MEC falls victim to a consumer attack on guns that is powerful but capricious: Don Pittis

When it comes right down to it, which companies gethurtin a consumer boycott is to some extent arbitrary.

That thought came to mind when Mountain Equipment Co-Op facedthreats of a backlash as a result of the Florida high school shooting that stole17 lives.

Ultimately,MECannounced it would bow to growing pressure and stop selling products from Vista Outdoor, a U.S. company that produces guns and ammunition.

Responding to pressure

MEC'sresponse, ending the sale of such non-lethalitems as Bushnell binoculars and JimmyStykspaddleboards, demonstrates the power of consumer boycott action. But it also reminds us about its capriciousness.

In a world full of wickedness, amidthe companies we use regularly, MECmust be among the most benign.

"I don't think anyone thought that Mountain Equipment Co-Op was endorsing assault weapons," says Marvin Ryder, marketing professor atMcMasterUniversity'sDeGrooteSchool of Business.

Unlike its Quebec-based competitor, Sail, or the nationwide chain Canadian Tire,MEC doesn't sell guns.

And while MECwill stop selling Vista Outdoors goods, the products includingclothing,water bottles andBell bike helmets will continue to be easily availableat other familiar Canadian outlets.

Double standard

As Ryder points out, it's a double standard created by the outdoor chain's own statement of principles.

"Your values statement says you're there to better mankind, you're there to make a better world," says Ryder

It may be unfair for MEC, but for consumers trying to shape the world around them, boycotts are one of a handful of effective weapons they can wieldagainst giant corporations.

But since many of the people wishing to boycott a company that sells guns don't actually buy guns, organizers of the boycott must look for strategic points of leverage. By putting the pressure on a company like MECthe boycott increases its power.

Not only are protesters refusing to buy Vista Outdoor goods themselves, they have succeeded in preventing all MEC membersfrom buying those products.

But compared to other companies such as Federal Express, the shipping company that has offered special deals to members of the National Rifle Association, the attack on MECseems disproportionate. Besides,FedEx, Amazon and Apple have ignored calls for a boycott.

People who study such things say boycotts are short-lived. Activistsfollow the news cycle:Tim Hortonslast month, MECthis month, but then they go back to their ordinary shopping patterns.

And manyconsumers aren't willing to upset their lives fora boycott call if the company involved seems only moderately implicated.

Switching banks?

Toronto-Dominion Bank and BMO showed up on a U.S. list of financial institutions with connections togun companies. According to the progressive news site ThinkProgress, TD offered lines of credit to two gun companies and BMOlent money to Vista Outdoor, the company at the heart of MEC'stroubles.

Banks clearly take such accusations seriously. While saying it couldn't discuss individual customer accounts, TD was quick in responding to a CBCNews inquiry.

"We at TD condemn violence in any form and our hearts and thoughts are with the victims in Florida and their families," said TD's Matthew J. Doherty in an email. "We strongly support bipartisan efforts aimed at preventing these types of tragedies from happening again."

While it is hard to know how many bank customers would bother movingtheir accounts in response to such reports, there is another consideration. While the fickle finger maypointat TD and BMO this time, we know that in an integrated global economy, there are few clean hands.

Odds are the company that makes theplane you fly in for your winter holiday makes weapons that have contributed to more than 17 deaths. The car you drivevery likely has parts shared with weapons of war.

Making choices about such thing is not easy. But many of the considerations have already been addressed in the business world by the practice of ethical investing, according to Adam Spence, director of a group atToronto's MaRS Discovery District that connects ethical investors with ethical projects.

Positive pressure

The most common method, says Spence, is to "screen out the bad," similar to the method used in boycotts, whether what's considered bad is weapons,pornography orcoal.

The focus of Spence's group iswhat they call impact investing.

"You invest in enterprises,funds and organizations that are trying to do good for the world,"explains Spence.

BMO,for instance, has an investment fund that allows you to invest in gender-positive companies where women play a larger role.

But when a company does some things you like and some you don't, where do ethical investors draw the line?

Athird strategy is what Spence calls "selectingbest in class,"trying to study the overall impact of a company as judged by third-party agencies such asB Corporationor MSCI.

"MSCIcan look at companies and the amount of revenue expenditure on both positive and negative markers," says Spence. "Increasingly we have public market transparency on the impact performance of companies."

Whether through boycotts or the pressure of ethical investing,activists seemto point companies in the rightdirection. Spencesays studies have shown firms that are more ethical outperform others in the S&P index.

Follow Don on Twitter @don_pittis

More analysis from Don Pittis