The next month, Dick’s Sporting Goods, which has grappled publicly with its ties to the gun industry, said it had destroyed more than $5 million worth of military-style, semiautomatic rifles. Its chief executive, Ed Stack, has said the company is considering whether it will continue to sell guns.

Rising consumer outrage is not the only issue facing companies like American Outdoor Brands. Some families of mass shooting victims have sued retailers and gunmakers in an attempt to make them accountable. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court allowed relatives of shooting victims at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., to move forward with a lawsuit against Remington Arms, the maker of the rifle used in the 2012 massacre.

A drawn-out legal fight and the headlines that would come with it are “something the parent company probably wants to avoid,” said Mr. Lytton, the gun expert at Georgia State. “By splitting Smith & Wesson off, they’re more likely to insulate themselves from that litigation and reputational damage.”

Separating from Smith & Wesson may also simply be a smart business decision for American Outdoor Brands: Sales from its firearms segment have fallen 38 percent since 2017.

That drop has come during a broader downswing for the industry since the 2016 presidential election, as gun owners have become less worried about the prospect that the government might seize their weapons.

Gun-makers tend to enjoy their greatest success when political forces seem to be arrayed against the industry, said Allen Rostron, a professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law.

“People being upset about gun violence isn’t going to put a gun company out of business,” Mr. Rostron said. “The people who are going to protest and boycott — they’re not buying guns.”