YouTube and Reddit are sued for allegedly enabling the racist mass shooting in Buffalo that left 10 dead::The complementary lawsuits claim that the massacre in 2022 was made possible by tech giants, a local gun shop, and the gunman’s parents.

  • Otkaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    176
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    It use to be video games and movies taking the blame. Now it’s websites. When are we going to decide that people are just bat shit crazy and guns need some form of regulation?

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because every gun owner thinks they are “the good guys”

        Just wait till I use my gun to save a bunch of lives. Then you’ll see that I’m a hero. /s

        • Shapillon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why always equate gun owners with right wing wackos? It’s getting a tad tiring…

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because most are.

            Now I know the new trendy thing is for gun lobbyists and right-wing operatives online to stoke the division by pitching guns to the left. I know the intent is to profit from a wider market while simultaneously muddying the waters of who is the most violent ideological group.

            … And some ground is being made with this vector, but it’s still nowhere close to comparable.

      • aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Usually from their perspective they are. Most people don’t try to be bad.

        • Eufalconimorph@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yep. This guy thought he was fighting a righteous battle against the evil of white replacement. Brainwashed, but not insane by any clinical definition any more than any soldier is.

          • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is a key insight. There have been plenty of despots and dictators that ruled countries for decades while committing uncountable atrocities who had full command of their faculties.

    • DarkWasp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can see the nuance in an argument that an online community, unmoderated, could be using an algorithm to group these violent people together and amplifying their views. The same can’t really be said for most other platforms. Writing threats of violence should still be taken seriously over the internet, especially if it was later acted upon. I don’t disagree with you that there’s a lot of bat shit crazy out there though.

      • lud@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or fucking Cicso for daring to switch those evil packages.

      • AeroLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most people need to drive to gun stores in order to buy them. We better ban cars!

      • tastysnacks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        Guns are the primary cause. They should go first. The others are secondary causes. They should go next.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          They’re not going anywhere, because our rights are solidly established and the Supreme Court is not going to abide with any infringements.

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Unfortunately there’s a long history of ignoring supreme court rulings.

            • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              There’s also a long + contemporary history of citizens ignoring bans too. Check out the levels of compliance in New York after they banned some guns. Many of their counties’ sheriffs have even stated they won’t enforce those bans.

              I guarantee the guns will still be here long after everyone who can read this is gone.

    • Anonymousllama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not popular nowadays to mention that people need to have self accountability, there’s always apparently a website, service, game or social media platform to “blame” for the actions of the individual

      • Quokka@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly and sites that profit off of hosting extremist content that radicalises terrorists need to be held accountable for their actions.

            • aidan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t agree in legislating extremist speech unless it is a call to action

                • aidan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t inherently oppose private platforms controlling who is allowed to comment- I oppose the government deciding certain beliefs are too radical to be allowed on any platform.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Guns have more legislation written about them than nearly any other product. They are heavily regulated. They are not effectively regulated however.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This ineffectiveness is directly due to NRA lobbying, and their zero-tolerance attitude towards any new gun legislation. Any gun-friendly lawmaker who even gets close to writing gun control legislation will end up getting harassed (and likely primaried in the next election). So when gun control legislation passes, it’s inevitably written by people who don’t understand guns at all. No wonder it’s all shit!

        Maybe now that the NRA is having financial difficulties legislators will have make leeway to enact things that might have a chance of working.

        • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s the biggest ball of nonsense speak I’ve read all day.

          So we have regulations, the regulations don’t work, and that’s the fault of the NRA…because they oppose more regulations?

          Look, I’m no fan of the NRA either but that’s just word vomit.

          Also, the political angle you describe is also nonsense. Just look at Sen. Feinstein, one of the biggest gun grabbers in American politics, who’s been in her seat for thirty years.

          Getting the party nod or not getting it based on being anti-gun is basically a non-issue. If you’re an anti-gun Democrat, that won’t likely set you apart from other primary challengers, and certainly not enough to singlehandedly unseat an incumbent (not to mention the questions raised by your party leaving you vulnerable to primary challengers). If you’re an anti-gun Republican, you’ve got bigger issues to worry about than the NRA.

          No, the NRA doesn’t make it so that gun friendly legislators don’t draft gun legislation, leaving it to be written by those who know nothing about the subject…rather it’s just common sense. A pro gun legislator knows that we’ve been trying that shit for years and it just… doesn’t…work. You’re expecting them to push for something that is not only against their political self interest but also their personal self interest, then blaming the NRA when it doesn’t happen.

