Binary Triggers In Your Future?
The recent terrorist attack in Las Vegas is spurring Federal lawmakers to introduce new legislation. These laws would ban any device or combination of parts that can “accelerate” the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm. This includes bumpfire stocks, Gat Crank triggers, Autoburst trigger, Hellfire and other gadget triggers, binary triggers, light match grade triggers, and 3 mode triggers. Sadly, the U.S. National Rifle Association (NRA) gave up on this issue without a fight [1] less than a week after the tragic massacre. This means that there is now a strong likelihood that some legislation will be passed within a month. Once passed, I suspect that it will be signed by President Trump and possibly go into effect on or before January 1st, 2018. The clock is ticking, folks!
In my blog writings, I’ve often mentioned the futility of so-called “gun control” legislation. In a country like the United States, with more guns in circulation than there are adult Citizens, enforcing gun laws is a Fool’s Errand. Liberals are now in the habit of calling gun control laws “Gun Safety laws”, which is disingenuous. They don’t want safety. They want disarmed peasants. I refer to these laws as “civilian disarmament” laws. Because in essence that is what they truly are: An attempt to rob the citizenry of their God-given right to keep and bear arms.
I’ve also gone on record for my opposition to all government mandated “bans” and “freezes” as well as any attempts at wage and price controls. History has repeatedly shown that legislated or dictated bans and freezes don’t work [2].
A Speculative Gamble
Are you a gun owner that is in the mood to take a speculative gamble? If so, you might consider investing in a few fast firing AR-15 triggers. What I’m recommending are two types: binary triggers and “3 mode” triggers. Why? Federal lawmakers are preparing legislation that would ban any device or combination of parts that can “accelerate” a semi-automatic firearm. (That is, faster than a standard trigger, but not truly full automatic fire.) Unlike bump fire stocks and “Hellfire” style triggers, which are inherently inaccurate, modern 3 mode and binary triggers are actually quite practical and relatively accurate to use.
Here is where the “gamble” comes in: Senator Feinstein’s current bill (that might soon come before the Senate) is an outright ban, with no Grandfather Clause. If passed and signed into law in its current form, it would wipe out any possible gains. In fact it could cause you you to lose all of your investment. (By law, they would have to be turned in for destruction!) However, given the history of American jurisprudence, the final wording of the law before passage will probably be supplemented with a Grandfather Clause. This would allow then-current owners to keep or re-sell their “banned” gun parts. If that happens, you might earn an overnight 100% or even 200% profit. A precedent for this is the 1994 to 2004 Federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” and on magazines over 10 round capacity. During the 10 years of that ban, some gun and magazine owners made handsome profits.
There is also the possibility that there will be no new ban legislation enacted. If that happens, you might only break even when re-selling your extra AR parts.
Binary Triggers and 3 Mode Triggers
My current favorite parts for this investment would be either be a FosTech Echo AR-II trigger (an ATF approved binary trigger) or a Tac-Con 3MR trigger (also ATF approved, with an AR-10 variant available.) OpticsPlanet.com seems to have a good price on FosTech Echo triggers [3], although they are currently back-ordered for several weeks. And I just heard that Ready Made Resources has more than 50 3MR triggers on order and arriving soon [4].
To explain the difference: Both types of triggers utilize the third selector switch position originally used on M16 rifles, on your AR-15 or M4gery. But here is how they differ:
- With a binary trigger, that third position gives you a trigger that fires once on the pull of the trigger, and once again on the release of the trigger. (The Federal definition of a “machinegun” is a firearm that fires more than once with “each function of the trigger.” And for FosTech, the ATF ruled that the pull and the release of the trigger constitute two separate functions of a trigger. Nice.)
- With a 3MR trigger, the third position gives you an extremely crisp, light, short-stroke trigger pull with a very light and quick reset. With either of these the cyclic rate is around 500 rounds per minute–in the hands of an experienced shooter.
I’ve done business with both of the companies mentioned, for many years. And Ready Made Resources has been a SurvivalBlog advertiser since 2005. I highly recommend both companies.
UPDATE: I also recommend buying the Franklin Armory BFS-III binary trigger [5]. That design is functionally quite similar to the FosTech Echo trigger. Franklin Armory now has an ATF approval letter on the BFS-III. The price of the BFS-III is about $100 less than the FosTech Echo trigger. OpticsPlanet offers a great discount on the BFS-III trigger kit [6].
What About Full Capacity Magazines?
