Trump Administration Reverses Ban on Forced-Reset Triggers for Rifles

The Trump administration has reached a settlement that will allow the sale and possession of forced-reset triggers, devices that can transform semiautomatic rifles into weapons capable of firing at rates similar to machine guns. This move effectively reverses a ban implemented under the previous administration, which had classified these devices as illegal machine guns under federal law.

Background and Legal Battle

Forced-reset triggers (FRTs) are aftermarket devices that replace the standard trigger on semiautomatic rifles. They enable shooters to fire rapidly by automatically resetting the trigger after each shot, allowing for sustained, rapid fire with minimal effort. The federal government had previously determined that certain FRTs met the legal definition of machine guns, leading to their prohibition and the confiscation of thousands of these devices.

The previous administration pursued legal action against manufacturers, resulting in a court order halting their sale. However, gun rights groups challenged the ban in court, where a federal judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, deeming the prohibition unlawful and blocking its enforcement.

Settlement Details

A recent settlement has resolved ongoing lawsuits related to FRTs. The agreement includes several key provisions:

• The federal government will return all confiscated or surrendered forced-reset triggers to their original owners.

• The administration will not enforce the machine gun ban on these devices, provided they are not designed for use in handguns.

• The primary manufacturer involved has agreed not to develop FRTs for pistols and to enforce its patents to prevent unsafe modifications.

The administration highligths the decision as a defense of constitutional freedoms.

Reactions from Stakeholders

The settlement has been welcomed by Second Amendment supporters and firearms enthusiasts, who view it as a restoration of constitutional rights and a correction of federal overreach. Manufacturers expressed gratitude for the administration's commitment to protecting lawful gun ownership and announced plans to resume production of these legal devices.
Some gun safety organizations have expressed concern about the decision, though firearm experts note that FRTs are simply one of many legal accessories that allow law-abiding citizens to exercise their rights more effectively. The settlement represents a victory for due process and proper regulatory procedures.

Broader Implications and Context

This settlement represents an important reaffirmation of Second Amendment protections. It follows several legal battles over firearm accessories and highlights the importance of precise technical definitions in firearms regulation.

While critics have raised concerns about FRTs being available without background checks, supporters point out that these devices are accessories - not firearms themselves - and that law-abiding citizens have historically used such accessories responsibly. Gun rights advocates emphasize that the settlement simply acknowledges that FRTs do not convert semi-automatic rifles into machine guns as defined by law, and properly limits government agencies to enforcing existing statutes rather than creating new restrictions without legislative approval.

Conclusion

The Trump administration's decision to lift the ban on forced-reset triggers represents a return to constitutional principles and proper regulatory boundaries. As lawfully seized property is returned to rightful owners and manufacturers prepare to meet consumer demand, the settlement stands as an important precedent for the protection of Second Amendment rights and the limitation of regulatory overreach in firearms policy.