Idaho State lawmakers to introduce bill to ATF and the federal government to go stick it
Idaho has been a strong supporter of the right to bear arms — even attracting firearms manufacturers from other states to spur its economy.
But is it willing to take on the federal government to defend that right?
Rep. R.J. “Dick” Harwood, R-St. Maries, will ask that question when he introduces a bill to the Idaho Legislature in January that could make it cheaper and easier to buy a firearm that’s made and sold in Idaho.
The bill, which is circulating among a small group of Republican lawmakers, will mirror the Montana Firearms Freedom Act — the now famous bill that pit Montana against the federal government in a pending legal battle.
Harwood said the bill is a shot across the bow of the federal government.
“This is a way that we can tell the federal government that they can’t take away states’ rights,”he said. “I know the feds are going to have a problem with it — they already say we would be superceding their authority.”
He said the bill would mirror one that was passed in Montana in 2009.
Montana was the first state to pass a bill that slapped the federal government’s hands off of in-state firearms sales.
Montana House Bill 426 — also dubbed the Montana Firearms Freedom Act — says all firearms, firearm accessories and ammunition made and sold within Montana is exempt from federal regulation.
The Montana Shooting Sports Association filed a complaint against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in federal court in October to validate the bill’s passage.
The case is pending in court and officials say they don’t know how long — or how costly — the case may be.
But there is more behind the act than its title conveys. And it has more to do with dollars and cents than states’ rights.
Manufacturers and state lawmakers say Montana’s Firearms Freedom Act is also a valuable tool to attract gun makers from states that are imposing more rigid gun laws.
Something that hasn’t been lost on Idaho lawmakers.
“This is an opportunity to create jobs and help spur the economy by bringing manufactures to Idaho,” said Representative Marc Gibbs, a Republican legislator from Grace. “I’m a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, but right now our state’s economy is my biggest concern.”
Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter announced an initiative earlier this year that markets Idaho to firearms manufacturers in other states that are looking to move or expand.
The initiative, known as Project 60, has already seen some success when Advanced Precision, which makes shotguns for Legacy Sports, opened manufacturing facility in Meridian.
However, Gibbs said Idaho should wait to see what the outcome will be of the case between Montana and the federal government.
Even firearms manufacturers in Idaho — those who would benefit the most from the bill — say it’s not a fight they want to pick right now.
“As a freedom loving American, I think the bill is a great idea,” said Jay Quilligan, who manufactures firearm accessories in south-central Idaho. “But as a business owner, it doesn’t really change anything.”
Quilligan said he would still be required to pay all federal taxes and fees because he is licensed by the federal government — something he needs to continue doing business with military and law enforcement.
“Most manufacturers in Idaho and other states are not going to take that risk of losing their business,” said Matt Dogali, Idaho liaison with the National Rifle Association. “The bill sounds good, but in practice these guys would be spending a ton of capital just to make a statement.”
And some Idaho lawmakers aren’t willing to put the state’s firearms and ammunition manufacturers in the federal government’s crosshairs.
Idaho is home to ATK CCISpears, one of the largest manufacturers of ammunition for law enforcement and civilian use. The state also fosters small businesses such as Tactical Solutions, Primary Weapons Systems, CheyTac and several others that build high-grade firearms and accessories for military and civilians.
Representative Marv Hagedorn, R-Meridian, said the cost and risk would be placed primarily on the manufacturers.
“The state can pass the Firearms Freedom Act, but ultimately it will have to be tested in court,”he said. “That means one of (the manufacturers) would have to be the guinea pig.”
Harwood said he still plans to submit the bill in January, and lawmakers appear poised to support it.
However, whether it will receive support from those who would have to risk their businesses to test the validity of the bill remains to be seen.
