ASA Clarifies ATF Stance on Modular Suppressors
August 11, 2017
After meeting with ATF officials, the American Suppressor Association (ASA) has some good news on the modular/adaptable suppressor front. Some readers may recall that last week; the Prince Law Offices released a statement indicating that the agency was in the process of reviewing modular suppressors. This led to widespread speculation that the ATF could issue a ruling that would effectively ban silencers with removable or configurable parts. Based on the information provided by the ASA, Prince Law wasn’t wrong in their reading of the ATF’s comments, but they weren’t correct either. Here’s what the ASA had to say:
Modular Suppressor Design – FATD [ATF Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division] is in the process of reviewing a request from an independent industry representative regarding a single, specific modular suppressor design. The representative is seeking a determination regarding their specific product, not a blanket determination that would apply to other existing modular designs. The issue in question is whether or not the suppressor being reviewed has the ability to assemble more than one functional suppressor out of the component parts that are supplied as a single suppressor to the end-user.
This news should alleviate concerns shared by many enthusiasts. It also calls attention to an interesting distinction. Based on the language of the ATF’s response (and assuming that the ASA has effectively paraphrased it here), the agency doesn’t appear to be opposed to modular suppressors at all. Rather, they’re concerned with designs that could allow a single silencer to be configured into two separate and functional suppressors. For example, imagine a Rugged Obsidian 45 with female threads on the front module (the real suppressor has male threads here) that could accept the same boosters and fixed mounts as the main body. At least to this point, manufacturers have smartly designed their suppressors to avoid these issues.
The ASA also received additional information regarding ATF’s proposed rule, ATF 29P. 29P was originally published in May of last year but was a response to a 2008 query from the now-infamous National Firearms Act Trade & Collectors Association (NFATCA, the same group responsible for bringing ATF 41P/F to the forefront) which dealt with the proper marking location for suppressors. Within the 29P text, the ATF proposed that manufacturers apply the required markings (serial number, model, etc.) to the main body of the silencer. This caused outrage among enthusiasts who saw it as a backdoor attack against modular and tubeless suppressor designs. According to the ASA, the ATF has abandoned this proposal.
Overall, this is great news from both the ATF and the ASA. I’ve been critical of the ASA in the past, but their pursuit of these issues and information is unquestionably good for all of us.
An information security professional by day and gun blogger by night, Nathan started his firearms journey at 16 years old as a collector of C&R rifles. These days, you’re likely to find him shooting something a bit more modern – and usually equipped with a suppressor – but his passion for firearms with military heritage has never waned. Over the last five years, Nathan has written about a variety of firearms topics, including Second Amendment politics and gun and gear reviews. When he isn’t shooting or writing, Nathan nerds out over computers, 3D printing, and Star Wars.