Idaho · individual fact

Idaho crime

Reported violent and property crime, police reporting coverage, and Idaho public-safety context.

Reported violent-crime rate236.6 per 100k2024 · #38 of 50 · highest first
Reported property-crime rate758.3 per 100k2024 · #50 of 50 · highest first
Police population reporting coverage99.6%2024 · #18 of 50 · highest first

Idaho over time

Explore Idaho readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Idaho officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Idaho effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Idaho change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Reported violent-crime rate Idaho · source units
IdahoPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Reported violent-crime rate2024: 236.6 per 100k211.2 per 100k237.2 per 100k263.1 per 100kIdaho, 2015: 216.2 per 100kIdaho, 2016: 228.6 per 100kIdaho, 2017: 242.6 per 100kIdaho, 2018: 238.4 per 100kIdaho, 2019: 237.8 per 100kIdaho, 2020: 258.1 per 100kIdaho, 2021: 248.1 per 100kIdaho, 2022: 251.6 per 100kIdaho, 2023: 243.2 per 100kIdaho, 2024: 236.6 per 100k201520192024
✦ Major events & context · 33National context · Booker makes federal sentencing guidelines advisory · 2005-01-12Federal sentencingNational context · Adam Walsh Act establishes new registration standards · 2006-07-27Adam Walsh ActNational context · Survey changes disrupt the 2006 victimization comparison · 2006-12-312006 survey breakNational context · Congress strengthens firearm background-check records · 2008-01-08NICS records lawNational context · Second Chance Act expands reentry support · 2008-04-09Second Chance ActNational context · Heller recognizes an individual firearm right · 2008-06-26Heller decisionNational context · Financial crisis deepens during the Great Recession · 2008-09-15Financial crisisNational context · Shepard–Byrd Act expands federal hate-crime law · 2009-10-28Federal hate-crime lawNational context · McDonald applies the firearm right to the states · 2010-06-28McDonald decisionNational context · Fair Sentencing Act changes federal crack penalties · 2010-08-03Fair Sentencing ActNational context · FBI expands the rape definition · 2013-01-01Rape definition expandsNational context · Violence Against Women Act reauthorized · 2013-03-07VAWA reauthorizationNational context · DOJ publishes Ferguson policing findings · 2015-03-04Ferguson investigationNational context · Murder rates rise in 2015 and 2016 · 2016-12-312015–2016 murder riseNational context · First Step Act enacted · 2018-12-21First Step ActNational context · FBI launches national use-of-force data collection · 2019-01-01Use-of-force reportingNational context · COVID-19 characterized as a pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · George Floyd is killed by a Minneapolis police officer · 2020-05-25George Floyd killedNational context · Murder rises sharply while property crime declines · 2020-12-312020 murder surgeNational context · FBI transitions to incident-based reporting · 2021-01-01NIBRS transitionNational context · COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act improves review and reporting · 2021-05-20Hate-crime reportingNational context · Executive order sets federal policing safeguards · 2022-05-25Federal policing orderNational context · Bruen changes the test for firearm restrictions · 2022-06-23Bruen decisionNational context · Bipartisan Safer Communities Act enacted · 2022-06-25Safer Communities ActNational context · FBI annual report again includes summary submissions · 2023-10-16Reporting coverage growsNational context · Vehicle theft rises while total property crime falls · 2023-12-31Vehicle-theft surgeNational context · Victimization survey tests a redesigned questionnaire · 2024-01-01NCVS redesign beginsNational context · Supreme Court rejects ATF’s bump-stock classification · 2024-06-14Bump-stock rulingNational context · Rahimi upholds disarmament for a credible domestic threat · 2024-06-21Domestic-threat rulingNational context · Federal policing executive order is revoked · 2025-01-20Policing order revokedNational context · Court sustains ATF’s rule covering some firearm kits · 2025-03-26Firearm-kit rulingNational context · Executive order redirects federal law-enforcement support · 2025-04-282025 policing policyNational context · FBI publishes 2025 annual crime estimates · 2026-08-142025 crime data release● Idaho Legislature · 52● U.S. Congress · Idaho delegation · 2◆ Governor · 32■ Idaho agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-01-012026-08-31

10 of 10 reviewed Idaho actions match · 8 date markers shown. 33 major events shown separately.

