Is there a reason you guys aren't following his lead?

Walking into a walmart with body armor and a rifle at low ready while streaming is not "taking precautions" and you fucking know it.

>what the fuck is going on?
The left also has accelerationists.

prosecutor must be a lib.

Attached: 911 lib fault.jpg (390x434, 58K)

>I already open carried into my local Walmart just yesterday
faggot, and this guy is a faggot too. You're worse than the fucking fudds

I'm honestly surprised they haven't taken away our cc rights on domestic flights yet.

To be fair, there's likely a great deal of political pressure to prosecute a dumbass that open carries a rifle into a Walmart 24 hours after a major shooting, regardless of whether or not the case will feasibly end in a conviction.

>It'd be like screaming "Allahu Ackbar" on a plane a few days after 9/11.
It's not and you know it. It's more like putting armed marshals on planes after 9/11. Oh wait, that happened.

you're a tactless retard if you can't fathom why what this other tactless retard did only hurts the very cause you're trying to be a martyr for.
normies weren't even thinking about plate carriers, even after ohio, until this retard brought it into the spotlight.

Attached: 1556519177020.png (1130x900, 181K)

you can charge anyone for anything. though they may pull out some tricks to prosecute him as well. it'll be interesting either way

>skinny teenager larping in full battle rattle in a fucking store
>legally-designated law enforcement on an airplane
The dude's not an air marshal.

stop associating criminal violence with law abiding citizens

Attached: mad world.jpg (500x572, 102K)

>It's more like putting armed marshals on planes after 9/11.
This guy wasn't dressed as a cop, so that comparison doesn't even work. Walking into a mall equipped like the North Hollywood shooters is closer to inciting hysteria than it is federal precaution.

He wasn't streaming, you retard. Your getting your facts and fiction mixed up

Attached: 1563248387217.jpg (800x685, 84K)

Unfortunately, that association is already set in the American consciousness thanks to the various mass shooters over the past few decades. Societal norms and expectations are not necessarily law, but unless you're actually autistic, there's zero reason to expect a different outcome than what happened.

>"Hey did you hear about that guy who shot up a place while meeting no armed resistance? Yeah we better not carry today."

Jesus this board's changed. Do you even hear yourselves?

Carrying is a great idea. Publicly calling attention to the fact that you're armed in such a scenario is fucking retarded. It is legal, though.

>the only alternative to not carrying at all is open carrying an AR and full body armor in the middle of a crowded walmart days after a multiple mass shootings
why is it that autists are only capable of thinking in these absurd extremes?

How did he call attention? Dude was literally just minding his own business.

Yeah when I get arrested and kept in jail for a week who's gonna conver the lost money from my lost time at work.
>just sue them
yeah but that cash wont get to me untill after the trial. If it gets to me and they don't just sweep it under the rug.

I'd rather die than be at walmart in the middle of the day anyways.

We MUST break that consciousness with brute force!

Attached: break the insanity.jpg (1242x702, 237K)

Do you hear yourself?
>A couple of shootings happened
>Better fucking kit up and go to wally world
>Better be VERY obvious and obnoxious about it all

Welcome to life where perception is reality and now everyone is going to perceive open carry fags with rifles as a threat and people like him only compound the issue. If you go out of your way to be a faggot when tensions are high regarding the second amendment, then you're an asshole.
If your EDC is an ar15 with platecarrier, then be my guest. Go get your groceries.
But then no one will be surprised because it's just autistic faggot getting his groceries with his guns as usual.

Attached: 1517194927073.jpg (438x437, 20K)

I really hope you're just pushing the point for the sake of the argument, but if you really can't see why he incited the response he did, I invite you to try it out for yourself. Him going to jail was probably the least bad way it could've ended once someone called the police.

His entire motivation was attention so he could pull the "I AM ALLOWED TO DO THIS OCCIFER" card. It's just as bad as "AM I BEING DETAINED?!" faggots.
They do it for all the wrong reasons

>Yeah we better not carry today
don't ever oc you retard

I mean, I agree with the principals he's fighting for, but Jesus, read the room before you do dumb shit like that.

