The families of the UVALDE shooting victims are sustaining video games and media companies, claiming that the shooter was subjected to violence through these platforms before performing one of the worst shootings in schools in the United States.
Families filed a lawsuit against ACTIVISION, the military shooting maker from the first person “Call of Duty”, Meta and another company, another company reported Los Angeles Times.
They have made allegations of neglect, assistance, incitement and illegal death.
“To put a more accurate point on this: the defendants are chewing with the young adolescents and spitting the collective archers,” the complaint stated, according to the port.
The file indicated that the common thread between school shootings in Uvalde, Parkland and Sandy Hook is that they all committed young men of Duty and used AR-15, as reported to the Times.
Families say the shooter Salvador Ramos is exposed to a virtual version of the AR-15 bearing the Daniel brand in “Call of Duty”, which he later used to shoot at school.
Nineteen students and teachers were killed and 18 people were injured during the shooting at the Rob Elementary School in 2022 in Uvalde, Texas.
The lawsuit states that the AR-15 manufacturer has a market share of less than 1 %, but it was promoted in the “Call of Duty” game, which caught Ramos’s attention.
“Call of Duty” is a simulation, not a game. It teaches players how to target, download, and fire accurately, while the teenage nervous system returns to recurrent graphic violence. Although killing is hypothetical, weapons are authentic, “as families complain, according to times.
The lawsuit stated that the lawsuit “invented a simulation” they created a simulation with realistic weapons and praised the children for their murder. “
UVALDE families also sue Meta, claiming that the shooter got the rifle ads that strengthened the violence on Instagram.
“They glorify these weapons. They have been supposed to want young children to buy these weapons, and children who accept young people of these types of things,” Veronica Mata, who lost her daughter at fire, told the Times.
Companies submitted requests to refuse to complain, saying that their products are constitutionally protected.
Activision argued that the first amendment protects “Call of Duty” as an artwork. Meta said that the legal precedent protects social media platforms from responsibility for the content of the third party published by users and advertisers.
“Call of Duty tells complex stories that explore the real world’s fighting scenarios faced in modern war. There can be no doubt that Call of Duty is expressive and fully protected through the first modification.”
A hearing is scheduled to be held on whether the lawsuit will move forward on Friday.