Super Safety Crowd Funds Defense Against RareBreed Triggers

February 13, 2026
5:40 pm

▶

Listen to Article

Hoffman Tactical, the innovative minds behind DIY gun projects like the Liberator and Femto, just launched a crowdfunding campaign to mount a defense against a lawsuit from RareBreed Triggers and ABC IP. The beef? RareBreed's hammering their legal arsenal at Hoffman's super safety design—a clever forced-reset trigger system that's caught fire in the 2A space for pushing the boundaries of what semi-auto can feel like without crossing into full-auto territory. Codenamed DEEZ Nuts in some circles (a nod to their irreverent style), Hoffman isn't backing down, rallying the community to fund what could be a pivotal courtroom battle over intellectual property in the trigger game. This isn't just lawyer ping-pong; it's a symptom of a deeper rot in the gun industry where innovation gets lawyered to death instead of iterated in garages and forums. RareBreed, no strangers to ATF drama themselves with their FRT-15O ban-fight, now turns litigator against a fellow disruptor—ironic, given how both thrive on bending mechanical norms. Hoffman's super safety, much like RareBreed's own tech, democratizes high-performance shooting for the everyman builder, but IP wars risk chilling that spirit. We've seen it before: patented designs lock out tinkerers, stifling the open-source ethos that birthed 80% lowers and ghost guns. Pro-2A folks should care because every dollar to Hoffman's defense fund (via GiveSendGo, naturally) bolsters the precedent that ideas in the trigger realm belong to the community, not corporate vaults—especially as Biden's ATF eyes more crackdowns. The implications ripple wide: win for Hoffman, and it greenlights a renaissance of homebrew triggers, keeping pace with commercial options amid supply crunches. Lose, and it emboldens every trigger maker to sue rivals into oblivion, fragmenting the market and handing ammo to gun-grabbers who paint us all as reckless. Personally, I echo the source—litigation's a loser's game in this industry; collaboration via shared specs or public domain drops would supercharge 2A resilience. Chip in if you're inclined, but more importantly, let's push for a culture where we out-engineer the bureaucrats together, not sue each other into submission. Stay vigilant, build on.

Best FFL Software Ranked and Compared!

This isn’t just lawyer ping-pong; it’s a symptom of a deeper rot in the gun industry where innovation gets lawyered to death instead of iterated in garages and forums. RareBreed, no strangers to ATF drama themselves with their FRT-15O ban-fight, now turns litigator against a fellow disruptor—ironic, given how both thrive on bending mechanical norms. Hoffman’s super safety, much like RareBreed’s own tech, democratizes high-performance shooting for the everyman builder, but IP wars risk chilling that spirit. We’ve seen it before: patented designs lock out tinkerers, stifling the open-source ethos that birthed 80% lowers and ghost guns. Pro-2A folks should care because every dollar to Hoffman’s defense fund (via GiveSendGo, naturally) bolsters the precedent that ideas in the trigger realm belong to the community, not corporate vaults—especially as Biden’s ATF eyes more crackdowns.

The implications ripple wide: win for Hoffman, and it greenlights a renaissance of homebrew triggers, keeping pace with commercial options amid supply crunches. Lose, and it emboldens every trigger maker to sue rivals into oblivion, fragmenting the market and handing ammo to gun-grabbers who paint us all as reckless. Personally, I echo the source—litigation’s a loser’s game in this industry; collaboration via shared specs or public domain drops would supercharge 2A resilience. Chip in if you’re inclined, but more importantly, let’s push for a culture where we out-engineer the bureaucrats together, not sue each other into submission. Stay vigilant, build on.

Share this story