Gun-control litigation just swung to a new name.
According to Howard Gatch on the Hegshot87 channel, Everytown for Gun Safety sent a strongly worded letter to Ruger on November 3 demanding the company pull its RXM pistol from the market.
Gatch frames it bluntly: Ruger is “on the chopping block,” and the organization is trying to replicate the pressure campaign that cornered Glock.
He says the group is betting Ruger will fold. He doubts it.
Gatch believes Ruger’s response will be “defiant,” the opposite of Glock’s recent design pivot.
He argues this push isn’t coming from a fringe outfit. It’s a major, well-funded legal arm that thinks it has a winning playbook.
What Everytown Demands
The Everytown letter lays out the case in detail.
It claims pistols designed like Glocks – and copies of that pattern – can be “easily” converted with illegal auto sears into fully automatic weapons.
Everytown says the RXM, launched in December 2024 and marketed with broad Gen 3 Glock compatibility, stepped into a known problem space.
The letter cites a national “784% increase” in conversion-device recoveries from 2019 to 2023, and warns of rising use in violent crime.
It argues that with Glock allegedly pulling legacy models and Shadow Systems reportedly changing designs, Ruger could become the largest U.S. source of an “easily convertible” pistol.
Crucially, Everytown concedes it is “not aware of any public reports” of modified RXMs recovered in crimes.
But the letter insists it’s “only a matter of time,” and urges Ruger to remove the RXM “unless and until” the design is changed.
Everytown sent copies to Connecticut’s Attorney General and to Magpul’s leadership, signaling a wider pressure campaign.
Hegshot87: The Stakes For Industry
Howard Gatch walks through why he thinks the move matters.
He says the ATF’s cited 784% increase looks alarming but remains a small slice of all traced guns, and traces do not prove criminal use by definition.
He notes the practical point: many illegal conversions – where they happen – often show up in the most restrictive cities.
He argues accuracy nosedives in most “switch” videos, and that many recoveries link to broader charges unrelated to a shooting.
More importantly, Gatch warns of precedent. If every “could be converted” claim forces a redesign, makers face endless demands.
That chills innovation, he says, and invites legal gamesmanship instead of legislation.
He points to Ruger’s recent history. When activists and shareholders sought corporate “harm assessments” in 2018 and 2022, Ruger held firm that criminal misuse after sale is outside the manufacturer’s control.
Gatch’s view: Ruger knows which fights are worth it, and this is one.
Mrgunsngear: The Legal Backstop
On the Mrgunsngear Channel, Mike reports the same letter hit Ruger and names the RXM specifically.
He calls it, in his testing, a “product-improved Gen 3 Glock 19,” with parts interchangeability that makes it familiar and popular.
That compatibility also fuels Everytown’s claim: if Glock switches fit Glocks, they can fit Glock-like guns.
Mike highlights the broader legal posture. He says firearms makers have the same basic product-liability protection as any manufacturer when a lawful product is misused by a user.
He argues the Department of Justice – particularly the Civil Rights Division – should step in to shut down suits that attempt to blame lawful manufacturers for criminal acts.
He notes Glock is now facing “well over 20” lawsuits, with potential legal fees in the hundreds of millions if fully litigated.
He worries that letting these cases stand signals a green light to sue any semi-auto manufacturer until nothing is left.
His bottom line is simple: if a lawsuit against Ruger is filed, it should be dismissed quickly.
Liberty Doll: The “Not Yet, But Soon” Standard
Liberty Doll adds context and cites specifics from the letter.
She says Everytown’s head lawyer, Eric Tirschwell, wrote to Ruger’s general counsel alleging an “urgent public safety matter” tied to the RXM.
She notes Everytown openly admits it hasn’t seen public reports of criminally modified RXMs. The theory is predictive – “almost certainly only a matter of time.”
She points out something striking: Everytown argues Ruger “ran toward” the Glock-like design after the risk was widely known, leveraging Gen 3 compatibility for accessories and aftermarket support.
Her view is that the demand boils down to this – pull the model now, redesign it, and accept liability for what others might do in the future.
She also flags that Everytown cites YouTube and Facebook videos claiming RXM conversions, and social-media chatter speculating the RXM could replace Glock as a “switch” host.
As of November 5, she says, the RXM was still on Ruger’s website.
