Everytown for Gun Safety is moving quickly to capitalize on Glock’s recent redesign announcement.
Stephen Gutowski at The Reload reports that Everytown sent a letter to Ruger demanding the company pull its RXM pistol from production or change its trigger design immediately. He notes the letter argues the RXM’s internal geometry is similar to Glock’s and therefore “easily converted” to illegal full-auto with a switch.
Gutowski also points out a key detail: Ruger hasn’t commented.
That silence now carries real weight, because Everytown is signaling the next phase – pressure any maker whose internals resemble the Glock layout.
The Core Claim: Cruciform Triggers and “Switches”
The technical hook is straightforward but hotly disputed.
According to Gutowski’s report, Everytown asserts the RXM uses a cruciform-style trigger bar similar to Glock’s. Illegal “switches” (auto sears) can interrupt the semi-auto cycle by interacting with that geometry, allowing multiple rounds per trigger pull.
The group says online videos show RXMs running with auto sears and uses that as evidence the design is “easily converted.”
Guns & Gadgets host Jared Yanis frames the legal reality around those claims.
He reminds viewers that converting a semi-auto to full-auto without proper federal licensing is already illegal, and possession of unregistered machine guns is already illegal.
He argues the push isn’t about criminal law – that’s settled – but about shifting civil liability onto manufacturers by branding the geometry itself as a “defect.”
From a practical standpoint, Yanis warns this theory could be used to chip away at entire categories of popular striker-fired pistols.
If one design is tagged as “too convertible,” he says, any similar layout becomes a domino.
After Glock, the Ripple Effect Hits Ruger
William, host of Copper Jacket TV, ties the public campaign to Glock’s decision and warns about momentum.
He says Glock “caved to pressure,” which anti-gun groups viewed as a win. In his telling, that opened “Pandora’s box,” signaling to activists that sustained litigation plus sympathetic state laws can force redesigns or de-facto market exits.
William underscores why Ruger’s RXM is in the crosshairs.
It’s a modern, Glock-inspired package with its own tweaks, introduced late 2024. He calls it a strong product that “checks a lot of boxes,” which is exactly what makes it a valuable scalp.
If Everytown can pressure Ruger to halt production or alter internals, he says, they’ll keep going down the list of similar designs.
My take: that’s the long game – litigate, legislate, and leverage PR until compliance becomes the cheaper path.
Whether you agree with the end goal or not, the tactic is coherent – and repeatable.
Lawfare Meets Legislation
Gutowski adds crucial context from the policy and litigation fronts.
He reports California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed the first state law banning pistols with cruciform trigger bars, with his office characterizing it as fixing a “design defect” exploited by criminals.
Gutowski also notes Glock faces lawsuits in multiple states, and Everytown is taking credit for pushing both legal and legislative lanes to corner makers.
Gun-rights groups immediately challenged the California law in federal court.
Gutowski cites their argument in Jaymes v. Bonta: handguns, including those with cruciform trigger bars, are in common use for lawful purposes and thus protected under Heller and Bruen. That position rejects carving out an entire engineering architecture as a banned class.
Yanis walks through why the legal theory matters beyond California.
If courts accept that a firearm is “defective” because someone can add an illegal device obtained on the black market, he says the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is eroded in practice.
The manufacturer becomes responsible for a third party’s criminal modification, and the easiest way to avoid liability is to stop making the gun.
That’s not just a courtroom risk; it’s a product-planning risk.
If you’re a manufacturer, you now have to model the chance that your design becomes the next target of a “design defect” campaign. That affects R&D, aftermarket compatibility, and consumer choice.
What Evidence Actually Shows – and What It Doesn’t
Gutowski carefully highlights the data ambiguity at the center of this fight.
Yes, ATF has documented a sharp rise in recoveries of conversion devices, and police nationwide are encountering more illegally modified pistols. Everytown cites that trend to argue the design is the problem.
But, as Gutowski reports, the same ATF findings also show illegal conversion methods for other platforms, like AR-15 drop-in auto sears, are common too.
He notes it’s unclear whether Glock-style cruciform designs are inherently “more susceptible,” or if they’re just more common in circulation and thus more frequently targeted by criminals and seized by police.
That matters.
If prevalence is mostly a function of market share, then banning or redesigning one architecture doesn’t necessarily reduce criminal conversions – it just shifts which models get hacked. And the illegal device is already, well, illegal.
Copper Jacket TV’s William leans hard on that point.
He argues the responsibility is on law enforcement to interdict criminal activity, not on manufacturers to abandon designs used lawfully by millions because a small subset of criminals break existing laws.
My view: if policymakers want to reduce illegal conversions, the most direct lever is to go after the devices and supply chains themselves – import pipelines, 3D-printed patterns, distribution hubs – not to outlaw design architectures that dominate the lawful market.
What Happens If Ruger Says “No”?
Gutowski says Ruger’s response could set the industry tone.
If Ruger resists, Everytown will likely escalate – more lawsuits, more statehouse bills modeled on California’s, more PR. If Ruger complies, the letter becomes a template, and other brands with similar internals will be next.
Yanis suggests three paths Ruger could take.
One: publicly defend the RXM’s compliance and function, and explain, with specificity, why criminal modifications don’t equal design defects.
Two: if there’s a genuine engineering tweak that impedes illegal add-ons without harming reliability or compatibility, present it on Ruger’s terms, not as a capitulation.
Three: prepare for litigation in partnership with industry groups, because this strategy is built for repetition.
William’s bottom line is simple: someone has to draw a line.
He argues that if the RXM is pulled, activists will see confirmation that the pressure recipe works – and they’ll keep running it.
Where This Leaves Gun Owners and Retailers
Short term, expect uncertainty.
Retailers will watch inventory closely. Consumers will worry about buying into a platform that might be redesigned or retired. Aftermarket suppliers will hedge on parts that could be implicated by copycat laws.
Long term, the American handgun market could drift toward more proprietary internals to avoid “looks like Glock” claims.
That likely reduces cross-compatibility and pushes prices up. It also risks consolidating the market around a smaller number of “legally safe” designs—even if the safety benefit is unproven.
Gutowski notes the National Shooting Sports Foundation isn’t commenting on Glock’s individual design choices.
That’s typical trade-association caution. But the stakes are larger than any one model. The question is whether design-by-lawsuit becomes the norm – deciding which internal geometries are “acceptable” by threat of liability rather than by standards, testing, and the constitutional line Heller and Bruen have already drawn.
Punish Crime, Not Geometry
There’s no debate that illegal conversion devices are a growing problem.
The debate is whether the answer is to outlaw common, lawful architectures by labeling them “too easy to abuse,” or to attack the illegal devices and the people who traffic and use them.
On the merits, the latter is the cleaner, more constitutional path.
Designs in common use should not be banned by clever relabeling, and civil liability should not be stretched to penalize makers for crimes they neither intended nor enabled. If a specific part fails a safety standard, fix it. If criminals are adding contraband to make machine guns, go get the criminals and the contraband.
Stephen Gutowski’s reporting lays out the stakes and the facts.
Copper Jacket TV’s William captures why Glock’s retreat invited more pressure. Guns & Gadgets host Jared Yanis explains the legal gambit now pointed at Ruger’s RXM.
Ruger can set a new precedent – either for resistance or for retreat.
However this breaks, it won’t stop with one pistol. The strategy is industry-wide. The response will be, too.
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.
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.