What a horribly written article. It is disjointed, wandering all over the place, leaving ideas and unexpectedly returning to them in the weirdest places.
Preemption, which should be the focus of the issue, isn't mentioned until the end of the article, and then is totally misstated. The Alabama Constitution doesn't bar counties and cities from making gun law; the code does.
Anyway, the article defines the bad guy: Commissioner Charles “Skip” Gruber, who admitted, “I was the one who asked our legal department to expand it to cover county employees and the public at other offices. Not just judicial employees deserve protection,” perpetuating the myth that laws will stop the bad guys from breaking gun and murder laws, obviating the need for folks to be able to defend themselves.
Of course, what he says also runs in the face of a recent AG ruling saying that, as a consequence of preemption, cities and counties may not bar employees from carrying on the job.
The question still remains as to whether judicial security committees have the authority to ban firearms in courthouses. This usurpation of power is going unchallenged, but the law clearly says that the matter of firearms is reserved to the legislature. The problem is further exacerbated by the existence of buildings that house courtrooms and government offices and the attempt to ban firearms in entire buildings that house courtrooms.
On the repeal itself: it's good that the local firearms ban will be repealed, but it would be better if they made it absolutely clear that the repeal is correcting an action they did not have the authority to take.