Idaho · 2024: 236.6 per 100k · Rank #38 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: Not available

FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query. These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred. Idaho's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.5% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting. Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Idaho Reported violent-crime rate · source units
PeriodIdahoRankU.S. benchmark
2024236.6 per 100k#38 of 50Not available
2023243.2 per 100k#39 of 50Not available
2022251.6 per 100k#39 of 50Not available
2021248.1 per 100k#38 of 50Not available
2020258.1 per 100k#41 of 50Not available
2019237.8 per 100k#40 of 50Not available
2018238.4 per 100k#39 of 50Not available
2017242.6 per 100k#40 of 50Not available
2016228.6 per 100k#45 of 50Not available
2015216.2 per 100k#45 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Idaho · state comparison

Reported crime over time

Compare the same calendar year across states. A lower reported rate can reflect fewer crimes, incomplete reporting, or both.

Idaho · 2024236.6 per 100k
Idaho rank#38among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Reported violent-crime rate

FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query.

These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred. Idaho's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.5% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting. Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Idaho
Reported violent-crime rate history in Idaho209.9 per 100k237.2 per 100k264.4 per 100k20152024
2024 · Idaho: 236.6 per 100k · Rank #38 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Idaho Reported violent-crime rate history
PeriodIdahoCompare
2015216.2 per 100k
2016228.6 per 100k
2017242.6 per 100k
2018238.4 per 100k
2019237.8 per 100k
2020258.1 per 100k
2021248.1 per 100k
2022251.6 per 100k
2023243.2 per 100k
2024236.6 per 100k

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.

Lower value · 102.6 per 100kHigher value · 744.7 per 100kStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Idaho · 236.6 per 100k2024 · Rank #38 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Reported violent-crime rate · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New Mexico744.7 per 100k—
#2Alaska731.9 per 100k—
#3Tennessee604.3 per 100k—
#4Arkansas589.6 per 100k—
#5*Louisiana504.5 per 100k82.0% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#6Colorado486.8 per 100k—
#7California478.4 per 100k—
#8Kansas474.7 per 100k—
#9Missouri472.7 per 100k—
#10Michigan442.6 per 100k—
#11South Carolina440.8 per 100k—
#12Arizona433 per 100k—
#13Oklahoma429.3 per 100k—
#14Montana428 per 100k—
#15Maryland425.9 per 100k—
#16Nevada408.6 per 100k—
#17Texas397.8 per 100k—
#18New York392.2 per 100k—
#19North Carolina382.9 per 100k—
#20Alabama380.8 per 100k—
#21Delaware368.4 per 100k—
#22*South Dakota356.9 per 100k89.6% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#23*Indiana349.2 per 100k87.2% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#24Oregon341.1 per 100k—
#25Washington331.8 per 100k—
#26Georgia328 per 100k—
#27Massachusetts317.9 per 100k—
#28Ohio311.9 per 100k—
#29Illinois294.5 per 100k—
#30Wisconsin287.6 per 100k—
#31West Virginia263.8 per 100k—
#32*Florida262 per 100k81.0% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#33Minnesota259.4 per 100k—
#34North Dakota258 per 100k—
#35Pennsylvania251.3 per 100k—
#36Iowa247.2 per 100k—
#37Utah237.8 per 100k—
#38Idaho · your comparison236.6 per 100k—
#39Hawaii230.3 per 100k—
#40Vermont227.1 per 100k—
#41Kentucky226.7 per 100k—
#42Nebraska224.6 per 100k—
#43Virginia223.7 per 100k—
#44New Jersey221.9 per 100k—
#45*Mississippi219.6 per 100k65.1% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#46*Wyoming212.5 per 100k89.9% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#47Rhode Island154.9 per 100k—
#48Connecticut139.2 per 100k—
#49New Hampshire112.3 per 100k—
#50Maine102.6 per 100k—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Reported violent-crime rate

236.6 per 100,0002024

Violent offenses reported to law enforcement per 100,000 residents in participating jurisdictions.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query.

  • These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred.
  • Idaho's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.5% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting.
  • Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series.
  • Average monthly population coverage in 2024 was 99.6%; this is not complete statewide reporting.

Reported property-crime rate

758.3 per 100,0002024

Property offenses reported to law enforcement per 100,000 residents in participating jurisdictions.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query.

  • These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred.
  • Idaho's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.5% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting.
  • Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series.
  • Average monthly population coverage in 2024 was 99.6%; this is not complete statewide reporting.
Idaho · state comparison

Firearm mortality

Firearm deaths include suicide, homicide, and other intents. Mortality is separate from reported crime.

