A state-by-state and regional look at the national suppressor registry

Suppressors have never been more popular in the United States. After the federal transfer tax on suppressors dropped from $200 to $0 on January 1, 2026 — a change enacted through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and driven by a years-long ASA effort — consumer demand reached record levels, and the national registry has now surpassed 6.5 million registered suppressors. But that national number hides an important question: where are all these suppressors?

For the first time, ASA can answer that with some precision. Through a Freedom of Information Act request fulfilled by the ATF in May 2026, ASA obtained a state-by-state and caliber-by-caliber breakdown of the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR). The dataset covers 5,767,293 state-attributable suppressors (about 94% of what is listed in the NFRTR) and reveals a market that is far from evenly distributed. It is concentrated in the South and Mountain West, shaped by state law, and split along regional lines in what buyers actually purchase.

Where the suppressors are

In raw numbers, the suppressor market is a Sun Belt story. Texas alone accounts for 944,959 registered suppressors — roughly one in every six in the country, and more than twice the total of second-place Florida (401,064). Georgia (265,010), Utah (198,839), and North Carolina (196,705) round out the top five. The top ten states together hold more than half of the national registry.

These totals track a combination of forces: state population, the strength of local hunting and shooting culture, the regulatory climate, and, to a lesser extent, how much dealer and manufacturer inventory happens to be registered in-state. Large, gun-friendly states naturally rise to the top. But raw counts are also supported by the biggest states (excluding those that ban civilian ownership) simply because they have the most people. Suppressor ownership runs deepest in those states with a combination of strong hunting and shooting traditions and fewer state-level firearm regulations. Several states with lower populations overall, have high per-capita suppressor ownership rates, including Alaska, Idaho and Wyoming.

Raw counts by state

The eight prohibition states

At the opposite extreme sit the eight states that prohibit or heavily restrict civilian suppressor ownership: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island. Their registry totals are strikingly low — Hawaii shows just 516, Rhode Island 671, Delaware 1,286, Illinois 5,019. What little exists is almost entirely law enforcement, government, and some dealer inventory rather than private ownership. California, the nation’s most populous state, registers just 26,100 suppressors, fewer than North Dakota.

These states also represent the industry’s largest untapped opportunity. Together they are home to more than 90 million Americans who currently have no legal path to suppressor ownership. ASA is leading legal challenges to these bans, and the ground is shifting. On June 18, 2026, the Fifth Circuit ruled in United States v. Comeaux that suppressors are “bearable arms” protected by the Second Amendment, creating a circuit split that positions the question for the Supreme Court. Should these bans fall and suppressor ownership is legalized through litigation the industry will be positioned to meet nearly a century of pent-up demand.

What buyers choose and where

The FOIA data also broke down the registry by caliber, and nationally four segments dominate. The 7.62mm family (.30, .300, .308, and 7.62 variants) is the single largest category at 34.4%, followed by .22 rimfire (21.9%), the 5.56mm/.223 family (17.8%), and 9mm (12.2%). Together these account for more than 85% of all registered suppressors.

Regional preferences vary in ways that connect with local shooting culture. The South Central region (Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana) over-indexes on the 7.62mm family at 39.8%, consistent with its big-game hunting and long-range shooting traditions. The Pacific Northwest leans harder into .22 rimfire (24.9%). The Midwest shows an unusually high share of universal, multi-caliber suppressors — the .46 category alone reaches 4.0% versus 2.9% nationally. This pattern is influenced by a single South Dakota based private-label seller that markets heavily to first-time buyers.

The starkest contrast is California and Hawaii, where the caliber mix is unlike anywhere else: 66.4% is 5.56mm — nearly four times the national baseline. That is a direct reflection of prohibition. With civilian ownership off the table, the registry there is dominated by law enforcement agencies whose acquisitions favor 5.56mm patrol and tactical rifles rather than the diverse, hunting-driven mix seen in free states.

What it means for the industry

• Ideal product mix varies by geography. A dealer in Texas or Montana should stock deep in 7.62mm hunting cans; one in the Pacific Northwest should favor rimfire. The “average” national caliber mix describes almost no individual market.
• First-time buyers favor versatility. A newly expanded, less experienced customer base favors one multi-caliber can for their whole collection rather than a dedicated suppressor for each firearm. As they gain experience, they will expand their collection and specialize.
• One of the biggest areas for growth is still locked up. The prohibition states hold a fraction of the suppressors their populations would otherwise support. Favorable litigation, spearheaded by ASA and our partners would not just open eight new markets; it would open the eight markets with the most catching up to do.

