Previous Post
Next Post

The limited reform of Idaho’s restrictions on campus carry (SB 1254) was signed by Governor Butch Otter yesterday. The law removes the university-imposed restrictions from retired peace officers and people who have received Idaho’s enhanced concealed carry license.  Those two groups will now be able to legally carry concealed weapons on the public property of college and university campuses . . .


The legislation allows a limited group of people to carry concealed weapons on college and university campuses. Supporters say the bill protects people’s Second Amendment rights.

It does not allow for concealed carry in resident halls or in sports arenas with a seating capacity of more than a thousand.   Over 100,000 people have the standard concealed carry license. Less than 1,200 people currently have the enhanced carry license, although instructors say that their classes are packed.

Of at least equal importance, the bill reclaims some of the authority to regulate firearms from the universities, and grants immunity from liability to universities and colleges that allow people to bring and store firearms on campus.


No action shall lie or be maintained for civil damages in any court of this
state against the board of regents of the university of Idaho, the boards
of trustees of the state colleges and universities, a dormitory housing
commission, the board of professional-technical education or the boards of
trustees of each of the community colleges established under chapter 21,
title 33, Idaho Code, where the claim arises out of the policy of the board or
commission to either specifically allow or not prohibit the lawful posses-
sion and storage of firearms on its property.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Off topic, but oh my word their PR fail continues…MDA has a twitter post yesterday that says:

      “#gunbullies marching @sxsw today in opposition to our #DisruptNRA panel 4 days ago.”

      Here’s the full picture:

      That dude (or the child) does not look at that threatening, but the funny part (and what caught my eye) is that on the main twitter page, the photo is cropped so you barely see the rifle … if you did not know it’s there, it just looks like a photo of a guy carrying a kid on his shoulders.

      Go to the main twitter page,

      scroll down and look at the cropped picture!

      Does this guy look like a GUN BULLY?

      The phrase laughing stock comes to mind…those MDA activists are becoming a bigger joke every day, and that, my friends, takes real talent.

  1. I shall send boxes of rags to the university presidents so they can mop up the inevitable blood in the streets.

  2. WTH is an “enhanced CCW”

    “the regular license requires three hours of training, all in a classroom with a firearms instructor.

    The enhanced license is eight hours, with half in a classroom with either an attorney or law enforcement officer, the other half hands on shooting at the range”

    Thats 1/2 of the required just to get a CCL here in Illinois. Damn.

    • Plus the full FBI background check, which is probably more than the average college professor is required to have.

      • Given that at least a couple of convicted terrorists teach at universities, I’m going to have to agree with you on the FBI background checks.

        • Yeah Wtf. In Ohio I had to get 8 hrs ccw training and then FBI/BCI background check. 3 hours in Idaho for normal ccw. Must be nice…

    • Idaho recognizes EVERY state’s concealed weapons license/permit, even for the states that don’t recognize ours. The “enhanced” permit law was passed by the Idaho legislature to meet the requirements of more states for reciprocal recognition of the Idaho permit, especially our neighboring states such as Nevada and Washington. (California and Oregon are hopeless cases.)

      • And adoption of an enhanced license lost you reciprocity with PA, due only to the fact that the change gave our Prog AG the excuse to revisit the Idaho agreement. I apologize on behalf of the Commonwealth, though I’m proud to say I didn’t vote for her.

  3. I sure hope Hampikian’s students know (and exercise) their right to carry in his AO since he has openly broached the question of shooting students for none imminent threat situations.

    He struck me as a little quick on the trigger…

    • Seems unlikely that this twit has or could get an enhanced Idaho license. What will likely happen is every time someone sneezes or even raise their voice in his class he will shit his pants.

      Let’s wait and see how many of these Liberal professors are really so frightened by this that they give up their teaching positions and move out of state.

  4. Hi there, boys and girls! Today’s vocabulary word for Idaho residents is “Schadenfreude”! I am sure you all recognize that word, so let’s sing it together! What fun! (Sung to the music of blood vessels popping in the heads of every leftist public college/university president in Idaho [which is all of them].) There were several quotes in today’s “Idaho Statesman” coverage of this law which just warmed the cockles of my heart:

    “Heads of all eight of the state’s public colleges opposed the bill, arguing it would strip policy-making power from universities, stymie recruitment efforts and put those on campus at risk. The bill also sparked a protest that drew hundreds to the Capitol. Otter, who didn’t receive the bill until Tuesday, was pushed to veto it in recent days by the mothers of shooting victims in college mass shootings across the nation [that would be Shannon Watts’ernames Bloomberg group], and by Idaho student leaders.”

