Rich B
Regular Member
Greetings from CT.
I seem to recall a case/ruling/opinion/etc and I believe it was from Georgia that said essentially:
It is RAS to detain and ID someone if they are carrying concealed (because criminals conceal, perhaps)?
It is not RAS to detain and ID someone if they are carrying fully exposed (in a holster of course).
Does anyone remember where this might have come from? I swear I used to have a link/citation but for the life of me I cannot find it.
I seem to recall a case/ruling/opinion/etc and I believe it was from Georgia that said essentially:
It is RAS to detain and ID someone if they are carrying concealed (because criminals conceal, perhaps)?
It is not RAS to detain and ID someone if they are carrying fully exposed (in a holster of course).
Does anyone remember where this might have come from? I swear I used to have a link/citation but for the life of me I cannot find it.