In defiance of California legislation, the Shasta County Board of Supervisors this week voted to permit hid weapons in native authorities buildings.
The decision, handed Tuesday in a 3-2 vote, seeks to defy Senate Invoice 2, a brand new state gun legislation — at present tied up in court docket — that bans hid carry allow holders from bringing weapons into locations that lawmakers deem “delicate.”
These locations embrace authorities buildings, polling locations, faculties, public transit, medical amenities, playgrounds and bars.
“The Board of Supervisors considers SB 2, a legislation handed by the California Legislature, as unconstitutional beneath the Second Modification, and unconstitutionally infringes upon the folks’s proper to bear arms,” the decision states.
Anybody who has a legitimate California hid carry license and legally registered gun can convey their firearm onto county property, “besides the place in any other case exempted by County Coverage, State, and Federal legislation,” it says.
Supervisor Patrick Jones, who launched the decision, decried California’s strict gun legal guidelines, saying they “don’t change prison habits.”
Jones, who manages his household’s Redding gun retailer, mentioned the decision “permits the authorized alternative for folks to hold, correctly admitted.”
Questions stay about how a lot energy the decision has on this deeply conservative Northern California county.
Gretchen Stuhr, the county’s lawyer, advised the supervisors that office coverage prohibits county workers from having weapons at work, and the decision “doesn’t revoke” or “put any restrictions on our present coverage in opposition to violence within the office.”
Altering office security insurance policies, Stuhr mentioned, requires the board to work with county worker unions.
Steve Allen, enterprise supervisor for United Public Workers of California Native 792, which represents about 1,000 Shasta County workers, advised The Instances in an electronic mail that the union was not notified in regards to the decision and that such a change must be negotiated.
Jones mentioned the decision applies to members of the general public and that he intends to convey again one other proposal relating to county workers.
The vote comes six months after the Board of Supervisors handed a largely symbolic decision saying it could “use all lawful means at its disposal to assist and defend the Second Modification.”
The supervisors’ new decision blasts Senate Invoice 2, which has been blocked as authorized challenges proceed in federal court docket.
The controversial legislation, which was set to take impact Jan. 1, bars concealed-carry allow holders from bringing weapons into an extended record of locations. The invoice additionally makes companies routinely gun-free zones until the proprietor posts indicators explicitly permitting firearms.
In an electronic mail to The Instances, the press workplace for California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta mentioned some parts of the legislation weren’t challenged in federal litigation and stay in impact.
These embrace restrictions on carrying hid weapons in faculties, courthouses, jails, airports, polling locations and authorities buildings, the press workplace mentioned.
In Shasta County — the place raucous board conferences in recent times have included violent threats in opposition to supervisors and a failed try by one man to place all of them beneath citizen’s arrest — some questioned the knowledge of permitting weapons into such a charged surroundings.
Supervisor Mary Rickert, who voted in opposition to the decision, mentioned that in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, when there was heated debate over masks, vaccine necessities and different mandates, a former Shasta County worker who had a hid carry allow emailed her a demise menace.
Rickert mentioned she met with a disaster intervention crew and that she was given images of the person and his automobile.
“To this present day, I hold my eyes open for him,” Rickert mentioned.
“You’ll be able to’t persuade me [that] as a result of somebody has a hid weapons allow that they’re completely innocent.”
Jenny O’Connell, a resident, mentioned she anxious a few repeat of the 2015 terrorist assault in San Bernardino, when a county worker and his spouse opened hearth on a vacation social gathering for his colleagues, killing 14 folks.
“Simply have a look at the risky surroundings inside these chambers,” O’Connell advised the supervisors earlier than their vote. “Have a look at this! Would you like need one in every of these folks to come back in and shoot you all? Have a look at how pissed everyone seems to be!”
Jeff Gorder, a retired Shasta County public defender, requested if county division heads who must self-discipline workers will now have to fret whether or not they’re carrying weapons.
“Let’s say anyone will get shot. You understand this county will get sued,” he mentioned.
Others welcomed the measure. One lady who mentioned she has 4 daughters and several other grandchildren mentioned “all of them are weak” and that “sadly, one of many nice equalizers is a gun.”
Jon Knight, a right-wing political activist and conspiracy theorist whom the supervisors not too long ago appointed to the native mosquito management district board, mentioned California is simply making an attempt to take weapons away from law-abiding residents.
“I actually recognize you guys standing up for we the folks by opposing [this] tyrannical overreach of presidency making an attempt to remove all of our liberties and rights,” he mentioned.
In a video posted on-line earlier this month, Shasta County Sheriff Michael Johnson mentioned he and his deputies wouldn’t implement the Senate Invoice 2 restrictions on carrying hid weapons in delicate locations.
“It’s a fraud. It’s a lie, and in my view it’s unconstitutional,” Johnson mentioned of the legislation.
“We won’t expend our time and our efforts to deal with such useless and unconstitutional laws.”
