Armed Man Walks Into a Springfield, Missouri Walmart and…Begins Filming Himself

armed man springfield walmart

Courtesy ky3.com

A man reportedly pulled up to a Walmart Neighborhood Market store in Springfield, Missouri, this afternoon, put on what appears to be load bearing equipment, armed himself with what looks like an AR pistol and walked into the store.

According to ky3.com, he then . . .

…began pushing [a shopping cart] around the store. Police say the man was recording himself walking through the store via a cell phone.

The store manager at the Neighborhood Market pulled a fire alarm, urging people to escape the store.

Police say the man then made his way out an emergency exit where a firefighter held the man at gunpoint. At that moment Springfield Police arrived on scene and detained the man.

Was this some kind of a stunt? An abortive attempt at a copycat shooting?

Lieutenant Mike Lucas said it was clear the man’s intent was to cause chaos, saying in part, “His intent was not to cause peace or comfort…He’s lucky he’s alive still, to be honest.”

That was our thought exactly.

comments

  1. avatar Nanashi says:

    Missouri is open carry.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      Actually, if you have ccw you can open carry anywhere if you don’t have a ccw businesses with anti gun signage as well as several municipalities will get you a class b felony for open carrying. Not sure about Springfield though.

      1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

        Class B Misdemeanor

        1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

          If it is posted and you do not have a permit.
          Walmart does not post in Missouri.

        2. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

          I stand corrected, do you happen to know what the penalties for open carry in cities like Kansas City and Cape Girardeau, where they have ordinances against open carry, are?

    2. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

      Special kind of stupid, but not illegal;
      unless the firearms were displayed in a “rude and threatening manner” or threatened a felonious act.

      Plate carriers are a fashion statement;, saw one at Freddie’s Famous Hamburgers Tuesday night.
      It was embroidered with “38 Never Broke Again”.

      1. avatar MLee says:

        Can’t say legal for sure. While open carry may be legal, it probably isn’t if it is done in such a way as to cause fear or concern, which was probably his purpose. I’m not spending my vacation time researching their laws, but I’d bet money he’s arrested for disorderly or something or some other crime that fits the elements.

        1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

          Most likely a peace disturbance at most but since he geared up in the parking lot they may be able to go for what most people call “brandishing”

        2. avatar Bill Mills says:

          He’s been charged with making a terroristic threat, under Missouri Code 574.115-004Y201716.
          It’s very weak, IMO, but the arresting agency’s spokesperson is attempting to make their case in the public sphere, with nothing but eager help from the Media…

        3. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

          @ Bill MIlls, No offense is committed under this section by a person acting in good faith with the purpose to prevent harm.

          don’t agree with what he did but thats bullstuff, now he’s rosa parks

          in Missouri, it better not stand

        4. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

          @Bill Mills link, please

    3. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Let him explain it to a jury of his peers. If he can convince them he was innocently exercising his 2nd Amendment Rights, it’s all good. If not….. well, he made his bed.

      1. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

        He could just say after what happened in El Paso he felt the need to have body armor and a rifle to shop at Walmart thanks to their lax security.

        1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          That thought did occur to me as well. But the article is entirely lacking any actual details that could explain motive.

        2. avatar Cloudbuster says:

          That thought did occur to me as well. But the article is entirely lacking any actual details that could explain motive.

          Well, you don’t expect the media to make any attempt to give the guy a fair hearing, do you?

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        Not that I endorse this sort of antic but your Constitutional Rights are not meant to be awarded only by jury. How many juries have been perfectly willing to overlook violations of rights before?

        1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

          Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

        2. avatar MarkPA says:

          With Public Relations “experts” like this guy,
          we don’t need Bloomberg at all.

          Just because we COULD do something with a plausible claim to Constitutional Legality doesn’t mean that that thing is NECESSARILY advancing our cause.

          We can, Constitutionally, shoot ourselves in the foot. Doing so doesn’t make us look like sane citizens.

          His point could just as well have been made by dressing in dress-cloths and tie wearing a sidearm holstered. He didn’t HAVE to be counter-productive.

        3. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          You are absolutely right about this, Hannibal. Already our constitutional rights are under threat because people have begun to think that being offended, made afraid, or “triggered” is cause to abridge someone’s rights. Freedom and liberty are under direct assault as a result. Granted, the country’s currently gripped by a moral panic, but suspending constitutional freedoms because of that is something we should all be very concerned about.

      3. avatar John in Ohio says:

        If all he did was walk and shop, on what charge? There has to be a real charge before it gets to that point.

        1. avatar frank speak says:

          …….wait’l he gets his bill from his lawyer!…..

        2. avatar Bill Mills says:

          He’s been charged with making a terroristic threat, under Missouri Code 574.115-004Y201716.
          It’s very weak, IMO, but the arresting agency’s spokesperson is attempting to make their case in the public sphere, with nothing but eager help from the Media…

        3. avatar Arc says:

          Lawyer will probably get a payday from the taxpayers when the activist sues. If I saw someone walks through a walmart looking like one of uncle sam’s misguided children and they didn’t have their hands on their rifle and I did not hear any gunshots, I probably wouldn’t give a hoot about it. Hands on your weapon though and I’ll probably hands on mine as well.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          @Bill Mills: My reply was to Huntsman’s comment which was jumping steps in law. When I posted my reply, I was aware of the charge as it had already been posted on other sites. Mine was a comment of a more general nature.

          As to the charge… It’s thin unless he did some specific at beyond that which is legal. Reports I read today indicate that they are trying to question him to build a case. So far, it looks like a bit of a fishing expedition.

          However, I do appreciate you posting the charge as I did not indicate that I already knew what the charge was.

    4. avatar Chris says:

      And? There are obviously a number of people like yourself her, thankfully even a minority here, in bubble probably from living in deep red states.

      We lose the White House and then one on SCOTUS it s game over, reversal of Heller, and major changes in gun laws that will dwarf the 1990’s Clinton assault rifle ban, and the NRA will not be able to get grandfathering or sunset this time either, since Bloomerg has achieved the coveted litmus test for Democrats and there are NO blue dog or moderate on gun control Democrats.

      You can blurt “shall not be infringed” all you want. You can listen to some GOA, etc Youtube channel and ignore the fact that you are in a marginal echo chamber. You can decide that you and your buddies at the range have a common point of view within your bubble>, but you don’t sit on the courts, nor do you decide how an election in another state’s assembly purple district, or state’s US House purple district is going to go in the next election.

      This guy is NOT “normalizing” open carry, he is engaging in a deeply selfish, narcissistic provocation that is all net negatives in the real world. His act has national coverage and likely pushed tens or hundreds of thousands of people in the middle away from our side — and it matters.

