XPost: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, alt.politics.media, sac.politics   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.guns   
   From: yourdime@outlook.com   
      
   The families of schoolchildren who were shot at Robb Elementary School in   
   2022 filed two lawsuits on Friday accusing Instagram, the publisher of the   
   popular “Call of Duty” video game and a manufacturer of semiautomatic   
   rifles of helping to train and equip the teenage gunman who committed the   
   massacre.   
      
   The unusual lawsuits were filed on the second anniversary of the   
   elementary school shooting, in which 19 fourth-graders and two teachers   
   were killed in their classrooms by an 18-year-old gunman who had purchased   
   his weapon — an AR-15-style rifle — a few days before, as soon as he was   
   legally able.   
      
   While much of the attention in the aftermath of the shooting has been on   
   the flawed police response, the two suits — one filed in California, the   
   other in Texas — focus on the gunman and the companies that he regularly   
   interacted with leading up to the shooting. Each company, the lawsuits   
   claim, took part in “grooming” the teenager to become a mass shooter.   
      
   Together, the suits are among the most far-reaching actions to be filed in   
   response to the escalating number of mass shootings in the United States.   
   The California suit, which names the publisher Activision, appeared to be   
   one of the first to go after a video game maker for helping to promote   
   weapons used in mass shootings.   
      
   The lawsuits argue that the gun maker, Daniel Defense, would not have been   
   able to connect with the gunman, a socially isolated teenager living in   
   rural Texas, without the help of the technology and video game companies.   
      
   A spokeswoman for Activision said in a statement on Friday that “we   
   express our deepest sympathies to the families” in Uvalde, but added that   
   “millions of people around the world enjoy video games without turning to   
   horrific acts.” The other companies did not immediately comment.   
      
   The Uvalde families are represented by Josh Koskoff, a lawyer who has   
   previously challenged gunmakers over mass shootings. In 2022, Mr. Koskoff   
   reached a $73 million settlement with Remington, the maker of another AR-   
   15-style rifle that was used in the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting   
   that left 26 people dead in Connecticut in 2012.   
      
   “Daniel Defense is a predator but can’t get to the prey without the help   
   of these other third parties,” said Mr. Koskoff, who is also representing   
   Uvalde families in a suit filed this week over the police response.   
      
   The families announced a $2 million settlement with the City of Uvalde   
   earlier this week, which they reached without filing a lawsuit.   
      
   Editors’ Picks   
      
   The Brewing Tradition Passed From Mother to Daughter   
      
   Melissa Clark’s Go-To Pizza Recipe for Busy Nights   
      
   36 Hours in Traverse City, Mich.   
   The new cases must clear significant hurdles. There is a section of   
   federal law known as Section 230 that has largely insulated online   
   platforms from lawsuits over content posted by others. And a 2005 federal   
   law grants gun makers broad protection from liability for shootings.   
      
   Mr. Koskoff made use of exceptions in the 2005 law for the Sandy Hook   
   lawsuit. That suit, like the new ones on behalf of the Uvalde families,   
   focused on the marketing of the weapons.   
      
   Makers of violent video games have survived previous efforts to link them   
   to real-world violence based on the graphic content of their games. The   
   suits filed on Friday focus instead on violent first-person shooter games   
   as a form of advertising for the weapons they depict.   
      
   Documents surfaced during the Sandy Hook case showing that there were   
   licensing agreements between Remington and Activision, the maker behind   
   the realistically violent “Call of Duty” franchise.   
      
   The marketing potential for real-world weapons in “Call of Duty” also   
   figures in a suit brought in 2022 by victims of a mass shooting at a   
   parade in Highland Park, Ill. The gunman in that case was an avid player   
   of the game, according to that lawsuit, though Activision was not named as   
   a defendant.   
      
   The Uvalde families are suing Activision and Instagram, as well as their   
   parent companies Microsoft and Meta, in California because that was where   
   the alleged conduct took place, their lawyers said.   
      
   According to the suit, the Uvalde gunman spent significant time playing   
   “Call of Duty,” including a recent version of the game that prominently   
   featured the rifle model sold by Daniel Defense that the gunman used.   
      
   The suit argues that the game allows players to try out realistic   
   simulations of recognizable real-world firearms, making Activision “the   
   most prolific and effective marketer of assault weapons in the United   
   States.” Instagram allowed Daniel Defense to promote its products through   
   its social media presence even though the platform formally bans firearms   
   advertising.   
      
   “Refuse to be a victim,” one of the gun company’s Instagram posts read,   
   with an image of a person taking an assault-style rifle out of the trunk   
   of a car.   
      
   Meta allows firearms makers to bypass its advertising prohibitions and   
   market directly to children, the suit argues, through “organic” content   
   and social media influencers.   
      
   The California suit is among the first to try to link social media   
   companies to mass shootings. In March, a similar lawsuit — accusing   
   YouTube and Reddit of helping to equip, train and radicalize an 18-year-   
   old white gunman who killed 10 Black people in Buffalo, N.Y. — survived an   
   effort by the companies to have the case dismissed. (The companies are   
   appealing.)   
      
   The intersection of social media and gun culture has become an increasing   
   focus of gun-control advocates.   
      
   “The theory here is that they were responsible for addicting the shooter,   
   and then, through his addiction, radicalizing him and helping to equip him   
   to carry out this deadly attack,” said Eric Tirschwell, the top litigator   
   for Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun-control advocacy group that is   
   representing the Buffalo families. The group has also been involved in   
   litigation against Daniel Defense and police officers over the shooting in   
   Uvalde.   
      
   Justin Wagner, a former prosecutor and the group’s senior director of   
   investigations, said Everytown had also sought to work with social media   
   companies to limit gun-related content. “We’ve tried to build common   
   ground around at least protecting kids,” he said.   
      
   Mr. Koskoff, along with another lawyer, Erin Rogiers, is representing most   
   of the families of the children who were killed or wounded in the Uvalde   
   massacre. They filed suit in Texas against Daniel Defense, which sold the   
   gunman his rifle online and shipped it by mail, and against the gun store   
   in Uvalde, Oasis Outback, where the gunman picked up the rifle and bought   
   a second gun as well.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)