Firearm manufacturers operate in one of the most heavily regulated consumer industries in the United States, and every marketing decision is shaped by legal, reputational, and compliance concerns. When the idea of cannabis-related sponsorships emerges—especially as cannabis becomes more mainstream—many outside the industry assume gun brands may be open to the crossover. After all, both markets appeal to passionate lifestyle-driven consumer bases. Yet from the perspective of a marketing and retail expert within the firearms sector, the reality is far more complicated. Firearm companies continue to avoid cannabis sponsorships for reasons rooted in risk management, federal law, brand protection, and dealer relationships.

At the core of the issue is the ongoing federal classification of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. Cannabis remains illegal at the federal level and is still labeled a Schedule I drug. Firearm manufacturers, bound by federal oversight through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), cannot risk any association that may be interpreted as endorsing or promoting federally prohibited substances. Even indirect sponsorships create concerns about regulatory scrutiny that could affect operational licenses, manufacturing approvals, import permits, and distribution channels.

Another major barrier is liability. Firearm brands know that cannabis—despite state-level legalization—continues to be scrutinized through the lens of impairment. Gun companies do not want to be seen as encouraging consumers to pair intoxicating substances with firearm ownership or handling. Legal teams within the industry argue that even symbolic partnerships could be used in civil litigation following accidents or misuse. The marketing upside is simply not worth the potential courtroom consequences.

Brand identity also plays a significant role. Many firearm manufacturers cultivate a “responsibility-first” image built around safety, discipline, and lawful ownership. Cannabis sponsorships could conflict with that branding, especially for companies whose core audiences include law enforcement, military personnel, shooting sports organizations, and traditional hunting communities. These consumer groups often maintain conservative views about the association of firearms with controlled substances, and manufacturers risk alienating long-standing customer bases.

Dealer and distributor relationships further complicate the equation. Retail gun shops must adhere strictly to federal background check requirements, including the rule that individuals who use marijuana—medically or recreationally—are considered prohibited firearm possessors under federal law. If manufacturers formed partnerships with cannabis brands, dealers could find themselves pressured to explain the discrepancy between federal regulations and corporate marketing choices. This gap places strain on the retail pipeline that firearm companies rely on.

Finally, insurance and financing issues cannot be ignored. Some insurers and financial institutions categorize cannabis-related ventures as high-risk, which can increase premiums or jeopardize lending relationships. Firearm companies—already navigating financial institutions wary of their industry—avoid adding another layer of complexity.

For these reasons, firearm manufacturers see cannabis sponsorships not as a branding opportunity but as a legal and reputational minefield. Until federal cannabis reform reshapes the regulatory landscape, the firearms industry will continue to keep its distance.

Read More: Federal Cannabis Reform: The Next Major Turning Point for U.S. Gun Laws