LAPD sued, again

[BanditLAPD]

for the third time, basically LAPD lost a lawsuit in 1995 making them a shall issue CCW department, there are 6 criteria and if you meet one of the requirements they have to issue you a ccw, yet after 21 16 years they still refuse to abide by it. They were sued in 2001 and lost, now they are being sued again in 2011, this is coming at the cost of hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars when the economy is in the toilet and they want to give officers and firefighters furlough days, this is just disgraceful that an entity that is sworn to uphold the law cant abide by a simple court order. Here is the details on the case.
http://michellawyers.com/guncasetrac...f-los-angeles/

[pulicords]

So long as politicians and department managers feel they are above the law, can disregard orders from the court and won't have to pay anything out of their own pockets, this kind of stuff will continue. Ideally, the courts should rule on their lack of "good faith" and hit them with punitive damages and/or jail them for contempt.

[DAL]

LAPD seems to interpret "clear and present danger" extremely narrowly. The settlement should have provided examples of good cause so that a court would be in a position to determine whether the department acted arbitrarily in denying a permit, and should have set deadlines for processing applications.

[BanditLAPD]

DAL- it has LAPD has 6 criteria that if you meet one they SHALL issue you a ccw permit. They refuse to abide by it. Just think if that sere a P2 or P3 that just decided to ignore a judges orders they would be looking for new employment and yet the chief refuses to comply. Amazing

[DAL]

^^^^

I understand that. They do that by interpreting the criteria exceedingly narrowly. In the case of the individual who alleged that he review board recommended that his permit application be granted, he said that the board determined that he had met the "clear and present danger" criterion. The original settlement should have been better written to preclude such gamesmanship.

[DAL]

Related thread: http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...Advocates-quot