this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
1014 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

59461 readers
4545 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] solrize 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This guy seems to have bought the gun legally at a gun store, after filling out the forms and passing the background check. You may be thinking of the guy in Maine whose parents bought him a gun when he was obviously dangerous. They were just convicted of involuntary manslaughter for that, iirc.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yup, I was just addressing the point of tangential arrest, sometimes it is well justified.

[–] solrize 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Well you were talking about charging the gun owner if someone else commits a crime with their gun. That's unrelated to this case where the shooter was the gun owner.

The lawsuit here is about radicalization but if we're pursuing companies who do that, I'd start with Fox News.