South Dakota Bill to Allow Gun Silencers as “UN-Controlled Weapons” Introduced

AmmoLand ^ | January 26, 2026 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

South Dakota – SB 2 has been introduced in the South Dakota legislature. It removes silencers from the list of “controlled weapons” in the state statutes. This bill effectively removes state regulation of silencers, but not federal regulation. From sdlegislature.gov:

Introduced by: Senator Crabtree: An Act to provide that a firearm silencer is not a controlled weapon. The Bill removes silencers from the definition of “Controlled weapon”. The definition is Section 1. § 22-1-2 (8). 

The bill creates a new definition which removes silencers. Here is how the new definition would read:

(8) “Controlled weapon” includes machine gun and short shotgun as those terms are defined in subdivisions (17), (23), and (46) of this section but does not include a firearm silencer;

As you can see, South Dakota does not include short barreled rifles in their definition of “controlled weapons”. The definition of what a silencer is still exists in Section 1.§22-1-2 (17).

(17) “Firearm silencer,” any instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance for causing the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol, or other firearm to be silent, or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any such weapon;

Because silencers are removed from the list of “controlled weapons”, they would no longer be banned from possession by most of the people in South Dakota. In effect, the law removes the state ban on the possession of silencers for everyone who may legally posses firearms in South Dakota. In the current law, an exemption exists for people who have a federal tax stamp for a particular silencer. The ban on short barreled rifles has already been removed from the statute.

For whatever reason, the bill keeps short barreled shotguns on the list of “controlled weapons”.

---

TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: banglist; bill; sd; silencer

[marktwain]

Many state laws against the possession of National Firearms Act (NFA) weapons still exist.

It is worth while for states to reform these laws so as to remove the power of state prosecutors to drag innocent people through the process of taking such charges to the Supreme Court. There is a great deal of punishment in the process, even if you win in the end.

[BipolarBob]

I don’t want the UN to be in control of our gun laws.

[T.B. Yoits]

I don’t want the UN to be in control of our gun laws.

Yeah, I saw that also. Bad title.

It should be corrected to "Un", not "UN" (as in United Nations).

The emphasis on "un" changed it to an acronym.

[drwoof]

I’m not an expert on the subject by any means, but from what I’ve read and seen, the more accurate term is ‘Suppressor’. Reducing noise ‘pollution’, providing protection for hearing, etc. are all very good reasons to permit their use. It was once pointed out to me that were they not associated with firearms, they’d be mandatory, like mufflers on cars and other types of noise reduction. Seems most people believe they actually make weapons completely silent (per Hollywood), which makes them for some reason seem scary. Crossbows, blow-guns, slings, and all kinds of other devices are more quiet, and just as deadly. Perhaps we should require them to make some kind of noise!

[Disambiguator]

I call them mufflers. It helps to illustrate the absurdity of the NFA.

[marktwain]

Mufflers is a good term. I have used the term gun mufflers.

It is exactly what they are.

[Organic Panic]

Such a stupid law. If anything, a suppressed pistol is twice the size and harder to carry.

[Navy Patriot]

It should be corrected to "Un", not "UN" (as in United Nations).

Apparently the headline should be "not controlled weapons" rather than "UN-Controlled Weapons".

This has nothing to do with the UN (United Nations).

[marktwain]

Such a stupid law. If anything, a suppressed pistol is twice the size and harder to carry.

---

I have had two people at the ATF say they had heard it was the Secretary of the Interior who wanted to ban gun mufflers out of concern for poaching in the national parks.

Possible, I suppose. Rather odd. Still this insanity has lasted for 90 years!

[No name given]

That’s the truth.

[Disambiguator]

Were you going to post that interview you did at SHOT with Chuke’s?

That was very good.

[Paal Gulli]

"I’m not an expert on the subject by any means, but from what I’ve read and seen, the more accurate term is ‘Suppressor’...."

What you think -- and what's 'accurate' -- is irrelevant. The ATF (and all its paperwork) says they're "silencers."

They're like the National Time Standard. If NTS says it's 46 o'clock, by dint of law, it's 46 o'clock. The ATF says it a "silencer" so it's a silencer.

It's also a "firearm," even if it isn't mounted on a gun, because the ATF says so. So "logic" don't enter into it.

And oh by the way, that's also what Hiram Maxim -- who invented the thing -- called them.