By Andrew Scott
Let’s briefly look at this quote from Kaine:
“The voice against background checks… is largely fueled by gun manufacturers and funded by gun manufacturers who basically have one policy. And that’s sell as many weapons to whoever you can, whenever you can, wherever you can, in whatever frequency you can.”
This quote was, of course, in regards to widespread opposition to universal background checks. His remarks aren’t original, in fact if you’ve ever had a conversation with an anti-gun “progressive” you’ve almost certainly heard this same quote in some form or another. This idea that the pro-gun movement, and every issue supported therein, is entirely made up of the NRA and gigantic gun manufacturers who are looking to pad their own pockets, no matter the cost, is nothing new.
It seems like this idea is taught in “Progressivism 101”, and dutifully parroted ad nauseam by their ilk.
While it’s certainly easy to paint the “big gun manufacturers” in the stereotypically evil light, envisioning a bunch of white men wearing custom tailored suits, sitting in a dimly lit room, smoking their Cuban cigars while menacingly rubbing their hands together for hours on end, this narrative flies in the face of basic logic.
Why on Earth would these men, who are looking to “sell as many weapons to whoever they can”, oppose background checks? If these evil CEOs of the gun industry really existed, universal background checks would be a Godsend!
Anyone who follows gun rights knows that universal background checks only effect legal person-to-person transfers. Essentially, this concept only covers, limits and restricts the secondary (used) market for firearms (and yes, we could talk about how astoundingly ineffective such an approach is when it comes to curbing violence, but that isn’t the purpose of this article). And money hungry manufacturers never want a secondary market for their goods.
This is Business 101. The mere existence of a secondary, or used market, drives up available supply, which in turn drives down prices on the market as a whole. Moreover, the manufacturer of a good isn’t going to see a single dime of any sales made of their product on the secondary market, they only make revenue off of their sales in the primary market (from manufacturer, to FFL, to consumer).
If I sell my Smith and Wesson M&P to my brother, I don’t have to pay Smith and Wesson a single red cent of that sale.
As such, it only makes sense for a manufacturer to do everything they can to destroy whatever secondary market exists for their goods. For a great example of this, look at the video game industry. Game Stop is company that makes nearly all of its money off of the buying and selling of used video games (secondary market). They are currently valued at over $4.3 billion (Smith and Wesson, by the way, is valued at under $1 billion presently, which really doesn’t help the left’s “super powerful gun company” narrative).
Game Stop has become so effective at directing the flow of the video game secondary market that video game producers have had to change their entire business model. They now essentially release the first half of what would have been the full video game 10 years ago, but hold the second half of the game in reserve for online, digital sales (what they call DLC, or Downloadable Content).
These digital sales are then linked to the purchaser’s Xbox or Playstation account, and cannot be sold or traded to any other individual, essentially destroying half of the potential secondary market for video games.
Likewise, universal background checks would make transfers of firearms in the secondary market expensive, time consuming, confusing, and littered with the potential for criminal litigation against both the buyer and seller. It would severely restrict the secondary market for firearms.
The only effect it would have on gun manufacturers would be to limit the aftermarket supply of the goods they create, and thus driving up demand from the primary market, which in turn drives up their price and their profits.
If the NRA and pro-gun movement were really just a shadow organization, created and controlled by money hungry CEO’s who put profits over everything, they would be pining for universal background checks!
This is such an incredibly simple concept I can’t understand how this narrative has been allowed to continue for so long.
And while the gun-grabber bedtime story of the NRA/CEO boogeyman doesn’t make a lick of sense, it does make their end goal abundantly clear. With a wide range of studies showing that universal background checks do little to nothing to curb violence, why continue to push for them?
There is only one logical conclusion: To push for firearms registration and destroy the secondary market for firearms. That or they’re just plain stupid, I’ll let them take their pick.
P.S. As a brief aside, a recent CNN Money analysis determined that roughly 90% of donations to the NRA come from people who donate less than $200 a year. This likely seems common sense to the average pro-gun advocate, but it flies in the face of this bogus narrative that they continue to push.
The NRA and other pro-gun lobbies speak for the people that support them, not some mysterious and shady business mogul who could be the main villain in a DC comic book.
Sincerely, Andrew Scott A&A Ammunition, CEO
About A&A Ammunition:
A&A Ammunition was founded with a single goal in mind: To help shooters be able to train by offering them high quality, affordable ammunition.
For more information, visit: http://shop.trainhardammo.com.
A&A Ammunition, CEO
Andrew Scott is the Founder and CEO of A&A Ammunition, an ammunition manufacturing and sales company located in Tucson, AZ that specializes in re-loading high quality training ammo. He is also a Veteran currently serving in the Arizona Air National Guard, and has previously worked in numerous industries ranging from food prep to stock trading.
For more of his writings, visit the A&A Ammunition website at www.TrainHardAmmo.com/blog