Houston, Texas – Families affected by a tragic mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas are taking legal action against the gun manufacturer, Instagram, and video game company Activision for their alleged role in promoting the weapon used in the shooting. On May 24, 2022, a teenage shooter armed with an AR-15 style rifle killed 19 children and two teachers, marking one of the deadliest school shootings in the United States in a decade.
The families have filed a lawsuit accusing Daniel Defense, the gun manufacturer, Meta-owned Instagram, and Microsoft-owned Activision of wrongful death and gross negligence. Their lawyer, Josh Koskoff, argues that the companies’ marketing strategies targeted insecure adolescents, ultimately contributing to the tragic events that unfolded at the elementary school.
Koskoff claims that the shooter, who purchased the weapon immediately after turning 18, was influenced by Instagram, Activision, and Daniel Defense even before reaching the legal age to buy the gun. He alleges that the companies exposed the gunman to the firearm, portrayed it as a solution to his problems, and provided training on how to use it.
In response to the lawsuit, Activision expressed condolences to the families affected by the Uvalde shooting, emphasizing that millions of individuals play video games without engaging in violent acts. While Activision has acknowledged the tragic nature of the incident, Meta and Daniel Defense have yet to publicly comment on the allegations brought forth by the families.
Earlier in the week, the families reached a $2 million settlement with the city of Uvalde due to reported “critical failures” in police response to the shooting. Authorities had waited over an hour before attempting to apprehend the gunman, leading to criticism from the Justice Department for the delayed intervention.
The prevalence of school shootings in the United States reflects a larger issue surrounding gun ownership and lenient regulations on firearms, particularly concerning military-style rifles like the AR-15. The ongoing legal battle between the affected families and the implicated companies sheds light on the complex web of factors contributing to such tragic events and raises questions about corporate responsibility in the marketing of firearms and violent content.