    “After Boise Police Chief Mike Masterson and two other police chiefs from cities with public universities or colleges were shut out of a Senate committee hearing on the bill last month, Masterson said the public dialogue on the issue greatly increased. “From reading the polls it looks like overwhelmingly people are against guns on campus, but the governor and his Legislature want to see it a law, so we will just start preparing for how we will respond to complaints of people carrying weapons on campus,” he said Wednesday.”
    Hey, Chiefie – the Legislature belongs to the people of Idaho who elected them, not the Gov. And by the way, the 81% GOP Idaho legislature indicates that a “poll” of Idaho residents taken at every election shows our support for the 2nd Amendment and our rejection of the leftist policies of the Democrats and the Boise mayor who appointed you. Stiff upper lip, Chiefie.

    “Aside from perhaps agriculture, the NRA is the most powerful interest group in the Idaho Republican Party. Vetoing the bill would have been a huge gift to Otter’s more conservative primary opponent — Sen. Russ Fulcher — quickly altering the landscape in the May 20 primary.”

    Read more here:

    The howls of outrage in the on-line comments from our local loony libs are the best part of this story. Yes, Schadenfreude is the dominant emotion at this point. Plus, as an NRA member, I really enjoy reading about how politically powerful we are – Masters of the Universe, as it were. Oh, and by the way – we see this law as “a good first step” in restoring civil rights to university and college campuses.

    Gloat, gloat, gloat. (Sorry about that – couldn’t help myself. We have been working on this 2nd Amendment advance for 3-4 years. We had to toss out a few RINOs in the primaries in 2012 to get this through the key Senate committee.)

    • “good first step” … I like it. Throw in a nice “Common Sense Gun Control Reform” for good measure.

      Good on you guys for your work in ID. Hopefully, campus carry continues to spread.

      • Interesting question – I never saw any reference to the polling company, or any publication of the “results” of the Chief’s “poll”. I plan on sending the Boise PD a Public Information Request under Idaho law, asking for a copy of this alleged poll. I would be willing to bet they cannot produce it.

        • The debates do seem to have been pretty contentious, so it wouldn’t surprise me if the public support for this bill was not high, but without real poll data there’s no way to know for sure.

          Constitutional carry and campus carry still seem to make many otherwise pro-carry people uncomfortable, that’s why I was asking.

        • There’s no way to no “for sure” WITH poll data. Opinion polls are not exactly representative or without selection bias.

          I suppose one could also poll state legislatures to try to gage what input they got form their constituents…if you choose to believe that as a data source.

          Aside from a handful of university administrators and big city police chiefs, is there any organized outcry against the new law, like, say there is against the registration law in CT?

          There’s your poll on a law’s popularity.

        • There seems to have been pretty vocal opposition from some student groups. Of course, just like the opposition in CT doesn’t mean the majority of the State isn’t anti-gun, the vocal opposition in Idaho doesn’t necessarily reflect the State as a whole on this issue.

          A non-partisan poll could give us an idea on where the public stands, but it’s not clear there was one taken in Idaho this time.

  5. Greetings: I am one of two reviled “libtards” that regularly visit here. I always learn something and get a laugh or two. I voted green in the last general election, I support gay marriage, I believe in a womans right to decide what happens to her body, I believe that climate change and evolution are scientific fact not theory or some quaint idea, I believe that Fox news is the biggest collection of idiots occupying one space on the planet, I believe President Obama should be in Leavenworth making gravel and that he should be proceeded there by Bush and Cheney. I could go on but you get the picture. I just locked up my Benelli 12/semiauto and am heading out the door strapped with a Walther PPQ-M2 in a TTgunleather IWB held up with a Beltman belt. It is quite a nice gun and am considering a Walther PPS for t-shirt weather. Everyone have a nice day.

    • PPS is a great choice. I picked one up in 9mm after shooting my good friend’s PPS in .40, and it’s become my EDC. Very slim, lightweight pistol. I shoot more accurately with it than I do with a P99, strangely enough.

    • As a fairly conservative member of this particular group, I would like to say that I wish the term “libtard” would go away.

      True, I thought it was funny at first…after years of seeing myself referred to as “republipuke” and the like by people who have never met me. But, after about three times, terms like that (from either side) just look mighty adolescent.

      I honestly cannot remember if I ever used the term, but if I did, I’d regret it now. I myself don’t care for using cliche terms.

      Only other point…”I believe that climate change and evolution are scientific fact not theory or some quaint idea”

      Not to debate the merits of these ideas one way or another but … ‘belief’ does not make something true. This is part of the problem we constantly fight with the gun-grabbers; they BELIEVE guns are bad | evil | sentient, and no amount of data seems to sway them away from that dogma.

      I got to hold a PPQ recently and really liked the feel of it. Did not get to shoot it, though.

    • Eugene, like all good Liberals (there’s an oxymoron), you seem to base you choices on what you “believe” or your emotional response. Do you have any factual data to support any of those opinions, other than the one about Obama?

