Of course, back then [2002], everything was done in the name of anti-terror, so it was the politically expedient thing to do,” Oliva said. “But it wasn’t true then and it’s not true now.”

As he noted in his Townhall article, “A quick internet search could easily reveal that suppressors are not just legal for use in foreign countries, some actually require their use. In Finland and France, suppressors are available over the counter. The notion that the rest of the world is devoid of suppressors because U.S. companies could not export them is preposterous.”

Oliva is also a retired Marine Master Gunnery Sergeant with 25 years of service, including tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Albania and Zaire, so he was speaking from this experience. “Brady’s ‘do it for the troops’ assertion would be laughable if they weren’t so serious in their outright dishonesty,” said Oliva. “Brady isn’t doing anything about illicit international arms trade. They’re only out to deny law-abiding Americans their God-given rights. They don’t care how unscrupulous they are in that goal.”

The anti-gun extremists truly don’t care, even when at issue is a product that actually provides a public-health benefit like hearing protection.

Latest

House Committee on Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Jason Smith
House Committee on Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Jason Smith

The Greatest Second Amendment Victory in a Century

On July 4, 2025, Americans celebrated not only our nation’s independence, but also the restoration of our constitutional Second Amendment rights becoming unconstrained by burdensome and arbitrary fees.

Opening Salvo | More Evidence That Gun-Control Groups are Freaking Out

With the Trump administration’s law-and-order push showing America’s crime problem is clearly not the fault of lawfully armed citizens, gun-control groups are freaking out.

John Rich has a Song for Armed Citizens

John Rich's latest song is "The Righteous Hunter." It is a moving tune about standing up to stop those with evil intentions. It is a song for lawfully armed citizens.

This Department of Education Grant Could Change Things

The University of Wyoming’s Firearms Research Center has been awarded a nearly $1 million grant by the U.S. Department of Education to develop a nationwide program on the origins, meaning and implications of the Second Amendment.

From the Editor | Charlie Kirk Lived for Freedom

“Give me liberty, or give me death,” are the immortal words of Patrick Henry spoken on March 23, 1775, to the Second Virginia Convention in Richmond, Va. His impassioned words were a call to arms against British tyranny.  

Ninth Circuit to Revisit Background Checks on Ammo Case

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has granted rehearing en banc in Rhode v. Bonta—a case backed by the National Rifle Association and California Rifle and Pistol Association. 

Interests



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.