Idaho peeps, H.B.167?

[strakill]

I received a few texts today about this proposed bill, H.B.167, but I don't have any info on it yet.

It's apparently about being able to criminally trespass people that carry into buildings with no firearms allowed signs.

Again, I have not had a chance to really vet this just wanted to throw it out there. When I have more time later I'll look more into it.

Edit: So I found the bill and am coming up short on where it mentions "carrying" or creating gun free zones.

https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2023/legislation/H0167.pdf

Short of the definition of "Critical Infrastructure" I'm confused on why this is being considered to be an "anti-gun" bill.

[nikonmike5]

[BAJ475]

What needs to be added is section 3(d) to read: (d) Is not engaged in conduct that threatens to destroy or incapacitate a Critical Infrastructure Facility or impair its functionality. What also needs to be added is that no area or facility generally open to the public for retail trade or business shall be deemed a Critical Infrastructure Facility. And 6(a) needs to be modified by adding after the word agency, "but only to the extent such facilities are otherwise included in the definition of a Critical Infrastructure Facility: In other words, it needs to be clear that the list does not broaden the definition of Critical Infrastructure Facility.

[strakill]

called out specifically each facility

What needs to be added is section 3(d) to read: (d) Is not engaged in conduct that threatens to destroy or incapacitate a Critical Infrastructure Facility or impair its functionality. What also needs to be added is that no area or facility generally open to the public for retail trade or business shall be deemed a Critical Infrastructure Facility. And 6(a) needs to be modified by adding after the word agency, "but only to the extent such facilities are otherwise included in the definition of a Critical Infrastructure Facility: In other words, it needs to be clear that the list does not broaden the definition of Critical Infrastructure Facility.

I think that is the culprit right there. It's too open and easily manipulated.

Probably something that is worth making a stink about in general, needs to be vastly more clarified.

[BAJ475]

I think that is the culprit right there. It's too open and easily manipulated.

Probably something that is worth making a stink about in general, needs to be vastly more clarified.

I think that we fully agree. Clearly Critical Infrastructure must be protected. But in a way that does not open to door to manipulation as you state.