When the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives tried to get rid of forced reset triggers (FRTs), it lost in federal court. So why then do manufacturers of certain reset mechanisms find themselves tied up in litigation over their products? It comes down to a strategic move by the ATF.
Under current law, “[t]he 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.” The key phrase for these purposes is “by a single function of the trigger.”
An FRT (using the term in its generic sense) operates by automatically resetting a firearm’s trigger after each shot. The shooter is then able to squeeze the trigger again without having to consciously release, and then reapply, pressure on the trigger. This allows the trigger on a semiautomatic firearm to be operated much faster than without an FRT. But the trigger is still being pulled, reset, then pulled again, for each shot and follow-up shot. Put simply, like all semiautomatic firearms, one equipped with an FRT fires only one bullet for each function of the trigger.
In 2021, the ATF sent a cease and desist letter to Rare Breed Triggers, demanding that it cease production and sales of their FRT because the agency deemed it to be a machinegun. Rare Breed Triggers fought back and eventually secured a win in federal district court. Judge Reed O’Connor ruled that FRTs are not machineguns. The ATF appealed to the Fifth Circuit, but ultimately reached a settlement agreement with Rare Breed Triggers: the ATF dropped the case and returned all seized or surrendered triggers. Seemingly the only conditions were that Rare Breed Triggers not develop an FRT for pistols and that it immediately take action to enforce its patent protections. All in all, an exciting victory for Rare Breed Triggers and tens of thousands of FRT users.
Enter Tim Hoffman and the Super Safety. Rare Breed Triggers’ FRT comes in a cassette style that drops into an AR-15 and replaces the fire control group. Looking for a simpler solution that could work with a (mostly) factory fire control group, Hoffman designed a replacement for the AR-15 safety selector that achieves a similar result. And to make the design easily accessible to hobbyists, he made the design files open source and free for all. This has led to a proliferation of small manufacturers selling their own variants of the Super Safety. Hobbyists have even found ways to install them in other firearms like AK-47s and MP5 variants. The result is a less expensive alternative to the FRT that drops in with only some minor modifications to the firearm.
Although they both achieve a similar effect, the Super Safety functions very differently than Rare Breed Triggers’ FRT. In Rare Breed’s design, the hammer is pushed back by the bolt upon firing and presses down on a portion of the trigger, thereby forcing it to reset. A locking lever then stops the trigger from being operated until the bolt closes. The entire system is contained in a cassette that replaces the fire control group.
A Super Safety, meanwhile, replaces an AR-15’s safety selector with what is effectively a lever attached to a pivot. The pivot has a contoured piece that engages the back of the trigger. The lever engages with the bolt. When the bolt cycles, the bolt pushes the lever back, twisting the pivot, which resets the trigger.
In spite of this difference in function, if Rare Breed Triggers’ patents are read a certain way, they might arguably cover the Super Safety design. And because of Rare Breed’s settlement agreement with the ATF, it is forced to make that argument in federal court. As of the date of writing, Rare Breed Triggers has initiated lawsuits against Hoffman and several manufacturers of the Super Safety design.
The ATF’s strategy is brilliant. By giving Rare Breed Triggers a win, but requiring it aggressively to pursue patent litigation, ATF essentially deputized Rare Breed to continue the battle it couldn’t win: keeping trigger reset mechanisms out of the market. Rare Breed is presumably not required to pursue frivolous suits—but it also has incentive to be quick on the draw with lawsuits in order to keep the ATF at bay. Not only did this move let the ATF avoid a potential loss before the Fifth Circuit, it allowed it to offload litigation labor to Rare Breed Triggers. It turned a loss in court into a potentially massive win. Of course, the losers in the situation are the thousands of firearms enthusiasts who prefer the Super Safety as their choice of reset mechanism. And if the strategy proves successful, we may see the ATF try to expand its weaponization of patent law through settlements in other cases it would otherwise ultimately be destined to lose.
Jamie G. McWilliam holds a number of firearm-related patents.