The only way to reduce gun violence in a country that won’t give up its guns is to set cultural boundaries on what’s acceptable and what’s not. And some members of corporate America have realized it’s partly up to them to do that.
Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz this week “respectfully” asked customers not to bring guns into his establishments. The request is the latest, and perhaps highest-profile, example of firearm restrictions put in place by corporate entities for their customers. Starbucks didn’t outright ban weapons on its premises, but other companies like Whole Foods and Peet’s Coffee and Tea have banned them.
Even in open-carry states, such as Arizona, retailers routinely ask that weapons remain off their premises. In Phoenix, for example, it is not uncommon to see signs on restaurants stating that firearms are not permitted inside.
Gun-control advocates agree that changing the country’s cultural view of guns is an important, and often overlooked, factor in curbing gun violence. Legal changes alone, like expanded background checks, won’t stop gun-related suicides or accidents.
“You have to change social norms,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “There’s not enough focus on this big picture. It doesn’t tend to drive enough of the conversation historically.”
Corporate America, particularly the retail sector, has a lot of sway in terms of social norms. And their actions have the distinct advantage of being removed, at least a little bit, from the polarized political debate on gun control.
Think about designated smoking areas or dress codes at restaurants. It’s a lot easier for a manager of a Starbucks to tell a latte drinker that it’s not cool to bring his gun in with him than it is for Congress or state Legislatures to outlaw them at all coffee shops.
The advantage of corporate policies on firearms is that they don’t get in the way of gun owners’ legal rights to possess their weapons, and that’s important for keeping the gun conversation more or less open. Gun owners are on guard for any hint that their rights might be curtailed by the government, and “gun owners drive this debate,” said Richard Feldman, president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association.
Gun-control advocates are trying to tone down the confrontational talk about the issue, says Gross. “We’re acknowledging the guns that are already out there, reaffirming our respect for the reason why those people own guns.”
Gross says cultural change comes from education about gun safety, understanding the risks and the benefits. Some 20,000 gun deaths a year are suicides with legally purchased guns. Others are accidents or crimes of passion. “There, the solution is not policy. There the solution is public health and safety campaigns. There are risks associated with bringing a gun into your home and allowing unsafe access to it…. It’s like ‘Friends don’t let friends drive drunk,’ ” he said.
As Congress is stalled on gun legislation, actions like Starbucks’ open letter to its customers will become critical in the debate over gun policy. Otherwise, the national conversation about guns will surface only when something dramatic happens, such as the mass shooting at Washington’s Navy Yard.
Then, as the news cycle dwindles down, the topic will sink back into obscurity. But Starbucks will still respectfully ask you to leave your gun outside.
What We're Following See More »
President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”
It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”
It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.
Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.