A Bold Stand Against a Dangerous Plan
California Attorney General Rob Bonta has taken a decisive step to protect communities by joining a multistate lawsuit against the Trump Administration's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The target is a controversial settlement that would return thousands of forced reset triggers, devices that transform semi-automatic firearms into rapid-fire weapons, to owners across the United States. This move, announced on July 8, 2025, underscores a commitment to public safety over unchecked firearm proliferation.
Forced reset triggers, or FRTs, allow shooters to sustain firing rates rivaling fully automatic machine guns, unleashing devastating barrages in seconds. Previously classified as illegal by the ATF, these devices are now at the center of a legal battle after the Trump Administration agreed to reclassify them as legal and return seized units. Bonta, alongside 16 other attorneys general, argues this decision endangers lives and defies federal law.
The lawsuit, led by New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, seeks an injunction to halt the redistribution of FRTs, which remain banned under California law. Bonta's involvement reflects a broader effort to prioritize community well-being, especially in a nation where gun violence claims more young lives than any illness or accident. The stakes are high, and the coalition's resolve is clear.
The Lethal Power of Forced Reset Triggers
Forced reset triggers are firearm accessories that drastically increase a weapon's lethality. Technical analyses by the ATF reveal these devices enable firing rates exceeding 600 rounds per minute, a capability that mirrors prohibited machine guns. Such firepower amplifies the potential for mass casualties, as seen in the rising presence of FRTs at crime scenes nationwide.
Public health data paints a grim picture. Firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teens in the United States, outpacing car accidents and diseases. Rapid-fire devices like FRTs exacerbate this crisis, enabling shooters to inflict maximum harm in minimal time. The ATF estimates over 100,000 FRTs are already in circulation, with the Trump settlement poised to add thousands more.
In California, state laws classify FRTs as illegal multiburst trigger activators, reflecting a proactive stance against devices that undermine safety. Bonta's June 2025 bulletin to law enforcement reinforced this position, clarifying that the federal settlement does not override state bans. The lawsuit builds on this foundation, aiming to protect communities from an influx of deadly technology.
A Flawed Settlement Sparks Outrage
The Trump Administration's May 2025 settlement with FRT manufacturers, including firms like Rare Breed Triggers, has drawn sharp criticism for prioritizing industry interests over public safety. By agreeing to abandon enforcement of the federal machine-gun ban and return seized FRTs, the ATF has effectively reversed years of regulatory efforts. Critics argue this move violates the National Firearms Act, which prohibits civilian ownership of machine guns.
Federal courts have issued conflicting rulings on FRTs, with a New York judge upholding their classification as machine guns and a Texas judge ruling otherwise. The settlement, however, sidesteps these legal debates, granting blanket exemptions to manufacturers and owners. Bonta and his coalition contend that this agreement undermines federal law and jeopardizes state efforts to curb gun violence.
The potential consequences are staggering. Law enforcement agencies, already stretched thin, would face new challenges in tracking these devices. States like California, which invest heavily in gun violence prevention, could see rising costs for enforcement and trauma care. The coalition's lawsuit seeks to restore accountability and prevent a dangerous precedent.
Historical Roots of the Fight
The battle over rapid-fire devices has deep historical roots. The 1934 National Firearms Act established strict controls on machine guns, followed by the 1986 ban on new civilian-owned models. These laws aimed to limit the destructive power of automatic weapons, a goal now threatened by modern accessories like FRTs, which emerged commercially around 2015.
Past regulatory efforts, such as the 2018 bump-stock ban, faced similar legal challenges but underscored the need for clear federal standards. The ATF's earlier crackdown on FRTs, including seizures and cease-and-desist letters, aligned with this tradition of prioritizing public safety. The Trump settlement, however, marks a sharp departure, prompting states to step into the breach.
Solutions Grounded in Safety and Justice
They seek to enjoin the Trump settlement, restoring the ATF's authority to classify FRTs as machine guns. Federal legislation could further clarify and expand bans on rate-increasing devices, ensuring uniform enforcement nationwide.
Beyond legal action, advocates call for increased funding for gun violence research and prevention programs. Community-based initiatives, such as buyback programs and stricter penalties for illegal possession, could reduce the circulation of dangerous devices. These measures align with California's track record of implementing commonsense gun laws that save lives.
Collaboration is key. Federal grants could support state-level enforcement technologies, while manufacturers might agree to serialization and tracking to balance market access with accountability. Such compromises would prioritize safety while addressing the concerns of lawful firearm owners.
A Call to Protect Communities
The fight against FRTs is a fight for the future of our communities. By joining this lawsuit, Bonta and his allies are standing up for the right of every person to live free from the fear of gun violence. Their efforts challenge a reckless federal policy that threatens to undo decades of progress in firearm regulation.
The evidence is undeniable: rapid-fire devices like FRTs have no place in a society striving for safety and equity. As the coalition pushes for stronger laws and smarter policies, they carry the hopes of countless families affected by gun violence. Their success could set a precedent for responsible governance and collective action.
This moment demands vigilance and resolve. California's leadership, alongside its partners, offers a path toward a safer tomorrow. By holding the line against dangerous devices, they affirm a commitment to protecting lives and building a nation where communities thrive without fear.