These so-called “gun-free” zones are anything but, as criminals do not abide by such foolishness.
Thankfully a federal judge issued an injunction against the state overreach, putting the law on hold in response to multiple legal challenges. It was supposed to take effect January 1 across the state. However, some of the new zones were not challenged by plaintiffs, meaning they are still “gun-free.”
That’s where courageous leadership in California’s Shasta County stepped in. Supervisors voted last week to brush aside state law and permit concealed carry holders to exercise their Second Amendment freedoms in those locations not covered by the injunction.
These are government buildings, and any lawful permit holder who is not a county employee and on the clock at that time is permitted to be armed there.
The resolution states that Northern California’s Shasta County considers SB 2 “unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, and that it unconstitutionally infringes upon the people’s right to bear arms.” It further permits citizens to carry licensed and properly registered weapons onto county property “except where otherwise exempted by County Policy, State and Federal law.”
The county’s resolution was proposed by Supervisor Patrick Jones. He correctly noted that California’s latest round of restrictions “do not change criminal behavior.”
Jones should know. He is the manager of his family’s gun shop in Redding.
County Attorney Gretchen Stuhr told lawmakers that policies in place prohibit county employees from being armed at work. She further explained the new resolution “does not revoke” or otherwise amend the present policy against workplace violence.
Unionized county employees will also have a voice in the matter.
Six months ago, Shasta County passed a resolution establishing the area as a protector of constitutional rights. The measure asserted it would “use all lawful means at its disposal to support and defend the Second Amendment.”
Gun control extremists, of course, are up in arms over the county rejecting Sacramento’s repeated infringements on personal liberties. Supervisor Mary Rickert voted against the resolution and recalled an incident when there was strong debate over mandating masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.
She said a former Shasta County employee who was also a concealed carry permit holder emailed a death threat to her. Rickert said she was provided photos of the man and his vehicle, and to this day she watches for him.
Another raised the 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino by a county employee and his wife that claimed 14 lives. What resident Jenny O’Connell failed to note was that the attack eight years ago took place in a “gun-free” zone, proving yet again the meaninglessness of such regulations.
Further, an armed guest at the holiday party where the mass shooting took place could have changed the outcome in a hurry.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) emailed the Los Angeles Times regarding the issue. He confirmed that some parts of SB 2 that were not directly challenged in court are not subject to the injunction and remain in effect.
These are prohibitions on carrying firearms in schools, airports, polling places, jails, courthouses and other government buildings.
At least for Shasta County, the list is shorter. Disarming law-abiding citizens in 2024 is not the way to control violent crime. Instead, it only removes the most immediate means that a criminal may be confronted by a good guy and lives may be saved.
