Connecticut Attorney General William Tong has formally warned Sturm, Ruger & Co. that litigation could be coming over the company’s RXM 9mm pistol.
Paul Schott of CT Insider reports that Tong’s letter alleges the RXM can be “easily” converted into an illegal machine gun using aftermarket machine-gun conversion devices (MCDs).
Tong ties his concerns to two state laws: the Firearms Industry Responsibility Act and the Unfair Trade Practices Act.
If the RXM is readily convertible with an MCD, Tong argues Ruger may have failed to adopt “reasonable controls,” exposing the company to liability, according to Schott’s reporting.
Ruger pushed back in a written statement, saying it has a long history of corporate responsibility and safe products.
The company also said no one from Tong’s office reached out before publicizing the letter, adding it had offered to meet in Hartford, Schott reports.
The immediate clash isn’t just about one pistol.
It’s about whether state consumer-protection and “reasonable controls” statutes can be used to police firearm design – especially where criminals misuse illegal conversion gadgets.
The RXM Design – and the Conversion Device Debate
Schott notes Tong’s focus is not new: MCDs have been surfacing in Connecticut crime scenes, with ATF data showing 31 devices recovered in 2023.
Tong cited shootings – including an August 2023 ambush near his office and a November 2024 double homicide in Hartford – where pistols equipped with MCDs were used.
MCDs are illegal already, and Tong underscores why.
He writes that a converted pistol can hit rates of fire up to 1,200 rounds per minute, rivaling military machine guns.
Where the state and the company will likely battle is causation and foreseeability.
Schott reports Tong’s letter leans on Ruger’s December 2024 launch of the RXM and its marketing emphasis on Glock Gen 3 compatibility for “nearly unlimited customization” – a feature Everytown and Tong say could make conversion more likely.
Ruger’s RXM was introduced in collaboration with Magpul, shipping with GL9 magazines in 15- or 10-round configurations, according to the release quoted by Schott.
Tong says that touting “off-the-shelf” compatibility sits awkwardly beside a wave of MCD-related crimes – even if other brands were the guns most often recovered.
It’s a hard policy line to walk: manufacturers sell lawful semi-autos; criminals add illegal gadgets; prosecutors chase violent actors; and state AGs now eye design choices as part of “reasonable controls.”
That’s where new state statutes are trying to expand industry duties beyond federal baselines.
A New Liability Frontline, According to 2A Media
On Guns & Gadgets, host Jared Yanis frames Tong’s letter as an escalation against the firearms industry itself.
Yanis highlights Everytown’s prior letter demanding Ruger pull the RXM “unless” the design is changed, and he argues the AG’s move closely tracks that advocacy.
Yanis also connects the moment to Glock’s recent V-series pivot and reports that Shadow Systems is making product changes, too.
In his view, litigation pressure is reshaping design decisions more than innovation is—an outcome he warns will shrink choice and raise costs for law-abiding owners.
His central critique is “reasonable foreseeability.”
Yanis argues on his channel that any firearm can be modified, just as any rifle can be cut into an SBR; holding a maker liable for a criminal’s illegal add-on, he says, risks turning state law into an end-run around federal protections.
He points out, as of now, there’s no public evidence of an RXM recovered in a crime as a converted machine gun.
That absence may become a factual hinge if Connecticut proceeds—though Tong is pressing broader marketing and design theories, not just recovery counts.
The bigger concern, in Yanis’s analysis, is that state “reasonable controls” laws could circumvent the federal PLCAA shield by reframing claims as consumer-protection or unfair-practices actions.
He warns that if blue states multiply these statutes, the industry faces a patchwork of liability that chills product lines nationwide.
Ruger’s Position – and What Comes Next
Schott reports Ruger isn’t signaling product changes.
In Q3 results, new products – including the RXM, Marlin lever guns, and the American Centerfire Rifle Gen II – made up $40.6 million (about 34%) of firearm sales, and CEO Todd Seyfert said “more is still to come, including the expansion of the RXM pistol family.”
That forward-looking optimism sets up a sharper contrast with Tong’s preservation demands.
Per Schott, the AG asked Ruger to preserve documents dating back to 2020 on MCDs, pistol design and marketing, talks with law enforcement, and financials.
Ruger declined to make forward-looking statements about its plans, which is typical for a public company.
But continued RXM expansion could soon collide with discovery if the AG files suit or if private litigants follow his lead.
Schott also ties in Everytown’s assertion that Glock may pull easily modifiable pistols and that Ruger could become the “largest” U.S. maker of a Glock-style, readily convertible pistol if others exit.
Glock did not immediately respond to those claims, he reports.
This isn’t Ruger’s first legal crossfire.
Schott notes the company also faces a Colorado case over marketing tied to the 2021 Boulder shooting – a reminder that plaintiffs are testing multiple lanes: design, marketing, and “reasonable controls.”
The Legal Tension: Safety, Misuse, and the Limits of Foreseeability
At bottom, the state’s case theory tries to connect design choices and customization messaging to the foreseeable criminal misuse of illegal conversion gadgets.
Manufacturers counter that illegal third-party devices and bad actors break the causal chain.
Schott’s reporting captures how Tong plans to thread that needle with Connecticut’s statutes.
If a pistol is designed to be broadly compatible with aftermarket parts and marketed as such, the state may argue that “reasonable controls” should include design or messaging changes to deter conversion.
Yanis argues that’s a slippery slope—and a policy that punishes the lawful majority for the crimes of a few.
He warns that if this theory spreads, companies will preemptively pull models, drop features, or raise prices to hedge litigation risk, and ordinary owners will feel it first in the wallet.
There’s a practical question lurking: would design tweaks even stop illegal conversion devices, which are themselves already banned?
If the answer is no, the public-safety gains may be marginal while the costs – less choice, higher prices, more friction – are real.
Still, it’s hard to ignore the human stakes in Tong’s letter, as relayed by Schott.
From ambushes to child victims, the MCD trend is a grim one. States will keep searching for levers that move outcomes, and design liability is the current lever on the workbench.
Why This Fight Matters Beyond Connecticut
Schott’s piece shows a Democratic AG testing a broadly written state law against a top manufacturer with a flagship new pistol.
Yanis’s segment shows how 2A media sees the same move as the model for a national strategy to pressure designs by lawsuit.
If Connecticut files suit, discovery will shine light on the guts of pistol programs – how compatibility decisions get made, how marketing language is vetted, how risk is weighed.
Even without a judgment, that kind of scrutiny can change behavior across the industry.
If the case lands in court, one pivotal issue will be how judges define “reasonable controls” and “foreseeable” conversion – and how far consumer-protection theories can run without smashing into PLCAA.
Early rulings in Connecticut could become templates for other states, for better or worse.
For now, Ruger says it’s willing to meet with the AG, per Schott.
Everytown has planted its marker. Tong has asked for preservation and answers.
A resolution that targets criminal misuse while preserving lawful design freedom is the sweet spot everyone says they want.
Whether state liability theories can deliver that – without blurring the line between illegal gadgets and legal pistols – will be the question that decides much more than the future of one model called RXM.
Raised in a small Arizona town, Kevin grew up surrounded by rugged desert landscapes and a family of hunters. His background in competitive shooting and firearms training has made him an authority on self-defense and gun safety. A certified firearms instructor, Kevin teaches others how to properly handle and maintain their weapons, whether for hunting, home defense, or survival situations. His writing focuses on responsible gun ownership, marksmanship, and the role of firearms in personal preparedness.