Idaho · 2024331
Idaho rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Firearm deaths

Deaths with firearm injury recorded as the cause, all intents.

Counts reflect population size. They do not measure shootings, crimes, or the effect of a policy.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Idaho stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Idaho has a dark outline.

Lower value · 55Higher value · 4,389Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Idaho · 3312024 · Rank #35 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Idaho with every state · 50 ranked
Firearm deaths · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas4,389—
#2Florida3,191—
#3California2,853—
#4Georgia1,985—
#5North Carolina1,835—
#6Ohio1,745—
#7Pennsylvania1,624—
#8Illinois1,563—
#9Tennessee1,448—
#10Arizona1,331—
#11Missouri1,234—
#12Michigan1,228—
#13Alabama1,212—
#14Indiana1,196—
#15Virginia1,153—
#16South Carolina1,064—
#17Louisiana1,031—
#18Colorado961—
#19Washington915—
#20New York896—
#21Kentucky870—
#22Mississippi810—
#23Oklahoma794—
#24Wisconsin735—
#25Maryland716—
#26Oregon663—
#27Arkansas638—
#28Minnesota582—
#28Nevada582—
#30New Mexico563—
#31Utah454—
#32Kansas446—
#33New Jersey393—
#34Iowa389—
#35Idaho · your comparison331—
#36Massachusetts287—
#37West Virginia281—
#38Montana247—
#39Connecticut224—
#40Nebraska218—
#41Alaska182—
#42Maine181—
#43South Dakota159—
#44New Hampshire152—
#45Wyoming143—
#46Delaware123—
#47North Dakota95—
#48Vermont76—
#49Hawaii56—
#50Rhode Island55—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Firearm deaths

3312024 final data

Deaths in which firearm injury was the underlying cause, with the rate age-adjusted per 100,000 residents.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Population-adjusted measure

Age-adjusted firearm death rate
15.9 per 100,000
Method and limitations

CDC National Vital Statistics System death-certificate data.

  • The total combines firearm deaths across intents, including suicide, homicide, legal intervention, and unintentional or undetermined injury.
  • It does not measure nonfatal injuries, firearm ownership, defensive uses, or policy effects.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about crime, victimization, policing and criminal justice from FactVote’s Idaho candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

21 statements from 8 candidates

2026 Idaho Attorney General — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Lori Hickman

1 statement

Democratic · Attorney General · ID

Policing & criminal justice context

The Attorney General should advocate for adequate funding of our justice system, including law enforcement, courts, public defenders, and corrections, in accordance with the Constitution. The AG’s office should promote legislative fixes to problems impeding the work of that important system.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Safeguard Our Elections

Candidate campaign source

The Attorney General should advocate for adequate funding of our justice system, including law enforcement, courts, public defenders, and corrections, in accordance with the Constitution. The AG’s office should promote legislative fixes to problems impeding the work of that important system.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Lori Hickman — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

2026 Idaho Governor — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 10 statements

Pro-Life

10 statements

Constitution · Governor · ID

Crime & victimization

As Governor I will never allow the National Guard to participate in an unjust or unconstitutional war. Would the Idaho commanders follow me, or a wrongful President and Congress? Unjust war is murder.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: National security, foreign policy, and veterans

Candidate campaign source

As Governor I will never allow the National Guard to participate in an unjust or unconstitutional war. Would the Idaho commanders follow me, or a wrongful President and Congress? Unjust war is murder.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
View 9 more statements from Pro-Life
Crime & victimization

We believe that an elected sheriff could, and should, protect his citizens against unconstitutional and immoral laws and edicts by so-called higher authorities. The sheriff should stop baby murder (abortion), protect gun rights, prevent wrongful arrest, etc. However, almost no sheriffs believe they …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

We believe that an elected sheriff could, and should, protect his citizens against unconstitutional and immoral laws and edicts by so-called higher authorities. The sheriff should stop baby murder (abortion), protect gun rights, prevent wrongful arrest, etc. However, almost no sheriffs believe they have this authority.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Crime & victimization

General criminal law jurisdiction, constitutionally, belongs with the states. Pre-born baby murder, homosexual marriage, transgender issues, etc. should never be decided by federal courts. In truth, almost all laws belong in state jurisdiction. When federal judges accept cases that belong in state j…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