There is also a risk of Congress again banning so-called “high capacity” magazines. I refer to these more accurately as “full capacity magazines.” (Anything else is a “limited capacity magazine.”) Presently, I don’t believe that Congress has the political will to ban magazines that can hold more that 10 cartridges, as they did back in 1994. But they might ban magazines with more than 30 round capacity. Therefore, it might be wise to stock up on some 40, 60, and 100 round magazines. For these, the brands that I recommend the 40 round capacity MagPul Industries PMAG, the 60 round capacity MagPul Industries PMAG D-60 Drum, and the 100 round Beta Company C-MAG. The latter is configured as a double snail drum. Three good sources of magazines are KeepShooting.com [7] (a current SurvivalBlog advertiser), GunMagWarehouse.com [8] (a former SurvivalBlog advertiser), and Midway USA [9]. All three these are very reputable firms with good prices and proven customer service.
Yes, It is a Gamble
In closing, I’d like to remind readers that this tangible investing strategy is a bit of a gamble. No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe when Congress is in session. I do not advise this investment to timid investors, nor to widows and orphans. Rather, it is an investment for someone who won’t be badly hurt if they lose it all.
Oh, and Caveat emptor. – JWR
Comments Disabled To "The Legislative Entrepreneur: Investing in Some Key AR Parts"
#1 Comment By Nosmo On October 9, 2017 @ 9:12 am
The great danger here is Mrs. Feinstein’s bill contains very ambiguous and completely undefined language about “accelerating the performance of a semi-automatic firearm” which could be interpreted to apply to bolt carriers, slides, recoil springs, trigger springs, maybe even lubricants.
I doubt her proposal will survive intact, but there is a very real chance that parts of it will get copied and pasted into legislative proposals that stand a better chance at passage.
And, while today federal regulations on recoil springs seems far fetched, there’s an entire bureaucracy in Washington and beyond desperate for Something to Do. Someday this might be just the thing for them.
#2 Comment By Ken in Camp Perry, Ohio On October 9, 2017 @ 10:18 am
The 535 “Bobble Heads” now sitting in Mordor on the Potomac will inevitably pass some new useless FED GOV mandate to show how “compassionate” and “caring” they are. Cue the photo-ops for these preening peacocks, desperately seeking re-affirmation in what they do. Worse than pathetic–enraging would be more accurate.
Same-old-same old. Chip away at our God given rights by cowardly men and women elected to protect, not deep-six our rights.
RUBBISH!
59 Murders in Las Vegas will prompt this–yet–there were 58 murders alone in Chicago during SEPT 2017! 537 to date in calendar year 2017, yet no hue and cry. Black lives DO NOT matter [to the politicians]!
Let’s all “feel good about ourselves” and take away firearm rights from everyone.”
NOT!
#3 Comment By SAM On October 9, 2017 @ 11:06 am
Have they got the 100 round Beta Company C-MAG working at last?
#4 Comment By James Wesley Rawles On October 9, 2017 @ 12:40 pm
The Franklin Armory website must be out of date, because it mentions that they are still awaiting an ATF approval letter.
#5 Comment By Kris On October 9, 2017 @ 1:55 pm
From The LawDog Files:
“We cannot negotiate with those who say, ‘What’s mine is mine, and what’s yours is negotiable.'”
— John F. Kennedy, Address to the American People, 25 JUL 1961
Most people tend to substitute the word ‘compromise’ for the first ‘negotiate’ in that quote, and it does tend to fit the current circumstances.
Once again the anti-gun people are starting to trot out the tired and hackneyed meme of “compromise” in the “national gun conversation”.
One of the more highly linked of my posts is the one about the “Gun Rights Cake” analogy, which I will now re-post and expand a bit:
I hear a lot about “compromise” from the gun-control camp … except, it’s not compromise.
Allow me to illustrate:
Let’s say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with “GUN RIGHTS” written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, “Give me that cake.”
I say, “No, it’s my cake.”
You say, “Let’s compromise. Give me half.” I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.
Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.
This leaves me with half of my cake and there I am, enjoying my cake when you walk back up and say, “Give me that cake.”
I say — again: “No, it’s my cake.”
You say, “Let’s compromise.” What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what’s left of the cake I already own.
So, we compromise — let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 — and this time I’m left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.
And I’m sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.
This time you take several bites — we’ll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders — and I’m left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you’ve got nine-tenths of it.
Let me restate that: I started out with MY CAKE and you have already ‘compromised’ me out of ninety percent of MY CAKE …
… and here you come again. Compromise! … Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble). Compromise! … The HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble). Compromise! … The Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM). Compromise! … The School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)
After every one of these “compromises” — in which I lose rights and you lose NOTHING — I’m left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you’re standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being “reasonable”, and wondering “why we won’t compromise” as you try for the rest of my cake.