      And based on that, how did you manage to make a rational decision to CCW with a reasonably efficient sidearm?

      The universe is filled with wonders, and even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    • That’s because you’re not a liberal as defined in the modern sense. Today the word “liberal” has been re-defined to persons who would normally be called a “statist”. I’m pretty sure you’re not a collectivist that views state power as the ultimate arbitrator of personal freedoms.

      You could be considered a “classic liberal”, which advocates person freedoms of the individual from coercion by government intrusion. This position is much closer to the principles of libertarianism than anything else.

    • That’s because you’re not a liberal as defined in the modern sense. Today the word “liberal” has been re-defined to persons who would normally be called a “statist”. I’m pretty sure you’re not a collectivist that views state power as the ultimate arbitrator of personal freedoms.

      You could be considered a “classic liberal”, which advocates person freedoms of the individual from coercion by government intrusion. This position is much closer to the principles of libertarianism than anything else.

    • That’s because you’re not a liberal as defined in the modern sense. Today the word “liberal” has been re-defined to persons who would normally be called a “statist”. I’m pretty sure you’re not a collectivist that views state power as the ultimate arbitrator of personal freedoms.

      You could be considered a “classic liberal”, which advocates person freedoms of the individual from coercion by government intrusion. This position is much closer to the principles of libertarianism than anything else.

    • The part of the climate change debate that troubles me is when people say “human caused global warming is SETTLED SCIENCE.”

      The scientific method, as used in real science (say, physics) demands that the scientist assume that there is NO “settled science”. EVERY scientific hypothesis is a THEORY that must be tested with experiments, not based on “belief”. Quantum physics is being tested now with the CERN Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland, and there is some evidence that theories about the Higgs boson may be correct. No reputable scientist will stand up and say “quantum physics as we know it today is settled science, and anyone who disagrees is the equivalent of a Holocaust denier.”

      And yet that is what the “global warming scientists” are doing. Global warming “science” is based on theoretical models, which to date have been unable to explain the last 15-20 year “pause” in warming.
      So far, all we have is theory that is not backed up by repeatable experimentation.

  6. Once again, we see that the public employees don’t like recognizing the rights of those who pay their plush benefits and paychecks.

    Here’s a massive clue for public employees: If you don’t like taking orders from the public (via the legislature or other elected officials), quit the public sector and go get a job in the private sector.

    Everywhere, in every state, public employees have forgotten the Golden Rule: He who has the gold, makes the rules. The taxpayers are waking up to the fact that they’re being bled dry by public employees, and now the Golden Rule is about to be enforced in many states/cities/towns on many issues. Campus carry is just one of those many issues. In several years, many academics will quit whining about campus carry and they’ll be happy to have any job at all. The educational sector in the US is headed for a great contraction as their unsustainable spending patterns meet their destiny in financial reality.

    Reading of public employees whining and crying about what the public is telling them to do has become one of my favorite hobbies in my advancing years.

    To quote South Park: “MMmmm! Yummy tears of unfathomable sadness, mmmmmm, yeeees!”

  7. Daughter is a chemist with four degrees and extensive experience in climate research. Duplicating all the science behind climate change here is impossible. And, besides, I don’t do other peoples homework. I laid out not only what I believe but what I know from my own research and experience. What others think about what I believe or think or know is none of my business and completely irrevelant. The point that was missed is that there are so-called libtards who happen to believe in the 2nd and our right to own and carry firearms. My belief, there’s another belief, in the above comes from an oath I took many years ago to protect and defend the constitution. I took that oath seriously enough to volunteer for service in the republic of South Vietnam where I served with the 1st Air Cavalry Division. I spilled my blood for that oath and take no less seriously today. So believe what you will about what I say. It matters no.

    • Geez, I guess I rubbed a raw nerve and helped you into defensive mode. I think you missed my larger point, and the part where I specifically said I was not “debating the merits of those topics one way or another.”

      But since you brought it up, I’m a chemist with an advanced degree, so I don’t really care to rehash it with you or your daughter. I know how to read refereed journals (and have published in a few) and I know how to mathematically analyze data. I refuse to discuss the topic with anyone with less than a PhD in chemistry or physics (or a mathematics field) in addition to real experience in stochastic modeling. And, generally not even then, since the issue has become so completely polarized it is hardly about “science” anymore at all.

      Fair enough?

      I find it interesting that that is what you focused on. The “liberal” strategy of pushing anti-gun agenda’s HINGE on “beliefs” in lieu of fact and logical thought.

      If you are as pro-2A as you claim to be (and I have no reason to doubt you), and you really do want to ‘fight’ for 2A rights, getting so bent up when someone calls to question populist dogma is not going to help.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here