PDA

View Full Version : Who Does a Better Job? Tobacco or Gun Industry


Bruceisontarget
08-07-2012, 5:38 PM
Seems to me the Tobacco industry does a better job of protecting their industry from political legislation than the Firearms industry. But then the Firearms industry makes more money when gun control amps up. They give to the NRA and then think that's enough to keep the gun grabbers at bay. The tobacco companies usually destroy the opposition by outspending them. Am I right or wrong?

mossy
08-07-2012, 5:47 PM
no you are wrong. in most of the USA we are winning the the gun rights battle. i know it only seems like we are losing because we live in CA where the dems can do anything they want and it takes forever for the courts to overturn bad laws. nationally tobacco is losing though more and more states are adopting anti smoking laws and the view point towards tobacco has changed. while guns have gone mainstream with shows like top shot, american guns,sons of guns and a few others i cant think of right now, tobacco has become demonized and is now viewed as a major health issue. tobacco sales are down nation wide while gun sales continue to rise. actually right now the bulk of the tobacco industry profits is coming from selling american grown tobacco to china and other developing nations.

Bruceisontarget
08-07-2012, 6:00 PM
no you are wrong. in most of the USA we are winning the the gun rights battle. i know it only seems like we are losing because we live in CA where the dems can do anything they want and it takes forever for the courts to overturn bad laws. nationally tobacco is losing though more and more states are adopting anti smoking laws and the view point towards tobacco has changed. while guns have gone mainstream with shows like top shot, american guns,sons of guns and a few others i cant think of right now, tobacco has become demonized and is now viewed as a major health issue. tobacco sales are down nation wide while gun sales continue to rise. actually right now the bulk of the tobacco industry profits is coming from selling american grown tobacco to china and other developing nations.

Valid points and well said. Maybe it's just my perception. I don't smoke, so legislation against them doesn't effect me personally, but I always support their efforts because I believe in personal responsibility and freedom of choice. I just feel the Gun industry is apathetic here.

SilverTauron
08-07-2012, 6:06 PM
Seems to me the Tobacco industry does a better job of protecting their industry from political legislation than the Firearms industry. But then the Firearms industry makes more money when gun control amps up. They give to the NRA and then think that's enough to keep the gun grabbers at bay. The tobacco companies usually destroy the opposition by outspending them. Am I right or wrong?

It helps that they sell a product which is addicting.

Doubtlessly our cause would have a lot more money and followers if withdrawal symptoms began after a shooter's last range visit.

Bruceisontarget
08-07-2012, 6:16 PM
It helps that they sell a product which is addicting.

Doubtlessly our cause would have a lot more money and followers if withdrawal symptoms began after a shooter's last range visit.

I suffer withdrawlals when I run out of ammo at the range. Sometimes I almost cry.:D

Capybara
08-07-2012, 6:19 PM
It helps that they sell a product which is addicting.

Shooting's not addictive? :rolleyes:

Tank 57
08-07-2012, 6:33 PM
Tobacco products are taxed at a rate so high that if firearms were taxed that way,very few could afford them.

"The power to tax is the power to destroy."

moleculo
08-07-2012, 7:02 PM
The tobacco industry is forced to run public service ads informing people that their products cause cancer. They have been forced to withdraw as sponsors from sporting events. Tobacco has no explicit constitutional guarantee that people have a right to their products, yet the firearms industry does. The tobacco industry continues to be profitable and really has no viable threat from government at any level in any State. At worst, local municipalities are a nuisance to tobacco. The firearms industry could learn a lot from the tobacco industry.

Bruceisontarget
08-07-2012, 7:15 PM
The tobacco industry is forced to run public service ads informing people that their products cause cancer. They have been forced to withdraw as sponsors from sporting events. Tobacco has no explicit constitutional guarantee that people have a right to their products, yet the firearms industry does. The tobacco industry continues to be profitable and really has no viable threat from government at any level in any State. At worst, local municipalities are a nuisance to tobacco. The firearms industry could learn a lot from the tobacco industry.

You made the point better than I did. I totally agree.

Wiz-of-Awd
08-07-2012, 7:26 PM
Shooting's not addictive? :rolleyes:

That's what I keep telling my wife :D

A.W.D.

mossy
08-08-2012, 12:36 AM
my mom and grandmother tell me that doctors would prescribe cigarettes as a medicine back in the day. do that now and you would probably get your licence pulled.

Bill Carson
08-08-2012, 1:06 AM
I do not like the comparison. It puts guns in the same category as cigarettes. A better comparison would be alcohol vs cigs. A better comparison would be cars vs guns or 1a vs 2a.

mossy
08-08-2012, 1:10 AM
I do not like the comparison. It puts guns in the same category as cigarettes. A better comparison would be alcohol vs cigs. A better comparison would be cars vs guns or 1a vs 2a.

its a valid match up. they are 2 industry's that make a ton of money and people either love them or hate them.

Bill Carson
08-08-2012, 1:17 AM
its a valid match up. they are 2 industry's that make a ton of money and people either love them or hate them.

Wrong. One is poison that has no value to the individual.

nicki
08-08-2012, 1:30 AM
The tobacco companies spend money to defend their product.

It is some of the American gun owners who spend time and money to protect gun rights.

