As gun owners of America watched Donald Trump take the last couple of states to clinch his shocking presidential victory, they let out a collective sigh of relief – their fear of gun regulation have finally come to an end. There are a plethora of policies Trump might change in the next four years, but implementing stricter gun laws certainly won’t be one of them. Trump is an advocate of the 2nd amendment, and it showed in the market – stock prices of major gun companies like Sturm, Ruger (RGR) and Smith & Wesson (SWHC) have dipped more than 20% since Election Day.
The nature of gun control has always been fascinating to me. I came across this blog while researching the topic, and had ambivalent thoughts. Although I wholeheartedly agree with the notion that there must be some form of gun control, I must also partially disagree because I don’t believe guns can ever be “safe”, no matter how strict the rules may be. The only solution is to get rid of guns altogether and I don’t believe it can be accomplished in America. It is a constant struggle between politics and corporations, and ties back to the idea in my first blog post – business ethics.
Are gun companies being unethical? Unlike Wells Fargo and Volkswagen, they aren’t doing anything illegal or rule breaking. However, given the nature of the firearms industry, it is a sensitive topic that will always be entangled with controversy. They are selling deadly weaponsand many people fully expect them to take responsibility. Should we expect gun companies to directly address this conundrum? They can implement policies such as limiting gun selection or requiring an extensive background check before transaction. Doing so will help alleviate the epidemic of gun violence that exists in the U.S. today. With that being said, this is an incredibly lucrative industry, generating over $13.5 billion in annual revenue and companies have no incentive to walk away from any of it.
Fortunately for gun companies, they won’t have to face any form of government control for the next four years. However, the underlying question still remains: to what extent should businesses attempt to limit their revenue for the safety of others?
Word count: 366
Sources: