http://www.guncite.com/court/state/70p609.html
[Cite as In re Brickey, 8 Idaho 597, 70 P. 609, 101 Am. St. Rep. 215, 1 Ann. Cas. 55 (1902).]
In re BRICKEY.
(Supreme Court of Idaho. Nov. 15, 1902.)
BEARING ARMS--CONSTITUTIONAL LAW--CARRYING CONCEALED WEAPONS.
1. The act of the territorial legislature approved February 4, 1889, which prohibits private persons from carrying deadly weapons within the limits or confines of any city, town, or village in Idaho, contravenes the provisions of the second amendment to the federal constitution and the provisions of section 11, art. 1, of the constitution of Idaho, and is void.
2. While it is undoubtedly within the power of the legislature to prohibit the carrying of concealed deadly weapons, and such regulation is a proper exercise of police power, yet the legislature does not possess the power to prohibit the carrying of firearms, as the right to do so is guarantied to the citizen both by our federal and state constitutions.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
I was specifically just trying to see which parts of the Preemption law you disagreed with. While I agree that the state has extremely limited authority to claim anything, I was just looking for very specific parts of it that you would cite.
You did not quote the parts of the law you disagreed with, unless you believe the whole thing is invalid.