TX22 FRTs
- Thread starter strobro32
- Start date
Unfortunately for RB and any one in any government that wants to ban the Super Safety or others, these parts are so simple and easy to make in a home workshop or with a 3D printer that it would be impossible to put the genie back into the bottle. Look at the Glock switch that is on so many gang guns and that is relatively complicated to make.
RB might just be fulfilling their duty to abide by the agreement with the federal govt and 'fighting patent infringement' knowing fully that they can't come close to stopping everybody making them. Like I said in another string it's like playing Whack-A-Mole with a very expensive mallet. If they really are trying then they are taking on an overwhelming task.
The restrictions and then ban on machineguns left a loophole that someone found and legally poked a stick through: the FRT concept. But it only brings up the question 'What is so bad about machineguns?" In spite of the hysteria that "they are weapons of war and don't belong in a civil society" can anyone prove with hard facts that they result in more death and injury? Seems to me that most gangsters with Glock switches just empty their magazines in the air and miss a lot more. No doubt any Army sergeant would tell you that most recruits shoot much worse on full auto than semi and likely most experienced soldiers. I have shot my MGs at targets at only 50 yards and it was humbling to see how much worse I do on FA than semi and I have been shooting them for a long time.
RB might just be fulfilling their duty to abide by the agreement with the federal govt and 'fighting patent infringement' knowing fully that they can't come close to stopping everybody making them. Like I said in another string it's like playing Whack-A-Mole with a very expensive mallet. If they really are trying then they are taking on an overwhelming task.
The restrictions and then ban on machineguns left a loophole that someone found and legally poked a stick through: the FRT concept. But it only brings up the question 'What is so bad about machineguns?" In spite of the hysteria that "they are weapons of war and don't belong in a civil society" can anyone prove with hard facts that they result in more death and injury? Seems to me that most gangsters with Glock switches just empty their magazines in the air and miss a lot more. No doubt any Army sergeant would tell you that most recruits shoot much worse on full auto than semi and likely most experienced soldiers. I have shot my MGs at targets at only 50 yards and it was humbling to see how much worse I do on FA than semi and I have been shooting them for a long time.
Last edited:
Ya RB claimed 40 mil + on the 1st sales and " millions " spent defending it.
Then they went from hero to zero in days.
I've watched most of the vids and followed a lot of what is going on.
The Hoffman video is pretty clear and stombuli (spelling? ) is pretty good too.
Best thing with the SS is it was released as open source.
That is public domain if you don't know what open source means.
So there is no one to sue since it belongs to the public.
Smart on Mr. Hoffmans part. He has other incomes.
And the files are now everywhere for 3d, CAD, or hand milling.
He also let it out to the public then RB tried to ammend their patent to encompass the SS.
The Hoffman video on page 1 is worth a watch for fine legal details.
TL/DR , Fuck RB
Back on the tx22 I went ahead and preordered one of their FRT units.
Pick a pistol up this Sept.
Then they went from hero to zero in days.
I've watched most of the vids and followed a lot of what is going on.
The Hoffman video is pretty clear and stombuli (spelling? ) is pretty good too.
Best thing with the SS is it was released as open source.
That is public domain if you don't know what open source means.
So there is no one to sue since it belongs to the public.
Smart on Mr. Hoffmans part. He has other incomes.
And the files are now everywhere for 3d, CAD, or hand milling.
He also let it out to the public then RB tried to ammend their patent to encompass the SS.
The Hoffman video on page 1 is worth a watch for fine legal details.
TL/DR , Fuck RB
Back on the tx22 I went ahead and preordered one of their FRT units.
Pick a pistol up this Sept.
Alaska_Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 405
People who say that FRTs aren’t comparable to MGs are 100% right.
They can be better. ?
The TX22 with FRT is the greatest thing ever invented
Ran 100% with CCI mag stuff and Rem Thunderbolt. Weaker ammo had FTE malfs but might work with a can or after break in.
I’ve never had a MG 22lr conversion run this well. My Norrell has never come close to running anywhere near this well.
This is the most exciting thing I’ve shot in many years of shooting so many different types of MGs
They can be better. ?
The TX22 with FRT is the greatest thing ever invented
Ran 100% with CCI mag stuff and Rem Thunderbolt. Weaker ammo had FTE malfs but might work with a can or after break in.
I’ve never had a MG 22lr conversion run this well. My Norrell has never come close to running anywhere near this well.
This is the most exciting thing I’ve shot in many years of shooting so many different types of MGs
Last edited:
A&S Conversions
UZI Talk Life Member
I get that I post too much at once.
Make your own, patents have no effect. But most shooters don’t have the skills to make their own. Especially machining your own.
So who has the deep pockets to fight Rare Breed in court to rule that Super Safeties aren’t subject to their patent?
If a court rules that the Super Safety are not FRTs, then the Super Safety is not covered by the ATF settlement agreement. So where does that put the Super Safety?
Scott
Make your own, patents have no effect. But most shooters don’t have the skills to make their own. Especially machining your own.
So who has the deep pockets to fight Rare Breed in court to rule that Super Safeties aren’t subject to their patent?
If a court rules that the Super Safety are not FRTs, then the Super Safety is not covered by the ATF settlement agreement. So where does that put the Super Safety?
Scott
Alaska_Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 405
It sure was! ?. I really need to get it working with the cheaper ammo that’s stacked deep
A few of the early SS/FRT providers are fighting. It doesn’t look like RB can scare them all off so this should get resolved.
The ATF settlement with RB has nothing to do with the legality of SSs or any flavor FRT. The settlement just ended the ATF prosecution of RB.
The legality of FRTs/SSs comes out of multiple district court rulings.
A&S Conversions
UZI Talk Life Member
It was my understanding that there were two distinct court cases. One in New York that wasn’t going well as they are very anti gun. And I think that the other was in Texas and going well, but not a sure thing. There was injuctive relief for Rare Breed, their clients and an additional gun rights advocate group members from the court in Texas. There were no actual rulings as it was ATF suing Rare Breed in the New York location and Rare Breed was suing ATF in Texas. The ATF and Rare Breed have set aside their lawsuits in the settlement, but there are no actual rulings that FRT/SSs are or are not machine guns.
I keep copies of my Form 4s with me when I bring my NFA items shooting. I choose to show my tax documents. So a shooter has purchased a FRT/SS, sets it up in their semi auto, and goes to their favorite shooting spot. Someone hears what they think is full auto rifle fire. They call the local law enforcement agency. What would the owner of a semiauto with a FRT/SS be able to show the officer that arrives and sees/hears what he thinks is full auto fire that he is witnessing is legal? I am asking, because I don’t know. Has anyone had this experience?
Scott
July 2024 judge Reed O'Connor ruled in a summary judgment that FRTs are not machine guns. Northern district of Texas Court. NAGR V Garland. If I recall correctly the injunction was to keep ATF from going after people while it was being appealed to the fifth circuit by ATF. That appeal of course was dropped and as far as I know the lower Court ruling still stands.
Here's the tricky part, until it reaches the fifth circuit and is decided there, it is not legal precedent for anybody except the parties involved. In other words rare breed triggers have a piece of paper that says what I have is not a machine gun and you can't touch me. Nobody else does. This is one of those times when letting it go through the process, assuming the ruling stood, it would have been better for more people. On the other hand you still can point to this case and say a federal district judge determined they were not machine guns, and ATF actually agreed they weren't in that case in a settlement. Saving the taxpayer money on a futile appeal. ATF is going after me now for my device that does the same thing in a different way, I at least have a case I can point to where ATF agrees they aren't, essentially they would be arguing schrodingers triggers. This thing here moves the trigger forward, it's not a machine gun. This thing here on the other hand moves the trigger forward so it is a machine gun.
As far as I know the New York lawsuit was never completed, and of course was dropped when the settlement was reached. So again nothing legally binding, there is no precedent from that case.
Here's the tricky part, until it reaches the fifth circuit and is decided there, it is not legal precedent for anybody except the parties involved. In other words rare breed triggers have a piece of paper that says what I have is not a machine gun and you can't touch me. Nobody else does. This is one of those times when letting it go through the process, assuming the ruling stood, it would have been better for more people. On the other hand you still can point to this case and say a federal district judge determined they were not machine guns, and ATF actually agreed they weren't in that case in a settlement. Saving the taxpayer money on a futile appeal. ATF is going after me now for my device that does the same thing in a different way, I at least have a case I can point to where ATF agrees they aren't, essentially they would be arguing schrodingers triggers. This thing here moves the trigger forward, it's not a machine gun. This thing here on the other hand moves the trigger forward so it is a machine gun.
As far as I know the New York lawsuit was never completed, and of course was dropped when the settlement was reached. So again nothing legally binding, there is no precedent from that case.
Rare Breed doesn’t have a patent categorically covering all FRTs. Something can still be an FRT without infringing. One of the earlier Blakley patents (US7398723B1) is expired, so anyone can make it if they want.
Alaska_Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 405
Fortunately, the cop has to show why he thinks it’s illegal but I understand your point. People get arrested quite often and then charges are later dropped
There’s lots of internet research and reading that can be done and shown to LEO. I just pulled a few examples:
https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2024/0...ers-and-heightened-scrutiny-of-atf-regulation
https://blog.princelaw.com/2024/07/...ers-as-machineguns-vacated-by-district-court/
Here’s some copy/paste off the internet;
“Under Merrick Garland's leadership, the Department of Justice has changed its stance on forced-reset triggers (FRTs), which are now generally legal under federal law following court rulings
. The legality is not absolute, however, as state laws can still prohibit them, and certain design variations may not be covered by the relevant legal agreements.
Federal policy and court decisions
- Reversal of the ATF's ban: In July 2024, a federal court ruled in National Association for Gun Rights v. Garland that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its authority by classifying FRTs as "machine guns". The Department of Justice (DOJ), led by Garland, did not appeal the decision.
- Influence of Garland v. Cargill: The federal court decision on FRTs was heavily influenced by the Supreme Court's June 2024 ruling in Garland v. Cargill. In that case, the court determined that the ATF overstepped its authority by banning bump stocks and that a bump-stock-equipped firearm is not a "machine gun" under the National Firearms Act.”