Yes I think everyone here agrees with the principles of it all, but it's an absurdly flawed execution that backfires in every conceivable way.
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions

But he didn't commit a crime?

>walking into Walmart with a gun and armor the day after a highly-publicized shooting
Any half-competent lawyer could argue that he was taking reasonable precautions in case there was another incident, so he would be able to defend himself.

anyone got links to a legal defense fund for him? I am willing to throw down.

I'm laying low until open conflict begins.

I suspect you'll be laying low for quite some time, then.

Attached: 1530719998631.gif (554x400, 46K)

No, but the firefighter did.
He brandished a firearm, threatened a person with lethal force, illegally detained a person, and made a false police report.

Private property.

Next.

>look like a criminal
>cry about being profiled
No matter how much you think otherwise, it is not normal behavior to open-carry anywhere unless you're a cop, especially into a similar environment to where a mass shooting just happened a few days ago.
The person acting irrationally and unreasonably was the dude trying to test his 2nd amendment rights, not the people looking at something completely out of the ordinary in the wake of a type of attack known to have copy-cats in the immediate days afterwards.

law.justia.com/codes/missouri/2013/title-xxxviii/chapter-565/section-565.090/

He literally did though. At the very least, it's harassment. He purposefully attempted to cause a panic

prove intent

So I'm from the area. This tard purposefully picked a very low crime area where police don't tend to patrol often so that he wouldn't run into an officer.
The dumbass rolled up, got out of his car, popped the trunk, pulled out and put on his vest, slung his weapon, and then headed for the store. Tell me any one of you motherfuckers wouldn't be getting out of the area if you saw that

Was there a stated policy that prohibited open carry on the property? Within the building?
Signs posted?
An employee stating it wasn't permitted?

I could walk around the spic infested neighborhood, but it's hot outside.

Walking onto private property with a loaded firearm when management explicitly states "remove firearm imagery" after a recent mass shooting.

Here's a start

Attached: IMG958233.jpg (1152x2048, 132K)

Did I have the right to kick my guest out of my house after we had a fight even though I greeted him warmly and invited him in?

Doesn't prove intent to cause panic of any sort.

Yes?

t. fed

>so explain why you didn't leave the area when the copycat gunman walked in?
>well it's not specifically against policy and I'd already taken my break today
Maybe value your own life more than what your manager tells you to do?

>(6) Without good cause engages in any other act with the purpose to frighten, intimidate, or cause emotional distress to another person, cause such person to be frightened, intimidated, or emotionally distressed, and such person's response to the act is one of a person of average sensibilities considering the age of such person.
Prove he had good cause to walk into a Walmart with a rifle in the days immediately following a mass shooting in a Walmart by someone using a similar weapon, especially considering that mass shootings are known to generate copy-cat crimes.

Walmart is basically a public playground for fat waddling white trash and niggers you fucking nigger nutcase fuck. Hide your keyboard in a filled bathtub and throw in a toaster with it.

uhhh, yes... and that's not equivalent or relevant

AHAHAHAHAHA Shit like this doesn't happen in China.

>act with the purpose
This can't be proven in court.

He was literally leaving when he got detained. IF (And it's a huge IF, the biggest IF of them all) a manager or even regular employee asked him to leave and IF he refused to leave after being asked to do so, then it's trespassing. If they never asked him to leave, or if he moved to leave after being asked, then it is not trespassing.

If he hadn't asked to buy things that "he can kill people with" (very loose quote) the cops probably would have just told him to fuck off. He's going to let something slip that confirms he was aware, by virtue of current events, of what effect his actions were designed to have, and they'll get him by virtue of the same laws that make it illegal to call in a bomb threat, regardless of whether you actually planted a bomb. Dude did something really fucking dumb that gives the left further ammunition against gun owners (as if they needed it) and further cements the stereotype of the retard extremist gun owner in the media. Despite all of this, you retards are defending him.

