Why Corporate America is Silent About Gun Violence | CNN affairs

Photo of author

By Webdesk




New York
CNN

America’s largest companies scrambled to strengthen their gun safety policies after the 2018 mass shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida.

Dick’s Sporting Goods stopped selling assault-style semi-automatic rifles in stores. Citigroup imposed new restrictions on arms sales by corporate customers.

A year later, after mass shootings at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, and a nightclub in Dayton, Ohio, Walmart stopped selling handguns.

But the tidal wave of collective action against guns is over. In the aftermath of the latest mass shooting at a Nashville school, most businesses declined to speak out. Much of corporate America has gone quiet about guns.

Few major companies have changed their gun policies in recent years. Their efforts to curb gun violence have met fierce backlash from Republican lawmakers who oppose both gun restrictions and corporations taking on social roles.

Gun safety advocates say companies have a social responsibility to protect their customers and employees from gun violence. Advocates have called for retailers to ban firearms in their stores, invest in communities plagued by gun violence and end political donations to lawmakers associated with the NRA. They have also urged banks to stop doing business with arms or ammunition manufacturers.

Some companies, including gun manufacturers, have financial reasons to challenge gun restrictions. Other companies may not believe it is their responsibility or role to weigh in on the American gun debate.

And some companies are staying on the sidelines of gun issues for fear of political backlash and hostile gun rights supporters.

Guns are “one of the hottest hot button issues right now,” said Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University and a CNN political analyst. “In a polarized era, most companies still prefer to avoid these kinds of questions.”

Even if executives sympathize with the need for gun control, they don’t want to get involved in an issue that could spark backlash from some consumers, Zelizer said.

Companies are targeted because of their gun safety measures. Banks and financial institutions that have tried to cut ties to the gun industry have faced pressure from Republican lawmakers.

Texas passed a law in 2021 requiring banks to underwrite the state’s municipal bond market to certify that they do not and will not refuse firearm customers.

More than 50 House Republicans introduced a bill last year that would “fight back against ‘gun control in boardrooms'” and prevent companies receiving federal funding from denying gun trade.

Visa, Mastercard and Discover also this month paused a plan to implement a new merchant category code for the national arms merchants after political pressure from Republicans.

The measure was intended to help identify potential mass shooters and arms dealers. But two dozen Republican attorneys general warned the credit card companies not to go ahead with their plans. The Republican officials said passing a new gun store sales code would violate the constitutional rights of gun owners and potentially violate consumer protection and antitrust laws.

Several state legislators also proposed legislation that would prevent the companies from using the new code.

Some companies and consultants question whether companies should play an active role in gun safety measures.

Paul Argenti, a professor of business communications at Dartmouth University’s Tuck School of Business, has developed a framework for companies that get involved in hot button issues. He says companies should ask themselves: Is the problem connected to their business strategy, do they have the potential to make a difference in it, and is there potential backlash to taking a stand?

“Companies, unless they are connected, shouldn’t be speaking out,” he said. “Companies are not social entities.”

But Corporate America has spent the last few years trying to redefine a company’s purpose beyond serving shareholders.

In 2019, the Business Roundtable, which represents CEOs and seeks to influence policymaking, said companies should help all stakeholders: customers, employees, suppliers, communities and shareholders.

It was a departure from the business theories of Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist who said that society benefits most from companies that grow profits and serve one master: shareholders.

According to this new philosophy, companies should take leadership positions in reducing gun violence, said Igor Volksy, the executive director of advocacy group Guns Down America.

“Whether you’re a company that works directly with gun manufacturers, sells guns, or is a grocery store, gun violence comes to your doorstep,” he said. “As a company, you have a responsibility to keep your customers, employees and communities safe.”

He also argued that it is in the economic interest of companies to play a greater role in reducing gun violence because of the business risks of shootings and the toll of gun violence on communities. More companies like Dave & Buster’s, Del Taco and Walmart have started warning investors about how gun violence could hurt their financial performance.

“I’m not arguing that they should solve the social problem of gun violence,” Volksy said. “I argue they have a business incentive to solve the cost of gun violence.”



Source link

Leave a Comment

Share via
Copy link