One of our initial priorities was expanding access—ensuring people could not only own suppressors, but also use them in the field. That effort has paid off, and the growth of the suppressor market reflects it.
We’ve also seen a shift in who is using suppressors. What was once primarily in the tactical segment has expanded into the mainstream. Today, whether someone is interested in target shooting, home defense, or hunting, suppressors have broad appeal across the shooting community.
And, that’s been great to see.
QA Outdoors
Speaking with some of the manufacturers, the hunting market, while not the primary market, it's one that's significant, and companies are focusing on developing products for hunters. To what extent do you think we'll be able to close the gap from 42 and 41 states, to picking up those last eight states?
Knox Williams
I think it will expand, but it’s going to require some victories through litigation. When we started, our mission and objectives were focused on pushing everything we could through legislation. We got up to speed quickly, learned how to win on the issue, and had a tremendous amount of success in a short period—turning the map on the hunting side from 22 states to 41. For a new organization operating on a shoestring budget, that was a big deal and pretty exciting.
We quickly realized we were going to hit a wall. There was very little legislative opportunity left to meaningfully impact the issue. We worked bills in every state—California, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Illinois—every state where suppressors were banned. But it doesn’t take much to look at the political makeup of those legislatures and understand there’s not a viable path in most of them.
We got very close in Illinois. We passed a bill through the House, but it stalled with the Senate President. Not putting it on the board—because we weren’t sure we had the votes—has become one of my biggest professional regrets. I wish we had rolled the dice. That lesson has carried forward into other legislative efforts and has ultimately been valuable.
At a certain point, we had to acknowledge reality. We didn’t have the resources or time to keep pushing in places where progress wasn’t possible. So we shifted to litigation. It’s expensive, but it represents the most viable path forward.
Right now, we’re part of a coalition that has filed lawsuits challenging state-level bans in Illinois and New Jersey. Our attorneys have also taken on a pro-state litigant case in California. That gives us three active lawsuits asserting that the Second Amendment applies to suppressors as protected arms and that the government should not be able to ban them.
We’re also involved in three additional lawsuits alongside the National Rifle Association, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Firearms Policy Coalition. These cases challenge the inclusion of suppressors and certain firearms under the National Firearms Act, particularly in light of recent tax relief.
Litigation is the next frontier. It’s not the final one—there will always be legislative work to do—but it’s where we see the most opportunity and optimism for achieving a less regulated future.
QA Outdoors
The barriers have come down. The two biggest barriers, aside from the tax stamp, have been the enormous wait times for processing approvals, and the submission process of the federal paperwork. Both those barriers have been dramatically reduced. How did these changes come about and how long did that take?
Knox Williams
When Silencer Shop first entered the market, it introduced a novel idea: streamline the process and simplify it for consumers. Watching the evolution of the company that Dave Matheny built has been fascinating. They’ve been involved with us for well over a decade, are one of our biggest supporters, and fundamentally changed how consumers interact with NFA items.
They made suppressors far more accessible—doing for the NFA market something akin to what Amazon did for online shopping. The process became easier, more approachable, and less intimidating for first-time buyers.
The introduction of their kiosk system was a turning point. Consumers no longer needed to obtain fingerprint cards at a local police station or get passport photos taken at a pharmacy, then assemble and mail a physical application to Martinsburg, West Virginia. The entire process became faster and more efficient.
Without that innovation, the industry likely wouldn’t be where it is today. Other companies have followed with similar solutions. Capitol Armory, for example, has taken a slightly different approach to streamlining the process. It’s an apples-to-oranges comparison, but both models have proven effective.
Knox Williams
What was the second part of your question?
QA Outdoors
The wait times. How did we go from 18 months to a day or two?
Knox Williams
Oh yeah. Without companies streamlining the process, we wouldn’t be where we are today. The same is true on the regulatory side—without the ATF streamlining the process on their end, we certainly wouldn't be in the position where we are today.
When I entered the suppressor industry in 2009, working for Advanced Armament Corp., wait times were highly variable. From 2009 through 2022, approvals typically ranged from six to 18 months, depending on when and how you filed. Submissions as an individual versus a trust or legal entity could affect timing, as could background check delays or paperwork issues. Under the old paper-based system, lost documents and processing errors were common.
The ATF’s launched of the eForms system around 2021 improved data entry and reduced some friction, but the process remained inefficient. Wait times were still measured in months, and the system struggled to deliver meaningful gains.
