Trump Administration Ends Legal Battle to Ban Forced-Reset Triggers
The Trump administration has dropped its efforts to ban forced-reset triggers, a device that significantly increases the firing rate of semiautomatic weapons. These triggers allow guns to fire hundreds of rounds per minute, mimicking automatic weapons. The Biden administration had previously attempted to block the sale of these devices, arguing they pose a significant public safety risk. This decision marks a reversal of that policy and raises concerns about the availability of rapid-fire gun accessories.
WASHINGTON The Trump administration has abandoned the legal fight to ban forced-reset triggers, devices that enable semiautomatic weapons to fire at a rate approaching that of machine guns. These triggers, which can allow a weapon to discharge hundreds of rounds per minute with a single pull of the trigger, had been targeted by the Biden administration.
The Justice Department under President Biden argued that forced-reset triggers effectively converted semiautomatic rifles into illegal machine guns, subject to federal regulation and prohibition. However, the Trump administration has now withdrawn from the legal proceedings, effectively allowing the sale and distribution of these devices to continue.
Gun control advocates have expressed strong concerns over the decision, citing the potential for increased gun violence and the circumvention of existing laws regulating automatic weapons. They argue that forced-reset triggers pose a grave threat to public safety and should be subject to strict federal oversight. Supporters of the decision claim that the triggers are a legal accessory and that restricting them infringes upon Second Amendment rights. The future of forced-reset trigger regulation remains uncertain.
The Justice Department under President Biden argued that forced-reset triggers effectively converted semiautomatic rifles into illegal machine guns, subject to federal regulation and prohibition. However, the Trump administration has now withdrawn from the legal proceedings, effectively allowing the sale and distribution of these devices to continue.
Gun control advocates have expressed strong concerns over the decision, citing the potential for increased gun violence and the circumvention of existing laws regulating automatic weapons. They argue that forced-reset triggers pose a grave threat to public safety and should be subject to strict federal oversight. Supporters of the decision claim that the triggers are a legal accessory and that restricting them infringes upon Second Amendment rights. The future of forced-reset trigger regulation remains uncertain.