General criminal law jurisdiction, constitutionally, belongs with the states. Pre-born baby murder, homosexual marriage, transgender issues, etc. should never be decided by federal courts. In truth, almost all laws belong in state jurisdiction. When federal judges accept cases that belong in state jurisdiction, they should be impeached and removed. Very few Americans want to accept this constitutional truth regarding jurisdiction.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Crime & victimization

Immunization passports are evil, like in "mark of the beast." I will never allow 'shot' passports. The Idaho Legislature would have to pass a law over my veto to make vax passports legal, and then ask for my recall election, because I would fight this to the end, just like I would on the question of…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Immunization passports are evil, like in "mark of the beast." I will never allow 'shot' passports. The Idaho Legislature would have to pass a law over my veto to make vax passports legal, and then ask for my recall election, because I would fight this to the end, just like I would on the question of baby murder and other basic principles.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Crime & victimization

We will never vote for candidates who refuse to treat abortion as murder. When sperm meets egg, a new person is on earth and this equals personhood in the eyes of God. We should have laws punishing all willing participants in these murders. IVF (in vitro-fertilization) causes many children to be fer…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

We will never vote for candidates who refuse to treat abortion as murder. When sperm meets egg, a new person is on earth and this equals personhood in the eyes of God. We should have laws punishing all willing participants in these murders. IVF (in vitro-fertilization) causes many children to be fertilized at one time from one mother. One of these tiny children is then chosen to be implanted on the mother's uterus and the rest are murdered or frozen for future use. The freezing of these little people who have adult spirits or souls is a horrendous crime. God and His angels are crying out about this most horrible crime against God and nature. We must join our voices with God to stop the freezing and murdering of these new people. Google 'snowflake babies.'

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Crime & victimization

Baby murder will not end, nor will it slow down, until everyone allowing and encouraging these murders is punished with the same intensity as regular murder. This includes the mother, especially the mother. Having knowledge of a mother planning or committing baby murder should be punishable by churc…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Baby murder will not end, nor will it slow down, until everyone allowing and encouraging these murders is punished with the same intensity as regular murder. This includes the mother, especially the mother. Having knowledge of a mother planning or committing baby murder should be punishable by church and government. All of us become complicit if we do not tell her that she will be committing murder. Birth control pills and morning-after chemicals are common instruments of baby murder. Legal personhood begins (in God's eyes) when sperm meets egg. All of these murders should be determined (in government jurisdiction) by juries. Some baby murders are committed by force by family members on other family members. If our culture accepted abortion as murder then this forced baby murder would end.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Crime & victimization

If I become Governor in 2026, by my order, all baby murder facilities will remain closed and no abortifacients will be sold. This emergency order will remain as long as I am Governor. Birth control pills are abortifacients just like 'morning-after' pills. Morning-after chemicals are large doses of r…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

If I become Governor in 2026, by my order, all baby murder facilities will remain closed and no abortifacients will be sold. This emergency order will remain as long as I am Governor. Birth control pills are abortifacients just like 'morning-after' pills. Morning-after chemicals are large doses of regular birth control chemicals. Also by my order there will be no transgender activity for any age in Idaho. The determination of crimes are in the jurisdiction of the Legislature, but as Governor I will not allow baby murder or body mutilations and chemical alterations for any age. My executive orders would force the Legislature to process these issues. Likely, the Legislature would falsely claim these issues are not in their jurisdiction and they would let the State or Federal courts make the decision. Or, they might seek to remove me from office via recall. Why do Christians vote for these peer-pressure politicians?

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Crime & victimization

On the life question, the commonly used birth control pill is an abortifacient (murder by chemical), so therefore, any governmental outlawing of surgical abortion should also outlaw the sale and possession of birth control pills and 'morning after' chemicals. Birth control pills cause a woman's body…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

On the life question, the commonly used birth control pill is an abortifacient (murder by chemical), so therefore, any governmental outlawing of surgical abortion should also outlaw the sale and possession of birth control pills and 'morning after' chemicals. Birth control pills cause a woman's body to have a false pregnancy, therefore a real child cannot attach to the uterus and dies. D&C procedures should be made illegal in rape cases. Legal personhood, if we follow science, begins at fertilization (when sperm meets egg).

