ATF agent
(AP Photo/LM Otero)
Previous Post
Next Post

The National Association for Gun Rights was granted a temporary restraining order in its Lawsuit against the ATF, National Association for Gun Rights v. Garland, in federal court in the Northern District of Texas.

The TRO preserves the status quo in the case until “either September 27, 2023 or such time that the Court rules on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 22), whichever is earlier,” according to the opinion handed down by the federal court in the Northern District of Texas.

NAGR argued that the 5th Circuit’s Cargill ruling (holding that bump stocks are not machine guns) should apply here. Judge O’Connor agreed: “The Fifth Circuit’s recent analysis of the exact statutory language at issue here shows that Plaintiffs [NAGR] are very likely to succeed on the merits… Because FRTs do not enable a weapon to automatically fire multiple rounds with a single function of the trigger itself, the Court finds that FRTs most likely are not machineguns under Cargill’s reasoning.”

In an open letter to all federal firearms dealers in 2022, the ATF stated: “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 Firearms Act (NFA), and ‘machineguns’ as defined in the Gun Control Act (GCA).”

Rare Breed Triggers began selling the Forced Reset Trigger in December of 2020, after having the design analyzed by multiple legal teams and firearms experts. By January 13th of 2021, the ATF had launched efforts to have FRTs outlawed. The ATF tried to justify this by saying that “multiple concerned citizens” reached out to them regarding Rare Breed’s FRTs, however FOIA requests proved that there was no record of a citizen ever contacting the ATF about the triggers. 

“The court has spoken and found that the ATF’s definition is ‘likely unlawful’, because it is ,” said Dudley Brown, President of the National Association for Gun Rights.

“This Temporary Restraining Order is another step in our fight to get the ATF’s bogus redefining of ‘machinegun’ thrown out and inches us closer to stopping the ATF’s harassment of our friends at Rare Breed Triggers.”

The goal of the Texas lawsuit is to bring an end to the ATF’s FRT trigger ban and to protect NAGR’s members and supporters who own FRTs from an out-of-control ATF.

Under federal law, a machine gun is defined as “a 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.”  This is the definition that has stood unaltered in the law for nearly nine decades that the ATF is now ignoring and trying to re-write through civil charges against our friends at Rare Breed Triggers.  There is no dispute that the Rare Breed Triggers’ FRT only allows one round to be fired for each function of the trigger. 

“Chances are very good, based on what the court said in today’s temporary restraining order, that we can get this extended to a full preliminary injunction protecting all our members, and that’s what we’ll fight for next,” said Hannah Hill, Executive Director of the National Foundation for Gun Rights, legal arm of the National Association for Gun Rights.

(ED: The restraining order only applies to the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit.)

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” This is the definition that has stood unaltered in the law for nearly nine decades that the ATF is now ignoring and trying to re-write through civil charges against our friends at Rare Breed Triggers.

    • Moderator, please remove the post above by Karalinda — it’s spam and may be a harmful link.

      • When 9 out of 10 Americans cannot Define Gun Control by its History of Rot it is no wonder why Gun Control continues to push forward and receive standing. Gun Control zealots know the stats so they feel free to run around rewriting history claiming The Second Amendment is Racist. It is what happens when those supposedly on point Defending the Second Amendment fail to Define Gun Control by its History thus providing standing for an agenda that should have been abolished like its sidekick Slavery.
        Gun talking Blowbags please Do Not Reply until you have asked 10 ramdom people to Define Gun Control by its History…

        • Woman, you are ridiculous.
          Let’s say you decide to put a baby goat into an enclosure with a couple wolves. I see you and proceed to tell you that is a bad idea because the goat will get eaten. By your logic displayed when talking about racial issues you will call me a bigot for saying something like that about the wolves.

        • Paul,

          Don’t waste your breath (er fingers typing). She is a bitter and nasty person who harbors hatred and insults anyone who fails to immediately and enthusiastically agree with everything that she says. Anything remotely resembling discussion and constructive debate is not possible. Of course agreeing to respectfully disagree is completely out of the question.

