Friends, believe it or not, it's not politicians who are bringing common sense Americans to their knees, or moviemakers, or pop stars, or schoolteachers, or bureaucrats. No, Enemy Number One isn't any of these. It's...lawyers. Most of the time, it isn't the threat of force or jail that humbles average people. It's the threat of legal action, including the possibility of being sued. "Liability" is the buzzword that every businessman fears most, and ordinary citizens aren't far behind, and for good reason, as a simple lawsuit can do more than ruin your day -- it can ruin your life. The Left, of course, has picked up on this fact, and they've won over the vast majority of trial lawyers to their side, and increasingly they're enlisting them in a no-holds-barred offensive against the Constitution (as written), democratic pluralism, free speech, gun ownership, the internal combustion engine, masculinity -- you name it! They're slowly winning the battle, too. Time and again, conservatives raise the white flag before the fight is even joined. That's because most of us would rather submit to the dictates of wokeness than risk our lives and livelihoods in mortal judicial combat. And who can blame us?
A case in point is the recent lawsuit lodged against Meta, Activision, and Daniel Defense by the families of those killed by Salvador Ramos at Ross Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. I wrote about this on Saturday, but I've turned that blogpost into a full-blown article, as you'll see below. Enjoy, and let me know your thoughts...
The Blame Game in Uvalde Has Gotten
Out of Hand
Before 2022, few people had heard of
Uvalde, Texas. To those who had, it was best known as the birthplace
of singer and actress Dale Evans, as well as Hollywood heartthrob
Matthew McConaughey.
Now, it's also the birthplace of a
massive lawsuit against Meta, the parent company of Facebook;
Activision, a video game producer; and a gunmaker, Daniel Defense.
You can guess the reason.
A Uvalde resident and former student,
aged 18, shot up Robb Elementary School and killed 19 children and 2
teachers there on May 24th, 2022. The lawsuit
alleges that Meta, Activision, and Daniel Defense have been
"grooming...socially vulnerable" boys and young men by
promoting first-person shooter video games and gun ownership, and
these companies are therefore legally and financially responsible for
the carnage at Robb Elementary.
Salvador Ramos, the perpetrator, was
indeed a frequent user of Instagram, which is owned by Meta. He
played "Call of Duty", which is a combat-based video game
released by Activision and enjoyed by millions of people all over the
world. He also bought a rifle, a DDM4V7, from Daniel Defense mere
minutes after his 18th birthday. None of this is in
dispute.
Now, reasonable people may question
why so many young people (and not-so-young people) are obsessed with
social media. They may question why so many boys and young men are
spending so much time shooting fake people in virtual combat. They
may also question the degree of access to firearms that ordinary
citizens, especially between the ages of 18 and 21, should have.
Nevertheless, the fact of the matter
is that using social media, playing video games, and owning guns are
all completely legal, acceptable, and even normal activities for
American adults. Neither separately nor in combination do they
routinely add up to tragedy and bloodshed. This lawsuit is therefore
riddled with logical and legal fallacies, and it ought therefore to
be dismissed out of hand.
First off, why not sue Ramos himself,
or his parents, who are, quite obviously, much more directly
responsible for this tragedy than Meta, Activision, or Daniel
Defense?
The question answers itself: Ramos
died at the scene, and no big cash payout can be had from his estate,
or from his penniless
family members.
Second, why should the deaths of 21
people, however horrific and avoidable, become a pretext for taking
away the rights of hundreds of millions of Americans who bear no
responsibility for the actions of Salvador Ramos? And, if taking away
our rights is not the object of the lawsuit, how would the transfer
of millions of dollars to the victims' families honor those victims
or atone for their deaths?
One of the most odious features of
modern American society is our monetization and commodification of
suffering and victimhood. We put on a pedestal almost anyone who can
make a case that they are aggrieved, and we shower the disadvantaged
and downtrodden with preferments, praise, and payoffs. It's frankly
disgusting, and, when it's done on the behalf of those who have died,
it debases their memory. Indeed, it turns them and their legacy into
a means to an end, and the end in sight is almost always...money.
It's stomach-turning, if we're to be honest.
Now, it's extremely unlikely that any
of these companies will ever pay a cent because of these lawsuits,
and nor should they, but, even if they did, how would this serve the
greater good? Does anyone think that violent video games, or TV
shows, or movies, or songs, are going to disappear? Does anyone think
that "AR-15 style" guns (whatever those are!) will wink out
of existence because a bunch of trial lawyers start keening about it?
Heck, no!
At most, the Uvalde victims' relatives
(and their stable of lawyers) will get rich because of these
lawsuits, and the companies in question may add little disclaimers to
their products: "WARNING: Shooting actual people, as opposed to
avatars, may violate our community standards." Otherwise,
Americans' fascination with, and unhealthy proclivity for, violence
will continue.
If you ask me, the true causes
of incidents like the shooting in Uvalde aren't social media
applications, or video games, or guns. What's really behind the
phenomenon of mass shootings is human frailty and pure evil,
exacerbated by atrocious
parenting and a culture of entitlement and
egoism.
This boy, Salvador Ramos, felt that
nothing in the world mattered except his suffering, and he decided to
take it out on anyone and everyone, without any concern for their
lives and dignity. He's an extreme case, but a lot of modern
Americans have similar attitudes about themselves, society, and other
people. They feel aggrieved, and they want payback, no matter what
the short- or long-term consequences may be. It's best understood as
a form of vengeful narcissism run amok.
In that sense, I'm sorry to say,
Salvador Ramos and the relatives of his victims may have something in
common: a very modern and increasingly universal fixation on their
own pain, and an indifference to the interests and views of others,
and to the good of society as a whole.
What happened at Ross Elementary was
appalling and unacceptable, but blaming social media companies, video
game producers, and gun manufacturers makes no sense. In fact, going
after these companies is part of the problem, because it deflects
responsibility from Salvador Ramos, the man who pulled the trigger,
and who was therefore the genuine perpetrator and evildoer.
Is that really the message that these
Uvalde families want to send? That Ramos was a bit player, and, as
long as Meta, Activision, and Daniel Defense pay up, justice has been
done? I should hope not!
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an
Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at:
www.waddyisright.com.
He appears on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480/106.9.
And here it is at World Net Daily:
https://www.wnd.com/2024/05/uvalde-monetization-suffering-victimhood/
***
In other news, the verdict in DJT's hush money trial is probably going to be forthcoming this week, and, while no one knows what the political consequences will be, the legal stakes are neatly summarized by this article. Bottom line: Trump isn't likely to go to prison, but that was never the point anyway. Dems want to turn Trump into a felon, because they assume that will be a political game-changer. They may be delusional, of course. It wouldn't be the first time!
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgg4kv0682o
You may have heard that the Libertarians were not especially hospitable to DJT or RFK, Jr., both of whom spoke at their recent convention. That's neither here nor there, but it turns out that the Libertarians have nominated a presidential candidate: Chase Oliver. Does that matter? Heck, yeah, it matters! The election in November is likely to be close, especially in the key states, and the presence of candidates in the race besides Trump and Biden is very consequential, because they don't have to pull all that many votes to change the outcome. Those who vote Libertarian tend to be right-leaning, so Trump will be particularly threatened by Mr. Oliver. Buckle up, because our five-way race is about to become a six-way race!
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/26/libertarians-reject-trump-rfk-chase-oliver-presidential-nominee-00160040