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Policing & criminal justice context

As Governor I would not allow arrests by Federal officers unless they had contacted the county sheriff prior to the arrest. This of course would not apply to National Parks, Monuments, etc. I would remind county sheriffs that almost all law enforcment decisions should be made by elected sheriffs. A …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public safety and justice

Candidate campaign source

As Governor I would not allow arrests by Federal officers unless they had contacted the county sheriff prior to the arrest. This of course would not apply to National Parks, Monuments, etc. I would remind county sheriffs that almost all law enforcment decisions should be made by elected sheriffs. A sheriff also has a right to ignore the Governor. At present, city councils hire police, and if the police misbehave, the voters have to go to the Mayor and Council for redress. Greater accountability could be achieved if law enforcement was directed by the elected sheriff.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Policing & criminal justice context

Laws regarding free speech, e.g., "free speech, only in a free speech zone," are wrong. 'Disturbing-the-peace-laws', along with jury decisions, should give law enforcement the tools to handle First Amendment disputes. Police want 'well defined laws' so they do not have to exercise discernment. Law e…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public safety and justice

Candidate campaign source

Laws regarding free speech, e.g., "free speech, only in a free speech zone," are wrong. 'Disturbing-the-peace-laws', along with jury decisions, should give law enforcement the tools to handle First Amendment disputes. Police want 'well defined laws' so they do not have to exercise discernment. Law enforcement should develop discernment, patience, and skills to resolve conflicts without violating natural rights. Our law enforcement culture is confused on this issue and will remain so, until we, through law, give law enforcement the responsibility to discern situational free speech. If a protester is lying 'and he knows it'- it is not protected free speech.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

Pro-Life — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗

2026 Idaho Lieutenant Governor — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 5 statements

Eric Myricks

1 statement

Democratic · Lieutenant Governor · ID

Policing & criminal justice context

Community safety is about trust, not talking points. I stand with law enforcement, firefighters, and first responders, ensuring they have the training, mental health support, and community partnerships to protect and serve effectively. Idaho doesn’t need partisan fear tactics; we need real partnersh…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public safety and justice

Candidate campaign source

Community safety is about trust, not talking points. I stand with law enforcement, firefighters, and first responders, ensuring they have the training, mental health support, and community partnerships to protect and serve effectively. Idaho doesn’t need partisan fear tactics; we need real partnerships that make every neighborhood safer.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Eric Myricks — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

Scott Bedke

4 statements

Republican · Lieutenant Governor · ID

Policing & criminal justice context

In our growing state, Lt. Governor Bedke supports local and state law enforcement in their courageous efforts to keep Idaho safe. Idaho backs the blue. When first responders play a more active role in their communities, the rate of crime goes down. Lt. Governor Bedke is in favor of competitively pay…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Promoting Public Safety

Candidate campaign source

In our growing state, Lt. Governor Bedke supports local and state law enforcement in their courageous efforts to keep Idaho safe. Idaho backs the blue. When first responders play a more active role in their communities, the rate of crime goes down. Lt. Governor Bedke is in favor of competitively paying our law enforcement officials and providing more training opportunities for critical situations, so they can continue to protect every Idahoan.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Scott Bedke campaign source 13 ↗
View 3 more statements from Scott Bedke
Policing & criminal justice context

For my efforts supporting law enforcement, I was proud to be named “Legislator of the Year” by the Fraternal Order of Police. As Lieutenant Governor, I will continue fighting to stop liberal efforts to defund the police, work to secure America’s borders, and keep Idaho families safe.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: STANDING WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT

Candidate campaign source

For my efforts supporting law enforcement, I was proud to be named “Legislator of the Year” by the Fraternal Order of Police. As Lieutenant Governor, I will continue fighting to stop liberal efforts to defund the police, work to secure America’s borders, and keep Idaho families safe.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Scott Bedke — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
Policing & criminal justice context

For my efforts supporting law enforcement, I was proud to be named “Legislator of the Year” by the Fraternal Order of Police. As your Lieutenant Governor, I continue fighting to stop liberal efforts to defund the police, to secure America’s borders, and to keep Idaho families safe.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public safety and justice

Candidate campaign source

For my efforts supporting law enforcement, I was proud to be named “Legislator of the Year” by the Fraternal Order of Police. As your Lieutenant Governor, I continue fighting to stop liberal efforts to defund the police, to secure America’s borders, and to keep Idaho families safe.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Scott Bedke — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Policing & criminal justice context

Support Law Enforcement and Border Security

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Issues

Candidate campaign source

Support Law Enforcement and Border Security

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026

Scott Bedke — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific crime, victimization, policing and criminal justice terms in retained, attributed source text from published Idaho candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Idaho incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Idaho legislators and Idaho’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Idaho’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

2 matching sponsorships or proposals · 2 Idaho incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Russ Fulcher

U.S. House of Representatives, Idaho District 1 · R–ID

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Russ Fulcher
U.S. Congress · Idaho delegation · HR 613

ATF Transparency Act

Jan 22, 2025 · In Congress

Rep. Russ Fulcher · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposed ATF Transparency Act would create administrative appeals for certain denied National Firearms Act transfer applications, provide reimbursement of reasonable and necessary attorney fees after successful appeals, and deem covered transfer or making applications approved if ATF does not decide before 90 calendar days after original filing. The reviewed amendments would apply to applications filed or pending on or after enactment. These are proposed transfer and registration procedures, not current rules or evidence of an effect on firearm deaths.

Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The firearm mortality series includes deaths across intents, including homicide and suicide. Transfer procedures and concealed-carry instruction concern firearm access or training; they do not establish an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Idaho evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Administrative relief for denial of firearm transfer application (a)In generalSection 5812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: (c)Administrative relief (1)In generalWith respect to any application described in subsection (a) for the transfer and registration of a firearm which is denied by the Secretary based on a determination that transferring the firearm to the transferee would violate subsection (d) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, or receipt of the firearm by the transferee would violate subsection (g) or (n) of that section or State, local, or tribal law, the Secretary shall— (A)provide the transferee with the relevant NICS transaction number with respect to such application, (B)permit such transferee to appeal such denial to the Secretary in a manner similar to the process for appeals provided under section 25.10 of title 28, Code of Federal Regulations, and (C)permit such transferee to provide information to the Secretary to prevent any subsequent erroneous denial or extended delay by NICS pursuant to a program (as established by the Secretary) similar to the Voluntary Appeal File program described in section 25.10(g) of title 28, Code of Federal Regulations. (2)Attorney feesIn the case of any successful appeal by the transferee pursuant to the process described in paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary shall reimburse the transferee for any reasonable and necessary attorney fees incurred with respect to such appeal. (3)NICSFor purposes of this subsection, the term NICS means the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (34 U.S.C. 40901).. (b)Effective dateThe amendment made by this section shall apply to applications for the transfer and registration of a firearm which are filed or pending on or after the date of enactment of this Act. 3.Timely processing of applications (a)Transfer of firearmsSection 5812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by section 2, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: (d)Processing of applicationsNotwithstanding subsection (a), if an application described in such subsection with respect to the transfer and registration of a firearm has been filed with the Secretary and the Secretary fails to make a determination regarding whether to approve or deny such application prior to the date which is 90 calendar days after the date on which such application was originally filed by the transferor, the transfer and registration of such firearm to the transferee shall be deemed to have been approved by the Secretary for purposes of this section and such transfer may be made. The Secretary shall only deny an application described in subsection (a) on the grounds that the applicable requirements under such subsection have not been satisfied, and may not deny an application solely on the grounds that a determination regarding whether to approve or deny such application could not be completed by the Secretary during the period described in the preceding sentence.. (b)Making of firearmsSection 5822 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following: Notwithstanding the preceding sentences, if a person files an application to make and register a firearm with the Secretary and the Secretary fails to make a determination regarding whether to approve or deny such application prior to the date which is 90 calendar days after the date on which such application was originally filed by such person, such application shall be deemed to have been approved by the Secretary for purposes of this section and such firearm may be made by such person. The Secretary shall only deny an application to make and register a firearm on the grounds that the applicable requirements under this section have not been satisfied, and may not deny an application solely on the grounds that a determination regarding whether to approve or deny such application could not be completed by the Secretary during the period described in the preceding sentence.. (c)Effective dateThe amendments made by this section shall apply to applications which are filed or pending on or after the date of enactment of this Act.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Sen. Mike Crapo

U.S. Senate, Idaho · R–ID

1 proposal
View proposals from Sen. Mike Crapo
U.S. Congress · Idaho delegation · S 364

