That No Crisis Goes To 'Waste'
That No Crisis Goes To 'Waste'
Lawsuit travels well beyond seeking 'justice'
The mass-shooting which occurred at a Buffalo, New York, grocery store in May of 2022 sent shockwaves through the nation. The racially-motivated massacre, which targeted a grocery store in a predominantly-black neighborhood, took ten lives; the gunman, 18 year-old Payton S. Gendron, received 11 consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole.
You would think justice has been served, to the degree that the law allows. Nope - enter the ‘activist lawyers’…
A lawsuit has been filed against social media companies, body armour manufacturers and a gun shop over a mass shooting… .
Look, I cannot imagine the heartache one feels from losing a loved-one to such a horrific tragedy, thus I am hesitant to say anything even remotely negative about family-members who are involved in this suit. However, I CAN speak about those who are actively using the grief of these people to push a political agenda.
I can, and I shall.
This is a prime example of why we desperately need tort-reform. Included in the suit is the gun store where the weapons were purchased (legally purchased, I may add), and the streaming service the shooter utilized (though the feed was cut off within two minutes of the action). Facebook, YouTube and Amazon are also included, for reasons which can - only generously - be described as suspect.
But there is an even darker agenda... because of course there is; as such, it is important to understand why the targets of this suit were chosen. Simply put, this is part of an ongoing effort to chip away at both First AND Second Amendment rights.
Firstly, by targeting the gun store you potentially place law-abiding business owners in the crosshairs for legal harassment; after all, if they are able to frighten entrepreneurs from opening and/or running such stores, and said-stores disappear… from where are you going to buy your firearms? This is nothing less than using the ‘law’ to apply a nefarious scheme of back-door disarmament.
Meanwhile, suing the social media concerns (which, with many of the examples in this suit, had nothing to do with this specific shooting) is a direct attack on freedom-of-speech guarantees. With the threat of lawsuits ever hanging over the heads of these companies - companies which are already eager to silence opinions with which they disagree - you can expect the hammer of censorship to fall harder than ever.
Filing a lawsuit which can be utilized as a threat of unfettered litigation in the future, essentially attacking two amendments at once? You will have to forgive me if I question the motivations of the ‘activists’ involved.
Question… and mistrust.