Franklin wants to allow concealed guns for protection in courthouse. Judges resist
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Repealing the resolution doesn't override court rules, but could allow changes for offices
- Superior Court has final say on courthouse weapons, citing security since a 1974 bombing.
- County is considering reconfiguring security or a separate office to allow staff access.
Citing a number of threats to elected officials and staff, Franklin County leaders want to allow county employees registered to carry concealed weapons to be able to bring their guns into county offices.
Making it happen could be more complicated than it appears, however.
Benton Franklin Superior Court judges have the final say when it comes to security at the courthouse in Pasco and so far they’ve said no – only law enforcement and private security officers can be armed.
Many of the elected officials and their employees, along with court officials, have offices in the county courthouse in Pasco.
County Commissioner Stephen Bauman said he has a concealed carry permit and made a formal request to the Superior Court judges for permission last week to have his gun on him following a 2024 threat to him and his family.
After the judges denied his request, the three county commissioners voted Wednesday to repeal an ordinance supporting a 2012 Superior Court policy barring weapons inside the courthouse for anyone other than law enforcement.
The policy gave the court the authority to make exceptions, but the commissioners say the judges have refused to do so.
Guns in the courthouse
County Assessor John Rosenau told the commissioners on Wednesday he and his staff frequently receive threats and believes the move would make county staff safer.
He has a background in law enforcement, including as a police chief, and also has a concealed carry permit, but said he would not get approval under the current rules.
While repealing the county’s ordinance does not override the court’s decision, it could open the door for the county to restructure its courthouse security.
The court’s decision goes back to a 1974 bombing that killed Franklin County Judge James Lawless.
The county may look at shifting the security setup at the courthouse to separate the courtrooms from other county offices. That could look like moving security and metal detectors to the entrance off the courthouse rotunda and the back door.
Commissioners also mentioned the idea of moving county offices in the future to a separate building.
They said their goal is to keep the courtrooms secure, while allowing staff and elected officials to protect themselves. It’s unclear what that would look like, or what offices might remain in the courthouse if the county moved its other offices.
In Benton County, the prosecutor and clerk offices are in the courthouse. The commissioners and other elected officials are in an administrative building next door.
County Administrator Brian Dansel told the Tri-City Herald that they are unsure what it would look like, or who would be allowed to carry a gun with a permit, because they first need to come to an agreement with the judges on courtroom security.
Bauman said he was frustrated with the one-sentence response from the judges when it came to a matter of personal safety.
Currently, to get into the courthouse, all visitors must go through a security guardhouse with metal detectors, operated by private security officers. Inside the courtrooms, the judges also have some security officers.
The sheriff’s office and jail also are on the courthouse campus.
Death threat
Sheriff Jim Raymond has previously said that some elected officials, including Bauman, were already carrying a gun inside the courthouse.
That came to light during a dispute over Bauman changing the locks on his office, leaving the sheriff’s office without a key to access the area in case of an emergency.
County employees can bypass the guardhouse by coming in through a separate employee-only parking lot gate.
Raymond had also let himself into Bauman’s office around this time.
The threat he received came in the same weekend all of that was happening, Bauman said.
He received two videos, a picture and a threatening message via text. One of the videos showed a man making threats while holding guns, the other appeared to a person going through the camera roll of a phone.
It turned out to be a likely scam, but the threatening messages were cause for concern and, Bauman said, the sheriff’s office didn’t take it seriously.
Bauman told the Herald that other law enforcement officers he talked to about the threat told him he should take it seriously, and the FBI contacted him.
Raymond told the Herald on Wednesday that deputies will continue to enforce the gun-free zone requirements under the court’s orders.
“Anyone caught carrying firearms in that secure courthouse area is going to be arrested,” he said. “Not cited. Arrested.”
Raymond also said he was having deputies review case files related to the threats that Bauman mentioned.
At the time, Bauman was reportedly looking for recording devices, believing a former county administrator bugged his office. There was no mention of personal threats in the documents or body camera footage obtained by the Herald.
Raymond posted police reports Wednesday showing Bauman had talked to a detective about the threat, though Raymond believes it was an overreaction.
“As you commissioners are aware I had a death threat against myself and my family, subsequent to that I had no less than four official interviews with law enforcement,” Bauman said
“I was mocked on social media as being a conspiracy theorist and paranoid, when you receive a death threat as significant and as detailed as I received it makes you pay pretty close attention.”
Bauman said he received another threat last year and grew more concerned.
“... In light of what we see in our society today I felt like I need to be able to defend myself, and I’ve sought diligently to be able to do that, and because of this resolution and a subsequent resolution of the Superior Court I have not been able to do that.”
Dansel also sent a response to the Superior Court judges, expressing their disappointment with the decision to deny Bauman’s request. He read that letter into the record at the meeting.
“I would ask why the death threat on the commissioner’s life doesn’t carry any weight with this? To me, these are things that should be taken seriously,” Dansel said in the letter.
“He is now unable to protect himself and possibly his family. I wanted to make sure the judges were aware of this. It feels cavalier to not allow a person their Second Amendment rights, especially after he’s received credible death threats, and that’s according to the FBI.”
Dansel pointed to national events in arguing that people making these types of threats could act on them.
“I think you have set a dangerous precedent wherein if someone simply doesn’t agree with an elected official, that official is powerless in the defense of themselves. It’s especially hard to understand given the very recent assassination of political figures including Charlie Kirk and the attempted assassination attempts on President Trump.”
This story was originally published February 4, 2026 at 5:09 PM.
