This week, arguments unfolded in a Brooklyn court over the legality of a
device designed to expedite the firing of rounds from a firearm, with
federal prosecutors contending that it breaches the federal machine gun
prohibition.
However, Rare Breed Triggers, a company that sells this innovative trigger
mechanism which, when integrated into a rifle, accelerates the rate of
firing, strongly disagreed with this interpretation.
Rare Breed's president, Lawrence DeMonico, boldly challenged the authorities
in court, stating, “If you are so convinced they're machine guns, arrest me.
Let’s go ahead.”
The company has reportedly sold over 80,000 units of their "forced reset
triggers" (FRT-15s) across the United States, including to New York City and
Long Island residents, as stated in the
court records. This legal dispute mirrors the broader, ongoing controversy regarding
other devices, such as bump stocks, designed to increase the firing rate of
firearms.
The U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York
initiated a lawsuit
to halt Rare Breed Triggers' sales earlier this year, alleging that the
company had set up an elaborate corporate structure and used pseudonyms on
shipping labels to conceal their actions.
Temporary restrictions were placed on sales by Judge Nina R. Morrison in
February. The outcome of this week's hearing will determine whether an
extended injunction to halt sales will be enacted as the case continues to
progress.
According to the
National Firearms Act of 1934
and the
Gun Control Act of 1968, machine guns—illegal under federal law—are defined as firearms that can
discharge more than one round of ammunition per single trigger pull.
The "forced reset triggers" sold by Rare Breed can technically fire multiple
rounds with a single trigger pull. However, a number of firearm experts
assert that the device does not turn a firearm into an automatic weapon, as
the trigger resets itself between rounds.
The case poses a challenge to the powers and restrictions of the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), the federal agency
responsible for implementing gun laws.
The ATF has been progressively more proactive in recent years, as firearm
legislation remains stagnant in Congress. The bureau has issued rulings on
several contentious devices, including ghost guns,
bump stocks,
stabilizing braces, and
forced reset triggers
like the FRT-15, leading to multiple legal objections against perceived
overreach.
President Joe Biden
has declared his intention to further bolster the ATF in order to curb
nationwide gun violence.
Company executives characterized the civil suit as a contrived legal
strategy aimed at obstructing their sales of the triggers, which have
generated an estimated revenue of $39 million since 2020.
Before the commencement of device sales, the executives consulted with
former ATF employees and attorneys who affirmed the device's legality. Even
after the ATF deemed the triggers illegal, the company continued to sell
them, disputing the agency's evaluation.
Expressing his resolute stand, DeMonico stated, “I am ready to stand for
what is right against an agency that arbitrarily changes its stance and uses
non-statutory language to discourage and intimidate people from exercising
their lawful rights.”
In two days of testimonies, a multitude of expert opinions were presented
about whether the FRT-15 fulfills the legal definition of a machine gun.
Prosecutors and defense attorneys explored the inner mechanics of the device
in exhaustive detail. Videos and comprehensive diagrams were presented, and
real gun parts were used to illustrate the device's workings.
The defense called two former ATF agents, who refuted the official ATF
report that labeled the FRT-15 as a machine gun. Both stated that the
mechanics of the FRT-15 required the trigger to reset after each shot,
contradicting the ATF's position that the device allowed continuous firing
without trigger reset.
The case encompasses more than the device itself, with allegations of
continued sales after a cease-and-desist order from the ATF and accusations
of fraud.
Company executives denied any attempts at deception, explaining that their
complex corporate structure was designed to limit liability in the event of
device malfunction and to streamline future partial business sales.
DeMonico disclosed that he had been transparent about the device's legal
hurdles through online videos and media interviews. He also confessed to
using pseudonyms on shipping labels to reduce the risk of theft of the
valuable firearm accessories.
Additionally, DeMonico revealed that he procured a stock of triggers from a
separate manufacturing company after their premises were raided by the ATF.
He argued that since the devices were already paid for, he saw them as his
property.
No comments:
Post a Comment