Rarebreed Triggers sends a powerful message to the 2A community and ATF

[safrole]

Make no mistake if they start succeeding with bullbubblegum like this they will come after everything. Is the trigger fast like a machine gun? Yes! Does it function like the definition of one? No!

 

[safrole]

 

[tac]

I'm missing out on all of this thread. What's a 'Triger'? And 'rare breed'? If it's a 'tiger/triceratops hybrid, then I agree that it's quite rare, especially as the latter has been extinct for 65 million years.

Maybe I ought to have mentioned that the video is not available in Europe, for some reason.

 

[308]

I'm missing out on all of this thread. What's a 'Triger'? And 'rare breed'? If it's a 'tiger/triceratops hybrid, then I agree that it's quite rare, especially as the latter has been extinct for 65 million years.

Maybe I ought to have mentioned that the video is not available in Europe, for some reason.

If you use a VPN like Express VPN, you can switch your location to somewhere more reasonable like Dallas, TX, etc, and then the vids will be available

 

[rdb241]

I remember seeing these at the Portland gun show back in the 90s and the ATF outlawed these as well. It was a bumpfire stock with rollers that the action set on. The ones I saw were like $900.00 for the stock and back then, that was a good chunk of money to spend on a stock. Then gun was never altered in anyway. So If they can outlaw this stock and bump stocks. What is going to stop them with this trigger?

 

[tac]

If you use a VPN like Express VPN, you can switch your location to somewhere more reasonable like Dallas, TX, etc, and then the vids will be available

'kay. I've figured it out now, thanks. Living in UK it's of little interest to me these days, well, since 1987, in fact. But it's nice to see what you guys are getting up to these days.

 

[RVTECH]

But if you understand the engineering and how the trigger is still individually pulled to fire every individual shot, it does not meet the definition of full automatic fire whatsoever.

I certainly get this, and I think most do as we see this repeated in nearly any gun forum, site or video about it HOWEVER...

What perplexes me (actually confuses me) is why it is so difficult for say this Lawrence Demonico and his 'throngs' of experts and lawyers to mount a defense to debunk the ATFs classification of the trigger as a 'machine gun'. The trigger does not possess an action, barrel or firing pin, cannot accept ammo and CANNOT BE FIRED!! It seems like a no brainier to me. I mean this would be like calling the gas pedal of a vehicle an 'automobile' even thought it requires varying pressure of the foot to control the speed.

I suspect it is nothing more than arrogance on the part of the ATF to maintain this classification but until THIS part is resolved it doesn't appear the ATF could care less how the trigger functions and will remain a 'standoff' with them.

 

[rdb241]

I certainly get this, and I think most do as we see this repeated in nearly any gun forum, site or video about it HOWEVER...

What perplexes me (actually confuses me) is why it is so difficult for say this Lawrence Demonico and his 'throngs' of experts and lawyers to mount a defense to debunk the ATFs classification of the trigger as a 'machine gun'. The trigger does not possess an action, barrel or firing pin, cannot accept ammo and CANNOT BE FIRED!! It seems like a no brainier to me. I mean this would be like calling the gas pedal of a vehicle an 'automobile' even thought it requires varying pressure of the foot to control the speed.

I suspect it is nothing more than arrogance on the part of the ATF to maintain this classification but until THIS part is resolved it doesn't appear the ATF could care less how the trigger functions and will remain a 'standoff' with them.

That can be said about the Akins accelerator and bump stocks as well. It's not hard to make your own bump stock. Why are 50bmg uppers now numbered like a complete firearm?

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance indeed.

 

[Ruger Rich]

This is so like many other situations where an entity or person with power or great finances comes at another with lessor means. The time
and finances available to fight back often make the battle objective, (i.e., a legitimate defense) very difficult. And then there's the matter of
time. Working an issue through the courts and appeals can be a seemingly forever thing. I know nothing regarding the finances or resources
of this company that makes the trigger, but I feel secure in offering their defense will hurt.

 

[Hueco]

Definitions lag behind technology, obviously. It'd be damn near impossible to define the specifics of some future tech.

So some politicians decided that John Q Public shouldn't own a machine gun and, at the time, there was an easy distinction: one trigger press equals one pew or one press equals pew pew pews. Pretty easy to draw the line.

The law is the technical representation of the want: the Fed doesn't want Mr. Public to have a fast rate of fire in any weapon he owns. The law serves this purpose.

Now, we have forced reset and binary technology. No, it doesn't conflict with the letter of the law, but it's obvious that it conflicts with the spirit of it by allowing John to have a fast rate of fire. In the FRT's case, a rate of fire that's damn near indiscernible from automatic fire.

We have (yet another) situation where someone is riding the line between letter of the law and spirit. It'll obviously go to the courts to decide, but don't be surprised when both forced reset and binary tech gets axed entirely or NFA'ed.

The only way this changes is if the NFA and Brady amendments start to be dismantled. I don't think FRT is going to be the one to take out the first brick. My money is on Texas's new suppressor law and cans being removed from the NFA first. It's going to be a long while before we see machine guns allowed (or any tech that likewise allows as fast a rate of fire).

This is no different than pistol braces. Both were going to be in the ATF's sights eventually and anyone arguing that they don't break the spirit of the law is delusional. You're playing in a grey zone and I really hope successful in getting things changed.

 

[USMC1911]

Definitions lag behind technology, obviously. It'd be damn near impossible to define the specifics of some future tech.

So some politicians decided that John Q Public shouldn't own a machine gun and, at the time, there was an easy distinction: one trigger press equals one pew or one press equals pew pew pews. Pretty easy to draw the line.

The law is the technical representation of the want: the Fed doesn't want Mr. Public to have a fast rate of fire in any weapon he owns. The law serves this purpose.

Now, we have forced reset and binary technology. No, it doesn't conflict with the letter of the law, but it's obvious that it conflicts with the spirit of it by allowing John to have a fast rate of fire. In the FRT's case, a rate of fire that's damn near indiscernible from automatic fire.

We have (yet another) situation where someone is riding the line between letter of the law and spirit. It'll obviously go to the courts to decide, but don't be surprised when both forced reset and binary tech gets axed entirely or NFA'ed.

The only way this changes is if the NFA and Brady amendments start to be dismantled. I don't think FRT is going to be the one to take out the first brick. My money is on Texas's new suppressor law and cans being removed from the NFA first. It's going to be a long while before we see machine guns allowed (or any tech that likewise allows as fast a rate of fire).

This is no different than pistol braces. Both were going to be in the ATF's sights eventually and anyone arguing that they don't break the spirit of the law is delusional. You're playing in a grey zone and I really hope successful in getting things changed.

Fortunately thats not how law works usually. The spirit of law is mental mastirbation at its finest and impossible to define. Its like the 2nd amendment argument that the founders didn't think about "military assault weapons" that we all no is not true statment or that the Constitution is a living document. All bs of the highest level.

 

[titsonritz]

Pants are machine guns.

So are shoe strings. That's the real reason they take them from you in jail, they don't really care if hang yourself.

 

[TTSX]

Dude's got that invisible lat stance on point. Complete with pre workout bicep veins

 

[rdb241]

Fortunately thats not how law works usually. The spirit of law is mental mastirbation at its finest and impossible to define. Its like the 2nd amendment argument that the founders didn't think about "military assault weapons" that we all no is not true statment or that the Constitution is a living document. All bs of the highest level.

Are you in the Military? I'm not. I do not own 1 single "assault weapon", I own a semi auto clone of a rifle that looks like a military rifle. Used for sporting purposes and self defense and in some cases, hunting..

 

[USMC1911]

Are you in the Military? I'm not. I do not own 1 single "assault weapon", I own a semi auto clone of a rifle that looks like a military rifle. Used for sporting purposes and self defense and in some cases, hunting..

You totally missed my point.

 

[Hueco]

Fortunately thats not how law works usually. The spirit of law is mental mastirbation at its finest and impossible to define. Its like the 2nd amendment argument that the founders didn't think about "military assault weapons" that we all no is not true statment or that the Constitution is a living document. All bs of the highest level.

Yes, because no statute has ever been written forcing a judicial interpretation and there really isn't any reason for courts since we can all read amirite?

Dismissing this interpretation as "mental masturbation" or "BS" is short sighted and ahistorical. You really don't think the founder's intent weighs on any decision that's ever been made by the SC? Uh huh…..

 

[quneur]

My opinion concerning what constitutes a machine gun, you have to start with basic definition. Basically, its a firearm that can provide a rapid rate of fire through mechanical means. All able body person able to fire a firearm must be able to provide the same rate of fire as determined by capabilities of the firearm, ie. one consistent rate of fire in which the firearm is built for. So, a trigger which depends upon the user capabilities does not meet the above definition; neither does bump stocks.

As to braces, its stupid of the ATF to try to differentiate a pistol vs rifles. Ex, vertical grips are illegal for pistols but not for rifles. Therefore, by their definition, your non-firing hand can not be vertically braced. So, a two hand stance with a revolver or glock would be illegal as your non-firing hand is vertically braced.

 

[USMC1911]

Yes, because no statute has ever been written forcing a judicial interpretation and there really isn't any reason for courts since we can all read amirite?

Dismissing this interpretation as "mental masturbation" or "BS" is short sighted and ahistorical. You really don't think the founder's intent weighs on any decision that's ever been made by the SC? Uh huh…..

Not what I said. Judicial interpretation? Yup all the time. ATF redefining mechanical features of a very clearly written law? Nope. Please cite something that is enforceable by simple "spirit of law"? Yes intent in this particular law is well established as it is very mechanical in nature and easy to define and understand. Very simply put, its at best overreaching by the ATF if not blatant misinterpretation of law to fit an agenda.

 

[billdeserthills]

Who's fault is it really?

The degenerates ATF?
OR
We the spineless people?

last time I checked, we voted for these losers in office and when they get out of line, we tolerate it. We the armed citizens of the United States are the biggest military in the world. We could take our country back but we are too fat and dumped down to do so.

I will admit, I too am part of the problem, to a point. I don't go above and beyond as a citizen to make changes for the better. But at least I have a clue as to how this system works and I try not to contribute. Trust me, I know how bad I'm getting shafted.

this is just the beginning..... We ain't seen sh!t yet.

Seems like dueling could really help out with our politician troubles