sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
Thanks Nick, now bookmarked.
I'm not sure I see hinted support in the quoted opinion just above.
I take the quote to mean the appellant was making a bare assertion, unsupported by law existing prior to the statute.
Help me out here. What am I missing?
I have spoken with the former Justice and if the question would of been posed and supported in this case then a ruling as to age of possession, carry, car carry would of been addressed. Unfortunately Justice Sanders lost his election last year.
I disagree, age is a factor in the crime that they have RAS for, i.e. underage carrying of a firearm. A 16 year old that is OC is committing a crime, if you are 18 1/2 years old (but look 16) and you are OC then (IMHO) they have RAS for a stop to determine your age and if over 18 that's it, free to go. Now the fun begins if you are carrying sterile (no ID on you, which is not required by law) then they could conceivably detain you until they confirm your age. This would be the same as a LEO seeing a person drinking, who while they are over the age of 21, looks under 21; detain to determine age because underage drinking is a crime.
I suggest you read what i posted before you reply
Age alone is not enough. the RAS requirements require at least 2 marks off that list with one that has to come from the second column.
Thats the law, An RAS stop has to be justifiable when the report is filed. if the LEO in this hypothetical situation pushes the issue without proper RAS requirements being met he opens himself and his department to litigation and possible criminal charges.