      Want to effect perception gun laws — man up and take a fence sitter to the range. Phone bank a GOP candidate in a purple district or organize a half dozen residents of purple districts to go see their legislators.

      1. avatar Ed earl says:

        Amen!

      2. avatar Miner49er says:

        “This guy is NOT “normalizing” open carry, he is engaging in a deeply selfish, narcissistic provocation that is all net negatives in the real world. His act has national coverage and likely pushed tens or hundreds of thousands of people in the middle away from our side — and it matters.”

        Exactly on point, it’s this sort of behavior that will cost us our rights. All for the ego gratification of some gun nut who has been looking at himself with his load bearing equipment in the mirror for years, fantasizing about shooting people.

      3. avatar Mercury says:

        You mean the Clinton “assault weapons” ban. Assault rifles (intermediate caliber select fire rifles) were banned in the US with exceptions in 1934, and said exceptions were eliminated in 1986. Anyone referring to banning assault rifles when they mean semiautomatic rifles (with scary black stocks) is either ignorant or a well-paid liar (i.e. the media and their pet politicians.)

        1. avatar Eclipse says:

          Mercury – Don’t you get it? They are openly talking about banning all semi-automatic long guns. This isn’t the assault weapon ban bills we have seen in the past where you can buy a semi-automatic if it doesn’t include xyz. This time they are going to be doing what Australia and New Zealand did and that is pretty much ban all semi-automatics with no grand fathering in.

        2. avatar Derringer Dave says:

          Mercury, you’re absolutely right when you say, “Anyone referring to banning assault rifles when they mean semiautomatic rifles (with scary black stocks) is either ignorant or a well-paid liar (i.e. the media and their pet politicians.)”

          Unfortunately, the news media has recently (just in the past couple months) switched from calling the AR-15 an “assault-style rifle” or “military-style rifle” to simply calling it an “assault rifle”, even if it’s really a pistol. At first, I just thought it was ignorance on the part of the news media, but now I think it’s deliberate, because the news media is using the same language and the same tactics as the “Violence Policy Center” that invented the misleading term “assault weapon.”

          I watch NBC News daily, so I noticed the switch happening right after the El Paso shooting. In the Ohio shooting where the man used an AR-15 pistol, NBC News called it “an AR-15 assault rifle which had been modified to make it more deadly.” When I heard that, I knew they were lying, because there is no way you can modify an AR-15 to “make it more deadly” unless you add a bump stock or a giggle switch, and the Ohio shooting had neither of those. Then I found out that the murderer had used an AR-15 pistol, not a rifle, and I thought, “Oh, so the news media thinks an AR-15 in pistol configuration is somehow ‘more deadly’ than an AR-15 in rifle configuration, even though in reality the shorter barrel makes it less powerful!”

        3. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          It’s the same old bullshit… Say it loud enough and long enough, pretty soon it’s truth… Russia, Russia, Russia we knew it was bullshit but after over two years of hearing it a lot of people started to see it as truth until it wasn’t, now it’s racist, racist, racist and not just Trump but anyone who supports him and the same thing is going on with the AR/AK/Mini-14 and whatever.. It was not so bad when it was the occaisional politician or supposed journalist who would get up on their box but now they have locked arms and the 20 something dumbasses running for the Dem nomination are all echoing the exact same lines and they are given unlimited airtime by the like minded networks that will repeat this crap over and over… Trumps a racist, Nazi, homophobic, mysoginistic, crass, bully, fast food junkie and anyone who supports him is, by association the same… Ban/confiscate/buy back assault weapons (how do you buy BACK something you never owned in the first place), we’re headed for a recession anything they can think of to try to make themselves look like the compassionate party here to save the country from this EVIL POTUS and the scourge of these military assault rifles in the hands of a bunch of murderous white boys hell bent on ridding the US of anyone that does not look like them… The Left has nothing to offer so they will try the old divide and conquer method.. They will continue (even when truth is shoved in their face) to spread their lies every chance they get as loudly as they can shout it… Remember, “We choose TRUTH over FACTS and POOR kids are just as smart as WHITE kids” Thanks creepy Uncle Joe…

      4. avatar arc says:

        The courts opinion only matters if people still think its worth listening to. Shall not be infringed is just that, shall not be infringed. The only thing the state gets to control is their own view on gun owners, if they will turn good people into criminals.

    5. avatar kevin says:

      “Missouri is open carry.”
      Yeah, but just cuz you can. . .
      Now is not the time for political open carry stunts. (I’m not sure there was ever a time.)

    6. avatar Hank says:

      Open carry of a pistol is a good and effective tactic. Open carry of a long gun especially right after a mass shooting is just plain stupid.

    7. avatar Fred E. Claudius says:

      He is a moron to attempt such a thing at this time, dumb ass shouldn’t be allowed to do that anywhere. Talk about setting panic in to innocent people without a good reason.

  2. avatar Fit2Btyed says:

    What an asinine thing to do in light of current events.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      Shall not be infringed.

      The second someone gets shot for… well… doing nothing but carrying, a new kind of shit storm begins.

      I don’t disagree… but I also think a point in regards to open carry needs to be made. All other attempts are failed/have failed and the only way we are going to make progress is to gather in larger numbers than those pink hat wearing anti trump protestors and start open carrying to the white house, and everywhere else. Tell me you have a better solution. Because clearly, sitting back and doing nothing hoping the courts won’t fuck us is about the dumbest solution anyone can attempt when government gets out of control like ours has.

      My support for open carry and “shall not be infringed” trample the bleeding hearts that mourn for their lost ones and the gun grabbers who see any firearm as a threat because of a crazy being made into a legend by the media. The more people doing shit like this, the more people get used to it, and the more people stop trying to pick off innocents out of fear there will be someone with firepower to match them at their target locations.

      1. avatar Dev says:

        Open carry is one thing. Walking into a Walmart looking like a wannabe SWAT officer less than two weeks after three terrorists attacks isn’t “open carry”.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          how is it not? He was wearing cargo pants and a shirt. He had a vest, sure… but how it that “looking like swat?”

          Why are people so offended by a vest? It’s is purely defensive. If people wore them while NOT carrying, would it still be an issue? Because it shouldn’t be, so why is it when they carry? It doesn’t matter that he was carrying a rifle. Open carry is open carry. If it had been a shotgun would you feel safer? How about a pink .22? Hell, what about a woman simply open carrying a rifle this way? Or a black man?

          You are so caught up in the looks, when you should be focused on the real issues: It was legal, and it should be. He was peaceful and anyone who would have harmed him for simply carrying would be in a shitload of trouble. Timing of the event? I’d say no time is better than any. If not now, then when?