– Owen Miller, Vice President, American Suppressor Association

Last year, the National Firearms Act (NFA) was weakened for the first time ever when the Big Beautiful Bill Act removed the $200 transfer tax on certain classes of firearms, including suppressors and short-barreled rifles (SBRs). While the Senate Parliamentarian unfortunately nixed the part of the bill that would have repealed the NFA’s registration requirements too, that legislative breakthrough paved the way to litigation success. In other words, while lawmakers didn’t manage to kill the NFA’s registration requirements in Congress, we may now manage to do so in the courts thanks to the elimination of the transfer tax.

For nearly 90 years beginning with Sonzinsky v. United States (1937), federal courts have consistently upheld the NFA as a valid exercise of Congress’ taxing power. The registration and related requirements were treated as necessary to collecting the transfer and making taxes.

Dozens of cases ended up at that same result. Congress enacted the National Firearms Act in 1934 purely as a tax measure under the Taxing Clause (Art. I, § 8, cl. 1) to constrain the market for certain “gangster weapons.” No other reasoning or source of authority was ever provided by Congress.

Fast forward nearly a century, to Aug. 5 when Judge James Wesley Hendrix, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, struck down the NFA’s remaining registration requirements in the consolidated cases of Jensen v. ATF and Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF. While Jensen is a SAF-supported case, the organization is itself a named plaintiff in another case, Brown v. ATF, and is backing yet a third NFA lawsuit in Roberts v. ATF. SAF’s sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, however, is a named plaintiff in Jensen along with the FPC Action Foundation, Texas Rifle Association, Hot Shots Custom and three individuals.

As Judge Hendrix explained in agreeing with our arguments, a tax must produce “at least some revenue.” With the transfer and making taxes at zero for the covered arms, the regulatory provisions no longer aid any revenue purpose and cannot be sustained under the Taxing Clause.

The government made several counterarguments, all of which the Court rejected. First, it argued that the special occupation tax levied against importers, manufacturers and dealers still collects revenue. But that tax has its own registration scheme to ensure compliance. The challenged provisions (application, registration, possession, transfer, and making rules) were designed to enforce the transfer/making taxes, not the special occupations tax.

Next, the government argued that the NFA registration requirements are “necessary and proper” to effectuate the special occupations tax. The idea being that if the ATF noticed people registering guns bought from dealers who had not paid that tax, they could bring an enforcement action against those dealers. But the Court rejected that argument because that almost never happened. As noted in the ruling, “At most, 691 defective occupational transfers out of nearly 2.2 million (or 0.03%) could even potentially be linked to the challenged NFA provisions.” Ultimately, the Necessary and Proper Clause cannot supply what the Taxing Clause no longer supports.

Finally, the government turned to the commerce clause, arguing registration was an acceptable requirement under Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce. The flaw with that argument, however, was that Congress originally enacted the NFA exclusively under the taxing power. The statute is housed in Title 26, uses tax language throughout, lacks any jurisdictional element or interstate-commerce language in the challenged provisions, and was historically administered by the Treasury. Courts cannot retroactively recharacterize a statute under a power Congress never invoked.

While our case also raised a Second Amendment argument for why NFA registration is unconstitutional, the Court opted to not reach that issue, given it ruled it unconstitutional on taxing power grounds, and the relief it had already granted was the maximum we had requested.

The Court stayed its own ruling for 7 days to give the government a chance to seek a longer stay with the Fifth Circuit. While frustrating, that is a normal procedure, especially when Courts issue a first-of-its-kind ruling like this. We don’t know yet if the government will appeal, but our presumption is they will. Importantly, even if the stay is lifted and the ruling goes into effect, relief will be limited to the plaintiffs in the case, and their members or customers.

Overall, the court’s ruling striking down the NFA’s remaining registration scheme is a huge step forward to ensure arms currently covered by the NFA will finally be removed. It’s been almost 100 years in the making, and this is the best opportunity we’ve had to remove even more Second Amendment infringements, much to the delight of gun owners across the nation. 

