Forced Reset Trigger ruling

[LiveLife]

Update to two closed threads on forced reset trigger:

ATF Open Letter to all FFL Holders - FRTs

Just received this email, thought they might do this. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) recently examined devices commonly known as “forced reset triggers” (FRTs) and has determined that some of them are “firearms” and “machineguns” as defined in the National...

www.thehighroad.org

Ya better get an attorney

For anyone who purchased a forced reset trigger its about to get ugly.

www.thehighroad.org

National Association for Gun Rights wins lawsuit against ATF trigger ban - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...t-trigger-lawsuit.922637/page-2#post-12946047

... Court concludes that Defendants engaged in unlawful agency action taken in excess of their authority. ​

​

Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Request for Summary Judgement ... Firearms incapable of automatic fire per trigger-action are thus not machineguns ... statutory parity was disrupted in 2018 when the ATF broadened the meaning of machinegun by re-interpreting the statutory definition ...​

​

Court ENJOINS Defendants from pursuing criminal actions against the Rare Breed Parties based on the classification that FRTs are "machineguns." Besides this narrow carve out, other manufacturers or sellers may continue to fully manufacture, sell, exchange, transfer, and/or market FRTs under this permanent injunction without facing civil or criminal consequences ...​

 

[danez71]

Scroll all the way down for the ruling

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67679751/national-association-for-gun-rights-inc-v-garland/

 

[illinoisburt]

Like many of the recent district court wins on gun rights related cases, there is likely going to be an appeal and injunction on this ruling in fairly short order. So although it's an encouraging case I would not expect be the last words on the subject.

 

[LiveLife]

Like many of the recent district court wins on gun rights related cases, there is likely going to be an appeal and injunction on this ruling in fairly short order. So although it's an encouraging case I would not expect be the last words on the subject.

That's the notion we have been holding for decades but things are different because the Supreme Court ruled on Bruen as reaffirmed in Rahimi, Cargill and Loper that executive administrative agency overreach and Chevron Deference is NO MORE.

And new authority of Cargill ruling on bump stock will apply to NAGR forced reset trigger as to what is a "machinegun". So the Circuit Court now must factor Cargill ruling's authority when addressing NAGR appeal.

A NEW WORLD of history in the making as we get to see how Cargill ruling will apply to NAGR case as two share similar issue of defining what is a "machinegun" and if Circuit Court misapply new authority of Cargill, it will be immediately be elevated to the Supreme Court for clarification.

So just like the two step approach used for decades with interest balancing of society's need overriding rights of few going out the window and lower "inferior" courts continuing to misapply NEW Bruen methodology which has been reaffirmed as "binding law" of the land, reason why justices Thomas, Kavanaugh, Alito and Gorsuch want to clear the air.

Therefore the old axiom of "it will just get appealed to Circuit Courts where decision will be reversed" will be coming to an end as many judges in the District Courts ARE properly applying Bruen methodology while the Circuit Courts (Except for 5th Circuit) are not applying Bruen methodology properly (Along with APA/Chevron Deference).

And once the Supreme Court clears the air, even the defiant Circuit Courts won't be able to "misapply" Heller/Caetano/Bruen rulings in expanding Second Amendment protection to "modern" types of arms/accessories lawfully used commonly by "We the People", including "the people" who misbehave on occasion as ruled in Rahimi and Range.

So we can smell the coffee and stop acting like Circuit Courts in continuing to embrace the OLD methodology of two-step interest balancing/executive agency overreach and acknowledge/accept the NEW methodology.

Even justice Jackson came to that conclusion as she conceded the Bruen methodology is now "binding law" of the land.

And we should too, until all the judges get the Bruen/Loper memos as to why and how this nation was founded with checks and balances to protect rights of "We the People".