Hearing Protection Act

Feb 3, 2025 · In Congress

Sen. Mike Crapo · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The proposed Hearing Protection Act would remove silencers from the National Firearms Act definition, change registration and record requirements, preempt specified state silencer taxes and registration requirements, and impose a separate 10% manufacturers’ excise tax. State preemption applies to covered silencers in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce and excepts generally applicable sales or use taxes. The proposal directs destruction of the specified federal silencer registration and identifying application records within 365 days. Its NFA-definition change and excise-tax provisions use calendar quarters beginning more than 90 days after enactment; the excise tax applies to articles sold by manufacturers, producers or importers. Other title 18 provisions remain material. The bill is a proposal about silencer regulation and access, not evidence of enactment or a measured mortality effect.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The firearm mortality series includes deaths across intents, including homicide and suicide. Transfer procedures and concealed-carry instruction concern firearm access or training; they do not establish an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Idaho evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Equal treatment of silencers and firearms (a)In generalSection 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking (7) any silencer and all that follows through ; and (8) and inserting and (7). (b)Effective dateThe amendment made by this section shall apply to calendar quarters beginning more than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act. 3.Treatment of certain silencersSection 5841 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following: (f)Firearm silencersA person acquiring or possessing a firearm silencer in accordance with chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, shall be treated as meeting any registration and licensing requirements of the National Firearms Act with respect to such silencer.. 4.Preemption of certain State laws in relation to firearm silencersSection 927 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, a law of a State or a political subdivision of a State that imposes a tax, other than a generally applicable sales or use tax, on making, transferring, using, possessing, or transporting a firearm silencer in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or imposes a marking, recordkeeping, or registration requirement with respect to such a firearm silencer, shall have no force or effect.. 5.Destruction of recordsNot later than 365 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall destroy any registration of a silencer maintained in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record pursuant to section 5841 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, any application to transfer filed under section 5812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that identifies the transferee of a silencer, and any application to make filed under section 5822 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that identifies the maker of a silencer. 6.Amendments to title 18, United States CodeChapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended— (1)in section 921(a), by striking paragraph (25) and inserting the following: (25)The terms firearm silencer and firearm muffler mean— (A)any device designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended— (i)to silence, muffle, or diminish the auditory report of a portable firearm; and (ii)to be attached to a portable firearm, directly or through a mount, adaptor, or other device that is not a firearm silencer or firearm muffler; or (B)the outer tube or other single part of any device that— (i)provides the primary housing or is the primary structure for internal sound-reduction components designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to silence, muffle, or diminish the auditory report of a portable firearm; and (ii)attaches to a portable firearm, directly or through a mount, adaptor, or other device that is not a firearm silencer or firearm muffler.; (2)in section 922(b)— (A)in paragraph (1), by striking shotgun or rifle the first place it appears and inserting shotgun, rifle, firearm silencer, or firearm muffler; and (B)in paragraph (3), by striking rifle or shotgun and inserting shotgun, rifle, firearm silencer, or firearm muffler; and (3)in section 923(i)— (A)by striking Licensed and inserting the following: (1) In the case of a firearm other than a firearm silencer or firearm muffler, licensed; and (B)by adding at the end the following: (2)In the case of a firearm silencer or firearm muffler, licensed importers and licensed manufacturers shall identify by means of a serial number engraved or cast on the outer tube or other single part that provides the primary housing or primary structure of the firearm silencer or firearm muffler, in such manner as the Attorney General shall by regulations prescribe, each firearm silencer or firearm muffler imported or manufactured by such importer or manufacturer, except that, if marking the outer tube or other single part that provides the primary housing or primary structure is impractical, licensed importers or licensed manufacturers shall submit a request for a marking variance to the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall grant such a request except on showing good cause that marking the firearm silencer or firearm muffler as requested would not further the purposes of this chapter.. 7.Imposition of tax on firearm silencers or firearm mufflers (a)In generalSection 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end of the list relating to Articles taxable at 10 percent the following: Firearm silencers or firearm mufflers. (b)Firearm silencers; firearm mufflersSection 4181 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following: For purposes of this part, the terms firearm silencer and firearm muffler mean any device for silencing, muffling, or diminishing the report of a portable firearm.. (c)Conforming amendments (1)Section 4181 of such Code is amended by striking other than pistols and revolvers and inserting other than articles taxable at 10 percent under this section. (2)Section 4182(b) of such Code is amended by striking firearms, pistols, revolvers, shells, and cartridges and inserting articles described in section 4181 and. (3)Section 4182(c)(1) of such Code is amended by striking or firearm and inserting firearm, firearm silencer, or firearm muffler,. (d)Effective dateThe amendments made by this section shall apply to articles sold by the manufacturer, producer, or importer in any calendar quarter beginning more than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Idaho officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Idaho statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.