• Cryophilia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 小时前

    The official renter ban is a bit of a loophole - a lot of Bay Area counties are taking over old federal properties (Navy and Coast Guard bases, former superfund sites, etc) and turning them into housing. Federal laws prevented having firearms in these places (for obvious reasons, can’t bring a gun to a navy base lol). During the “transition” period where the housing is partially built but not completed, there’s typically a joint ownership with the gun rules carried over from when it was purely federal property. The municipality could get these rules removed, but they really don’t want to. It’s a benefit to them.

    But more typically, you’ll see every large landlord in the area ban firearms as a part of the lease agreement, with the tacit encouragement of local governments. So it’s not law, but you still can’t really have one.

    Edit: plus the ban on all these places: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-01-02/judges-let-new-california-law-barring-guns-in-many-places-take-effect-challenge-ongoing

    It’s illegal to have any firearm (even with a concealed carry license) in almost any public setting.

    • antimongo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 小时前

      Interesting, hadn’t heard about the situation in SF. That’s unfortunate.

      And yes… good old SB2. CA had a relatively lax CCW policy, until we became a “shall issue” state. Now there’s all this policy reform.

      If the final part of SB2 kicks in, it’ll be pointless to have a CCW. The last part changes private property that’s open to the public from a default permitted carry, to a default not permitted.

      So any business that wants to allow lawful CCW would need to clearly place a sign to opt-in. Which isn’t happening in this state lol.

      Fortunately that last part is still being “stayed”. But so was the entire bill at one point. So I’m not holding my breath.

      I totally acknowledge that we need gun control, but not restrictions. And going after CCW holders? Literally the owners with the highest level of training? Most compliant with the law? Bananas.

      But anyway, I see where you’re originally coming from. It is kinda death by a thousand cuts. Slowly eroding away at gun rights. In the worst way… Criminals could care less about what’s legal, hence criminal.