Recent days in America can be described as grim as mass shootings increase and the leading cause of death for children changes to firearms. Before the Ulvade shooting, New York was hit with not one but two deadly shootings, one in a Brooklyn subway and another at a supermarket in the city of Buffalo. Civilians are no longer looking for a change. They’re begging.
According to a tally taken by the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive, the school shooting in Ulvade marked the 213th mass shooting in the US for 2022. Since the damning day, there seems to have been a rapid influx in shootings, with an estimated seventeen mass shootings following the Ulvade shootings, which occurred just about a week ago.
As lawmakers continue to fail in their reformation efforts, schools struggle to search for security and safety for both their students and employees. In an attempt to combat those fears, both history and government spending records indicate that the most common response from education leaders is to invest in more surveillance technology.
Where lawmakers and educators have failed, a victim attempts to set a precedent. Ilene Steur was one of thirty people who got shot during the Brooklyn subway shootings in April. Steur, who was shot in the buttocks, filed to sue Glock, Inc on Tuesday with the argument that the gun manufacturer should have known people with criminal intent could purchase its weapons.
Steur’s argument gages that Glock Inc markets its firearms by emphasizing qualities that make the guns more attractive to criminals. Steur also argues that the company failed to “adopt the most basic policies and practices” to stop firearms from falling into the wrong hands, the lawsuit claims.
If found guilty, Glock Inc is expected to pay contemporary damages to the 49-year-old; she is seeking reparations for both physical and emotional pain that was involuntarily thrust upon her breaking her everyday morning routine of taking the subway fearlessly to her real estate job.
The invocation of the lawsuit follows the passing of a 2021 first-of-its-kind New York State law allowing people affected by gun violence to sue gunmakers for creating a “nuisance” that endangers public safety and health. Steur, not only seeking but demanding a change, requested that the judge order Glock to “eradicate the effects” of its marketing practices.
In a complaint filed Tuesday at Brooklyn federal court, Steur’s lawyers wrote, “The defendants’ marketing and distribution practices made it far more likely that criminals, including Frank James, would obtain their weapons.”
The case is similar to one brought by the family of Sandy Hook shooting victims against Remington, the maker of the AR-15-style Bushmaster gun used in the tragedy. They claimed that the company’s weapon promotion was intended to appeal to disturbed young men, which was illegal under Connecticut law. $73 million resolved that complaint in February, acting as the most significant settlement since the legal shield got adopted in 2005.
Mark D. Shirian, one of Ms. Steur’s lawyers, said, “Gun manufacturers do not live in a bubble. They are aware that their marketing strategies empower purchasers with ill intent and endanger the lives of innocent people. This lawsuit seeks to hold the gun industry accountable.”
Glock is one of America’s largest gun manufacturers and has yet to respond to comment requests. However, the company has defended its company sales policies in the past. The New York legislation faced scrutiny from Companies and organizations, including Glock, Smith & Wesson, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation, in December 2021, claiming that the law was ‘unconstitutional and too vague.’