In 1933 I — or any other American — could buy a fully-automatic Thompson sub-machine gun, a 20mm anti-tank gun, or shorten the barrel of any gun I owned to any length I thought fit, silence any gun I owned, and a host of other things.
Come your “compromise” in 1934, and suddenly I can’t buy a sub-machine gun, a silencer, or a Short-Barreled Firearm without .Gov permission and paying a hefty tax. What the hell did y’all lose in this “compromise”?
In 1967 I, or any other American, could buy or sell firearms anywhere we felt like it, in any State we felt like, with no restrictions. We “compromised” in 1968, and suddenly I’ve got to have a Federal Firearms License to have a business involving firearms, and there’s whole bunch of rules limiting what, where and how I buy or sell guns.
In 1968, “sporting purpose” — a term found NOT ANY DAMNED WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION, TO SAY NOTHING OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT — suddenly became a legal reason to prevent the importation of guns that had been freely imported in 1967.
Tell me, do — exactly what the hell did you lose in this 1968 “compromise”?
The Lautenberg Act was a “compromise” which suddenly deprived Americans of a Constitutional Right for being accused or convicted of a misdemeanor — a bloody MISDEMEANOR! What did your side lose in this “compromise”?
I could go on and on, but the plain and simple truth of the matter is that a genuine “compromise” means that both sides give up something. My side of the discussion has been giving, giving, and giving yet more — and your side has been taking, taking, and now wants to take more.
For you, “compromise” means you’ll take half of my cake now, and the other half of my cake next time. Always has been, always will be.
I’ve got news for you: That is not “compromise”.
I’m done with being reasonable, and I’m done with “compromise”. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been “reasonable” nor a genuine “compromise”, and I have flat had enough.
LawDog
#6 Comment By Mathew On October 9, 2017 @ 5:25 pm
excellent comment, is it ok if I repost?
#7 Comment By Kris On October 10, 2017 @ 2:19 pm
Just be sure to credit the author, LawDog.
#8 Comment By Kit On October 9, 2017 @ 2:16 pm
There exists an alternative to the NRA which has been more than willing over the years to “compromise on reasonable” restrictions to firearm ownership. Its name is, “Gun Owners of America” and they consistently take a no compromise position. I voted with my feet and $ years ago.
#9 Comment By R in nyc On October 9, 2017 @ 3:00 pm
Thank you JWR for your thoughts and advice.
I have made investments into items over the years, knowing that this day would come.
We all know that so called bump stocks and larger capacity magazines are but a click away on your 3D printer.
I am not in favor of any compromise to further erode our God given rights.
That said, as a resident of NYC, I would trade my bump stocks (not saying I invested in them) for national reciprocity to force the hands of those cities and states to allow concealed Carry. IMHO I think that national reciprocity would further our rights than dying on the hill fighting for a bump stock that is but an inaccurate novelty. (Not saying I have firsthand knowledge of this).
JWR, I look to your thoughts and wisdom on this negotiation.
#10 Comment By James Wesley Rawles On October 9, 2017 @ 3:53 pm
The Second Amendment is not open to negotiation or compromise. It is an absolute right, both individually and collectively. Negotiating away a right is something akin to feeding a hungry tiger, in the hope that it won’t eat you. That appeasement game only lasts as long as you have meat available to toss to the tiger. When that runs out, then you are seen as the next meal.
#11 Comment By Ray On October 9, 2017 @ 3:29 pm
Come and take them…
#12 Comment By TominAlaska On October 9, 2017 @ 4:19 pm
Emotional gun control never crosses over to reality and honest evaluation. In my mind, the Las Vegas shooter would have killed more people using one weapon equipped with a “high end” scope and aimed fire. The comments of JWR are spot on and there is only one reason for this controversy……”they” really can’t take over until the U.S. population is disarmed. Period.
#13 Comment By Peter S On October 9, 2017 @ 4:55 pm
from the FosTech website, some States have varying laws already. Research before you buy.
[10]
#14 Comment By Peter S On October 9, 2017 @ 5:01 pm
Magazines. Try ammoseek.com. Example search for PMAGs:
[11]
#15 Comment By Rose On October 9, 2017 @ 5:37 pm
I suppose that some people’s fingers would need cut off, then. I believe the current record for firing is 8 per second? It is definitely not my rate of fire! Wish it was!
