1160X130 HeaderFP

The Business of Guns is Not Always Reality in the Board Room

CEOs may be hot crap within their own organizations, but they don’t mean squat in the real world.

Steve Comus

If nothing else, the gun control debate brings out the worst in both people and the media since the issue from the antis’ side is pure emotion and from the pro’s side is logic and common sense.

Yet it is the antis who preach “common sense” when it comes to their proposals of nonsense in the form of gun-grabbing laws. Any patriot with common sense couldn’t be a gun-grabber in the first place.

A recent piece by NPR (National Public Radio) is a great example of how deft writing and editing in the media can change the perception of a situation, even when the actual words themselves don’t support that misguided perception.

To wit: The headline on a piece published shortly before the vote in the House of Representatives on a gun control measure stated: “CEOs Urge Congress To Expand Gun Background Checks.”

That is technically true. Four CEOs were involved. There are roughly a quarter-million CEOs in the United States. That is 0.000016 of them who asked for the gun-grabbing legislation. Hardly enough to suggest that CEOs in general are voicing anything strongly. Often, it is not what is said, but what is not said that matters.

The four CEOs who signed the letter to Congress were: Chip Bergh of Levi Strauss & Co., Blake Mycoskie of TOMS shoes, Scott Rechler of RXR Realty and Edward Stack of Dick’s Sporting Goods.

Who cares what CEOs think anyway? They make on average over $11 million a year. That can buy a whole bunch of armed guards, etc., that normal folk can’t afford. To suggest that CEOs have even the slightest inkling about what reality looks like for normal people is a joke.

Those who do care what CEOs do, however, is another matter. Boards of directors tend to take profits seriously, so when CEOs get on their socially responsible high horses, they do so at their own risks – even if the boards approved the moves in the first place.

Dick’s Sporting Goods has been in the news in recent months after it slapped its customer base in the face over AR rifles. That company’s stocks took a dip following that fiasco, and now it looks like Dick’s wants to double down and alienate the entire part of its customer base that isn’t anti-gun.

Companies are free to do as they wish in such matters and those actions do have consequences.

Mycoskie at TOMS flippantly noted that about 12 percent of his customers won’t buy his company’s shoes anymore as a result of his stance on guns.

He then notes that he believes those who remain will be more loyal. News flash for Mycoskie – antis have the fidelity of alley cats. Not only that, but they don’t spend as much as shooters and hunters. Dream on.

So, if he wants to trash 12 percent of his customers and hope that the remaining ones will make up the difference, that’s his call. In today’s market, that’s a big chunk to jettison just to attack the U.S. Constitution.

Mycoskie and Bergh, of Levi Strauss & Co., are attempting to use their anti-American biases to build business under the mistaken conclusion that anyone cares who they are or what they think.

Levi Strauss argues that their social activism of late has contributed positively to their bottom line. Could be that they are misreading the tea leaves, so to speak. Time will tell.

Causes come and go, and companies’ fortunes are tied directly to their identities in these kinds of arenas if they choose to have such identities (most companies avoid unnecessary controversy). In other words, these CEOs are betting on the come. That may be fashionable on the gaming tables in Vegas, but hardly a winning long-term strategy in the board room.

It would be one thing if what they are doing would actually help anything. But history has proven that it won’t. That’s because they are attacking the wrong targets.

They say they are doing all of this to eliminate and prevent gun violence. Sounds noble, but that’s all it is – noise. That’s because they are doing nothing to address the core problem, which is VIOLENCE.

They are not waving banners to help people with mental problems, and they are not leading the charge to address basic violent behavior.

Ending violence is not achieved by restricting guns. It is achieved by going directly to the root causes and addressing them. Nothing those four CEOs suggested will do anything to address the core problems.

However, what they are doing is a perfect example of arrogant, self-appointed, delusional subversives trying to force their draconian dogma onto society as a whole. They want to dictate what citizens can and can’t do in a misguided effort try to save the citizenry from itself.

No thanks. We don’t need to be saved, but it would be nice to be spared from such needless meddling by enemies of freedom.

CEOs may be hot crap within their own organizations, but they don’t mean squat in the real world. These four CEOs and any others like them should crawl back into their ivory towers and take care of their own businesses – which ideally would not give them time to mess with our lives.

Regardless, it is likely that the media will continue its advocacy effort to mislead the public in matters that do not conform to their idea of propriety.

Look for the media to keep on parsing words in efforts to create false perceptions and then refer to those false perceptions as realities. Subverting the Constitution and our way of life can’t be done with facts and straight-forward statements. It needs lies and deception as we are seeing now from both the board room and the news room.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Our Mobile App

and get our latest news and featured videos instantly

Download Now