From LSM news report last night some things might explain what went on here.
- Claimed that he didn't have a LTC/FID.
- Claimed that he had a prior criminal record (that might make him a PP or if he was on probation, his "rights" to an "inspection" without a warrant no longer exist).
So, if he is unlicensed and is a PP, possession is illegal, GFSZ might indeed apply if this were the case, uncertain of that one.
- Claimed that he didn't have a LTC/FID.
- Claimed that he had a prior criminal record (that might make him a PP or if he was on probation, his "rights" to an "inspection" without a warrant no longer exist).
So, if he is unlicensed and is a PP, possession is illegal, GFSZ might indeed apply if this were the case, uncertain of that one.