– Kostas Moros, SAF Director of Legal Research and Education

Kostas Moros is the Director of Legal Research and Education for the Second Amendment Foundation. He has been a practicing attorney in California since 2015, and is a member of several federal circuit courts, as well as the Supreme Court Bar. Aside from his litigation experience, Kostas has authored numerous amicus briefs filed in courts around the country, a law review article on why bans on common rifles are historically baseless, and dozens of articles on gun policy. He maintains a very active presence on X under the handle @MorosKostas.

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) was recently awarded $7.1 million in Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) funds for the project: Improving Resilience for Oysters by Linking Brood Reefs and Sink Reefs. The project aims to increase oyster abundance and restore resilience to oyster populations by increasing reef connectivity through larval transport and the construction of oyster reefs over a range of habitats and salinities. The project will create a network of high-vertical-relief brood (protected) reefs that link to existing and/or created sink (harvested and/or protected) reefs through larval transport, as well as increase oyster population sustainability and oyster reef resilience.

ADCNR Commissioner Chris Blankenship serves as the lead Trustee for Alabama on the NRDA Trustee Council that oversees project selection and implementation for these DWH Oil Spill Funding components.   

ADCNR’s Marine Resources Division and Deepwater Horizon Restoration Section are working with the University of South Alabama and Auburn University to identify restoration sites and techniques that are most likely to yield best results for the project.  Building on the Marine Resources Division’s practical working knowledge and management of the fishery, ADCNR’s goals for this stage of the project are to understand biological, physical, and chemical factors that impact restoration success and use that information to build and enhance certain oyster reefs.  This project is expected to take about two years.

To help with oyster restoration in the short term, ADCNR’s Marine Resources Division (MRD) is teaming up with local oyster catchers and the Alabama Wildlife Federation (AWF) to try to bolster the current oyster habitat along the Alabama coast.

Craig Newton, MRD District Supervising Biologist, said that two grassroots efforts are underway to try to revive the state’s oyster reefs.

“Since the 2000s, our oysters have been primarily restricted to one main area,” Newton said. “Historically, our oysters have been anywhere from Whitehouse reef off Alabama Port south to the Cutoff at Jemison’s (Bait Shop across from Heron Bay), with Buoy reef, Cedar Point, Heron Bay and Portersville Bay as areas of significant harvest. All these places had oysters.

“For the last 15-20 years, we’ve been mostly restricted to Heron Bay and Cedar Point.”

AWF Executive Director Tim Gothard said the 50-acre AWF Cedar Point West Oyster Cultch Planting represents continuation of a great partnership between AWF, ADCNR Marine Resources Division, Vulcan Materials Company, and Cooper Marine.

“This is our second large-scale cultch planting project in the Cedar Point area,” Gothard said. “Those projects would not take place without these key partners. AWF is committed to the Coastal Alabama Comprehensive Oyster Restoration Strategy, developed by ADCNR Marine Resources Division in conjunction with NOAA. On-the-ground and on-the-water conservation work is just part of AWF’s DNA and we value the opportunity to make projects like this a reality.

“The 4,600 tons of limestone rock oyster cultch provides a significant window of opportunity, up to a decade or more, for the right conditions to come together for oyster larvae to attach and successfully develop. AWF chose to do this project within MRD’s Oyster Management Grid System. Ultimate success over time would be oysters of multiple age classes established on the site, including oysters of commercial harvest size, and the ability for a portion of those oysters to be harvested and utilized for food, per MRD oyster harvest rules and regulations.”

Alabama’s harvest last season, which typically starts in October, resulted in 5,153 sacks, or 210,000 meat pounds, of oysters taken from state waters. That compares to the most recent peak of 1.2 million meat pounds taken in 1992.

Newton said the oyster catchers and environmental organizations recognized that decline and stepped up to help.

“There have been grassroots efforts over the past couple of years,” he said. “They’ve taken it upon themselves to do whatever they can to provide somewhat of a quick relief and provide some benefits to the oyster population.”

Those methods traditionally include cultch planting projects, according to Newton. Cultch is a hard substrate made of a variety of materials, mainly limestone rocks, oyster shells and mussel shells. That material is then deployed in areas with the best environmental conditions to help larval oysters, called spat, find a place to attach and then grow into harvestable oysters.