        2. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Actually he didn’t look anything like a SWAT officer. I didn’t see anything that indicated affiliation with a law enforcement agency. It didn’t even look professional. He looked like some wack job who threw a bunch tactical gear on, strapped on modern sport rifle and strolled through Walmarts for whatever nefarious reason be it homicide or just to create a disturbance. Let him explain it to the jury. If he can get them to buy off on it I’m good. But good luck with that.

        3. avatar Chris says:

          I agree it is bad optics.
          But I don’t agree those attacks were “terrorist.” Those were killings by people who are severely mentally ill.

        4. avatar Miner49er says:

          “My support for open carry and “shall not be infringed” trample the bleeding hearts that mourn for their lost ones”

          There it is, complete lack of empathy.
          When one speaks openly of being willing to trample the hearts of people who mourn for their loved ones it’s clear your position is morally unjustifiable.

          Go ahead, celebrate the mass shootings by marching with your weapons and LBE as you chant “from my cold dead fingers”.

        5. avatar arc says:

          Miner, the right needs to stop playing fair and get with the program, there are no rules anymore. All it fair in love and war, guess what politics are? war by different means, they are one in the same. The dead are not limited to non-gun owners, and democrat voters, the dead likely cover a wide spectrum and its insulting that gun control is put forth after every incident.

          The event looks bad but its one of the best times to push the return to normalization of guns in public. My right to keep and bear arms does not depend on the actions of someone else, other wise we should suspend all rights every time anything bad happens. Its not unlawful to open carry, both the people and especially the cops need to figure that out.

          Pissed pants and hurt feelings do not supersede natural and God given rights.

          On a side note, deaths in “mass shootings” are statistically irrelevant in the face of just about every other cause of death. Death by trigger happy cop is much more likely than dead by mass shooting or even terror incident. Yes yes, it was a fire fighter that decided to draw on another citizen this time, however, next time bystanders might have the misfortune of a cop drawing in a mag dump frenzy.

        6. avatar B.D. says:

          Just ignore Miner49er. He is a far left gun grabber troll. No amount of sense can be talked to him and he will irrationally pick context from each statement to benefit his agenda instead of utilizing the entire context as a whole truth.

        7. avatar Fred E. Claudius says:

          BD 1 word sums it up, common sense! Ever heard of it, seems the 20 year old dumb ass hasn’t

        8. avatar Eclipse says:

          Chris – Please! The man in El Paso is not mentally ill, the guy in El Paso is a white supremacist, this was a hate crime/domestic terrorism.

      2. avatar david in az says:

        they tried that in san diego ca and the result is ca no longer has open carry! up until they flaunted open carry in the publics face they could not get rid of open carry even in ca. be careful flaunting your rights in the face of the publi, instead try exercising your rights in an adult responsible manner and earn respect rather than scaring the kids that have already been brainwashed in public school!

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          Flaunt?

          SMH…

          Stand up, don’t lie down.

      3. avatar kevin says:

        “You are so caught up in the looks”
        Looks matter. Costumes matter. If a guy in a chef whites carries a cleaver into a walmart, nobody would care. If a guy with a Jason mask carries a cleaver into a walmart, people will run.

        “the only way we are going to make progress” is when enough regular people carry and actually stop mass murderers that the MSM can’t ignore them any more.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      …..or perhaps a stunt pulled by the left?….anything’s possible…..

  3. avatar Ross says:

    Not smart at all.

    1. avatar Z says:

      Why we can’t have nice things.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      This is why California banned open carry. It scares the muggles, as someone around here is wont to say.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        I belong to a gun club that is pretty strict about safety and fairly militant about gun rights. If he showed up to one of our monthly dinners like that, well… it probably wouldn’t be a good thing. Once you start terrorizing peoples families for political purposes, you are are just asking for trouble. That is what this guy was doing, even if he had no intentions of actually hurting someone.

      2. avatar S.Crock says:

        CA banned open carry because Reagan was spooked by seeing African Americans exercise their right to carry.

        1. avatar tdiinva says:

          Black Panthers — a domestic terrorist group.

      3. avatar frank speak says:

        ….or is it just bad manners when you willfully alarm and offend people?….

        1. avatar Hush says:

          Of course, it is bad/terrible manners. His display served only the purposes of alarming people and giving the left more reasons with which to criticize POG. Sometimes it is not what you say or what you do but rather how others take it!

        2. avatar Arc says:

          Bad manners aren’t illegal. Alarm is a self-inflicted condition based on feelings. Actions matter, and unless the rifle was actively presented, carried at the low ready, the wielder performed a crime or spouted threats of some manner, hes entirely in the right, regardless of how “bad” it looks.

          People choose to be panicked without so much as a rational thought, the same as they are offended, they want to be. But hey, most people are incapable of rational thought and simply do what they are told. . . maybe the gun lobby should take control of the narrative and tell the sheep what to do and think.

  4. avatar Mark says:

    1A and 2A either exist or they don’t.

    Insensitive? Maybe. But one does not demand moratorium on auto travel just because of a high-profile vehicular attack.

    1. avatar asdf says:

      Yet, ironically, it’s clowns like this that help destroy the 2nd Amendment.

      Put another way, at this point it is impossible to tell whether this guy is Pro-2A or some anti-2A guy trying to get more gun control passed. Because the result is not helping gun rights.

      1. avatar Frank says:

        was there really anyone in power actually trying to defend the 2A? not that I know of. they all seem to be scurrying around trying to stay in power and not do anything controversial to the main stream commies.

    2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      No. You don’t have a 2A right to entire a store armed. You never have. The property owner LETS YOU onto his property AS LONG AS YOU ACT IN A CORDIAL MANNER.

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        So…. shopping is not what you do at wal-mart? Was he walking around pointing the gun at items he desired? Case and point: Shall not be infringed. Don’t let the big bad “fully semi automatic assault rifle” in it’s sling not being touched scare you.

        1. avatar Pissed Off says:

          You are totally fucked up and are the reason we are losing rights. Your reasoning is right out of a fringe/Klan/Weather Underground/Steal This Book/Anarchists Cookbook mind set. You need the fucking shit pounded out of you, so STFU or someone will find you and shut you up… asswipe. We do not need your shit right now – we know the laws, they just don’t need to be flaunted right now.

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “You need the fucking shit pounded out of you, so STFU or someone will find you and shut you up… asswipe.”

          @Pissed Off: Cry some more of those slave tears for me. I’m still thirsty.

          Makin’ those threats just like Anteeee-fa.

          ROTFLMFAO

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          So you think you right to carry trumps a property owner’s property rights?

          How about they come and start marching around your property carrying weapons and a butt load of mags, that’s just fine, right.

        4. avatar arc says:

          Pissed off, you are talking like a militant leftist, we don’t that shit here.

