In a first-of-its-kind lawsuit, the City of Buffalo, New York is taking aim at gun violence prevention by suing several defendants including ghost gun retailers, gun manufacturers and distributors, and other firearm industry members. The lawsuit is prompted largely by the rise in gun violence throughout the City of Buffalo over the past couple of years.

The lawsuit was filed in the Erie County Branch of the New York Supreme Court and called the behavior of the gun manufacturers in the lawsuit as being one that “endangered the safety and health of the public.”

According to city officials, as with other major cities throughout the nation, Buffalo has seen an unprecedented rise in gun violence over the past couple of years. In 2020, 355 people were injured or killed throughout the city. And as of March 2021, the number of people that were shot by guns was up 140% compared to the same period the year before. The recent mass shooting at the local Tops Friendly Market where ten shoppers were killed and three others were wounded was the tipping point for city officials.

“Members of our community have suffered too much and for too long from gun violence. We must do everything we can to decrease gun violence. Enabling the possession of illegal guns destroys lives and deeply affects our neighborhoods, especially in Black and Brown communities. I am proud to stand up to the gun industry and fight for the safety of people living, working, and visiting the City of Buffalo,” shared Mayor Byron W. Brown.

City officials explained that the lawsuit did not prevent legal gun ownership. However, they emphasized that the move is a proactive way to help curb gun violence throughout the city.

Some of the defendants named in the lawsuit are notable gun makers including Beretta, Smith & Wesson, Bushmaster, Glock, and Remington. Ghost gun retailers Polymer and Arm or Ally are also named in the suit. The city has not ruled out adding additional defendants as they continue through the discovery process.

The city also highlights the named defendants’ different marketing tactics that emphasize "high capacity and ease of concealment." Some of these marketing tactics include advertising high-capacity firearms in movies, social media, and video games. Such marketing tactics according to the lawsuit appeal to the criminal intent of many individuals who seek to illegally own firearms. With these claims, the lawsuit alleges that the named defendants have "maintained the public nuisance of unlawful possessing, transportation and disposition of firearms and the utilization of guns in the commission of an offense."

In addition to the marketing tactic, the lawsuit accuses the gun manufacturers of not doing enough to train dealers so that they can prevent “straw sales and other illegal transactions.”

The lawsuit also accuses named gun makers of refusing to end contracts with gun distributors who sell to dealers that have a disproportionately high number of gun sales that were eventually traced back to crime scenes and other criminal activity.

This lawsuit is the first of its kind as it challenges gunmakers over their business practices, an industry that has long since been protected by legislation.

An example of such protective legislation is the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a 2005 law passed by Congress that offered gun manufacturers and dealers immunity from being held liable when crimes are committed using their guns.

The law still holds gun makers accountable for a defective product, criminal misconduct, breach of contract, and other actions which show negligence on the part of the gun maker or dealer.

As part of the lawsuit, this city is seeking compensatory and punitive damages including money for an "abatement fund with sufficient capital to eliminate the public nuisance they are responsible for creating, exacerbating, and/or perpetuating."