“After you add that substrate to the water, you rely on natural processes to result in the settlement of larval oysters, and then those grow into mature oysters to have the oyster population that everybody wants,” Newton said.

One of the larger projects that included cultch material was done by the AWF Oyster Restoration Initiative a month ago. Limestone rock was hauled from the Tuscumbia area to the Tombigbee River, where it was loaded on barges to make the length-of-the-state journey to the Dauphin Island area. About 4,600 tons of washed limestone were then placed near Cedar Point.

“In the past few years, AWF has done an excellent job of coordinating with MRD biologists to identify water bottoms for enhancement that are most likely to benefit oyster populations,” Newton said. “They planted No. 4 limestone, which was selected because of its long-term durability. Oyster shells generally last about five years before they break down. Limestone lasts upwards of 10 years. The idea is that this long-term, durable material will provide quality settlement substrate and hopefully the environmental conditions are suitable during that time period to result in some type of generational survivorship of the oysters.”

Life can be difficult for oysters in habitat like the Alabama Gulf Coast. If the water is too fresh, the oysters slowly die. If there is too much salinity, a snail known as the oyster drill will attack the oysters and kill them. To deal with the oysters’ fragility, the deployment of cultch material is one method to try to offset that. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t.

“In 2023, AWF planted No. 4 limestone in 77 acres in the Cedar Point Beach area,” Newton said. “We saw some short-term success with the settlement of larvae on that Cedar Point Beach plant. Upwards of 6 million larvae were in that 77 acres. However, those larvae essentially died the following year due to freshwater, drills and possibly other stresses from the environmental conditions that are fighting against our oyster population. The good news is the reef material is still there and can grow new oysters this year if the conditions are right.”

“This year, AWF planted another 50 acres in the Cedar Point West area. We’re hoping we see the short-term success of the Cedar Point Beach area, and we’re also hoping we see long-term stability in the survivorship.”

Newton said the sites of the deployment of the cultch material by the AWF were chosen for specific reasons.

“They were selected because they were adjacent to our most productive, most stable oyster reefs,” he said. “They are also somewhat shielded from the water that comes out of the Mobile River. When you get a freshet (sudden influx) from large amounts of rain in the watershed, it reduces the salinity in the bay to a level that oysters can’t tolerate. Another reason that site was chosen was it has stable dissolved oxygen, and it’s in the historical footprint of our most productive reefs.”

MRD Director Kevin Anson addressed the oyster catchers’ contribution to the restoration efforts.

“We have a group of seasoned oyster catchers who have been catching oysters nearly their entire lives,” Anson said. “They have seen this transition from really good catches of oysters back in the 90s, and they’ve seen in recent years the dramatic decline in the populations of oysters. So, they took it upon themselves to volunteer their time to deploy oyster shell that they have sourced from seafood dealers. They wanted to put something back, literally, back into the system and their industry.”

MRD issued special permits that allowed the oyster catchers to deploy oyster shells as well as sample oysters by catching them with tongs.

“They sampled them and then had to return them to the water,” Anson said. “It was a good faith exercise to allow them to take a look at different areas and help hone down the locations that would provide the best benefits. They also provided us with some additional ideas and thoughts about what they thought the best locations would be.

“Heron Bay is the longest term productive oyster area in the state, even during these more dynamic environmental times. There were also a couple of areas in Dauphin Island Bay. We’re looking for areas where oysters can maintain when salinity drops. Those areas would allow them to live multiple years and be able to reproduce and get more recruitment, more baby oysters into the system, and increase the footprint of oyster habitat.”

Newton said the oyster restoration is moving in new directions to try to increase the chances of success, including planting live oysters by AWF. The first planting with small oysters saw limited success. The next effort used larger 2-inch oysters with the hopes of better survival.

“It’s important to keep working on these novel approaches,” Newton said. “Traditional methods aren’t working like they used to when we could just plant the bottom with oyster shells anywhere on the reef. I’m proud of these other groups executing these projects. We have to think outside the box and find alternative methods to affect positive change on oyster restoration efforts.  The NRDA oyster project and partnering with AWF and the oyster catchers will do just that.”

– David Rainer, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources

Late last week, more than 70,000 Moroccans surged past the border fence and seaway barriers at the tiny Spanish enclave of Ceuta — located on the northern most tip of Africa, bordering Morocco, the Mediterranean Sea and across the Strait of Gibraltar and mainland Spain.