      • It’s kind of hard to not believe that the role of the original Debbie W., who often displayed some semblance of rationality, has been assumed by a bot of some sort. I’d say artificial intelligence, but that would be stretching it.

  2. Is the ATF tired of all the winning yet?

    Most recent recruitment ad: “Join the ATF. Be a bully and a chump.”

    • “Must be willing to see all of your efforts flushed down the toilet by a single judge’s ruling …”

        • Several years ago, I was in a situation where I was legally justified to shoot a dog. Since the dog stopped its charge about 20 feet short of me, I did not shoot. I guess that means I would fail the employment character qualifications to be an Ay Tee Eff agent.

        • I can be a sap.
          I believe “all dogs go to heaven”.
          I also believe the same cannot be said for all ATF staff.
          Or career politicians.

        • UC,

          Same here. Aggressive mutt had bitten some people and it came up to me snarling and baring its’ teeth on a public street next to our house, (out of city limits,) so I drew on it, had it’s forehead in the sights and started backing into our driveway so it would be on MY property when I splattered its brains on the ground..

          It was following me about five feet away, and something drew its attention before it put a paw in in the driveway. It turned and wandered off..

          Later that day, I ran into one of the sheriff deputies I’d gotten to know over the years, and asked him about waiting until muttley was clearly on my property. He’d been involved in chasing the mutt down earlier in the day, and was aware of it. He just said it didn’t matter if the mutt was on my property or not. The only factor was if it was safe to shoot or not. Didn’t matter (in this case,) if it was on the county road or not. I think he was kind of hinting at ‘why didn’t you blast the damn thing when you had a chance..’

    • “Multiple Concerned Citizens” equals F-Troop agents who fail to understand the law and technical advice.

      No wonder ATF were the butt-monkeys of the federal agencies until the TSA was formed.

  3. Can’t sell FRT’s but you can go on multiple websites and buy everything you need to turn any AR-15 into a real machine gun for less than $100 and a dremel tool to open up space for the auto sear. Makes sense…

    Never done it myself. A birdie told me it takes about 30 minutes. I’m a good boy. I would never.

  4. I’ve never fired a gun with a binary trigger. I’ve always wondered this:

    What happens if, after pulling the trigger back, you decide you don’t want to fire the second round? Is there a way to “cancel” the shot so that you can release the trigger?

    • While holding the trigger back move the selector to “semi” or “safe”. Then release the trigger.

    • You are aware that a FRT is not a binary trigger? All a FRT is force the trigger reset with a spring, allowing faster firing. Apparently the ATF tested such devices and claimed that they were able to shoot at a rate of fire equivalent to a machine gun, hence the push to ban them even though for YEARS they had consistently approved such devices.

  5. FRT triggers are purely recreational and of no interest to me but as a free people we are allowed to own them!

  6. With Cargill on the books in the Fifth Circuit, this was inevitable, and shows how you do test cases: start with narrow cases and build on those wins to expand the protection.

    What will be fun here is that unlike Judge Ezra (who, after being bench-slapped by the Fifth Circuit en banc in Cargill, then proceeded to stay the case pending resolution of the AFT’s cert petition), I don’t think Judge O’Connor will be inclined to stay his TRO / preliminary injunction. I also expect to see a motion for summary judgment filed ASAP, and granted fairly quickly.

    • LKB,

      But, but, but, a certain allegedly female commenter on this site keeps screaming that all we have to do is shout to the masses about bigotry and all unconstitutional firearm laws will magically disappear! Surely you, an accomplished attorney on the U.S. Supreme Court Bar with decades of experience, have no idea what you are talking about, right?

      Just like the U.S. government and state governments believe that they can steamroll our rights with the “compelling public/government interest” magical incantation, she believes that her “bigotry history” magical incantation will eliminate unconstitutional firearm laws.

      The rest of us try our best to operate in the real world, not the world that we wish it to be. Then again, that is what separates us from Pr0gre$$ive True Believers.

  7. Bettleback Bettleback Bettleback.
    Judges? We don’t care what a judge has to say, we are theBiden

Comments are closed.