It's now been two years since the catastrophic mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and the families of the victims are still far from recovering from the tragedy. A significant number of lawsuits have already been filed as a result of the events of that terrible day, as had been predictable from the beginning. Yesterday, however, another pair of lawsuits was added to the pile. One of them is being leveled against Daniel Defense, the manufacturer of the rifle the shooter used at the school. The second is a bit more curious. The families are suing Meta Platforms because of their ownership of Instagram, and also Activision, the maker of the video game Call of Duty. We'll try to figure out why below. (Associated Press)

Families in Uvalde took more legal action Friday on the second anniversary of the Robb Elementary School attack, suing Meta Platforms, which owns Instagram, and the maker of the video game “Call of Duty” over claims the companies bear responsibility for products used by the teenage gunman.

They also filed another lawsuit against Daniel Defense, which manufactured the AR-style rifle used in the May 24, 2022, shooting — and has already been sued.

It added to mounting lawsuits over the attack and came as the small Texas city gathered to mourn the anniversary of one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. The gunman killed 19 students and two teachers. Officers finally confronted and shot him after waiting more than an hour to enter the fourth-grade classroom.

It's understandable that the families would be seeking action to hold anyone accountable who bore any responsibility for the tragedy. And any time a tragedy like this happens, there will always be attorneys circling around, waiting to help affected people build a case in a target-rich environment. Some of the lawsuits already filed are quite understandable. On Wednesday, the families brought a $500 million suit against Texas State Police officials and other officers involved in the botched response. Given all we've learned about how the response played out, I won't be surprised if they prevail in that suit.

These two latest suits are another matter, however. The lawsuit against Daniel Defense doesn't look promising. Similar lawsuits have been brought against other gun manufacturers following mass shootings but most of them (though not all) eventually fail. Plaintiffs need to find a way around the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and that's not easy to do. Such lawsuits also fly in the face of the reality we've known for so long. Guns don't kill people. People kill people. In this case, maniacs kill people.

In the suit against Meta Platforms, the families claim that Instagram didn't do enough to prevent young people from accessing violent content on the platform. This issue has been debated for years, but the platforms are largely protected from such liability because it is ultimately the content creators who are responsible for the content they post, not the platform that is provided for them to deliver it to the world. 

The attempt to sue Activision seems even more bizarre. It has been reported that the shooter had been playing Call of Duty since he was 15 years old. While I've never played it myself, I'm aware that involves a lot of violence and shooting to be sure. The plaintiffs are claiming that Call of Duty allowed the shooter to "practice with the version of the rifle he used at the school." This sounds like an allegation that was cooked up by an attorney looking for someone with deep pockets to sue. Activision is already crying foul, pointing out that no definitive link between video games and real-world violence has ever been established. I tend to agree. I've played every version of Grand Theft Auto that's ever been released from beginning to end, and that game is even more violent than Call of Duty. Yet I've never once felt the urge to outside and jack somebody's vehicle and start shooting up pedestrians. There was just something wrong with that kid and something probably would have triggered him eventually.

With all of that said, the families are grieving and they deserve their day in court if that's what they wish. The police certainly have a lot to answer for, though it's difficult to say how much direct responsibility for the extent of the shooting damage they can be held accountable for. As to the other defendants, as noted above, those lawsuits may not have much of a future.