Delta’s Stance On The “Gun Debate” Seems To Have Evolved

Just over a month ago Delta announced that they’d no longer offer discounted fares through their group travel program for those attending NRA conferences, and that they requested that the NRA remove Delta’s information from their website. This followed pressure from a lot of anti-gun consumers urging all companies to cut ties with the NRA — Delta certainly wasn’t the only company to make some changes.

Delta really ended up in hot water over this, though. Georgia lawmakers even repealed a tax break for Delta that could have saved them up to $50 million. I find that to be ridiculous, personally.

What’s interesting is that Delta wasn’t actually taking a side in the debate, but rather was claiming that they’d remain neutral:

Delta’s decision reflects the airline’s neutral status in the current national debate over gun control amid recent school shootings. Out of respect for our customers and employees on both sides, Delta has taken this action to refrain from entering this debate and focus on its business. Delta continues to support the 2nd Amendment.

This is not the first time Delta has withdrawn support over a politically and emotionally charged issue. Last year, Delta withdrew its sponsorship of a theater that staged a graphic interpretation of “Julius Caesar” depicting the assassination of President Trump. Delta supports all of its customers but will not support organizations on any side of any highly charged political issue that divides our nation.

Delta wasn’t saying that they’re against the NRA, but rather that they don’t support organizations that involve politically or emotionally charged issues. I can appreciate an airline not wanting to get involved in anything too controversial, though I also think companies should have backbones on some level.

For example, Delta has long been a supporter of LGBT rights, though I’d argue that for many this is still a “political” issue (and to be clear, I’m gay and I 100% appreciate and support Delta’s respect for the community). My point is that it’s a bit of a cop-out to throw your hands in the air and just say “this is controversial, so we don’t touch it.”

It looks like Delta has changed their stance on this at least somewhat. Delta said they would remain neutral in the gun debate, and that they stay out of issues like this. However, Delta donated three roundtrip charter flights to allow hundreds of students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School to go to Washington to participate in the “March for Our Lives” protest against gun violence.

Delta says that this is “part of [their] commitment to supporting the communities [they] serve.”

I commend Delta for doing this. The kids have been through a lot, and most importantly they’re doing more for an issue than adults have been able to do in years — they’re on the right side of history.

Clearly Delta has had a change of heart here, and I support that.

(Tip of the hat to View from the Wing)

Conversations (76)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Hutch Guest

@Rob I completely agree that society should focus on reducing preventable deaths. However, frankly, I think you're use of those things to support your position is a red herring... If society reduced preventable deaths in other areas, would you then support gun control? I don't think you would. You shouldn't need to wait for a incident to occur before discussing whether people should or shouldn't have access to a type of weapon. However, I also agree that overwhelming majority of people would agree with the banning or hoops before obtaining the weapons listed. Which should be the case for any weapon that has the potential to kill multiple people in short succession. Peace out.

0
‼ 0
Cheque Gold

@Anne, I am beginning to think that your IQ is pretty close to mine. It is such a relief to come accross your post among all the posts by these lowlife, idiotic Republicans.

0
‼ 0
Anne k Member

Little did we know that Cheque is also a comedian! Hope he doesn’t quit his day job. So grateful he isn’t the modest type, we would all be left in the dark. :(

0
‼ 0
chasgoose Gold

To all those who think the March for Our Lives movement is deadset on trashing the Second Amendment and taking away your guns, maybe try to actually listen to them. They have been fairly savvy about advocating for common sense gun control provisions that the vast majority of Americans (Democrats and Republicans alike) agree on in poll after poll. The only reason the gun control debate gets shut down time and time again is that the minority of Americans who oppose gun control legislation care far more about it than any other issue. There's essentially an intensity gap. Those who support gun control legislation in a poll, might not necessarily consider it a top policy priority, whereas its typically THE top policy priority for the minority of voters who don't support gun legislation, thus the more vocal and intense minority seems larger than the majority of people who focus on a number of other issues. It's not enough to just shut down any attempt at passing reasonable gun control legislation that respects the freedoms of responsible gun owners while making it harder for guns to end up in the hands of those with mental illness or who would use them to commit harm (or even those who would use or store them irresponsibly) by saying how it wouldn't work. We've seen in country after country that gun control legislation massively reduces the number of people who die from guns (including suicides) and to not even try is insane. If you really think the proposed gun control policies are bad, instead of shooting them down, maybe propose one that will effectively reduce victims of gun violence that you can get behind. Otherwise, you are demonstrating that you don't care at all about gun violence victims.

0
‼ 0
Cheque Gold

@AJ, I am smarter than all conservatives that frequent this site. I may be the most intelligent person you know.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published