In a move that highlights the growing trend of women turning to guns for self-defense, a lawsuit is set to be filed against Smith & Wesson, one of the largest gun manufacturers in the United States. Liberal activists are alleging that the company violated its fiduciary duty by selling and promoting AR-15 rifles, exposing shareholders to unnecessary liability. The lawsuit, part of a larger movement known as environmental, social, and governance (ESG), aims to pressure investors to be more socially conscious.
The draft of the lawsuit accuses Smith & Wesson’s board of knowingly allowing the company to violate federal, state, and local laws through its manufacturing, marketing, and sales of AR-15 style rifles and similar firearms. The shareholders claim that the board has shown an unwillingness to exercise oversight, which has put the company at risk.
This legal action is the latest in a series of moves made by liberal activists across the country who are targeting gun manufacturers. Their goal is to hold these companies accountable for their role in gun violence and to push for stricter gun control measures. Sister Judy Byron, an anti-gun activist, is one of the plaintiffs involved in the case. She has been vocal about the need for change and justice in the face of gun violence.
The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, representing investors with assets totaling $634 billion, has called for pressure on gun manufacturers and associated companies to review their operations and take action to address public safety concerns. The center emphasizes the moral obligation of corporations to counter gun violence and foster safer communities.
Smith & Wesson, however, has faced pressure from shareholders before, with proposals from activist stockholders being rejected in recent years. The most recent proposal, in September 2023, was rejected by 73% of stockholders. Despite the company analyzing its potential legal liabilities, the lawsuit argues that Smith & Wesson should still be held liable for breaching fiduciary duties.
The NRA, a pro-gun organization, has criticized the lawsuit and labeled the activists as “gun control extremists.” They argue that ESG investments may prioritize political agendas over financial returns, potentially disadvantaging savers. On the other hand, proponents of ESG investing argue that it helps identify riskier companies and can lead to more stable and profitable opportunities.
As the legal battle against gun manufacturers continues, the outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for the firearms industry and the ongoing debate surrounding gun control. The impact of ESG investing on corporate behavior and shareholder activism will also be closely watched.
