Gun control advocates have increased pressure on gun manufacturers following recent changes in firearm production. The latest focus is Sturm, Ruger & Co., after Everytown for Gun Safety and Connecticut Attorney General William Tong formally requested the company halt sales of its new RXM pistol. According to their statement, “Ruger must pull the RXM from the market unless and until it changes the pistol’s design.”
In his letter to Ruger, Tong referenced Glock’s decision to discontinue certain handgun models and stated that under Connecticut law, Ruger “must enact reasonable controls to prevent the sale or distribution of legal firearms that can easily be converted to illegal firearms.” He also asked for “a statement from Ruger as to what it intends to do with the RXM,” and required preservation of various company records for potential future action.
As of now, Ruger has not publicly responded, and the RXM remains available for purchase.
The demand comes as part of a broader effort involving both private organizations and state officials. Previously, several jurisdictions sued Glock over alleged design flaws related to criminal modification. California passed legislation effectively banning some Glocks from being sold in the state, which led to litigation by groups including the NRA.
Earlier this year, Connecticut enacted the Firearms Industry Responsibility Act (FIRA), giving its attorney general authority to bring civil actions against manufacturers whose products are “designed in a manner that is reasonably foreseeable to promote conversion of a legal firearm into an illegal firearm.” Penalties under this act can include punitive damages and fines up to $5,000 per violation.
Despite these efforts, there have been no reports of violent crimes committed with illegally modified RXM pistols.
During his time in office, President Joe Biden said about his legislative priorities: “If I get one thing on my list — the Lord came down and said, ‘Joe, you get one of these’ — give me that one …” His priority was repealing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a federal law shielding gun manufacturers from lawsuits intended to disrupt their business. Although this repeal did not occur during Biden’s term, his administration promoted state laws like FIRA aimed at weakening PLCAA protections.
Recent court decisions have further complicated compliance for gun manufacturers. While a U.S. Supreme Court ruling this year reinforced PLCAA protections, lower courts have created exceptions allowing more lawsuits against gun companies. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted that legislatures—not advocacy groups—are responsible for determining which guns may be sold legally under current law.
The situation remains uncertain for companies like Glock and Ruger as advocacy groups continue using administrative actions and litigation targeting gun makers’ design choices. Supporters argue maintaining federal protections like PLCAA is essential for industry stability.
Efforts also continue at state levels with legislation designed either to restrict or protect firearms manufacturing and sales. Both sides anticipate ongoing legal battles over how far states can go in regulating gun makers’ products.
“Protective state legislation remains a priority, as are ongoing efforts to protect and regain pro-gun legislative majorities in Congress and the states,” according to advocates opposing these restrictions.
