California County Responds to Glock Ban by Becoming 2A Sanctuary

California’s Glock ban is controversial, to say the least, and while Glock does seem to be trying to change its design in response to the criticism, the truth is that they likely won’t be available for sale in the Golden State when AB 1127 takes effect next year.

The idea of banning so many firearms based on the fact that a third-party designed and built device can modify the function of the weapon in a way that was never intended by the manufacturer is just wrong, and the strategy isn’t going to stick to just California. We’ve already seen similar bills introduced in Illinois and New York, and other liberal states could soon follow.

For a lot of people in California, though, there’s not a lot they can do. They’re kind of stuck.

But Madera County decided to do what it could.

The Madera County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted to declare the county a Second Amendment Sanctuary in a 4-0-1 decision, with Supervisor David Macaulay abstaining.

The resolution, introduced by Supervisor Jordan Wamhoff, expresses the county’s support for the right to keep and bear arms and its opposition to any law viewed as an unconstitutional restriction on that right. The measure passed without any amendments.

…

The vote comes in response to recent state legislation. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1127 earlier this month, banning the sale of firearms that can be readily converted into fully automatic weapons. While the bill does not name specific brands, its language effectively restricts the sale of certain Glock models in California.

Now, what will change? Nothing, really.

Gun stores have to follow both federal and state laws, and so they’re not going to keep selling Glocks once AB 1127 kicks in. And AB 1127 doesn’t prohibit the possession of Glocks, so residents in Madera County don’t have to worry about police trying to confiscate them. 

I like the Second Amendment sanctuary movement, if for no other reason than it’s an answer to immigration sanctuary cities, counties, and states.  Still, let’s not get too excited about what it actually means.

It’s largely symbolic.

That doesn’t mean it’s unimportant, though. Gov. Gavin Newsom tries to talk out of both sides of his mouth on guns, pretending he’s not anti-gun while signing and advocating for some of the strictest restrictions in the nation. For yet another county in the state to say they’re not going to enforce those laws is a middle finger to Newsom, especially when it’s in response to a particular law.

If enough counties do it, especially in response to this, it might send a much clearer signal to those with statewide or national political aspirations. If nothing else, it might spark some real debate in California over the right to keep and bear arms, which too many people there are completely misinformed about. They think these laws are reasonable and effective when they’re not. They think they’re constitutional, even when they’re not.

This is a good thing, even if it doesn’t mean much in the day-to-day lives of people living there. It’s a warning that not everyone in California is ready to see their rights stripped away and that, sooner or later, there’s a line that cannot be crossed.

Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.

Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.