They tried to get out of a deal and Axon essentially threatened them. What a nice credit rating you have; it would be a shame if something happened to it. "The

They tried to get out of a deal and Axon essentially threatened them. What a nice credit rating you have; it would be a shame if something happened to it. "The only cancellation term is Termination for Non-Appropriations or a lack of funding," was their reply, which was false, and they're making a positive statement about the nature of a contract apparently without having first reviewed said contract. I'm not an attorney and I know not to do that. If someone asks me a question as it relates to the terms of a contract, I would never respond without reviewing, or if I did, state that "I haven't had a chance to review it but if memory serves..." If someone says, "we want out of this contract," I would never say, "you haven't satisfied the conditions for cancelation" without reviewing the conditions for cancelation. If only because I may want to do business with that company or someone who works there in the future, and referencing the terms of a fair deal (which it looks like this was) is the best way to mitigate any unjustifiably bad feelings coming as the result of it. Terrible practice by Axon and they wound up in the news over it. The same could be said for the city and PD. Precisely nobody looks good in this scenario, and a quick search of the contract would have saved the city thousands and a lot of bad PR. Just because Axon isn't the only bad guy in this story doesn't mean they aren't the bad guy.