Gun Control’s Branding Problem

by
posted on May 22, 2015
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
gc-branding-header_1500x844d.jpg

If gun control was a brand, it would be The Sharper Image.

That company’s way-cool gadgets and sleek stores once were the definition of high-tech (remember that catchphrase?), making them the coolest kid in the mall. They sold shiny, remote-controlled gadgets at premium (at least to a college kid like me) prices that solved problems you didn’t even know you had. They were hot before hot was even a thing.

The fall began when we learned that Sharper Image’s indispensable air ionizer actually pumped our designer living rooms full of noxious ozone. Lawsuits followed, and stores closed. I remember seeing a TV spot featuring founder Richard Thalheimer, the man who created it all, as pitchman. He came across as the creepiest guy I’d never want to have dinner with. “Hot” had lost its cool.

If you consider gun control as a brand of advocacy, you can catch a whiff of Sharper Image in it. The hot new cause (or brand) for those who believed their thinking didn’t stink, gun control had everything going for it in the 1960s and ’70s. It was driven by high-profile assassinations, benefited from the national anti-war/peace movement, and had the support of the nation’s major daily papers, monthly magazines and the three-and-a-half channels that constituted a TV monopoly. Gun control had brought us sparkling products like the Waiting Period for gun purchases, Background Checks and the Assault Weapons Ban—and politicians bought them.

But in the Bill Clinton era, the brand began to lose its mojo. Gun control had brought us sparkling products like the Waiting Period for gun purchases, Background Checks and the Assault Weapons Ban—and politicians bought them. Waiting on its shelves were shiny new bans on handguns, Saturday night specials and cop-killer bullets, too.

Americans, however, didn’t buy them, because the stuff we had already purchased was starting to smell funny.

First, we learned that only law-abiding citizens submit to background checks, while criminals steal their guns or buy them from other criminals. Then we learned that “assault weapons” worked just like Grandpa’s 100-year-old semi-auto shotgun, and when the FBI told us the ban had no effect on gun crime, politicians caught the scent and declined to renew it. Perhaps they were both early examples of, “We had to pass the bill to find out what was in the bill.”

Americans began to feel they’d been sold a bill of goods, and looked at the gun-control movement’s other products like they contained lead paint.

So-called cop-killer bullets turned out to be most hunting rifle rounds. Saturday night specials were nothing more than affordable handguns. The assault weapons ban was not only a hoax; it was also a ruse to ban every handgun, rifle and shotgun with a semi-automatic action. Smelling a rat, we began buying handguns like they were hotcakes, and we made the AR-15 the most popular rifle in America.

And their losing streak continued. Al Gore for president. John Kerry for president. Heller. McDonald

In response, gun-control groups began to exhibit all the classic signs of brand panic. They changed their names to distance themselves from past failed products. Handgun Control Inc. became The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which then adopted the nickname The Brady Campaign so it could easily be written on a check. The National Coalition to Ban Handguns became the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. The Million Moms For Gun Control became the Million Mom March somewhere along the line (or vice versa). Unable to garner even a fraction of that many moms, it then morphed into Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. Michael Bloomberg then acquired the Moms brand, after all but abandoning his Mayors Against Illegal Guns in the face of departing mayors. To keep up the momentum, he folded both into a whole new brand, Everytown for Gun Safety, which doesn’t involve every town, and is not focused on gun safety.

Just when things looked darkest, Newtown happened—a national nightmare so incomprehensible that it shook every American, whether gun owner or not. Americans began to feel they’d been sold a bill of goods, and looked at the gun-control movement’s other products like they contained lead paint.

The gun-control movement saw daylight, and ran to it. In the middle of that opening was a microphone, and standing behind it was the most powerful man in the world, who welcomed the gun-control brand right into the White House. Every newspaper, every magazine and every TV anchor screamed for gun owners’ heads, and none dared to debate them in their righteous time slot. 

Yet gun control lost that one, too. Congress demurred. States revolted. Voters voted.

In fairness, the gun-control movement had lost that battle before it even began. Just as if they were choosing a family minivan, Americans had done their research and distrusted the specious claims, false data and empty promises. Brands die when they lie: Once that trust bond with brand loyalists is broken, it’s nearly impossible to regain it. Gun control had promised us safety, but couldn’t deliver. Consumers may be fooled once, but they’re brutal on brands when betrayed.

Today, the classic signs of brand desperation continue to accelerate. Unable to get the Center for Disease Control to do it for them, Everytown publishes “studies” so thin on credibility that they serve as their own opposition research. Shannon Watts of Moms Demand Action barely rises from the pavement before she trips over another falsehood. Bloomberg dismisses recalled state senators as being from districts “where I don’t think there’s roads.” Moms Demand manipulates photos of its rallies to hide paltry attendance. The gun-control brand has little grassroots support: Without an infusion of cash from billionaire investors, it likely would be on the trash heap.

In contrast stands a brand of advocacy called the National Rifle Association, which has never been, nor ever will be, the National Rifle, Handgun and Shotgun Association or the National March For Things That Propel Projectiles. For 144 years, the NRA has stood for the protection, enjoyment and pursuit of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. 

In the branding world, that’s called “focus.” And a brand that loses focus will eventually begin to smell like it is past its “use by” date.

Latest

PLCAA in marble
PLCAA in marble

Cynical Strategies To Subvert The Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act

Since President George W. Bush signed the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) into law on Oct. 26, 2005, those bent on civilian disarmament have sought to bypass the legislation’s clear commands. In fact, 20 years later, gunmakers were fending off a frivolous nuisance suit from the city of Gary, Ind., filed in 1999, despite the PLCAA and state-analogue legislation.

The New York Times Tries to Explain the Drop in Crime

The New York Times is attempting to explain away the Trump administration's success at lowering crime rates with these explanations.

Winner-Take-All Elections Mark A New Chapter In The Second Amendment

Will a meaningful Second Amendment survive in Virginia? That this is even an open question shows how dramatically one election can reshape a state when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms.

Part 1: How the Mainstream Media Lost Touch With America—The Takeover by the Elites

Why is so much of the mainstream, legacy or corporate media opposed to our right to keep and bear arms? This three-part series attempts to answer these critical questions—understanding, after all, leads to solutions.

President’s Column | NRA Focus On The Vision

I can’t believe it’s been seven months since I was elected NRA president, and I’m already composing my eighth President’s Column. The officers never fully anticipated or appreciated the immense challenges we faced when elected.

Standing Guard | The NRA is Strong

The strength of the NRA is, and has always been, our membership. Without our millions of members, we would not be able to effectively rally behind elections for pro-freedom politicians; just as importantly, if not for our large membership, our representatives in office would not feel the same urgency to listen to us in this constitutional republic.

Interests



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.