jddssc121 wrote:Hmmmmm.SNIP This does not, however, preclude personnel from reasonably detaining and identifying individuals in order to determine their legal basis for possession of a firearm(s).”
I thought you fellas had pre-emption. If an ordinance is pre-empted, then the above-quoted sentence isout of bounds according to my understanding.
No RAS = no basis for a detention, I should think.
Its the age-old question of first needing reasonable suspicion that the carrier is a prohibited possessor, as opposed to detaining someonefor fishing expedition tocheck if there are any violations occurring.