from www.wnd.com: one wonders as to how "the second act" will go??

[alan]

Posted on Thu, Aug. 21, 2003

Gun dealers, distributors settle California lawsuit
MICHELLE MORGANTE
Associated Press

SAN DIEGO - Five gun dealers and distributors agreed Thursday to reform their sales practices in California in order to settle a lawsuit filed against them by a dozen cities and counties.

The settlement, approved in San Diego Superior Court, will have the businesses take steps that "go above and beyond current federal and state law to prevent firearms from being sold into the underground market in California," according to a statement from the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, whose attorneys represented the plaintiffs.

The case marked the first time gun-industry companies agreed to alter their business practices in response to claims from cities and counties, according to Dennis Henigan, director of the legal action project at the Brady Center. Similar lawsuits are pending across the country.

"As such, it has a number of implications and makes it very clear that there are additional, significant steps that gun sellers could undertake to help prevent the flow of guns into the illegal market," Henigan said.

The lawsuit, filed in April, accused gun dealers, distributors and manufacturers of violating state law by failing to enforce sales practices that would make it harder for so-called straw purchasers to buy arms for gun traffickers. The court dismissed manufacturers from the lawsuit, but a trial against the dealers and distributors was to begin on Oct. 10.

An appeal to reinstate the lawsuit against the manufacturers is pending.

The defendants included in Thursday's agreement are: Trader Sports, a gun dealer based in San Leandro; Andrews Sporting Goods, which operates the Turner's Outdoorsman chain of stores in Southern California; Southern Ohio Gun Distributors; Georgia-based distributor Ellett Brothers; and Ohio distributor MKS Supply.

Under the deal, Trader Sports will no longer sell firearms at guns shows. It also will train employees on how to recognize and block sales to straw purchasers, implement an enhanced inventory tracking plan and adopt new measures to verify a buyer's identity.

Southern Ohio agreed that in California and neighboring states it would sell only to storefront gun dealers, take extra steps to verify dealer licenses and restrict assault weapons sales. It also will pay $50,000 to compensate the plaintiff's legal expenses.

The other three defendants agreed to make similar reforms during separate negotiations with the plaintiffs, Henigan said.

None of the five defendants responded Thursday to telephone messages left at their offices seeking comment.

The city attorney for Los Angeles, one of the cities represented in the lawsuit, applauded the settlement.

"This is a significant victory in our fight to reclaim the streets of California for our law-abiding residents," City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo said in a statement. "The settlement demonstrates that California is making great progress in its battle to break the illegal supply lines of firearms to criminals."

The plaintiffs were Los Angeles County, Inglewood, Compton, West Hollywood, San Francisco, Sacramento, Oakland, Berkeley, East Palo Alto, Alameda County and San Mateo County.

Posters question: In plain English, what does the following mean.
"The settlement, approved in San Diego Superior Court, will have the businesses take steps that "go above and beyond current federal and state law to prevent firearms from being sold into the underground market in California," according to a statement from the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, whose attorneys represented the plaintiffs. I refer to the business about "go above and beyond .....".

 

[Standing Wolf]

...will have the businesses take steps that "go above and beyond current federal and state law...

That means once again, the leftist extremists have demonstrated complete, utter, shameless contempt for laws and law itself.

 

[Henry Bowman]

This Associated Press "article" bears a striking resemblance to the Brady Bunch press release issued yesterday. Not a lot of creative input beyond "calls were not returned . . ."

Good luck in the future to those who caved.

 

[Baba Louie]

So now, crime, as we know it, will cease to exist in California.

Oh happy day.

Adios

 

[Old Fuff]

For years Anti-Gun/Gun Control Activists have tried to get they’re “common sense†or “sensible†proposals enacted into law. Some times this worked and sometimes it didn’t. Now they are trying another strategy.

Pick out someone in the firearms industry - manufacturers, distributors, and dealers even trade associations and sue them. So far in most places the courts have found these lawsuits to be without merit, but that doesn’t matter. The idea is to make the legal process so expensive that the defendants give up and sign onto an out-of-court settlement that goes beyond (sometimes way beyond) what the law requires. This is nothing less then legal extortion. In effect the anti-gun movement is using the courts to legislate - to get their way regardless of what the law says. If they can force manufacturers, distributors, dealers or whoever to sign an agreement rather then face financial ruin they don’t have to prove their case in court - where in the long run it wouldn’t stand up - even in places like California and New York.

Now that the Brady Bunch has succeeded in California you can expect them to start lawsuits all over the place. How too fight this? Gun owners need to support, along with others, a big legal fund to back the defendants and also counter-sue the plaintiffs into the ground - two can play that game. Right now the other side is playing, divide and conquer - and getting away with it. Ultimately if nothing is done the likely consequences will be fewer distributors and dealers, and higher prices - and not just on handguns.