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          Arc, I thought conservatives were all about private property rights? If I own my property, shouldn’t I be able to say who brings arms on to my property? Don’t I own my property heaven high and hell deep?

          Or is that property rights thing just when some big polluter wants to pump poison into the air and water and get a pass on dealing with the consequences down stream?

        6. avatar B.D. says:

          Miner… nice try. Open carry is legal in Missouri, and Wal-mart has stated it is allowed on their property. If a place has a no tolerance for open carry or concealment, then they don’t deserve my business. Also, that is the entire purpose for concealment… out of sight, out of mind. Clearly, it does not work because people like you exist. The only way to deal with people like you is to force you to see that simply carrying is not a threat, but a deterrent.

          Where is your bleeding heart for the rest of the world?

        7. avatar Arc says:

          @miner, private property is private property, however, the more open a business is, the more it must respect the rights of customers and patrons. Marsh v. Alabama is one instance of this.

          Private property is only absolute in that its closed to the public, until the king wants to take it.

          “In a 5–3 decision, the court ruled in favor of Marsh. The opinion, joined by three justices, was authored by Justice Hugo Black, with Justice Felix Frankfurter writing a concurrence, and Justice Stanley Forman Reed writing a dissent.

          The Court initially noted that it would be an easy case if the town were a more traditional, publicly administered, municipality. Then, there would be a clear violation of the right to free speech for the government to bar the sidewalk distribution of such material. The question became, therefore, whether or not constitutional freedom of speech protections could be denied simply because a single company held title to the town.

          The State attempted to analogize the town’s rights to the rights of homeowners to regulate the conduct of guests in their home. The Court rejected that contention, noting that ownership “does not always mean absolute dominion.” The court pointed out that the more an owner opens his property up to the public in general, the more his rights are circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who are invited in.

          In its conclusion, the Court stated that it was essentially weighing the rights of property owners against the rights of citizens to enjoy freedom of press and religion. The Court noted that the rights of citizens under the Bill of Rights occupy a preferred position. Accordingly, the Court held that the property rights of a private entity are not sufficient to justify the restriction of a community of citizens’ fundamental rights and liberties. “

    3. avatar Hannibal says:

      Then they do not exist. Because the courts, society and law have limited them in many ways. And this behavior gets them limited further.

      And before you say that they are natural rights or some other philosophical point… a right that cannot be exercised without being thrown in prison is not a right in any meaningful way.

      1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        The whole point of rights is that they always exist. Even if they are being violated or otherwise interfered with, they still exist. It’s a moral category. Those who violate a right are simply doing something wrong, no matter what physical power or excuse is being used to accomplish that violation. Therefore, it is always legitimate to act to defend those rights. That need to defend is why the 2nd Amendment is counted as a Right.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Exactly, EWTHeckman.

  5. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

    Obviously because of recent events folks are a little jumpy. But reality is there should be 10 or 12 of these people walking around every WalMart at any given time. Ready to deal with any disturbances that might come up. Won’t be long and shootings at Walmarts would become a thing of the past.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      All he needed was a badge and his permit prominently displayed on his chest rig and he probably would have been ignored.

      I was thinking about getting a custom badge to go with my permit to help keep the sheeple calm if they notice my pistol.

      I’m in an open carry State but in a liberal urban/suburban environment.

      1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        Interesting point. The badge thing is in fact a universal symbol that has always explained the presence of a gun on someones belt.

        1. avatar ‘liljoe says:

          In Utah it’s illegal to carry a badge if you are not law enforcement.

        2. avatar B.D. says:

          It’s a conceal carry badge… not a private agency badge. It’s a deterrent to these idiots who are easily offended and cause chaos simply at the sight of a gun. How is that not smart? As stupid as you may think it is to be “that guy”…. that guy is getting shit done. He is raising awareness, and he is keeping the public eye off him simply because he wears a symbol they thing correlates with law enforcement. It’s the perfect decoy.

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          “he wears a symbol they thing correlates with law enforcement. It’s the perfect decoy.”

          Yes deception always works, and impersonating an LEO is a fine idea, please go ahead.

      2. avatar MLee says:

        Those concealed carry badges are stupid. People will think you’re a douche. Don’t waste your time.
        Better yet, carry CONCEALED!

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          shall not be infringed.

          we should not have to conceal. period.

        2. avatar SoCalJack says:

          Agreed. The Conceal Carry badge is just a very bad idea.

        3. avatar Mad Max says:

          Only POTG and law enforcement will think you are a douche; the sheeple don’t know better and it will help keep the flock calm.

          Of course, if your state has a law against deploying badges, don’t do it.

    2. avatar Will says:

      RIGHT! Everyone should always go armed, and if you’re properly kitted with plate armor & a good rifle, so much the better. If everyone who owns were to carry everyday, the “normies” wouldn’t freak at the sight of a well-armed citizen peacefully going about his or her business.

      Anyone here old enough to remember hardware stores that sold guns & ammo, and pickup trucks with rifles in the rear-window rack?? This is what we need to re-normalize in America!

      Make America ARMED Again!!

      1. avatar Doc says:

        I am, up until I graduated high school.

      2. avatar Arc says:

        I may actually get a tight fitting, concealable level 2 or 3 vest if I ever open a store front…

    3. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Yeah, that sounds like a great idea. Their sales will go through the roof. I can tell you are one hot shot retailing executive, probably already making in the middle six figures. I’m surprised Walmart hasn’t recognized all that talent and made you a regional manager.

    4. avatar frank speak says:

      …and do you think that will help or hurt their business?……….

  6. avatar David Deplorable says:

    Total asshat. He needs to spend time in jail for felony stupid.

    1. avatar WhiteDevil says:

      Spending jail for carrying a firearm, in direct accordance to what the 2nd stands for? You’d serve better on the opposite side of this debate. We don’t want you nor need you in our fight for our rights.

      1. avatar MLee says:

        There is a US code federal offense for stupid. Can’t find it at the moment but I saw it.

        1. avatar Darren says:

          Congress would never pass a law that would implicate themselves. 🙂

          I don’t think this guy thought this out all the way. At this point he is a narrowly-averted disaster to antis, no hero for the pro-gun crowd, and now the money that would otherwise fund his next several gun (or maybe car) purchases will go to legal fees. Pretty much a multi-spectrum fail.

          His intent was not made clear, or he did make his intent clear and the media are not interested in conveying it. If MO is an open carry state and he was not presenting himself as a danger to others his lawyer should have a pretty easy time getting him out of any charges that come his way. Tooling up in the parking lot is a) stupid and b) hard to consider brandishing in an open carry state, assuming he didn’t muzzle anyone in the process.

