Machine Guns Are Effectively Legal Again
The dangerous legal fiction putting rapid-fire weapons back in circulation.
A rifle that fires 30 rounds in just over 2 seconds—without legally being called a machine gun.
That's what you're seeing in a video of a forced-reset trigger (FRT) in action:
These devices are now legal again in the U.S., thanks to a combination of narrow statutory interpretation and a growing judicial hostility to federal regulation. It's not just dangerous—it's deadly—and emblematic of how the courts are systematically dismantling our capacity to govern.
⚖️ The Supreme Court Opened the Door
In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6–3 decision in Garland v. Cargill, striking down the federal ban on bump stocks. These devices allow a shooter to use the recoil of a semi-automatic rifle to fire at near-machine-gun speeds. The Court ruled that because bump stocks don't result in more than one shot per function of the trigger, they do not meet the statutory definition of a "machine gun" under the National Firearms Act.
In doing so, the Court prioritized mechanical definitions over functional outcomes. It decided that if a device technically resets the trigger between rounds—even if the shooter's finger barely moves and the gun dumps a full magazine in seconds—it's not a machine gun.
This was not just a rejection of the ATF's bump stock rule. It was a green light to an entire class of rapid-fire devices designed to skate just outside the edge of that legal definition.
🧨 FRTs Ride the Loophole
Only a few weeks later, a federal district court in National Association for Gun Rights v. Garland applied Cargill's logic to forced-reset triggers (FRTs), ruling that they too were not machine guns under federal law. Judge Reed O'Connor found that the ATF had overstepped by attempting to ban these devices, which, despite enabling 900 rounds per minute, technically reset the trigger between shots.
The court emphasized a critical difference:
Machine guns fire multiple rounds per single function of the trigger.
FRT-equipped guns, by contrast, fire one round per function—just incredibly fast.
The judge faulted the ATF for focusing on how the shooter interacts with the device, rather than on the mechanical operation of the firearm itself. This reasoning—elevating form over function—has now become precedent.
🔧 Mechanical Operation vs. Human Intent
This legal distinction might make sense on paper, but it collapses in the real world.
Federal law defines a machine gun as a weapon that fires "automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger" (26 U.S.C. § 5845(b)). That was written in 1934. Today's devices exploit their language to deliver functionally automatic fire without meeting the letter of the definition.
An FRT forces the trigger forward after each shot, allowing the shooter to keep firing just by maintaining finger pressure. In practice, it simulates full-auto fire. The only difference? The trigger technically resets.
Critics—including ATF officials, public health experts, and gun safety advocates—argue that these devices are explicitly designed to circumvent the law while producing the same lethal results. Instead of weighing intent or impact, the courts focus on whether the internal parts meet a specific mechanical test.
📉 DOJ Backs Down
Two days ago (May 2025), the Department of Justice dropped its case against Rare Breed Triggers, one of the most prominent FRT manufacturers, and settled. Under the agreement, the government will return seized devices to owners and allow Rare Breed to resume selling FRTs so long as it stays out of the handgun market.
To gun rights groups, this was a victory. To anyone concerned with public safety, it was a bloody surrender.
As Brady United and other advocacy organizations noted, the ruling and its aftermath send a chilling message. If you're clever enough with mechanical semantics, you can legally manufacture weapons of war for civilian use.
🏛️ A Regulatory Crisis, Not Just a Gun Crisis
The FRT decision isn't just about firearms. It's part of a broader legal campaign to erode federal agencies' ability to interpret and enforce laws passed by Congress. Under the "major questions doctrine," conservative judges increasingly demand that Congress explicitly authorize every significant regulatory action.
But Congress is not built for speed. It's polarized, slow-moving, and incapable of adapting to fast-changing technologies. Agencies like the ATF exist to fill those gaps—to apply expertise to interpret and enforce the law responsibly.
The courts are now saying: That's no longer allowed. If Congress didn't spell it out in 1934, regulators can't enforce it in 2025. That mindset is not just a danger to public health or gun safety—it's a fundamental threat to modern governance.
As legal scholars have observed, the courts are handing gun rights advocates victories that Congress would never vote for directly.
💥 What Can Be Done?
Congress must act to update the National Firearms Act and explicitly ban accessories like FRTs and bump stocks.
State legislatures can pass their own restrictions on rapid-fire trigger modifications, even as federal regulation falters.
Support groups like Brady, Everytown, and Giffords are fighting to close these legal loopholes.
Educate others. Most Americans have no idea this is happening.
Join the Interdependence Movement
This is precisely why we need communities of mutual aid and civic responsibility, not just individual action. The fight against dangerous loopholes in our gun laws requires collective action.
Call on Congress: The most effective action we can take right now is to collectively demand that Congress update the National Firearms Act to ban both bump stocks and forced reset triggers explicitly. These devices circumvent the spirit of our gun laws while enabling mass violence.
Take action today:
Contact your representatives and demand legislation that explicitly bans these rapid-fire devices.
Join established gun safety organizations fighting this battle:
Everytown for Gun Safety has specific campaigns targeting these devices.
Brady United offers ways to take immediate action.
Giffords Law Center provides tools for effective advocacy.
Follow March For Our Lives @AMarch4OurLives for organized response opportunities.
Only through collective, organized pressure can we counter the gun lobby's influence and close these dangerous loopholes. No single person can do this alone, but we can create meaningful change together.
Remember: Resilience comes through collective action, not isolation.
P.S.
From this gun owner (rifles, shotguns, handguns) to, well, you:
No civilian needs to fire 900 rounds a minute. No responsible society allows it.
The law, as currently interpreted, does not reflect reality. It reflects power, pressure, and precision-crafted loopholes. And unless we push back—loudly and persistently—those loopholes will be where the next mass tragedy begins.