Are Forced Reset Triggers Legal in South Dakota? 2026

Are Forced Reset Triggers Legal in South Dakota?

At the state level, South Dakota has no specific law banning forced reset triggers (FRTs). However, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has classified FRTs as machine guns. Since federal law supersedes state law, possession is considered a federal felony.

Understanding the Forced Reset Trigger Mechanism

A forced reset trigger, or FRT, is a firearm accessory designed primarily for AR-15 style platforms. Its function is to dramatically increase the potential rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle. Unlike a standard trigger where the shooter must consciously release the trigger to allow it to reset, an FRT uses the energy from the reciprocating bolt carrier group (BCG) to physically force the trigger forward, resetting it instantly after a shot is fired. The shooter's finger acts as a stationary point of contact. As the BCG moves rearward, it trips a lever that pushes the trigger back to its ready position. This means as long as the shooter maintains rearward pressure, the rifle will fire again as soon as the bolt is in battery.

This mechanical action is the core of the legal controversy. Proponents argue it's still a semi-automatic device because it requires a separate function of the trigger for each round fired—the forward motion of the trigger reset is one function, and the subsequent pull is another. They maintain that one round is discharged for each complete cycle of the trigger. Critics, and most importantly the ATF, disagree. They argue that a single, continuous pull of the trigger results in a continuous stream of fire until the pressure is released or the ammunition is exhausted, which functionally mimics a machine gun.

South Dakota State Law: A Permissive Environment

South Dakota is widely recognized for its strong protections for gun owners, rooted in both its state constitution and legislative philosophy. When examining the South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL), there is a conspicuous absence of any language that specifically identifies, defines, or prohibits forced reset triggers. The state's definition of a 'machine gun' in SDCL 22-14-15 mirrors the federal definition found in the National Firearms Act (NFA), focusing on weapons that shoot automatically 'by a single function of the trigger.' The state has not passed any additional legislation to broaden this definition to include devices like FRTs.

Furthermore, South Dakota has robust firearm preemption laws. This means that local jurisdictions, such as cities or counties, are generally prevented from enacting their own gun control ordinances that are stricter than state law. This creates a uniform and permissive legal environment for firearm ownership across the state. From a purely state-law perspective, an individual in Sioux Falls or Pierre would find no statute on the books making possession of an FRT illegal. This permissive stance at the state level is common in the region, though gun owners should always check the specifics for neighboring states like North Dakota, as there can be subtle differences.

The lack of a state-level ban is significant, but it's only half of the story. Gun owners must understand that state law does not operate in a vacuum. Federal law and the interpretations of federal agencies can and do create legal jeopardy, even when a state has taken no action. The process of understanding how to buy a gun legally involves navigating both state and federal requirements, and this applies to accessories as well.

The Federal Hammer: ATF Rule 2021R-05F and Open Letters

The legal status of FRTs in South Dakota is entirely dictated by federal action. The ATF, exercising its regulatory authority, issued an open letter in March 2022 clarifying its position. The agency declared that some FRT designs, specifically those sold by Rare Breed Triggers and Wide Open Triggers, are 'machine guns' as defined by the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act.

The ATF's reasoning hinges on a particular interpretation of the phrase 'single function of the trigger.' The agency asserts that because an FRT can fire multiple rounds with a single, continuous rearward pull by the shooter, it qualifies as a machine gun. They contend the shooter's finger merely acts as a stationary object, and the internal mechanics of the firearm are what cause it to fire automatically. This interpretation effectively bypasses any state-level permissions. Possessing an unregistered machine gun is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and substantial fines.

This federal classification has created a high-risk environment for anyone who owns one of these devices. It also impacts the legal process for firearm transfers; understanding how to sell a gun now involves ensuring no illegal modifications, as defined by the ATF, are present. The ATF's position has been challenged in court by manufacturers and gun rights organizations, who argue the agency overstepped its authority by reclassifying a legal accessory without congressional action. As of now, those legal battles are ongoing, but the ATF's ruling remains the effective law of the land.

The legal climate for firearm accessories can be complex and varies significantly, not just for FRTs but for other devices as well. For example, the legal status of binary triggers in the state follows a different path of analysis. The federal government's stance creates a patchwork of regulations that can be confusing, with situations in states like Nebraska and Wyoming being similarly dominated by the ATF's position.

Navigating the Risks in South Dakota

For a gun owner in South Dakota, the conclusion is stark: despite the absence of a state law against FRTs, possessing one is a serious federal crime under the ATF's current interpretation. Federal law enforcement agencies, like the FBI and ATF, operate within South Dakota and can enforce these federal statutes regardless of the state's position. This means that a local sheriff might not have grounds to arrest you under state law, but a federal agent certainly would.

The ongoing litigation provides a sliver of hope for those who believe the ATF's ruling is an overreach, but hope is not a legal defense. Until and unless a federal court issues a nationwide injunction or the Supreme Court rules against the ATF, the agency's classification stands. Anyone considering purchasing, installing, or even keeping an FRT is taking a significant legal risk. Anyone looking to browse all gun listings should be aware that such devices cannot be legally sold or transferred between private parties without proper NFA registration, which the ATF is not approving for these items.

This situation underscores the importance of staying informed. The laws and regulations surrounding firearms are dynamic. For those interested in learning more about various firearm-related topics, the American Gun Trader blog provides ongoing analysis and updates. However, for a specific legal question of this gravity, the only prudent course of action is to consult with a qualified firearms attorney who is familiar with both South Dakota law and the current state of federal firearms litigation.