    • Squander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      The thing about bat shit crazy people is that they dont need guns to be violent, they will find another way.

          • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            As disturbing as that comment is, the inverse sheds light on one of the biggest issues with attempts to regulate guns to reduce gun violence:

            Legal attempts to restrict violence through restrictions of legal freedoms will not and have not democratized safety from violence, mostly because the vast majority of violent crime is perpetrated by people who are already in the habit and practice of disregarding laws.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can’t realistically stab ten people in a crowd before I’m disarmed by the mob. And I certainly can’t do it from a hotel window.

        • CoughProductions@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hella things with more force than guns though, and most of those aren’t outlawed yet. Ppl will make bombs and use vehicular methods if guns arent available. Outlawing guns will not solve the issue I think the most effective method is inclusion and treating people well, maybe there won’t be as many unhinged individuals who act out violently…? Of course more regulation would help too (without infringing 2nd amendment)

          • TheFonz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point they are making is that guns, besides being a force amplifier, are also easily accessible. The more steps involved, the less likely you are engaged in said acts. It’s why Americans will drive 1 mile to get a six pack, even though walking to the shop yields the same result. The easiest path is the most likely.

          • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            More regulation without infringement is what we want. I don’t care if you have a gun. I care that they’re super easy to get, I also care that you can easily get a big gun that can kill a lot of people just as easily as a handgun.

          • Yendor@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where are all these mass bombings and vehicular murders in other Countries then? You average multiple mass shootings per week in the US, while the events in other countries typically happen less than once a year.

    • jampacked@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why are video games immune to neuroplasticity? Or any form of entertainment really.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Neuroplasticity is not really relevant here - it’s just the ability of the brain to form new connections. You’d need a casual effect of video games/entertainment toward radicalization inherently and science does not support that position.

        Even meta studies are not showing any causal link between gaming/entertainment and aggression

      • Redditiscancer789@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Anecdotally I play a genocidal maniac in every game I can. I love playing total war and killing every single thing I come across, razing pillaging their villages and enslaving the survivors. I’ve done it since I was a young child playing RTS games like age of empires. Adding up all my video game kills would probably be literally in the billions. Can you guess how many people I’ve killed in real life?

          • Redditiscancer789@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I imagine it feels that way when tons of people disagree with you. But that’s also part of posting in public discourse, if people don’t like what you’re saying they will surely let you know.

          • AeroLemming@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Videogames don’t induce violent tendencies in people. That’s just a fact.

            • aidan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I agree generally- but I also personally know people who were in some ways inspired to violence by media.

              • AeroLemming@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, some social media groups or propaganda productions ABSOLUTELY DO incite violence in people. I’m talking about violent videogames like FPSes, not deliberate propaganda.

                Sorry if this double posts, my internet cut out in the middle of hitting reply and I’m trying again.

                  • AeroLemming@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I suppose it would depend on the media. It’s a lot easier to insert effective alt-right political messages into films than into a game where you just shoot things and barely pay attention to the plot.

        • jampacked@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          25
          ·
          1 year ago

          Basically when you do something over and over your brain rewires to do it more efficiently but nobody seems to think hours of video games or perceived negativity/positivity has any effect when it comes to certain entertainment.

          • Suru@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I mean… if you play video games for hours and hours, your brain will likely learn to play videogames better? Sure. I hardly see a correlation to mass murder here.

            If you believe that action repetition is to blame for rewiring people’s brains to be more efficient at mass murder, why not blame the military, or hell, why not just start picketing outside your local airsoft or paintball places?

            edit: he’ll into hell. I blame autocorrect.

          • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because clicking a mouse to go pew pew at fictional characters is drastically different than pointing and shooting a gun at a human being.

            Even the most realistic military shooters, you don’t just get a red tint over your eyes if you get shot, you can’t wait it out or use a medkit to immediately be fully recovered, and people don’t respawn the next match after they are killed. They don’t show how gruesome and nerve-wracking real violence it is. They can’t show the lasting consequences of that. People who play video games might not even know how heavy a real gun is.

            And then there are things like Fortnite and Overwatch, which are just silly cartoons. No comparison.

          • Anonymousllama@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Are there any actual scientific studies that back up that summation? Because video games have been under intense scrutiny for decades and every time it’s brought up the consensus seems to be that there’s no direct link

          • Gork@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Video games are not the causal reason for mass shootings. Do other countries have gun violence like America does? No. But they play video games just at much as we do.

            It’s not video games that are the problem, it’s the easy access to lightly regulated guns.