Maryland's Glock Ban Goes Beyond Glock: Other Handgun Brands That Could Be Affected in 2027

When most Maryland gun owners hear about the state's upcoming Glock ban, they understandably assume it only affects Glock pistols. But there's a significant detail in Senate Bill 334 that deserves more attention: the law doesn't specifically prohibit firearms based on their manufacturer. Instead, it targets certain mechanical characteristics found in Glock pistols and several competing handguns.

That means gun owners who have never purchased a Glock could still be affected by the restrictions taking effect January 1, 2027. Firearms manufactured by Palmetto State Armory, Shadow Systems, Ruger, and others have been identified as potentially falling under the same law, despite being sold under entirely different brand names.

We've previously covered which Glock models could be affected by Maryland's 2027 restrictions, but this time we're looking at the other manufacturers whose firearms could be caught up in the legislation.

Other Handgun Manufacturers That Could Be Affected

Over the years, several firearm manufacturers have developed pistols based on Glock's operating system. While these handguns often feature different ergonomics, upgraded components, and their own distinctive designs, many share important mechanical characteristics with traditional Glock pistols.

Because Maryland's legislation focuses on those characteristics rather than the name stamped on the slide, some of these alternatives may face the same restrictions. Several were specifically identified in federal litigation challenging the law.

Palmetto State Armory (PSA) Dagger

The PSA Dagger series is one of the better-known Glock-pattern alternatives on the market. Based on a design similar to the Glock Gen 3 platform, the Dagger offers its own features and configurations while retaining many of the mechanical characteristics associated with Glock pistols.

Factory-stock Dagger models use a Glock-style cruciform trigger mechanism, making them a significant example of the types of firearms that could fall under SB 334. For Maryland gun owners who assumed choosing a PSA instead of a Glock would avoid the upcoming restrictions, that may not be the case.

Shadow Systems

Shadow Systems has built its reputation around producing Glock-pattern pistols with its own approach to ergonomics, components, and performance. Its MR920, DR920, XR920, and CR920 families are among the handgun lines that have been raised as potentially affected by Maryland's legislation.

Although Shadow Systems firearms are manufactured and sold independently of Glock, many share the underlying mechanical design targeted by the law. Their inclusion demonstrates how a restriction commonly described as a Glock ban can extend to firearms from other manufacturers.

Ruger RXM

The Ruger RXM is another noteworthy example, particularly because Ruger is such a well-established American firearm manufacturer. Developed in collaboration with Magpul, the RXM uses a Glock-pattern operating system while incorporating its own modular design features.

The RXM was specifically identified in litigation concerning SB 334 as a firearm potentially affected by the new restrictions. Its inclusion is especially relevant for consumers who might otherwise assume that choosing a different major manufacturer would put them outside the scope of the law.

Custom Glock-Pattern Builds

The implications may extend beyond factory-produced handguns. Certain custom pistols assembled using Glock-compatible components, including builds involving Polymer80 or Lone Wolf parts, could also be affected depending on their completed configuration.

It's important to distinguish between a firearm's appearance, its component compatibility, and its actual internal mechanism. Not every custom build or Glock-compatible component automatically makes a firearm subject to the law, but completed pistols meeting the statutory definition may fall within the restrictions regardless of who manufactured the individual parts.

Why Are These Other Firearms Included?

To understand why Maryland's legislation extends beyond Glock, it helps to look at what the law actually targets.

Senate Bill 334 establishes restrictions on certain semiautomatic pistols classified as "machine gun convertible pistols." A central part of that definition involves the use of a cruciform trigger bar, a cross-shaped component found in many Glock-pattern firing mechanisms.

The law focuses on pistols with this design that can be readily converted to automatic fire through the installation of a machine gun conversion device, commonly referred to as a "switch." These devices are designed to alter a firearm's operation, allowing it to fire automatically rather than one round per trigger pull.

What makes this legislation particularly concerning is that machine gun conversion devices are already classified as machine guns under federal law and are generally illegal for ordinary civilians to possess. The handguns being targeted, however, are manufactured and sold as semiautomatic firearms, and their ordinary, lawful operation does not involve automatic fire.

Rather than focusing exclusively on illegal conversion devices and their misuse, Maryland's legislation extends restrictions to a broad category of otherwise lawful firearms because of their potential to be illegally modified. That distinction deserves attention, especially when the affected handguns are commonly used for personal protection, recreational shooting, and competition. The result is legislation that reaches beyond the devices at the center of the concern and directly affects the availability of firearms that law-abiding Maryland residents have legally purchased and owned for years.

Does This Mean Every Striker-Fired Handgun Is Affected?

No. Although many modern semiautomatic pistols are striker-fired, they do not all use the same internal firing mechanism. SB 334 specifically excludes striker-fired pistols that do not use a cruciform trigger bar, as well as hammer-fired semiautomatic pistols. That means firearms from other manufacturers are not automatically prohibited simply because they are striker-fired or resemble a Glock.

The distinction comes down to the firearm's mechanical design and whether it meets the full statutory definition. For Maryland consumers, this makes it important to verify the status of a particular model rather than relying on its appearance, brand name, or general operating category.

What If You Already Own One of These Firearms?

For Maryland residents who already legally own an affected handgun, SB 334 does not generally require surrendering the firearm or prohibit continued possession solely because it meets the new definition. The primary restrictions, scheduled to take effect January 1, 2027, concern future manufacturing, sales, purchases, receipt, and transfers. Limited exceptions exist, including certain qualifying family transfers, but those exceptions have specific requirements.

Maryland State Police is also required to establish implementing regulations and publish a list of prohibited pistols. Until the status of individual models is clarified through that process, gun owners and dealers should be careful about treating any unofficial list as a final legal determination.

What Happens Next for Maryland Gun Owners?

Maryland's law is already facing a federal court challenge from Second Amendment organizations and other plaintiffs who argue that the restrictions improperly burden the right to own commonly used firearms. In September 2026, a federal judge denied requests for a preliminary injunction in Bathras v. Moore, meaning the law remains on track to take effect while the broader litigation continues.

The larger concern is not simply that certain Glock models may become unavailable for future purchase in Maryland. It's that a law presented largely as a response to illegal machine gun conversion devices could restrict an entire category of legally manufactured semiautomatic firearms, including products from manufacturers that many consumers may not even associate with Glock.

At The Machine Gun Nest, we believe that distinction matters. Addressing the criminal misuse of firearms and restricting access to firearms commonly owned for lawful purposes are not the same thing, and Maryland gun owners deserve to understand the difference.

We'll continue monitoring Maryland State Police guidance, the ongoing litigation, and any changes affecting the implementation of SB 334. If you have questions about a particular firearm or how the upcoming restrictions may affect you, our team is available to help you understand the information currently available.

*This article is intended for general educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Firearm classifications and legal requirements may change as regulations are finalized and litigation continues.