The incursion is a mixed bag of blame, with some parties pointing to Spain’s lax immigration policies and others singling out online rumors of open borders. The result was border invaders, fueled by human smugglers, pouring across the border by land and sea. Spain now says most of the 70,000 have been returned to Morocco. But, according to news reports, nearly 2,000 remain in Ceuta or already slipped through.

Fox News reported an ominous fact of the situation, revealing “the unprecedented crossing was fueled by criminal smuggling networks and disinformation spread through social media, as Spanish authorities were examining whether known criminals or suspected jihadists exploited the scale and disorder of the crossing to enter Ceuta undetected.” It doesn’t take much imagination to think about what kind of atrocities could take place in Europe or beyond if those fears are closer to reality.

Separately, it’s worth knowing that Spain has extremely restrictive laws for its citizens to own firearms for self-defense purposes. People in Ceuta and a short distance across the straight into mainland Spain have little ability to protect themselves against criminals slipping through porous borders.

Déjà Vu Across the Atlantic

Some European Union member countries called for stricter border closures in Ceuta since it offers usually easy travel into the heart of Europe. But the macro view of the unfolding situation offers similar dynamics to what has been experienced right here in America. And it should be fresh in the memories of most Americans.

During former President Joe Biden’s administration, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recorded approximately 11 million total border encounters nationwide over the course of his four-year term. Approximately 8 million to 8.5 million of those occurring specifically at the Southwest land border. The actual number of illegal border crossing is likely much higher.

That dwarfs what was just seen in Ceuta. On top of that, it is a fact that some illegal immigrants crossing the U.S. southern border did have terrorist ties and violent plans.

In just one instance, according to Reuters, a smuggler with ties to a foreign extremist group helped migrants enter the U.S. from Mexico. That smuggler was based in Turkey and had links to the jihadist Islamic State, also known as ISIS. These are just two of the near countless examples America has dealt with over the past several years.

In fact, according to a report from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, since fiscal year 2021, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has apprehended nearly 400 individuals on the federal terrorist watchlist that were attempting to cross the U.S. southern border illegally. Over the same period, CBP intercepted tens of thousands of individuals with prior criminal convictions, though exact total numbers of individuals who successfully crossed un-apprehended remain unknown.

Of note too, it’s not just along the southern border where these violent people are coming into America. During the Biden administration, the U.S. northern border with Canada experienced a dramatic surge in migrant encounters and apprehensions.

The threats facing law-abiding citizens of one country by the actions of others is real. The decision by a government to disarm its citizens from the means of protecting themselves, their families and their property from those violent criminals is a choice.

Choose to be Prepared

The difference between the illegal border crossings in Spain and America is that Americans aren’t left defenseless. Americans enjoy the right to keep and bear arms. Wherever law-abiding Americans live, their constitutional rights protect the ability to lawfully purchase firearms for their own protection. That’s why the firearm industry exists—to provide the means of exercising the Second Amendment.

Examples of governments choosing to render their citizens defenseless against violent criminals and terrorists isn’t limited to nations across the ocean. That’s happening closer to home than many may realize. Within America’s borders, gun control activists and elected politicians are choosing to ban commonly owned firearms, including rifles, shotguns and handguns, limiting the ability of law-abiding Americans exercise their rights because of the criminal actions of those who ignore the law.

In states like Rhode Island, Illinois, New Jersey, Virginia, California, New York, Delaware and Maryland, there are constant attacks and unconstitutional limitations that chill Second Amendment freedoms. Millions of Americans are at the mercy of government bureaucrats who care little for constitutional rights.

Owning firearms is a God given right. NSSF encourages all law-abiding Americans to exercise that right and to do so responsibly. Educate and train. Practice and understand how firearms operate. Be prepared.

You may not live in a state with strict gun control laws, or that borders another country. But you’re only one election away from losing your freedoms. NSSF encourages all lawful gun owners to #GUNVOTE^® in November.

– Larry Keane

Larry Keane is SVP for Government and Public Affairs, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Freeman Coliseum Expo Hall, San Antonio, TX

Convention Center, Phoenix, AZ

Fort Worth Convention Center, Fort Worth, Texas