Legal Action Wins Court Order Forcing LAPD to Make CCW Policies Available

[GreenStormCloud]

http://www.ammoland.com/2011/06/10/legal-action-wins-court-order-forcing-lapd-to-make-ccw-policies-available/

NRA / CRPAF Legal Action Wins Court Order Forcing LAPD to Make CCW Policies Available at Stations and on LAPD Website

San Diego, CA --(Ammoland.com)- On Thursday, June 9, 2011, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Terry Green granted a motion in the NRA and CRPA Foundation financed case against the City of Los Angeles regarding the LAPD’s concealed weapons permit (CCW) processing and issuance policies.

The motion was brought to force LAPD to comply with a 16-year-old Consent Judgment from the 1995 Assenza v. City of Los Angeles case.

For years, LAPD has repeatedly sought to avoid its obligations under the judgment and to keep people in the dark about what it takes to get a CCW in the City of L.A.

The City unsuccessfully opposed the motion.

MUCH MORE AT LINK

This only requires the LAPD to make the information available. But it is an important first step. Further legal action is ongoing against the city.

[TPaine7]

1. Why do anti-gun "Officers of the Law"

thumb their noses at the law they allegedly enforce?

Why do anti-gun thugs in Chicago, New York, L.A. and other anti enclaves believe they are above the law? It seems to me that long before a "law enforcement" department thumbed its nose at a court order for 16 years, criminal charges should have been brought against at least one law breaking thug in a position to obey the order.

[Kurska]

2. Because they know their position doesn't survive the light of public scrutiny

People may buy the 'Ban all guns for everyone" line, but that isn't their real position. They want guns, but only for the "right people". Of course cops, politicians, anyone rich enough to buy their way in (Hey a mans gotta eat right if some rich asshole is willing to donate big to the police for the right to carry a pea shooter why not?).

At least that is how they think. Notice how the average citizen never factors into that equation, because the police have had it drilled into them for decades the average citizen is something to be feared. The bunker mentality of most big city police is driving a wedge between them and the general populace deeper than even the worst civil rights of abuses of the 60's through 90's.

[friendly_iconoclast]

3. K&R. This sort of thing needs to catch on in certain East Coast cities.

I'm looking at you, Boston and Philadelphia....

[Logical]

11. I myself trust the CCW carriers on this forum more than I trust the police with a gun. n-t

[Hoopla Phil]

4. Great news but do you think LA will just ignore this one as well?

[Euromutt]

5. That was my thought as well

After all, the City of Los Angeles seems to respond to court rulings it doesn't like by ignoring them, and when somebody sues them to abide by the previous court order, they ignore that ruling, etc. etc. Frankly, the only way I see this changing is if some judge starts throwing the mayor and the chief of police in the slammer for civil contempt of court until the City complies with the standing court orders, and threatens to slap them with criminal contempt if they try to pull that kind of stunt again.

[lawodevolution]

12. If the city ignores court rullings then they are renegade and all regulations or laws set forth

By the city are null and void, especially those with repect to the subject of the court ruling they are ignoring. If they do not comply this means I can conceal carry as much as I want in LA and if they arrest me they do so illegally and I'd bet if taken up the court system the city will not like the results and if they ignore the next decision and the next one eventually the city government leaders will have to be sent to prison or civilians will have to overthrow the city government.

[slackmaster]

6. Shining the light of day on the antequated "may issue" system is a good start

People will have a chance to see how poorly it fits present reality.

Los Angeles isn't Mayberry any more.

[gejohnston]

7. was it ever?

[slackmaster]

9. Sure, before about 1880

Here's what it looked like in 1873:

[ileus]

8. Firearms are supposed to be for the privileged and LEO's...they're who they trust.

[Logical]

10. Even anti-gun people should support this.....

because it shows the power the police have to ignore the law. And local police should not be the ones to decide CCW laws because personal feelings and bias enter the decision. No different that the local police deciding if I can have a drivers license.