I really don't get it. It's almost like you're all fucking retarded ideologues, completely incapable of seeing nuance in any situation.

lmao he done fucked up

ITT: Retards discover the law is not black and white, and that context matters a whole fucking lot

You sound like the sovereign citizen.morons who think quoting obscure laws will somehow stop them from being arrested. The world doesn't work that way.

>Prove he had good cause to walk into a Walmart with a rifle in the days immediately following a mass shooting in a Walmart by someone using a similar weapon
Self-defense. If shopping centers and places where the public gather are being targeted without protection, he could, in theory, argue that he took it upon himself to insure his own safety.

>you're all fucking retarded ideologues, completely incapable of seeing nuance in any situation.
most of Jow Forums doesn't own guns
most of Jow Forums only know SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED from the 2nd amendment
most of Jow Forums can't understand normal people and their views on things

they're out of touch with reality in a lot of cases

he's not going to argue shit. like another user just said, he's going to blab on accident and say something they can use against him because he's definitely going to be too stupid to just shut his fucking mouth

you sound like a cop, who thinks there's only one world view, and it belongs to people wearing badges

what would have happened if he just walked off when fireboi drew down on him?
if he literally just turned around and walked off slowly, keeping his hands at his out to his sides or something and just going into the woods or something?

Can you prove any of that conjecture will occur?

It absolutely can . Even without it, since he did not explicitly state he meant no harm, it's up for interpretation by a judge or a jury. Not looking super great for him in that regard, all things considered. inb4 you think a jury or judge would follow the precise letter of the law without consideration, we literally live in a common law system where the whole point is to not treat things to the exact letter of the law.

>self-defense
This is the first normal IQ post in this entire thread defending this guy. His only legit defense in court would be
>i was scared and wanted to feel safe

Fucking this. One of the biggest threats to guns right now is the retards giving gun grabbers even more of an excuse for doing it.

If what he did was legal, then what’s the issue in this case. Has he made any statements that can be considered illegal? He hasn’t done anything illegal, he hasn’t said anything illegal. So what, we’re just going to let the government put words into our mouths and turn us into felons when it’s convenient for them is that it?

In terms of the law, since we have a common law system, the perspective actually does belong to the judges, cops, and the jury before it belongs to the defendant.

From what I can see in the two posts, he never stated or even alluded to an act of violence, the threat of violence, or even terrorizing the public. All he did in those posts was state his disgust at a store's policies, something people commonly do on social media today in far worse terms everyday.

>Better be VERY obvious and obnoxious about it all
this is Jow Forums
we strap horse dildos to russian surplus guns, dress up as cartoon girls and go in the woods to rape deer.

NOTHING is too obnoxious for us.

1. The accused doesn't have to prove he had cause to do anything. The state has to prove he didn't. Moreover, making a political statement by exercising one's constitutional right to do something is almost certainly good cause.
2. The standard for harassment is not based simply on whether another person feels harassed. There's a reasonableness standard, and doing something that you're ordinarily legally allowed to do in a place where you're ordinarily allowed to do it is not harassment even if some people are bothered by it.
3. Even if he didn't have good cause, the state has to establish mens rea.

I probably would have run him down if I was driving. I know he didn't break a law but I would run him down with what little time I had to think. The open carry guys don't usually do armor, low ready etc.
Real story time. One day I was outside of my daughters pre school I had just dropped her off for the day. As I was pulling away I saw some kid way too old for the school get out of a van wearing a desert tan vest with molle on it right next to the school. He had some kind of rifle in his hands. In a split second I thought about my daughter dying. I drove straight for the fucker and pulled my pistol from under my seat. I screamed get the fuck down or die at the kid. He dropped like a sack of potatoes. It was then that I noticed the gun was airsoft and the vest was without plates etc. I kept my pistol low ready and asked him what the fuck he thought he was doing. Him and his friend where going to make a le epic video or some shit posing in front of the school signs for a dare. The cops were there almost immediately and I was relieved of my firearm. They took my pistol cleared it and talked to me. The kids were in handcuffs. Thank god there were witnesses on my behalf. They gave me back my weapon and a business card if I got a ticket or whatever. The point is go be a faggot somewhere else.