          Yes, shall not be infringed.
          Also, don’t tap on the glass at the zoo.
          Scaring normies helps no one. FFS get one of those tennis bag things and don’t make a spectacle of yourself.

      2. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Put him before a jury of his peers. If they think he was just innocently exercising his 2nd Amendment Rights as opposed to trying to create chaos or put on a show, they’ll let him go. That’s the way it works.

        1. avatar edeward kenway's ghost says:

          That’s the way it’s SUPPOSED to work.
          Unfortunately, the judiciary has been compromised and people turned into sheep because they’ve been convinced that open display of firearms, even in an open carry state, is an act with a possible intent of violence.
          What works in Missouri would never fly in NJ because the MINDSET is different. Hell, the appearance of camouflaged pattern clothing is enough to set someone off. One of my boys borrowed a BDU-patterned kevlar vest with plates to walk the stairs of Montclair University to lose weight and train his legs. He was NOT carrying a weapon but was reported to campus security by OF ALL PEOPLE, a Reserve Marine who called his Daddy on the phone for advice on what to do.
          I’m convinced certain people have lost their ability for reason and critical thinking to the point of being idiots, especially when they aren’t able to discern a dope smoking meth-head from a normal person.

        2. avatar CWT says:

          I wasn’t aware poor decision making was a crime requiring a jury trial.

  7. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Stupid yes. Illegal?? I dunno the law there.
    If open carry is legal then the cops have nothing other then recent events to run the guy in on. Which isn’t legal.
    If legal. Then he should be free by this morning.
    I wouldn’t want his future by then Im not him.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      they might be able to get him for a peace disturbance, given current events a reasonable person might consider it a threat but unless he’s got history that’s probably a stretch. (RSMO 574.010)

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        Current events? Someone is always getting shot. Across the world. The media’s focus on which ones fit their narrative is NOT current events worthy.

        1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          Like any given summer weekend in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, D.C., NYC, L.A………… Those never seem to fit the MSM or the DNC agenda..

      2. avatar Dani in WA says:

        RSMO § 574.010.
        1. A person commits the crime of peace disturbance if:
        (1) He unreasonably and knowingly disturbs or alarms another person or persons by:
        (e) Creating a noxious and offensive odor;

        1. avatar edward kenway's ghost says:

          God forbid someone disturb a precious mind with the intent of inducing the pressure of critical thought processes. There are, of course, ways to do so that are less alarming but there are those who do not want that sort of thinking to be allowed.

      3. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

        They might arrest him for disturbance of the peace. It won’t stick. If Walmart doesn’t have an anti gun policy then he had their permission to legally carry there.

        Pushing the fire alarm might have been a little extreme but it also might have saved lives if the guy was a real copycat.

        Kind of sounds like he just thought it would be an interesting video / make him famous.

        I think open carrying a rifle in a store is a bit much.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          In reading most of these comments there is one thing I cannot believe has not been discussed yet. In general pistols are considered to be self defense weapons, ie, up close and personal. If you are shooting at anybody greater than 15 yards away, it’s tough to claim self defense. An AR for the most part is an offensive weapon and has an effective range of well over two hundred yards. Packing an what is clearly an offensive weapon into a retail outlet. Would most people find that threatening. I think reasonably so.

        2. avatar Patrick says:

          I would disagree(not sure if I hit reply to the correct comment).
          5.56/.223 is good for potential of level III penetration(with proper load) as well as appreciable effect on human sized soft targets, light recoil, and additional accuracy at longer distances than pistol cartridges.
          The AR in this scenario may have been .300, as it was a pistol barrel, still effective on IIIA armor, fairly accurate at range, but more efficient use of capacity/volume, more recoil and effect on soft targets, but more recoil.
          The AR is used for ubiquity and corresponding availability of parts, reliability, modest weight, etc.
          The standard AR pistol furniture provides three contact points, giving it control-ability.

          To summarize, if I had to choose an effective defensive weapon that is light and practical, but not concealable, I would think this would be a fine option. I personally choose a concealable pistol, as I perceive a lower likely threat, but if he perceives a higher chance of encounter, he has certainly chosen a better tool.

  8. avatar MikeJH121 says:

    I bet he is like Dayton, Ohio dead little d***head, a Antifa lefty trying to push the guns are bad narrative. Just a little more sane not wanting to actually kill anyone? Not one of us. We POTG don’t tie up resources and put people and LEO’s in danger. His internet history will soon be scrubbed.

    1. avatar foobar says:

      ^THIS^

    2. avatar California Richard says:

      You never know… If it blows up all over the news for days, then this is a stupid pro 2nd ammendment stunt…. If the story dies and we don’t hear anything else, then it’s a stupid anti-2nd ammendment stunt…. kinda like the mass shootings.

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        it will die… because it’s the media. The only way to change it is to start open carrying. Everywhere.

    3. avatar B.D. says:

      How exactly did open carrying put anyone in danger?

      You have allowed yourself to be manipulated, and are in now way in support of the second amendment.

    4. avatar John in Ohio says:

      His Instagram seems to indicate differently. https://www.instagram.com/dmitriya16/?hl=en

      When we began regular open carry in Ohio, cops often came out. It wasn’t our doing, it was all on them. Please stop virtue signalling like some batshit leftist.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Don’t let Donald Trump see his photo, Trump would say to send he and his wife back to whatever shit hole country they came from.

  9. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    A firefighter held him at gunpoint. Good! Firefighters should be armed. So should paramedics. I know several of both that have been attacked. And several that helped me keep a situation in hand. They are as brave as anyone standing on top of the dirt.

    1. avatar Geoff "Guns. Lots of guns." PR says:

      “Police say the man then made his way out an emergency exit where a firefighter held the man at gunpoint.”

      Yeah, nice!

      A lot of areas strictly prohibit non-LE being armed…

    2. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      old fire fighter joke –
      Why do cops keep their shotguns muzzle up between the front seats? So they can stack their donuts it.
      Sounded more like advice than a joke to me but…

    3. avatar WhiteDevil says:

      Ah, another government employee holding someone at gunpoint, for having a gun. Not shooting anyone, not threatening anyone, just walking around with a firearm. As I told the individual above, you also are not a friend in this fight.

    4. avatar B.D. says:

      Why is that good? He was just carrying and shopping. The fireman should have minded his own business.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        the fireman may be open to charges, as well….

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          and he should be. Sad to say, but he needs to be held accountable for overreacting and so does the store manager.

    5. avatar SkorpionFan says:

      Note the video is title has “off-duty firefighter.” I doubt he is allowed to carry on-duty. I know a retired fire chief who wouldn’t let the firefighters (except for the officers) even carry their cellphones on duty because he was concerned they would take photos of deceased fire victims on the phones. Hopefully, Springfield Fire Department is more enlightened.

