I am no fan of the NRA and their sponsors but the standard of proof in this case for the line of arguement worries me. It is one thing if e-cig manufacturers g

I am no fan of the NRA and their sponsors but the standard of proof in this case for the line of arguement worries me. It is one thing if e-cig manufacturers get sued for marketing as smoking cessation devices while talking about flavor or advertising on influencers - it is damn clear that they are dodging anti-tobbaco advertisement and advertising nicotine to minors and the standard of evidence is well established. But trying to draw connection between the machismo and spree shooters? It seems far too speculative when courtroom junk science based on the desired outcome has already caused problems. Plus how easily used for the next moral panic. For a silly example that Minecraft causes illegal and unpermitted construction when it is really say priced out younger generations building their own squats.