Key Takeaways
- The Second Amendment Foundation sued Contra Costa County over unique carry restrictions on firearms.
- The lawsuit challenges policies that prohibit attaching red dot sights and flashlights to handguns, as well as banning 1911-style pistols.
- Residents with valid CCW permits, Andrew Moore and James Treuel, filed the complaint due to fear of prosecution.
- The case argues that these restrictions lack historical tradition and violate the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision.
- SAF seeks a court declaration declaring these policies unconstitutional and is tracking the case in the Northern District of California.
Estimated reading time: 4 minutes
MARTINEZ, CALIF. — The Second Amendment Foundation has sued Contra Costa County over carry restrictions that, by the group’s account, exist nowhere else in the country.
The federal complaint, filed June 17 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenges Sheriff’s Office policies that bar concealed carry permit holders from attaching red dot sights or flashlights to their handguns. The same policies ban carrying single action only semiautomatic pistols built on the 1911 platform.
SAF is joined by two Contra Costa County residents, Andrew Moore and James Treuel. Both hold valid CCW permits issued by the county. Both say they have held back from setting up their carry guns the way they want, out of fear of prosecution or losing their permits.
The Sheriff’s Office spells the rule out on its own permit page. Its guidance states that “Firearms with attached laser sights, flashlights, red dots, and sighting systems are not acceptable.” A separate line bars any single action only firearm, including any semiautomatic handgun built on the Colt 1911 configuration.
I have a hard time reading those policies as anything but an outlier. Red dot sights and weapon lights are standard gear for millions of armed citizens, and they do exactly what defensive equipment should do. They help you see the threat and place your shots only on that threat, especially in low light.
The complaint rests on the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Under Bruen, the government must point to a historical tradition that matches a modern restriction. SAF argues no such tradition exists for banning optics, lights, or the 1911.
“These are common, popular and safety-enhancing features,” said Kostas Moros, SAF’s director of legal research and education. He argued the restrictions cannot survive scrutiny under Bruen.
More from USA Carry:
The suit also highlights a contradiction baked into state law. Because California CCW permits are valid statewide, a permit holder from any other county can legally carry a red dot, a weapon light, or a 1911 straight through Contra Costa County. Only the county’s own residents are boxed out.
The 1911 is hardly exotic. It served as the U.S. Army’s standard sidearm from 1911 to 1985 and remains one of the most popular handgun designs in the country. The complaint notes that several California agencies, including the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department SWAT team, Los Angeles County Sheriffs, and the Long Beach Police Department, have adopted Staccato 2011 pistols built on the same single action only design.
The lawsuit targets only the ban on single action only semiautomatic pistols. It does not challenge the county’s separate restriction on single action revolvers such as the Colt Single Action Army.
The named defendants are Contra Costa County, the Sheriff’s Office, and Sheriff David Livingston in his official capacity. SAF is asking the court to declare the policies unconstitutional, to enjoin their enforcement, and to award nominal damages and attorney’s fees.
The case is Second Amendment Foundation v. Contra Costa County. I will be tracking it as it moves through the Northern District of California.
Read the full article here
