Will corporate backlash against guns actually change anything?

Companies have severed ties with the NRA or moved to tighten up sales of guns but whether their actions will lead to reform is unclear

Corporations – at least according to the US supreme court – are people too. And it seems in the wake of last month’s horrific school massacre in Florida they have had enough with America’s seemingly endless cycle of mass shootings.

Driven by popular outrage over the last week companies across the spectrum have severed ties with gun lobby group the National Rifle Association (NRA) or moved to tighten up sales of guns in ways the federal government has consistently failed to do.

While companies usually try to steer clear of political debate this is not the first time that US corporations have successfully pushed liberal social issues in recent years. Big companies including Apple and Bank of America have backed same-sex marriage and forced North Carolina to water down a bill that forced transgender people to use the bathroom that matches the gender on their birth certificate.

But despite the fact that most Americans are in favour of greater gun control, it has proved depressingly difficult to push Washington or the gun companies and their retailers to tighten up ownership rules. There is no doubt, however, that after the murder of 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in Parkland, Florida, the pressure for action is mounting.

Following that massacre on 14 February protesters have taken to social media demanding change and later this month they will take to the streets.

The initial campaign to force companies to stop offering discounts to NRA members has been a success.

The NRA claims to have 5 million members – the figure is disputed – but those numbers were not enough to stop companies including Delta, United Airlines, Alamo, Hertz and Best Western to drop their NRA deals.

The NRA – a potent force in US politics – called them “cowardly”, but the backlash has continued. On Wednesday Dick’s Sporting Goods and WalMart, two of the country’s largest gun retailers, moved to tighten up sales of guns. WalMart said it would no longer sell any gun to anyone under 21 years of age, raising that from 18. Dick’s immediately ended sales of all assault-style rifles like the one used in Florida in its stores.

“We did everything by the book,” Dick’s CEO Ed Stack said of accused Florida shooter Nicolas Cruz, who bought a gun from his company, although it was not used in the killings. “We did everything that the law required, and still he was able to buy a gun. And when we looked at that, we said the systems that are in place across the board just aren’t effective enough to keep us from selling a gun like that. And so we’ve decided we’re not going to sell the assault-type rifles any longer.”

In part, this campaign has been driven by the extraordinary response from survivors of the Florida shooting. Parkland students including Emma Gonzalez have emerged as media stars in the wake of the tragedy and are organizing a march on Washington in support of greater gun control later this month. Gonzalez now has 1.15 million followers on Twitter, nearly twice as many as the NRA.

David Hogg, another survivor, has used his Twitter feed to call on FedEx, which offers NRA discounts, to sever its ties and for Amazon to drop NRATV, the gun lobby’s digital channel.

“This is the moment when business leaders across the country get to decide if they want to stand on the right side of history,” said Shannon Watts, founder of gun control group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. “Mothers make the majority of spending decisions for their families, and we want to shop with businesses that care about the safety of our families – making this a smart business move, too.”

Robert Spitzer, professor of crime, law and policy and gun control at the State University of New York at Cortland, said corporations can have an impact on the national debate, precisely because corporations do not normally jump into the political fray. “They seem to be sensing that the great middle of America is being roused and moved, that the NRA is seen as ever more marginal, dogmatic, and unyielding, so there is both a PR and commercial reason for them to stake out their recent public positions. It is a notable moment that helps keep this issue in the news,” he said.

But the backlash from pro-gun rights lobbyists and politicians has only just begun.

In Georgia lawmakers dropped a jet fuel tax break that would have benefitted Delta after its decision to drop NRA discounts.

“I will kill any tax legislation that benefits @Delta unless the company changes its position and fully reinstates its relationship with @NRA. Corporations cannot attack conservatives and expect us not to fight back,” Casey Cagel, Georgia’s lieutenant governor wrote on Twitter after Delta’s announcement.

Companies have fought to change the gun debate before. Most notably Smith & Wesson (now American Outdoor Brands), one of the world’s biggest gun manufacturers.

After a teacher and a dozen children were killed in a mass shooting in Litteton, Colorado, in 1999, the US government sued Smith & Wesson. To settle the case, the company agreed to a set of voluntary reforms including child safety triggers and the development of “smart guns” that could only be fired by the owner.

But the NRA was not having it and gun groups organized a boycott that effectively ended the agreement.

This time gun reformers are hoping things will be different. Even Donald Trump, who styles himself as “a very strong supporter of the second amendment” has said it is time for change - although the NRA claimed he had backtracked on Thursday night.

Will it work? Spitzer, author of five books on gun control, is not sure. “It’s too early to tell. If pressed, I’d say no, but the atmospherics are different, at least for right now.”