Consider what judge O'Connor wrote at the end of his ruling - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...t-trigger-lawsuit.922637/page-2#post-12946047

Every year, our country commemorates the revolution waged against a tyrannical executive. To safeguard against future tyranny, our founding documents designed a system that prevents undue concentrations of power in order to protect important rights and to ensure that a legislative consensus is reached before enacting laws on the most important issues in society. Such foresight is especially prudent in cases like this one. Indeed, while this case may seem focused on firearms, it represents so much more. It is emblematic of a devastating problem that increasingly rears its head in federal courts: rampant evasion of the democratic process. Few issues more acutely underscore this problem than the present case. Our nation would do well to remember the very reasons and spirit that inspired our democratic system of governance in the first place.​

SO ORDERED this 23rd day of July, 2024.​

Reed OConnor​

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE​

 

[JTHunter]

Therefore the old axiom of "it will just get appealed to Circuit Courts where decision will be reversed" will be coming to an end as many judges in the District Courts ARE properly applying Bruen methodology while the Circuit Courts (Except for 5th Circuit) are not applying Bruen methodology properly (Along with APA/Chevron Deference).

And once the Supreme Court clears the air, even the defiant Circuit Courts won't be able to "misapply" Heller/Caetano/Bruen rulings in expanding Second Amendment protection to "modern" types of arms/accessories lawfully used commonly by "We the People", including "the people" who misbehave on occasion as ruled in Rahimi and Range.

So we can smell the coffee and stop acting like Circuit Courts in continuing to embrace the OLD methodology of two-step interest balancing/executive agency overreach and acknowledge/accept the NEW methodology.

And the sooner these judges pay attention to the revised methodology, the better.
That is also why this election is so important as the make-up of the SC could be drastically changed next year IF conservatives don't win.

 

[LiveLife]

Update: DOJ is in settlement discussions with 2nd and 5th Circuit cases - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1472641#msg1472641

Hannah Hill - https://x.com/hannahhill_sc/status/1914778392672559329

Settlement discussions are currently ongoing with the Department of Justice in our FRT case. We hope to make an announcement soon.

Firearms Policy Coalition - https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1914865899254796748

The federal government has asked the Second Circuit to stay its lawsuit against Rare Breed Triggers, saying that the parties are considering a settlement:

 

[LiveLife]

Update: NAGR and DOJ settlement granted by court - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1472727#msg1472727

Hannah Hill - https://x.com/hannahhill_sc/status/1915058674390716564

Motion for stay pending settlement agreement was granted by the court this morning. The 5th Circuit appeal of our summary judgment ruling is officially on hold.

 

[LiveLife]

Great news!

National Association for Gun Rights - https://x.com/NatlGunRights/status/1923457351119667475​

​

TOTAL VICTORY OVER THE ATF ​

​

FORCED RESET TRIGGERS ARE BACK ​

​

The DOJ has settled in our case, NAGR v. ATF - conceding on ALL points.​

​

Return ALL seized triggers.​

Drop their appeal in the 5th Circuit and all other cases.​

Pledge not to touch FRTs in the future.​

​

HUGE WIN! Your National Association for Gun Rights just landed the final blow on the ATF over their unconstitutional trigger ban! - https://donate.gunrights.org/1980_atftriggerbandefeated-join?pid=TWfrt516252​

​

The ATF has surrendered. It’s OVER.​

​

No more court battles. No more appeals. No more litigation. No more harassment from ATF bureaucrats.​

​

In a binding settlement agreement dated May 13th, 2025, the ATF agreed to drop their appeal of NAGR v ATF, abandon its malicious prosecution of Rare Breed Triggers, and return ALL seized Forced Reset Triggers.​

​

That’s right. The ATF is returning illegally s[e]ized triggers thanks to our WIN.​

​

This means FRT's are once again federally lawful for ALL law-abiding Americans to possess, purchase and transfer!​

​

Make no mistake, defeating this illegal Biden-era overreach would not have happened without the support of the community of law-abiding gun rights supporters like you.​

​

And this total victory will NOT last without your continued support.​

​

Please take a moment to JOIN the National Association for Gun Rights or make a generous contribution so we can continue WINNING legal fights for the Second Amendment, and so we can stop the radical left from ever trying to ban firearm triggers again.​

​

For Freedom,​

​

Dudley Brown​

​

President​

National Association for Gun Rights​

​

Reckless - https://x.com/Recklesscbr/status/1923466264564965743

@NatlGunRights is the New York case still going on where he can't sell them yet?

National Association for Gun Rights - https://x.com/NatlGunRights/status/1923467280563712498

New York case is also dead per this agreement.

 

[LiveLife]

Department of Justice Announces Settlement of Litigation Between the Federal Government and Rare Breed Triggers - https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/depa...ion-between-federal-government-and-rare-breed

Friday, May 16, 2025​

​

Today, in accordance with President Trump’s Executive Order Protecting Second Amendment Rights, as well as the Attorney General’s Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force, the Department of Justice announced the settlement of litigation between the federal government and Rare Breed Triggers.​

​

“This Department of Justice believes that the 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “And we are glad to end a needless cycle of litigation with a settlement that will enhance public safety.”​

​

In June 2024, in Cargill v. Garland, the Supreme Court held that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a rule classifying a bump stock as a “machinegun.” In July 2024, the Northern District of Texas applied Cargill v. Garland to a device called a “forced-reset trigger” (FRT) and concluded that FRTs also cannot be classified as a “machinegun.”​

​

The Department’s agreement with Rare Breed Triggers avoids the need for continued appeals in United States v. Rare Breed Triggers and continued litigation in other, related cases concerning the same issue. The settlement includes agreed-upon conditions that significantly advance public safety with respect to FRTs, including that Rare Breed will not develop or design FRTs for use in any pistol and will enforce its patents to prevent infringement that could threaten public safety. Rare Breed also agrees to promote the safe and responsible use of its products.​

​

The cases that will be resolved under the settlement agreement are:​

• NAGR v. Garland, 23-cv-830-O (N.D. Tex.), on appeal 24-10707 (5th Cir.).
• United States v. Rare Breed Triggers LLC, No. 23-cv-369 (E.D.N.Y), on appeal 23-7276 (2d Cir.).
• United States v. Miscellaneous Firearms and Related Parts and Equipment Listed in Exhibit A, 23-cv-17 (D. Utah).

 

[Jim Watson]

How is a forced reset trigger different from a binary trigger and what is the legal status of the binary?

 

[LiveLife]

Forced Reset Trigger fires one round per single pull and reset of trigger.

Binary trigger fires two rounds per single pull and reset of trigger.

 

[Jim Watson]

Would you call this a forced reset? “Acts against the natural resiliency of the trigger finger.”

Easy full auto conversion for Colt .45 pistol by C. J. Michal JR - US Patent no. 2,056,975

 

[papajim2jordan]

So, forced reset means that the trigger must be "pulled" or require a separate operation for each shot, but that the reset occurs against finger pressure still applied. If that finger pressure is not released, then a second trigger operation will occur, firing another round, and another... much faster than a human finger can manage, technically semi auto, tactically full. Is this correct?

 

[danez71]

So, forced reset means that the trigger must be "pulled" or require a separate operation for each shot, but that the reset occurs against finger pressure still applied. If that finger pressure is not released, then a second trigger operation will occur, firing another round, and another... much faster than a human finger can manage, technically semi auto, tactically full. Is this correct?

The mechanics you described is my understanding, essentially.

 

[papajim2jordan]

The mechanics you described is my understanding, essentially.

Thanks.

 

[Jim Watson]

That is the way that 1936 patent I linked works. A gunzine article in the 70s gave the same argument for it as the current crop of forced reset devices.

 

[papajim2jordan]

That is the way that 1936 patent I linked works. A gunzine article in the 70s gave the same argument for it as the current crop of forced reset devices.

I got lost trying to find an IWB holster for the thing online. Could be a custom order item.

 

[CapnMac]

For a slightly contrary opinion to NAGR's Matt Larousier a gun rights lawyer presents his read

Which is pretty literal, as he does read relevant parts of the opinion.

