Idaho Man Wants Law Passed Against Open Carry and Alcohol Consumption

A man in north Idaho wants to change Idaho’s firearm carry laws.

Back in June a number of 2nd Amendment supporters were in Coeur d’Alene to watch over the city. They didn’t want Coeur d’Alene to experience what many other cities were experiencing with looting and rioting.

Gun owners showed up by the hundreds when rumors started that Antifa was headed to the town. Some gun owners were allegedly seen at bars having a drink with their rifles by their side.

David Hopkins, a Coeur d’Alene resident, says he wants another law to change what he witnessed back in June.

Hopkins says he is retired from working at the Kootenai County Jail, is trained in firearms, and has an Enhanced Concealed Weapon’s License.

Hopkins told the Coeur d’Alene press,

With our recent protests in Coeur d’Alene, I saw a myriad of weapons like sniper rifles, hundreds of AR rifles, AR pistols, shotguns, AK-style rifles (and) even lever-action rifles. There were many different handgun models semi-automatic, revolvers, etc. Then it occurred to me: What if someone dropped one firecracker or a car backfired downtown? Can you imagine the outcome by one individual who was intoxicated carrying and fired?

Is it ever surprising how people who allegedly train with and handle firearms talk about them? He saw “sniper rifles” among the firearms?

Does he care to clarify exactly what he meant by that? He also saw “lever-action” rifles which is supposed to mean what in relation to the situation?

Hopkins also mentions that he saw many different models of handguns and revolvers and this led him to think about firecrackers and if one went off or a car backfired then all hell would break loose.

No responsible gun owner advocates drinking and carrying a firearm. However, is yet another firearm law really needed? Did something actually happen in Coeur d’Alene or is this another reaction to a few individuals not acting responsibly?

The reality is that Idaho’s legislature is prohibited from regulating open carry and passing a law is not even possible without first passing a constitutional amendment.

Hopkins actually wrote the mayor of Coeur d’Alene and told him that he wants an ordinance that would cover any substance that impairs judgement.

What Hopkins doesn’t realize is that Idaho has a preemption law that prohibits cites from enacting local ordinances. So, Coeur d’Alene can’t pass an ordiancne even if they wanted to.

That means that it would have to go through state law and as we mentioned previously, Idaho’s legislature can’t regulate open carry.

Seth Rosquist, Chairman of the Idaho Second Amendment Alliance said another law is not needed.

He told Northwest Gun News,

We have had open carry in Idaho for a very long time. In that time, the instances that Mr. Hopkins is describing are almost non-existent. While we don’t advocate that people drink and handle firearms, we don’t feel that yet another law is necessary.

This year and the following years are likely to be very tense for gun owners as more and more restrictions are sought. Additionally, Idaho finds itself under attack by the radical left which has already taken over the entire west coast.

Do you believe Idaho needs a law to address open carrying and drinking?

Let us know in the comments below.

5 thoughts on “Idaho Man Wants Law Passed Against Open Carry and Alcohol Consumption”

  1. No, our guns laws need to remain the way they are. I don’t condone drinking while carrying…bad choice…but to be fair just because they’re in a bar doesn’t mean they’re consuming alcohol. Not saying there weren’t any…just being real.

  2. No we do not need a law. I dont think anyone should have any intoxicating substance in their body when carrying or handling a gun. But I think it is up to the responsible gun owners to let the irresponsible ones know that we do not accept them as a responsible gun owner if they do that.

  3. No. While I have had a beer while open carrying, I don’t advocate it but responsible people follow laws like, don’t shoot others who are not presenting a lethal threat. Show an actual public danger that has happened as a result of the present laws before changing them.

  4. Mr. Hopkins showed his ignorance and insecurities with his statements. responsible gun owners aren’t going to spin around and begin firing of random shots because they heard a car backfire. too many movies, not enough grey matter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *