Uvalde families accuse the video game ‘Call of Duty’ and Instagram of “grooming” the perpetrator of the massacre

The families say these companies played a leading role in “grooming” the perpetrator of the tragedy and colluding with the weapons manufacturer, Daniel Defense.

This is the first time that relatives of victims have sought compensation from actors who are often cited as components of the epidemic of mass shootings in the United States, but who are never held accountable for them.

The lawsuit is filed by lawyer John Koskoff, who has played a leading role in accountability for shootings. He was the person who secured $73 million in compensation in 2022 for the families of the Newtown (Connecticut) school shooting by gun manufacturer Remington. Until then, it was very difficult to hold manufacturers accountable for massacres in which their weapons were used. Koskoff opened a window for these compensations and now wants to extend it to other actors who may have an influence on the behavior of the killers.

According to one lawsuit, The meta and Activision “intentionally exposed the killer to the gun, “They prepared him to see in it a solution to his problems and they trained him to use it.”

“The truth is that the weapons industry and Daniel Defense did not act alone. They would not have been able to reach this boy without Instagram,” the lawyer wrote. “They could not have exposed him to the dopamine that literally kills a person. That’s what ‘Call of Duty’ does,” he explains about the most popular war video game.

The video game allows users to use simulations of real weapons, which can be found on the market in situations of high violence. For this reason, the lawsuit states, Activision has become “the most prolific and effective seller of assault rifles in the United States.” Ramos purchased a version of ‘Call of Duty’ in November 2021, six months before the massacre, which included in its presentation the Daniel Defense DDM4V7 model that the killer later used in the shooting.

At the same time, Instagram invites people like Ramos to buy these types of weapons. The social network prohibits gun manufacturers from buying advertising on its platform. But, at the same time, it opens another door: it allows companies to share promotional messages on their corporate accounts. Some of them, with messages that some could see as a way of promoting violence. ‘Hunters hunt,’ said one of these messages, with soldiers and no trace of the animals. ‘Refuse to be a victim,’ read another, with a man pulling an assault rifle out of a car trunk.

The lawsuit contends that Activision and Meta knowingly promote these types of powerful, military-style weapons to vulnerable populations, such as young people who are “insecure about their masculinity, are often victims of bullying and who have a need to display strength and dominance.”

“Defendants demonize marginalized teenage boys and spew out the heroes of mass shootings,” Koskoff’s letter said, adding that trying to recover compensation from the companies will have a difficult path in court.