>The open carry guys don't usually do armor, low ready etc
Where have you been the last 5 years?

Why do people still use social media

The same reason you're on Jow Forums.
People naturally want to connect with other people.

Around here they don't. There is a regular group of them that go around. Honestly I have no problem with them.

>Around here they don't.
>There is a regular group of them that go around.
Are you drunk?

Holy shit you’re one paranoid faggot

wow you're so brave anonymous internet poster

Do you have a pre-K daughter?

Yeah I would draw on him for sure. Line I said earlier, there are a lot of similarities in this case to calling in a fake bomb threat, although this has an element of a much more direct threat. In both cases, you have an act which is explicitly designed to cause public panic. Following through on it would add much more serious charges, but the fact is that you intended to cause people to fear for their lives and property in a public space. In the context of this specific action, the follow through is irrelevant. The fact that he's recording himself is evidence at a mindset which is aware of the spectacle it would cause, so a simple "feared for my life" defense will likely not fly. Competent prosecutor will assemble much of this kind of data to establish cognizance and intent.

They're gonna throw the book at him, and for good reason.

Walking around in the general public with body armor and a long rifle is testing out nothing but how retarded you can be. There's no practicality in it. It wasn't made for going on a walk in the park or food shopping. Wearing it in public is the same thing as seeing a guy wearing a skateboard helmet while walking inside a shopping mall. With that said I've worn body armor in public while doing volunteer security. I was thanked by people, and cheered on by some. This guy just sucked at what he was trying to do. He's disorderly in his conduct, and that's all.

Local group of fudds and veterans open carry all the time. They get breakfast etc. and walk around town usually in shorts, t-shirts, really casual stuff like they are normal people who happen to be carrying guns. Then there's the new faggots who think life is a fucking video game and they always have some sort of camera.

>this guy fucks.

>If only I could teleport at will.

>making a political statement by exercising one's constitutional right to do something is almost certainly good cause
You're seriously implying that acting like you exist in a social vacuum is a good idea while trying to defend your individual rights in a democracy. You can't be this braindead.
>the state has to prove he didn't
That's absolutely right, but to do that doesn't actually require a direct admission of guilt from the person being accused of a crime. It often only takes circumstantial evidence for a judge or jury to believe the guilt of the accused beyond a doubt, and people have gone to jail for more serious offenses with more tenuous evidence in the past. Please, stop pretending like our justice system is some perfectly logical, perfectly rational machine.
>reasonableness standard
So you do understand that real life doesn't happen in a vacuum, like the law does. It's fine that you might think it was perfectly reasonable for a young white-male to arm himself with a rifle and body arm and then walk into a Walmart, directly mirroring a mass shooting that just happened days ago, but no reasonable person would agree with you.
>mens rea
Yea, because that's going to be impossible here.

Oh, here's the actual charges
documentcloud.org/documents/6251358-DMITRIY-N-ANDREYCHENKO.html
>a person commites the crime of making a terrorist threat int he second degree when he recklessly disregards the risk of causing the evacuation of any portion of a building and knowingly communicate an express or IMPLIED threat to cause an incident
Obviously, it's totally unreasonable to assume there was any implication in his action. No reasonable person would possibly assume a young man dressed in body armor and carrying a rifle walking into a public space, on the heals of a mass-shooting which is known to cause copy-cat crimes, could be up to no good.

>there are a lot of similarities in this case to calling in a fake bomb threat
This is probably the route the prosecution will take. There's definitely a chance it ends up in a conviction, depending on the jury.

You'd go to jail for improper use of deadly force unless you can prove you were going to die if you didn't draw your gun. The police can get away with the assumption. You can't.

what makes your daughter so special sheep dawg?

>Do something legal
>Get sent to jail anyways
Land of the Reeeeee!

You mean like how that firefighter held fucknuts at gunpoint until police came? Guarantee that regardless of how fucking retarded fucknuts is, he didn't actually point his rifle at anyone.

I don't have a daughter, at least none that I know of.