I don’t always carry around paperwork showing that everything I do is legal. If someone wants to be extra extra safe then they could stick with RB devices.
From my prior reading of the judicial decisions, I’m comfortable that it applies to all flavors of FRTs that I’ve used.
If a local cop decides to go rogue and make up new laws then I’ll treat it like any cop that goes rogue for any reason.
I don’t have the IG app. Did someone add weight to a TX22 slide?
Crap. I’m sorry to hear this. I’m very surprised to hear this. I would have thought it would be burning up the FRT/SS forums. Is there any public info or links that you can share?
Regarding cops, that is going to be a problem. Since you can't prosecute and arrest for federal crimes locally, many states have their own state statute outlawing machine guns and whatever. This gives the state and local cops the power to arrest someone for having an illegal machine gun, once you're in custody if ATF is interested they take over, if not your local prosecutor does. Usually they give an exception for machine guns that are properly registered federally. That's how Indiana is anyway.
So if you read the actual Indiana code on this it basically says all machine guns are illegal, then the next section says operating a machine gun is illegal, then we get to the third section which says this does not apply to and then it gives the usual military and police exemptions, manufacturer and dealer, and of course if it is owned and operated by someone who properly registered and transferred it with ATF.
This is what is known as an affirmative or positive defense. Just the fact you have something that goes brrrrrrrrrrrrpp in front of the officer, the court is going to say that is prima facie evidence you have an illegal machine gun. This now puts the burden of proof on you, you have to prove that it was registered with ATF to be legal.
But it's not a machine gun you say, see this little part makes it do this not that. And of course the court will say you can't expect police to be experts on the internal differences between a frt or super safety versus a real machine gun. Any reasonable person if they were not aware of the differences would think firing fast like that was a machine gun. A Texas judge says it isn't, and New York judge says it is.
There's going to be some interesting times ahead.
So if you read the actual Indiana code on this it basically says all machine guns are illegal, then the next section says operating a machine gun is illegal, then we get to the third section which says this does not apply to and then it gives the usual military and police exemptions, manufacturer and dealer, and of course if it is owned and operated by someone who properly registered and transferred it with ATF.
This is what is known as an affirmative or positive defense. Just the fact you have something that goes brrrrrrrrrrrrpp in front of the officer, the court is going to say that is prima facie evidence you have an illegal machine gun. This now puts the burden of proof on you, you have to prove that it was registered with ATF to be legal.
But it's not a machine gun you say, see this little part makes it do this not that. And of course the court will say you can't expect police to be experts on the internal differences between a frt or super safety versus a real machine gun. Any reasonable person if they were not aware of the differences would think firing fast like that was a machine gun. A Texas judge says it isn't, and New York judge says it is.
There's going to be some interesting times ahead.
Alaska_Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 405
Like anything with LEO, if they decide to single a person out to make the process the punishment, it’s going to hurt. No piece of paper saying something is legal will stop that
My local police got caught on video last night tasing a suspect multiple times. The suspect was on the ground with his hands open and stretched out. Three cops were holding him down at the time.
We all live under the risk of being singled out by someone with a badge having a bad day.
My local police got caught on video last night tasing a suspect multiple times. The suspect was on the ground with his hands open and stretched out. Three cops were holding him down at the time.
We all live under the risk of being singled out by someone with a badge having a bad day.
They wouldn't be singling anybody out, as part of their regular duties they come across somebody firing one of these, and unless you are familiar with the nuances, which 99% won't be, they're going to think machine gun. and if you don't pull out a form 4 you're likely to get arrested. Only then do you get to try to explain the nuances and get out of jail..
Alaska_Shooter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 405
I’ve found the exact opposite with many LEO encounters. I’m sure this is a regional difference. Weapons are absolutely everywhere in Alaska.
If I have a LEO encounter it’s usually happenstance meetings where they want to chat like a civilian while I’m carrying around town or else while I’m shooting MGs at a range. I’ve never shown a form-4 or been asked to prove anything was legal.
From the LEO encounters with FRTs I’ve read about on the internet FRT groups, I haven’t yet read of anyone getting arrested anywhere (recently or even pre-ATF reversal)
Has anyone heard of any arrests since the reversal? There’s 100,000s of thousands (?) of these things out there. Arrests aren’t happening for FRTs. Arrests aren’t happening for not carrying a form 4 with a MG
I agree with your point that a cop can arrest you for anything. That’s a risk we all take
If I have a LEO encounter it’s usually happenstance meetings where they want to chat like a civilian while I’m carrying around town or else while I’m shooting MGs at a range. I’ve never shown a form-4 or been asked to prove anything was legal.
From the LEO encounters with FRTs I’ve read about on the internet FRT groups, I haven’t yet read of anyone getting arrested anywhere (recently or even pre-ATF reversal)
Has anyone heard of any arrests since the reversal? There’s 100,000s of thousands (?) of these things out there. Arrests aren’t happening for FRTs. Arrests aren’t happening for not carrying a form 4 with a MG
I agree with your point that a cop can arrest you for anything. That’s a risk we all take
Please Visit our Sister Sites Below
Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter