You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Countermarketing in the Courts: The Case of Marketing Channels and Firearms Diversion
Kevin D. Bradford, Gregory T. Gundlach and William L. Wilkie
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
Vol. 24, No. 2 (Fall, 2005), pp. 284-298
Published by: American Marketing Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30000666
Page Count: 15
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Firearms, Marketing, Distribution channels, Weapons regulation, Lawsuits, Handguns, Gun shows, Public policy, Sales distribution, Sales operations
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Rarely has the field of marketing thought been closely associated with the topic of citizens' use of firearms in the United States, but it is now at the center of interest in this controversial and multifaceted area. Public policy has not yet resolved the challenges from conflicts among personal freedoms, fundamental rights, deaths, pain, and huge dollar expenditures to address the problems from guns used in crimes; it is still evolving in this area. A more recent addition to the public policy debate is a set of major judicial cases that raise issues about the U.S. distribution system for firearms, how it is designed and operated, and what role it should play with respect to contributing to the control of firearms diversion. In response, marketing academics have begun to conduct channels-of-distribution analyses to inform these judicial deliberations. This article presents the framework of one such analysis and reveals the considerable insights that marketing theory and concepts, especially countermarketing, demarketing, and channels-of-distribution theory, can bring to public policy makers' understanding of these issues. In addition, assessment of this framework should assist marketing scholars in explicating key topics for future attention in the realm of the marketing of other potentially harmful or dangerous products and services.
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing © 2005 American Marketing Association