Like how DoJ might not return all the seized FRT inventory, to either the company, nor to those who surrendered their triggers.
Or the part where the DoJ wants FRT to patent enforce against all possible "reset" triggers (even ones not yet invented; and possible all "glock switches") on their own dime. In return FRT gets to stay in business, but only so long as DoJ allows them to,

Matt also points out that FRT is actually on shaky patent ground, as there's a "prior art" patent from around 1932 (before NFA '34).

Is it a "win"? Both sides are claiming it is. They may both be right.

Now, there are a couple of pending case involving NFA lurking in the dockets. There's a possibility the entire notion of NFA as a "tax law" actually infringes on 2A (and without any sort of historical analog). Strike down NFA and much of this is moot (although disentangling all the various court cases could take decades).

 

[AlexanderA]

the reset occurs against finger pressure still applied. If that finger pressure is not released, then a second trigger operation will occur, firing another round, and another... much faster than a human finger can manage, technically semi auto, tactically full. Is this correct?

The mechanics you described is my understanding, essentially.

In other words, the gun will fire more than once with a single pull of the trigger. Got it.

26 U.S. Code § 5845(b) : The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

So, the crux of this case is the contention that a "pull" of the trigger is not synonymous with a "function" of the trigger. Seems like a slim reed to me...

This is actually more "automatic" than a binary trigger, which only gives two shots with a pull and release of the trigger. This in contrast could potentially continue to fire until the magazine was empty.

 

[papajim2jordan]

In other words, the gun will fire more than once with a single pull of the trigger. Got it.

26 U.S. Code § 5845(b) : The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

So, the crux of this case is the contention that a "pull" of the trigger is not synonymous with a "function" of the trigger. Seems like a slim reed to me...

This is actually more "automatic" than a binary trigger, which only gives two shots with a pull and release of the trigger. This in contrast could potentially continue to fire until the magazine was empty.

I'm lost on this issue.

 

[danez71]

In other words, the gun will fire more than once with a single pull of the trigger. Got it

I didn't or allude to anything like that.

If that's what you got from my comment then you misinterpreted it.

So, the crux of this case is the contention that a "pull" of the trigger is not synonymous with a "function" of the trigger. Seems like a slim reed to me...

It's not a slim read as you described.

Your finger doesnt, nor does a rubber band, make a gun full auto.

The function of the trigger does

No matter how you try to slice it, it still only fires 1 round when the trigger is pulled, or functioned, rearward.

Before another round is able to be fired, the triggers function must travel forward to reset, then rearward again, to fire.



They never met the definition of full auto and with you having full autos, it's curious that you have the take that you do.

 

[Jim Watson]

I wonder if something that SOUNDS like a machine gun might get you plenty of opportunities to explain the machinery to government employees.

 

[1976B.L.Johns.]

might get you plenty of opportunities to explain the machinery to government employees.

Just show 'em your Man Card, problem solved!

 

[LiveLife]

I wonder if something that SOUNDS like a machine gun might get you plenty of opportunities to explain the machinery to government employees.

Just show 'em your Man Card, problem solved!

In addition to teaching eyes closed fast point shooting using natural point of aim in retirement, I now supplement fast cadence shooting to defensive point shooting with pistols and PCC/ARs demonstrated at 5:23 minute of video - https://youtu.be/TCFRWFh4Uyc?t=323

People WILL stop shooting and come over, especially for shooting fast 3 shot cadence as they think you have 3 round burst on your AR/PCC. When I explain the principles of cadence shooting, they go "Oh I see ..." - https://www.gunsandammo.com/editori...erstanding-tempo-distance-and-accuracy/466958

Try it. It's a fun drill exercise, like eyes closed natural point of aim - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...those-with-vision-issues.891558/post-11996959

 

[Jim Watson]

People WILL stop shooting and come over, especially for shooting fast 3 shot cadence as they think you have 3 round burst on your AR/PCC. When I explain the principles of cadence shooting, they go "Oh I see

Doesn’t seem like the response you would get from those government employees.