How Ruger Might Respond
Howard Gatch predicts Ruger won’t budge, based on company posture in recent years.
He recalls the old Bill Ruger era on magazines – when the company wouldn’t sell standard-capacity mags to civilians – but says modern Ruger has moved in the opposite direction, resisting pressure to adopt activist frameworks.
He also notes the RXM reportedly isn’t sold in California or Maryland, complicating the theory that it will flood “ban-state” markets.
Gatch suggests the company already knows the regulatory battlegrounds and picks its fights accordingly.
His concern is the “copy-and-paste” effect. If Ruger folds, smaller brands could be crushed by redesign costs, uncertainty, and a wave of me-too demands.
He believes Everytown wants that chilling effect even without winning bans outright.
What the Letter Actually Argues
The Everytown letter explains the technical core: a cruciform trigger bar geometry and an unshielded backplate area allegedly enable auto sears to interface easily on Glock-pattern pistols.
It says Ruger “copied” Glock’s design choices and advertised near-drop-in compatibility.
It cites posts and videos claiming RXM conversions and quotes commenters predicting an RXM surge if Glock exits legacy SKUs.
It also points to suits against Glock by Chicago, Baltimore, Seattle, and by Minnesota, Maryland, and New Jersey, noting several courts have allowed claims to proceed past dismissal.
The implied message to Ruger is blunt: pull the RXM or expect the same.
Why This Fight Is Fascinating
The most interesting angle here is time.
Everytown isn’t just alleging harm; it’s alleging future harm and demanding a preemptive redesign to stop third-party criminal behavior that’s already illegal.
That flips product liability on its head. If “might be misused later” becomes enough to trigger corporate liability, the scope expands far beyond firearms.
Another striking piece is messaging. Gatch, Mike, and Liberty Doll each point out the campaign relies not just on statistics but on shaping public narratives – Glock “capitulated,” so who’s next?
In the court of public opinion, that can be as potent as a court order.
The Policy Tension
Mrgunsngear leans on a simple test: lawful product, unlawful misuse – don’t punish the maker.
Hegshot87 adds the innovation angle – force redesigns via legal threat, and you steer the industry’s R&D from the courthouse, not the marketplace.
Liberty Doll spotlights the “not yet, but soon” standard and asks whether corporate responsibility includes controlling illegal third-party parts and conduct.
The Everytown letter counters that design choices matter. If a platform is purposefully built for “nearly unlimited customization,” they argue, a company shares foresight – and risk – when that customization includes illegal paths.
That is the crux. Is foreseeability of criminal modification the same as corporate culpability?
What Happens Next
Expect two tracks.
First, public pressure – media, shareholders, state AGs – all nudging Ruger to announce a design change or pause.
Second, litigation – copying the Glock map in city and state courts, seeking discovery, headlines, and leverage.
Ruger can stand pat, redesign, or split markets. Each path has costs.
If DOJ leadership takes Mike’s view seriously and actively backs manufacturer protections in court, that reshapes the field.
If not, expect more letters, more lawsuits, and more engineering done at the point of a legal spear.
Practical Impacts For Owners And Makers
If Ruger resists, owners probably see status quo in most states, with blue-city lawsuits shaping retail channels and insurer behavior.
If Ruger redesigns, the market will sort winners quickly – either the new internals run better than legacy or they don’t.
Smaller companies will watch closely. If legal risk becomes a toll booth for Glock-pattern engineering, many will look for safer platforms – or exit.
And the “switch” reality remains. As Gatch notes, the 3D-printing genie isn’t going back in the bottle.
The Everytown letter puts it on the record: pull the RXM, or we’ll make Ruger the next test case.
Whether Ruger fights or folds will ripple far beyond one handgun.
Because this isn’t just about the RXM. It’s about who gets to decide the future of a whole design ecosystem – the engineers who build it, or the lawyers who sue it.
UP NEXT: “Heavily Armed” — See Which States Are The Most Strapped
Image Credit: Survival World
Americans have long debated the role of firearms, but one thing is sure — some states are far more armed than others. See where your state ranks in this new report on firearm ownership across the U.S.
The article First Glock, Now Ruger? Gun Control Activists Target Another Major Manufacturer first appeared on Survival World.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.
