Remington's bankruptcy illustrates three ways in which gun manufacturers have historically depended on the state; and also how that dependence is masked by our current politics.
First, a significant portion of Remington's revenue comes from public contracts, as it has for more than 150 years. The company nursed itself on government sales and foreign contracts during the 19th C. It made than 3 million guns for the US and its allies in the World Wars. 2/
Other iconic American arms companies have likewise depended on the state and its taxpayers from the 19th century to today. 3/
theconversation.com/the-american-p…
theconversation.com/the-american-p…
In recent years, Remington Defense won $100 million in U.S. military contracts (it is the only US firm that makes arms AND ammo). It won other contracts with fed, state, and local law enforcement agencies. So like many competitors, Remington depends significantly on the state. 4/
Second, like other arms producers, Remington also depends on the state, or rather a menacing caricature of the state, to market its guns to private consumers. It wants the public to see the government as the enemy of the gunmaker, rather than its historic patron. 5/
During the Obama years, the NRA honed its message of omnipresent danger (in a time of falling crime) and imminent govt. disarmament. Obama's actual proposals were modest. But the first black president was ready-made to activate white men's fears of crime and govt. tyranny. 6/
Gun sales soared, and firms like Remington ramped up capacity. In 2008 the industry employed 166,200. By 2015 it employed 287,986. By the fall of 2016 gun executives were gleefully awaiting the impending 'Hillary bump.' 7/ usatoday.com/story/opinion/…
Instead they got the 'Trump slump." In December one prominent CEO lamented that "there is no fear-based buying right now." His firm, American Outdoor Brands Corp (Smith & Wesson), has seen its stock price collapse by more than 2/3 since the election. 8/
Another metric: Background checks declined faster in 2017 than in any year since 1998 (when the FBI began compiling that data). Remington's bankruptcy is part of this broader crisis in the industry, the inevitable bust following a fear-mongering boom. 9/
Here's where we get to the third major way in which gun makers depend upon the state: for protection from creditors and from most consumer lawsuits. Like many other industries (and our current president), gun makers have found bankruptcy very useful. 10/
Colt, another iconic 19th century firm, entered bankruptcy in 2015, after it lost a multi-million dollar contract to supply the army with M4 rifles (government contracts!). Colt came out of Bankruptcy in 2016, and is still producing arms for government and civilian markets. 11/
Remington will follow Colt's lead; reorganize, deal with creditors, and get back into the game (and pray that Democrats retake Congress this year and the presidency in 2020) 12/
The most interesting question is what bankruptcy protection will mean for the lawsuit that parents of the children slaughtered at Sandy Hook have pending against Remington - maker of the AR-15-style Bushmaster rifle Adam Lanza used to murder those kids and their teachers. 13/
The 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act shields arms makers from liability for crimes committed with their products. The Sandy Hook parents and their lawyers think they've found a way through that shield, arguing that Remington is liable for "negligent entrustment" 14/
The argument is that the AR-15 was designed as a military weapon (contracts!), and should never have been marketed or 'entrusted' to civilians. The suit also claims that Remington's marketing had special appeal for troubled young men 15/
The CT Supreme Court is still deciding if the case violates the PLCAA. If not, Remington could be forced to reveal marketing strategies that the company has until now fiercely protected. That could have implications for the whole industry. 16/ nytimes.com/2017/11/12/nyr…
Law Professor @HeidiLiFeldman has some very informative twitter threads about the bankruptcy and what it might mean for the Sandy Hook case. Short story: while Chp 11 will stay the court decision for now, the case remains a significant threat for Remington. 17/
The big point of this thread: Like most major arms makers, Remington is intimately bound up with the state, and, by extension, with American taxpayers: through government contracts, cynical marketing, and law. 18/
Our current leverage over the industry is preposterously constrained right now, given how dependent gunmakers are on taxpayers and how consequential their products have become in our lives. We have a stake in these companies and how they operate. 19/
That stake will become clearer when Remington and other firms are forced to be more transparent with the public about how they sell their guns. That will either happen when the CT Supreme Court allows the Sandy Hook Parents to move to discovery 20/
Or it will happen as soon as Democrats retake Congress and the Presidency, and repeal the PLCAA. Either way, it's going to happen. 21/ (end)