That began to change with new leadership at the ATF’s NFA Division. They engaged with industry stakeholders, listened to feedback, and worked collaboratively to improve the process. The resulting changes were both simple and highly effective.
One of the most significant shifts involved moving away from a strict first-in, first-out system. Previously, applications submitted later would be held until earlier submissions were cleared, regardless of complexity. That approach created bottlenecks, especially when more complicated applications slowed the entire queue.
By abandoning that model and allowing simpler applications to move forward more quickly—essentially creating an “express lane”—the ATF significantly reduced processing times. What had once taken months or even years began to be measured in days and weeks, marking a meaningful improvement for consumers and the industry alike.
QA Outdoors
Speaking of working with the ATF, how has that relationship evolved? And how has it improved? Is the ATF more willing to listen to proposals from ASA and the suppressor manufacturers?
Knox Williams
We’ve always maintained a working relationship with the ATF because we’ve had to. The agency regulates every aspect of the industry—from manufacturers and distributors to dealers and end consumers. Without an open line of communication, we’re not doing our jobs.
At the same time, that relationship hasn’t always been smooth. There have been periods where we didn’t see eye to eye—at times, we fought hard over policy and enforcement issues. As with any federal agency, priorities and attitudes shift with changes in administration, and the ATF is no exception.
Since January 2025, when Donald Trump was sworn in for a second term, the working environment with the ATF has been the most constructive we’ve seen in 15 years. The agency has been more receptive, more open to dialogue, and more willing to address systemic issues that have existed for well over a decade.
There have also been personnel changes, and the agency appears more willing to engage with industry feedback. The tone has shifted toward collaboration—treating the industry more like a partner than an adversary.
That approach is more consistent with how other regulated industries interact with their oversight agencies. It’s a dynamic we hadn’t experienced to this degree before, and the change has been significant.
QA Outdoors
Do you think that will hold if a Democrat comes into office? Will they flip the switch immediately and force the ATF to be more adversarial?
Knox Williams
One of the most encouraging developments is the foresight and long-term strategy the current administration is applying to Second Amendment issues. They’re not getting everything perfect, but there is a clear effort to make changes that will be durable.
Nothing is permanent in policy. Even laws can be undone by future legislation. That reality makes it all the more important to focus on changes that can withstand shifts in political control.
I’m encouraged by where we are now and by what can be accomplished over the remainder of the administration. If that momentum continues under another pro–Second Amendment administration, even better. If not, the expectation is that we will still be in a stronger position than we were coming out of the first Donald Trump administration.
QA Outdoors
Turning to 2026, it’s safe to say we're on a record pace for Form 4 suppressor sales just in the first quarter. Sales are up and manufacturers are working through backorders. What's on ASA’s radar for the remainder of 2026? Are there things you think will drop into place for the industry over the next three quarters?
Knox Williams
We certainly hope so. We have been working with the administration since Trump was sworn in to push meaningful reform through regulation. A number of rules from the Biden era remain on the books, and those need to be addressed.
That’s one reason we’ve been supportive of [Deputy Director of the ATF] Robert Cekada and his nomination to lead the ATF. Our understanding is that, if confirmed by the Senate, he has a suite of regulatory reforms ready to move forward—changes that would benefit not just the NFA segment, but the broader firearms community.
There is significant opportunity on the regulatory side, particularly within the framework of the National Firearms Act. It’s not a perfect solution—we would prefer to see certain items removed from the NFA altogether—but regulatory reform represents the most immediate and achievable path.
We will continue to pursue legislative options, including potential reconciliation efforts, as they emerge. For now, the focus is on regulatory changes, and there is a great deal of anticipation around Cekada’s confirmation and the implementation of those reforms.
QA Outdoors
We’ve taken up enough of your time, but let me ask you this, what are the two or three things that are top of the ASA’s wish list right now?
Knox Williams
Beyond removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act and affirming that Second Amendment protections apply to them, those remain the top priorities. The goal is nationwide consistency, meaning legal ownership in all 50 states, including for hunting, without having to be in any form of registry.
There are additional regulatory efforts under consideration. I’m hesitant to discuss those in detail at this stage, as it’s still unclear how they will ultimately take shape.
QA Outdoors
Knox, thanks very much for your time. We look forward to keeping in touch as 2026 progresses.
