Dick’s Sporting Goods, an American retail company, has recently come under pressure after it was alleged to have sold a gun to a nineteen-year-old student who shot his fellow students. The open criticism has forced the company to make an economic decision that will significantly reduce its profits. The decision to barn selling of assault rifles and increased age limit of selling of other guns is meant to mitigate the social problems related to selling guns.
The company, through its director, says that it’s their social responsibility to mitigate this problem. He cited the government’s fault in allowing the sale of guns to minors, “The systems in place are not effective to protect our kids and our citizens,” (Wilts, 2018, pp. 1, para 6). The criticism by the media and public regarding the company’s sale has reduced the profit margins of other products. The company, therefore, has ceased sale of these guns and raised the minimum age for buyers of other guns. Dick’s is a major weapon’s retailer in America, and the move will significantly affect the revenue from the sale of weapons.
The company is also constantly being sued by prospective customers. The public, in suing the firm, cites a violation of rights. The government is reluctant in enforcing legal means such as the bills proposed to raise the minimum age for weapons possession. Thus the firm is left susceptible to the lawsuits by private institutions and individuals (Mamula, 2018).
The problem posed by the barn on weapons by Dick’s Sporting Goods is manageable. The changes are enforceable only if the firm seeks the support of the government. Through presentations to the legal entities, the firm could present its case or sue the states for allowing the sale of weapons to minors. The barn is ethically acceptable by the vast majority. Hence, it is a marketing strategy: Being the only company that has barned sale of weapons to minors, the firm creates the impression of a socially responsible company.
Conclusion
The decision to barn sale of guns is arguably an ethical and political for Dick’s Sporting Goods. Though the move posed significant economic challenges for the firm, the firm remains unchanged in its decision. The decision could be used as a marketing strategy, posing the firm as ethical.
References
Mamula, K. B. (2018). Second lawsuit filed against Dick’s Sporting Goods over new gun policy. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 1(1), 1. Retrieved from http://www.post-gazette.com/business/pittsburgh-company-news/2018/03/12/Second-lawsuit-filed-Dick-s-Sporting-Goods-firearms-gun-policy-age-fulton-michigan/stories/201803120081
Wilts, A. (2018). Dick’s Sporting Goods will stop selling assault-style rifles after lack of legislation action on guns. Independent, 1(1), 1. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/dick-sporting-goods-assault-rifle-ban-weapon-ar-15-gun-control-age-florida-shooting-parkland-a8232961.html