#16 Comment By alan On October 9, 2017 @ 5:37 pm
guns dont kill people, people kill people
how many people would have been killed in Las Vegas if the criminal had only a knife?
#17 Comment By James Wesley Rawles On October 9, 2017 @ 5:39 pm
As I’ve mentioned before: It he had instead used his private pilot skills, then the death toll might have been well north of 100.
#18 Comment By L Tecolote On October 10, 2017 @ 12:57 am
If the killer (killers?) somehow lacked the means to acquire guns (fat chance with the US border all but nonexistent) do you think he’d (they’d?) have been thus constrained to the singular option of knives? Either you lack imagination, or merely wish to mislead, alan.
#19 Comment By Not So Free On October 9, 2017 @ 11:08 pm
Death by a thousand cuts
#20 Comment By Doc Raydio On October 10, 2017 @ 2:11 am
The meaning of the word ‘compromise’ has changed over time. Research the meaning of the word.
Would you want to be aboard an aircraft and discover at altitude that its structural integrity had been compromised?
#21 Comment By JH On October 10, 2017 @ 5:04 am
Military history textbooks connote the first step to genocide is the removal of the People’s right to resist. We’ve seen unprecedented examples of this in the last century alone. With Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini, Moa, Pot Pol, Stalin whom all asked for the guns to be collected and for the safety of the citizens then it was mass murders such the world has never known. Notice the LEFT always enact gun control at the same time they are proliferating the woman’s right to choose. They’ll take your gun so it can’t kill and then legalize abortion killing the most humans on American soil than any gun, domestic scrimmage, and all foreign wars combined in the history of our nation. Folks we need to remove that right of them utilizing gun control at ever corner right out of their playbook. They have no right to touch our guns. The LEFT kills more than all put together. Get my drift!
#22 Comment By Lt. Mike On October 10, 2017 @ 5:28 am
That there should be any discussion on what congress may or may not ban is repugnant. I say fire the whole bunch and be done with the idiots who pass any further gun control laws of any kind that further restrict our God given freedom. Until we vote out every congress critter that fails to uphold the Constitution, we’ll be one day closer every day to total tyranny.
#23 Comment By T. Teetz On October 11, 2017 @ 4:03 am
Well the idea that there can be no compromise on second amendment issues sounds nice , but do we really want felons to posses firearms?We have a local gentleman who talks to telephone poles for hours . Do we want stark raving crazy people carrying guns? Or how about laws that enhance sentences for people that are armed in the commission of a crime?
Does no compromise mean anyone can carry a gun into a court house without restriction?We know how that has worked out in some divorce cases.
How about a 14 year old who wants to carry a concealed pistol to school because of bullies? Think that’s a good idea?
None of these are reducto ad absurdum arguments. These types incidents happen every day.
#24 Comment By James Wesley Rawles On October 11, 2017 @ 12:46 pm
Sir:
Full Constitutional Rights (all of them) are for adult Citizens of sound mind. The phrase “no compromise” applies to assuring the rights of those who are fully enfranchised–not to minors or others who are not.
#25 Comment By Rose On October 11, 2017 @ 1:29 pm
Even crazy people understand the concept of dying, and that if the good guy has a gun, he may use it on the bad guy. Who will stop the bad guy if the good guy doesn’t have a gun? Where do all these shooting happen? Always in places where no guns are allowed. Never in a shooting range or a police station or a gun show. Wonder why?
#26 Comment By T. Teetz On October 11, 2017 @ 3:13 pm
“Never …(at )a police station”
Really ? How about two fatal shootings in FBI offices and murders in Washington DC police station.?
How about the four Detroit officers shot in their station 6 years ago?
My point is simple. [You are overlooking] suicidal crazy people with guns who could care less if there are armed people around.
#27 Comment By Anonymous On October 12, 2017 @ 8:31 am
Predictably, pabulum is offered by Teetz…
Freedom requires that we understand its paradox. For example, one must give it away in order to have it. This never involves compromise but rather, it requires acceptance.
#28 Comment By Kurt Hofmann On November 14, 2017 @ 3:19 am
Please forgive what is undoubtedly a monumentally dumb question, but is it technically possible to build a trigger that combines the assisted reset feature of Tac-Con’s 3MR trigger, with the binary function of the Fostech Echo or Franklin Arsenal binary trigger? And if so, could it be done in such a way that the assisted reset feature does NOT cause the binary feature to fire all by itself, without any pressure on the trigger (and thus bringing the ATF’s erstwhile forbearance to a crashing end)?