Here's an article by that bastion of truth, the Boston Globe. This article distorts the facts of the Bloomberg sting operation and omits much other relevant data regarding his gun control methods.
Earlier this year, the city hired a private investigative firm to conduct a sting operation against these 15 dealers. Investigators, working in pairs, videotaped store clerks illegally selling guns to individuals whom the clerks believed to be straw purchasers. A straw purchaser is an individual who fills out the personal information required to pass a federally mandated background check in order to purchase a gun for another person, typically one who is legally ineligible to purchase a gun based on a felony conviction or other disqualification or may simply wish not to be recorded as the purchaser of the gun in the event that it is later recovered in a crime. Federal law prohibits licensed dealers from making a sale when they have a reasonable belief that the firearm being sold is not for the person who purports to be the purchaser.
In the New York City sting, one investigator would make all of the inquiries about purchasing the gun and the second investigator would show up at the counter only to fill out the background check information. The lawsuit alleges that by allowing such straw purchases, the 15 out-of-state dealers facilitate illegal gun trafficking that increases gun violence in New York City. The city alleges that the gun violence resulting from the way that these dealers do business constitutes a "public nuisance" - an unreasonable interference with public health and safety. While public nuisance litigation has traditionally been used to go after polluters, New York City Corporation Counsel Michael Cardozo has explained that just as the city might sue to stop the illegal dumping of sewage into waterways that flow into the city, it is now suing to stop the illegal dumping of guns into the black market that end up in New York. The suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages and asks the court to put an end to the illegal sales.
If you care to read the article you won't find any mention of the fact that the investigators and Bloomberg are being investigated,(at a glacial rate) by the BATFE for this "sting." No mention that the investigators were the ones committing a felony by making the straw purchases. They were not law enforcement officials in any sense. There could very well be some question of the dealers not refusing to deal with obvious straw purchases, which would make this a legal issue for the BATFE.
The two dealers who have settled agreed to supervision of their sales practices by a court appointed special master chosen and paid for by the city. The special master will be given unrestricted access to the dealers' records and inventory and will be empowered to conduct ongoing surveillance. Five or six more of the dealers are currently considering a similar settlement. The remaining dealers have, for now, decided to fight the suit in court.
Now what is missing? No mention that Bloomberg is being sued for his illegal actions.
Not surprisingly, the writer provides his opinion that litigation is good for stopping gun violence.
Litigation complements these legislative and law enforcement efforts. Despite its troubled history in the courts, municipal gun litigation has played an important role in shaping public policies aimed at reducing gun violence. Gun litigation has helped to reframe the problem and the policy options for dealing with it. Whereas once gun violence was understood as a problem caused exclusively by street criminals and addressed primarily through tougher criminal penalties, civil litigation has focused attention on the role of marketing, distribution, and sale in facilitating illegal gun trafficking.
You'll note that the Boston Globe has an interesting section in their paper called "Ideas." Fascinating if disingenuous way of twisting opinion into news. Journalistic honesty be damned. But then, honesty in journalism has been getting thinner all the time.
Boston Globe "Ideas" on Gun Litigation
Here is one of the the most important aspects of this story.
Link TextNew York City sues gun shops in Pa., 4 other states
From the article:
For the sting operation, the city singled out about 45 dealers based on gun trace data that links weapons sold in those shops to hundreds of shootings and other crimes in New York City from 1994 to 2001.
The majority of dealers refused the sale, Bloomberg said. In a video from one such attempt, the man behind the counter shrugged his shoulders, apologized and said it would be against the law for him to sell to the woman because she was clearly not the intended user.
The original lawsuits by NYC and other cities, now ended (except in NYC) by the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, were based mainly upon gun trace data. Bloomberg now admits that the majority of dealers with a high incidence of gun traces refused the straw sales and appear to be innocent of wrongdoing.
Under the type of lawsuits that Bloomberg and other gun control advocates wanted (and still want), the innocent majority of gun dealers could have been found liable based upon gun trace data, now shown to be a false indicator of wrongdoing in the majority of cases. Bloomberg and other gun control advocates also wanted (and still want) to hold firearm manufacturers and distributors liable for selling to dealers with a high incidence of gun traces, now shown to be a false indicator of wrongdoing in the majority of cases.
Thus this story illustrates the reason for and the necessity of the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.