We got the Heller case because one man, Robert Levy personally bankrolled Alan Gura. To my knowledge, the firearms industry hasn't reimbursed him for the 176K he personally spent out of his pocket.

Robert Levy is a retired lawyer who wasn't even a gun owner, but he felt that protection of the bill of rights was so important that he bankrolled a case that should have been done by the gun industry.

The tobacco industry funds their legal and political defenses by passing costs onto the end consumers, I wish the gun industry would seriously step up.

The fact that most people don't know who the national shooting sports association shows that the industry group is not well known by Americans.

Of course we have divisions in the gun community and until we set aside differences and work for our common good, our effectiveness is limited.

Nicki

SilverTauron
08-08-2012, 3:01 AM
Its relevant to note that while every state has programs opposing tobacco use, anti-gun policies are only a problem at the local and state level in select areas of the country. Doubtlessly the nature of opposing gun control would be much closer to that of Big Tobacco if California's issues applied to the whole nation, which fortunately isn't the case. For most of America , "gun control " begins and ends at paying a fee for a CCW permit class.

Hallucinosis
08-08-2012, 3:31 AM
I find that shooting is an addictive hobby.

davbog44
08-08-2012, 3:57 AM
I don't think it can be said that the tobacco industry has done a good job of protecting itself. For one thing, they lost their freedom to advertise over the public airwaves a long time ago. I'm old enough to remember when there were commercials for cigarettes on TV.

The Winston Cup is now called the Sprint Cup, and you don't see the names of big tobacco companies around major league sports venues anymore.

And then there was the unprecedented suing of big tobacco by 30 plus (I think it was around 30 but I might be slightly off) State's Attorney Generals who banded together and collected billions.

On the other hand, the tobacco companies may get demonized, but intentionally or unintentionally they are now in bed with government. The SCHIP program uses tobacco taxes to fund kid's health care, for example. Tobacco may be addictive to individuals, but tobacco tax dollars have become an addiction politicians can't afford to quit.

The gun industry has one thing going for it. Their products (some anyway) will always be needed by the government. (Military and LE.)

The question asked by the OP has merit though. Smokers are a minority, and the tobacco industry got very little sympathy or support when the several states sued them. There was a lot of "I don't smoke so I don't care" attitude going around. Just like some sportsman don't care if those evil black rifles get banned, as long as there field gun or deer rifle gets left alone.

When one person's (or industry's) rights get trampled, everyone's get trampled.

mossy
08-08-2012, 4:37 AM
well i think one thing we can all agree on is that the smoke coming off our guns smells mighty fine.

Mesa Tactical
08-08-2012, 7:42 AM
There is widespread misconception about the US "Firearms Industry" and its effectiveness in influencing state and Federal policy.

First, aside from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) there isn't even a national organization representing industry participants. Until relatively recently, the NSSF was focused almost exclusively on hunting-related activities: if an animal doesn't die, it's not a shooting sport. This attitude has changed in the last decade in the face of the growing importance of black rifles and "tactical" platforms and competitions among hobbyists, but it would be hard to make a serious case for the NSSF being some kind of powerful manufacturers' lobby. Mostly they do outreach and education and also sponsor the SHOT Show.

The fact is, the US firearms industry is neither organized nor wealthy. There is not a lot of money in making guns for the commercial market, margins are squeezed. By comparison, tobacco production and sales has always been a huge cash cow. Only two American firearms makers are publicly owned, Ruger and Smith & Wesson, and while they have been doing well this year a look at their history does not reveal massive profits. Some of their largest competitors have only narrowly avoided bankruptcy in recent years, and of course others, such as Winchester, are now foreign-owned. Colts has been limping along from disaster to disaster for decades.

The premise of the movie Runaway Jury, that a rich and shadowy firearms industry lobby is out there buying politicians and juries, is patently absurd.

No, national advocacy for gun rights and the commercial firearms industry is almost entirely in the hands of the NRA, which represents gun owners, not the industry. Like many of us, I have my issues with the NRA, but overall they do a pretty good job. Unlike the tobacco lobby, we don't see a lot of egregious lying from the NRA; also, unlike the tobacco industry, the NRA isn't unconcerned whether their members live or die. On the other hand, when comparing the effectiveness of the NRA and the tobacco lobby, keep in mind the tobacco lobby's goal is to promote and protect the widespread use of poison. Their continued success in this, despite many reversals, forces me to consider them very effective indeed.

It's also worthwhile to remember that what is good for the firearms industry may not always be good for more general gun rights (cf. Bill Ruger's 1989 letter to the US Congress proposing a nationwide ban on higher capacity magazines, in an attempt to protect his business from more restrictive gun controls).

swilson
08-08-2012, 7:46 AM
Wrong. One is poison that has no value to the individual.

Tell that to Native American Indians.

the86d
08-08-2012, 7:48 AM
Well Tobacco is about taking your money, AND your life.

Unless you are currently high OR still have acid in your spinal column, firearms are about SAVING lives from the mindless drones they are breeding with drug-use that wish to cause harm to generally non-violent people...

Sunday
08-08-2012, 5:11 PM
The tobacco industry has more money to lobby the lawmakers with [as well as getting lots of tax revenue]. Same thing with the beer and booze producers . The media should hype that more people die on any 3 day holiday from drunk driving drunk boat and swimming and Alky poisoning than all of the mass murders in total.