Yes, Florida's restriction on Forced Reset Triggers (FRTs) can absolutely be challenged constitutionally under the Second Amendment. In fact, following recent major legal shifts at both the federal and state levels, the landscape is highly ripe for a direct challenge.
How Florida restricts these devices, why they are open to a constitutional challenge, and where the legal landscape stands right now shape the current situation:
### The Basis of Florida’s Restriction
Florida does not have a statute that explicitly says the words "Forced Reset Trigger." Instead, the state restricts them under **Florida Statute § 790.222**, which was passed in 2018 immediately following the Parkland shooting.
While the law is titled *"Bump-fire stocks prohibited,"* the actual text defines a "bump-fire stock" incredibly broadly:
> *" ...a conversion kit, a tool, an accessory, or a device used to alter the rate of fire of a firearm to mimic automatic weapon fire or which is used to increase the rate of fire to a faster rate than is possible for a person to fire such semiautomatic firearm."*
>
Because FRTs assist the trigger in resetting faster via mechanical residual energy—allowing for a significantly increased rate of fire—Florida law enforcement and state prosecutors have interpreted this broad definition to include FRTs and binary triggers. Arrests have already occurred at Florida gun shows under this exact statute.
### The Constitutional Arguments for a Challenge
If an individual or a gun-rights organization brings a formal constitutional challenge against § 790.222 regarding FRTs, they will likely use a two-pronged attack:
#### 1. The *Bruen* Historical Tradition Standard
Under the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in *New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen*, any modern firearm regulation must be consistent with the nation’s "historical tradition of firearm regulation" from the founding era (the late 18th century).
* **The Challenge:** Plaintiffs will argue that there is zero historical precedent from 1791 for banning internal mechanical modifications that merely optimize a shooter's manual trigger manipulation. Because FRTs still require a distinct pull of the trigger for every single shot fired, they fall under the protection of "arms" in common use for lawful purposes.
#### 2. Void for Vagueness (Fourteenth Amendment)
A law violates due process if it is so poorly defined that an ordinary citizen cannot understand what is permitted and what is a third-degree felony.
* **The Challenge:** The phrase *"increase the rate of fire to a faster rate than is possible for a person to fire"* is highly ambiguous. Precision competition shooters can fire a standard semiautomatic match trigger faster than an average person can fire a gun equipped with an FRT or a binary trigger. Because the restriction relies entirely on a variable human baseline rather than a fixed mechanical standard, lawyers argue the law is unconstitutionally vague.
### Why the Federal Landscape Pivoted
The constitutional argument against Florida's law has gained massive momentum due to recent federal victories.
The ATF originally attempted to classify FRTs as "machine guns" under federal law. However, following the Supreme Court's 2024 *Cargill* ruling (which threw out the federal bump stock ban), federal courts soundly rejected the ATF's overreach. In mid-2025, the Department of Justice reached a major federal settlement with Rare Breed Triggers, confirming that **FRTs are completely legal under federal law** because they do not meet the statutory definition of a machine gun (they do not fire multiple rounds with a single function of the trigger).
### The Current Reality in Florida
While FRTs are federally legal, **Florida’s state ban remains active on the books.** Under our system of federalism, states are allowed to pass stricter gun laws than the federal government, provided those laws survive constitutional scrutiny.
Until a state court explicitly strikes down § 790.222 or the Florida Legislature amends the statutory definition to match federal law, possessing or selling an FRT in Florida still carries the risk of state-level felony prosecution. Given the federal precedent, it is highly likely a formal constitutional challenge will come to a head in the near future.
This video from legal defense attorneys breaks down how recent federal court victories and DOJ settlements impact the status of FRTs and what it means for state-level bans moving forward.
FRT Update: Now Legal?

Originally Posted By whiteryno:
Hell even a teaser like maybe by the end of the year would be wonderful.

Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:
A lot of things are happening behind the scenes. But I cannot discuss it.

https://aef.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/class-socres-adcouncil-looselips.jpg

Originally Posted By TheJudgeHolden:
Guy just got arrested for possession of an FRT in Tallahassee. It didn't make the news. Glock with a Freedom FRT trigger in it. No other associated charges and the guy has zero criminal history of any kind. Also it was a warrant approved by the SAO and judge, not an on view arrest.

Don't be fucking stupid and be that guy.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381243/1000011373_png-3698671.JPG

Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:
A lot of things are happening behind the scenes. But I cannot discuss it.

https://aef.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/class-socres-adcouncil-looselips.jpg

Originally Posted By Blackbeard91:
Any updates? Especially now with all this nfa hullabaloo?

Originally Posted By BMad316:


AIPAC Shakur picked gun grabber Bryan Avila as his running mate, the political wind will soon be blowing hard against us, I wouldn't hold my breath on any FRT action in Florida.  You can count on more data centers and flock cameras though.

Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:
GOA endorsed Byron Donalds because he voted against the Parkland gun-control bill and has spent eight years calling for its repeal. He pledged to GOA on camera that he will repeal it as Governor.

Bryan Avila voted for Parkland, but the Governor sets policy, not the Lieutenant Governor. With Donalds, CFO Blaise Ingoglia, and AG James Uthmeier all opposed to Parkland gun control, three of Florida's four statewide offices are now aligned against it. GOA expects Donalds to keep his word and repeal Parkland.

Originally Posted By BMad316:


AIPAC Shakur picked gun grabber Bryan Avila as his running mate, the political wind will soon be blowing hard against us, I wouldn’t hold my breath on any FRT action in Florida.  You can count on more data centers and flock cameras though.

Originally Posted By Miami_JBT:
GOA endorsed Byron Donalds because he voted against the Parkland gun-control bill and has spent eight years calling for its repeal. He pledged to GOA on camera that he will repeal it as Governor.

Bryan Avila voted for Parkland, but the Governor sets policy, not the Lieutenant Governor. With Donalds, CFO Blaise Ingoglia, and AG James Uthmeier all opposed to Parkland gun control, three of Florida's four statewide offices are now aligned against it. GOA expects Donalds to keep his word and repeal Parkland.

Originally Posted By CZRider:


מצטער שפישבק הפסיד!

Originally Posted By BMad316:


Sadly he did lose (this time).  Do you support genocide?