  10. avatar Truckman says:

    sounds like a damn idiot to me and needs to spend some time behind bars and maybe a mental checkup

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      for simply carrying a gun Wearing protection of his vital organs and shopping?

      1. avatar Eclipse says:

        BD – The man is incredibly stupid that did nothing but hurt our cause! The reason why everyone reacted that way is because everyone was aware that a person dressed in body armor with a rifle is the dayton mass shooter. So any time anyone see someone dressed liked that with a rifle across their chest walking around in public they are going to assume that person is a mass shooter.

        You can argue all you want to about how it is irrational but it isn’t going to change their perception of gun owners and it can only harden their views on supporting gun control.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      It’s a shame you don’t support the right to keep and bear arms, Truckman.

      Here’s you goat.

  11. avatar Hippi says:

    Great another Chipotle ninja

    1. avatar Biatec says:

      You made my night with that comment.

    2. avatar Mad Max says:

      The only homicide that ever occured in my area was at a Chipotle. Manager was killed during a robbery.

    3. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Except that using “Chipotle Ninja” supports a narrative that wasn’t actually the truth at that Chipotle.

  12. avatar Texas Gun Vault says:

    “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

    – Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jurassic Park, 1993)

  13. avatar enuf says:

    Hell yes he’s lucky to be alive! A FIREMAN pulled a gun and held him for the cops, I’m amazed he didn’t just shoot the fuckwit.

    Don’t care what he thought he was doing. To pull a stunt like that now, he deserved to be Taser’d and pepper sprayed and shot with bean bags right in the nuts. Repeatedly in the nuts, make sure somebody that stupid cannot breed additional idiots.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        I think he pretty much explained it in the last sentence. In great detail.

    1. avatar Defenders says:

      The fireman would be going to prison, I don’t agree with what the guy did but what right did the fireman have to pull his firearm and hold him there, in my opinion the fireman should go to jail. Like I said I don’t agree with what happened but if it isn’t against the law then leave the guy alone.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        The story really didn’t supply enough information for any of us to draw any kind of valid conclusions.

    2. avatar B.D. says:

      I can see you ending up in prison, but not someone who simply open carried, wore protection of their vital organs, and tried to shop.

  14. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

    Too early to assign motive but if he’s law abiding and that concerned about going to walmart maybe he try amazon.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      Either way expect an executive order on rifle caliber pistols any time now. I should go check the price on those 30-30 BFRs before trump wakes up.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        Not going for 45-70? Jeez it’s like you care about your wrists.

        1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

          nah, 45-70 in a thunder five’s my ccw choice, do I need a sarcasm note?

  15. avatar Mike V says:

    AR pistol, really? The Dayton killer used an AR pistol and that fact has prompted a shit ton of the uninformed to speculate on how that made his gun more lethal and how they are exploiting a “loophole.”

    Seems odd that some dude suddenly creates a spectacle seemingly only for the spectacle…using an AR pistol.

    My concern is that this “loophole” is the low hanging fruit that politicians will swarm all over to convince others that they’re doing something.

    1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

      Totally a coincidence and not at all planned from years of research and trolling to find something popular and vulnerable. I only hope it’s popular enough to provoke a f-off response or bring some sanity to barrel length regulations that isn’t yet more loss of rights. My state’s case can’t come soon enough.

    2. avatar Eclipse says:

      Mike V – AR pistols are a loophole. You use these AR pistols to get around the NFA laws on short barreled rifles.

  16. avatar Woody from NY says:

    This is antisocial behavior, he is clearly being vulgar to provoke a reaction. He is visually frightening, if you saw him at wal mart dressed that way you would most likely draw your gun. He is trying to provoke a reaction, it hurts not helps. We need to condemn social displays like this as a community. This doesn’t mean he doesn’t necessarily have the right, it means it’s a very bad idea.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Woody from NY,

      … if you saw him at wal mart dressed that way you would most likely draw your gun.

      Sure, if you are a hysterical person — and pure, raw, unfiltered emotion is your standard for everything and facts are irrelevant.

      The only time that you can legally and righteously draw a gun and point it at someone is if/when that someone is offensively pointing a firearm at people or shooting people. Period. Full stop. How someone dresses/accessorizes and what type of firearm they possess is neither here nor there. It is their ACTIONS that matter, not their appearance.

      We need to condemn social displays like this as a community. This doesn’t mean he doesn’t necessarily have the right, it means it’s a very bad idea.

      How can it be a right if we are not allowed to exercise it?

      1. avatar WhiteDevil says:

        He should have shot the fireman and would have been fully within his rights to do so.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          You feel confident making that conclusion based on the limited information given in the article?

        2. avatar CWT says:

          @Huntmaster Yes, the man presented no threat of imminent danger with no weapon in his hands. The firefighter had no legal right to present or point his firearm.

      2. avatar Ton E says:

        He certainly had the right to do it but that doesn’t make the entire situation any less stupid.

        1. avatar WhiteDevil says:

          Just because someone else shoots up Walmart doesn’t mean that every person that walks into a Walmart with a firearm is an active shooter. I thought that the shooter was the only person responsible and that us responsible people are not to be blamed for the actions of a few nuts. So now if someone wants to exercise their right to keep and BEAR arms, they should be treated like an active shooter?

        2. avatar Ton E says:

          Never said he didn’t. I even acknowledged he had the right to do what he did. But how he went about it is far from being immune from criticism.

      3. avatar Dev says:

        I see people all the time here in Nevada open carrying. I’ve never once saw someone dressed like a wannabe SWAT officer except during the Bundy situation a years ago. It made sense there, not in a Walmart and not days after three terrorist attacks. Lose the “tactical” vest, make carrying normal.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          why is a vest seen as an offensive piece of clothing? If it was a under their shirt, you would have no opinion of it. Right? So wearing a vest as a defensive piece of clothing openly should not offend you so much. You may think they are wanna be’s, but what have you done for us lately?

        2. avatar Dev says:

          Probably more than you. And yes, under a shirt would be better given the current hysteria. If we want to normalize gun ownership and open carrying making a statement like this AT THIS TIME is not good. You really think that with the current state of terror that the left media and the antigunners are in right now is a good time to walk into a Walmart and film yourself carrying a rifle while wearing a tactical vest? Don’t be an obstinate fool, you’re acting exactly like the close-minded zealots on the other side.

        3. avatar B.D. says:

          “probably”

          so… nothing. K.

          Whenever you are ready pumpkin.

      4. avatar John in Ohio says:

        I agree, uncommon_sense. You saved me some typing. 🙂

    2. avatar Arc says:

      Some of us had to deal with rules of engagement and operating procedures. No, I wouldn’t just draw on someone unless they met criteria first.

  17. avatar anaxis says:

    Clown world has really amped up the show lately.

    What’s next; furries with folding Glocks?

    1. avatar Arc says:

      . . .

      I am a furry, specifically a furdragon, and I own a glock, what of it? What? Does the 2A not apply to furries?

  18. avatar Chief Censor says:

    I thought this would happen. I didn’t think we had to tell people not to open carry rifles for awhile. This jackass wants to get gun control passed even if he doesn’t know it.

    Right now everyone is terrified of white guys with guns especially young white guys.

    1. avatar MtnDewey says:

      I am not afraid of anyone with a gun….

    2. avatar B.D. says:

      clearly you are more terrified of the government and what people think of you.

      Open carry march on DC is the ONLY thing that will get our point across. Especially when no bullets are fired.

      Be honest, can you see riot police trying to push a crowd of 10,000 armed patriots back with pepper spray and cs gas? How do you think it would play out when a police shoots someone for simply carrying? The only way to get sympathy for our right to carry, is to make them see we are not a threat. The only way to do that is by threatening the government with peaceful protests. The only difference is we have to the ability to actually fight back. How else do you see our right to own firearms playing out in the future. 10 years from now, 100 years from now? Please tell me how the government has not overgrown and overstepped and how it will simply get better by voting and hoping the billions of laws they are attempting to pass on a daily basis will just vanish.

      If you don’t support it, stay the fuck out of the way until the rest of us make you feel safe in your bubble again. Because right now… nobody who is a “law abiding gun owner” should feel safe. It’s beyond time to actually do something.

      1. avatar Chief Censor says:

        Yes, I am worried what the government thinks of me. They have almost shot me before. I don’t need to go through that again.

        I do care what people think of me because I live in a state with red flag laws. Thanks, Trump and the NRA. I don’t need to go out to Walmart right now with all my kit. If I show up looking like an operator people will likely think I am crazy and I will be red flagged for being a danger to myself or others.

        Last thing we want is people getting their fighting gear taken from them before the fight begins.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          Dude, i get you think you are willing to fight… but if you have not already done anything, you won’t ever.

          Your kit, along with the rest of your shit, will collect dust like it always has. Stand for something, or you will fall for anything. “the fight” has already begun. People open carry rifles all the time. Is it a protest? Yes. How else will “the fight” be won? You expect to just allow all these laws to pass making it illegal to carry anything, anywhere, and then fight? lol. You are worried about being red flagged? Buddy, your registered firearms are already your red flag.

          You need to seek out a group and stand with them. It’s liberating. Doesn’t matter how fat they are, or what they are carrying…. they are doing something, which is better than what you are doing. I was there for Bundy, and I was there at Standing Rock, and now I will be there at wal-mart. What have you done besides vote? And how is that working out for you? Whatever helps you sleep at night I guess.

          I am certain if you showed up to an open carry event you would feel a lot better about yourself. Because where you stand now, is not helping. Just waiting never accomplished anything.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        I was in for that last open carry march in DC that was planned but never materialized. I believe I’d be down for the next one.

    3. avatar Huntmaster says:

      I am suspecting the jackass wants to get more gun control passed and he DOES know it.

  19. avatar Otto Lode says:

    so what did he do wrong if Misery is a constitutional carry state ?

    now the terrorists have all you guys turned against legal carry

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      I see it as a teaching moment in threat assessment especially since the anti- gunners are gonna copycat the hell out of this. In El Paso the guy had the gun in his hands at ready and ear muffs on. That shows his intent. This guy gun on a sling if he wasn’t fiddling with it maybe a threat maybe not.

      1. avatar SoCalJack says:

        I hate to speculate, but I think you are right. If I was in an open carry state and some guy in a plate carrier was open carrying, in light of recent events, I would not draw on him unless the guys body language indicated threat. He message may only work with folks in open carry states but not for most in slave states.

    2. avatar Chief Censor says:

      He decided to grab a hundred of rounds of ammo, body armor, a rifle and walk into Walmart to film the reaction of unarmed people whom are terrified to enter a Walmart after hearing about El Paso. I am not against open carry and I advocate for it. What he did was intentionally done to cause a panic, which I believe is illegal in that state. It’s not smart regardless of the law. He makes us gun owners, and young white males, look bad only days after 2 mass shootings.

      He didn’t need all of that to go to Walmart, that is obvious. He could have took his pistol only. But he wanted the attention.

      Should we all go grab our kit and walk into Walmarts? Let’s make it an unofficial national holiday.

      1. avatar WhiteDevil says:

        So walking around with Tac equipment and a rifle is equatable to causing a panic? Goddamn, and I thought the individuals that comment on TTAG are the ones interested in individual rights. Sure, one could see how his appearance could be disconcerting to people, given the events that have occurred lately, but what purpose are rights if you can’t exercise without being strung up on a law that shouldn’t be law in the first place.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          We are not arguing against our human rights. We are telling you that it’s stupid to intentionally cause panic with your go to war gear at Walmart just to film it.

          Social experiments for attention at a time when we are fighting gun control is not strategically sound. I am fine with him walking around like that after the heat has died down. When we are not closing in on gun registration, gun confiscation and the redefining of arm braces as SBRs

          This young white male took an AR-15 pistol, body armor, dozens of rounds to Walmart after a young white male did the same thing in Ohio. It’s as if he wants us to all become felons for owning arm braces like some people became felons for owning bump fire stocks.

        2. avatar B.D. says:

          Chief: the only ones causing panic are ones like you. Over reacting.

          He is creating conversation and awareness by being peaceful and simply carrying.

          Try not to overthink it when people stand up for your rights.

        3. avatar Jim Sargent says:

          | So walking around with Tac equipment and a rifle is equatable to causing a panic?

          Uhm yes? After reading all these comments on here I’m 100% convinced everybody who thought there’s nothing wrong here are definitely trolling. No normal person would not find it crazy.

        4. avatar B.D. says:

          Jim:

          it’s 2019. People are killing innocents in mass numbers. Is it really “crazy” to want to protect yourself? Maybe because you SEE it, you are threatened… but I am willing to bet there are people who wear body armor under normal clothing, concealing and you’d never know it.

          The only thing that will change the perspective of people like you assuming it’s crazy to be prepared, is to let them see it. Nothing happened here. A peaceful prepared man walked into a store and tried to shop. His attire was not a threat, and his slung/holstered weapons were not either. If they were, the situation would have played out differently, would it not? So how was he ACTUALLY threat?

        5. avatar Huntmaster says:

          “So walking around with Tac equipment and a rifle is equatable to causing a panic?” Actually no, it isn’t equivalent to causing a panic. It did cause a panic. Brought police and fire units to the scene, tying up valuable and expensive resources, panicked a lot of people, families and disrupted the operations of a large retail operations employing dozens of people and involving tens of thousands in sales. If he was simply exercising his 2nd Amendment rights, let him explain it to the jury.

        6. avatar John in Ohio says:

          @Huntmaster, there would have to be a viable charge to even get to a jury. If he hasn’t violated a law then it shouldn’t even get that far.

        7. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          cop seems to think the young man violated a law or two, doesn’t say what but….. Ozarks First reported that no shots were fired, no one was injured, and the suspect is still in custody. No charges have yet been filed, but Lt. Lucas assured, “We definitely have some crimes here.”

      2. avatar B.D. says:

        Should we?

        Yes. We should.

        The end. No more issues to discuss. Only way to win this battle is to NOT LET OUR RIGHTS BE INFRINGED.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          Okay. Go get your militia gear on and put that bump fire stock on your AR-15. Then go to Walmart.

        2. avatar B.D. says:

          I will. Tomorrow. Already planned it before idiots like you spoke up. Seeing people peacefully carrying in public is a great thing. To one up you: I already called the local wal-mart and police. Told them I would be open carrying with my rifle slung on my back.

          And it’s not “militia gear” you fucken fudd… it’s vital organ protection. The bump stock? Well, we all know what side you are on… Even if I had one, it shouldn’t matter.

          I’ll even upload proof to the writers at TTAG.

          Thanks for trying to infringe my rights, fudd.

        3. avatar Chief Censor says:

          Wait.

          Why would you call the cops and Walmart to inform them that you are going to exercise your human rights? Why do you have to do that? Are you scared that you might get a negative response? I thought you were free to walk around ready for combat patrols in Iraq?

          Calling the cops ahead of time is essentially saying you are carrying as a protest. You are not carrying as a normal daily activity. It’s solely for attention and to prove a political point at a time when it’s not intelligent to do that specific thing at that specific place.

          If you knew a lot about the 2nd Amendment you will know what well regulated means. Hence why I said “militia gear.” Long guns, body armor, etc, is considered required gear for today’s militia to be considered well regulated. They had lists of what you were required to show up with when reporting for duty in the militia. By the way, the definition of “arms” includes body armor.

          If you are going to provide security to a free state you must follow the guidelines. You can ask your local militia what they are. If you are doing it alone you have a different set of standards.

          I am pretty sure Walmart didn’t ask you to walk around their private property as security. They will likely ask you to leave because you are making them lose money.

        4. avatar B.D. says:

          chief:

          Instead of talking shit about people attempting to peacefully stand up for your right to self defense, you should try thanking them. This man, and hopefully many like him, will be doing you and other every day carriers a great service by raising awareness. Hopefully, it remains legal, and hopefully it remains peaceful. Which was a risk I took by calling to check the legality of such a fight for your freedom. You are welcome.

        5. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Just in case anyone else decides to do something like this to exercise their 1st and 2nd Amendment Rights consider the following. If you cause a disruption you might beat the criminal rap but Walmart stores earn more than a hundred thousand dollars a day in revenue. The Super stores much more than that. You could be on the hook for that lost revenue. Will they come after you? I think they are going to start getting pissed.

        6. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Don’t let him bait you, B.D. Notice he even added bump stock to the mix? He has no skin in that game so don’t play it.

        7. avatar John in Ohio says:

          @Huntmaster, I almost wrote about possible civil suit in the last reply to you but got lazy. Walmart might bring suit but it could also be turned around on the one that pulled the fire alarm. It all depends on what the video shows before the alarm was activated. Also, the fact that Walmart isn’t posted would give strength to his defense.

        8. avatar Chief Censor says:

          You have to understand the average person’s mind. The leftists know exactly how to twist your event to their advantage. Look what CNN does with their “townhall” events. Don’t give the opposition something for free.

          There was a story on TTAG about the open carry movement in California. They explain how they did reckless stuff like you are planning to do and how it hurt them big. They realized they can’t give the media the opportunity they want. That they had to be perceived a certain way to combat negative propaganda and public sentiment. Due to random people not thinking about what they were doing before they did it, and the reaction it brought to the general public, Californians lost their ability to open carry.

          You have to have a well thought out strategy. You are in a propaganda war. Don’t run out in the open…

          I support open carry. I like open carrying myself. I don’t mind putting on my gear and carrying my rifle. However, I am not dumb enough to do it days after a couple of mass shooting occurred at the same business.

          I remember when Marine recruiting offices were attacked. They couldn’t protect themselves because of a gun free zone law. Civilians put their gear on and went down to the offices to provide security for the unarmed who were being targeted by terrorists. That was a different situation than walking into Walmart to prove a political point. Those civilians went down to those offices to provide wanted protection and deterrents.

          If Walmart wants you to come down and protect their stores then go do that.

        9. avatar B.D. says:

          Chief:

          The point now… needs to be political. It always has been. It was no different then, and it’s no different now.

          I’ll let you know how it plays out when I go to wal-mart next week. I will tell you this much, I plan on wearing nice clothing, stripping my black vest to have it blend in as much as possible, carrying my rifle on my back (which I hate, but it will make people less edgy), and my usual 3 o’clock carry as well. No multicam… no tacticool shit, no extra ammo. Just carry. Tucked in shirt and tie under my vest.

          Whenever you are ready to join the cause and actually do something, it would be a lot better than making excuses.

      3. avatar Otto Lode says:

        Oh I didn’t realize you were an investigator on this case because the article said no such thing

        If I have a choice between a gun free walmart and a walmart with all legal citizens carrying AR-15’s on a sling I’m right at home cocked and locked

  20. avatar Ton E says:

    What a moron……

  21. avatar Political gristle says:

    Mark my words.
    Next items to be banned
    AR,& AK pistols and all variants there of.
    AND no more rifle caliber pistols for good measure.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      throw in shockwaves and taurus judges

  22. avatar Hannibal and the Elephants says:

    I guess he does not get the Bloomie bonus check. Didn’t fire the firearm. I’m very glad he didn’t and applaud the off duty FD who didn’t blow his brains out, but I’m sure his PO’d overlord is debating if he still gets the agreed upon payment for denigrating the 2A.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      I’m looking forward to details but the Ozarks are popular with the anti government militia types so who knows…

    2. avatar Miner49er says:

      Nope, he’s a full on gun-nut, just check his Instagram photos.

      I think he needs to be held 48 hours on a mental hygiene warrant for an eval by a professional.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        For what being an insensitive ass? This deserves no further attention unless an actual law was violated as attention seems to be what he was after.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          @SAFEupstateFML: +1

  23. avatar former water walker says:

    Doofus…sounds like a Bloomie stunt.

  24. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    I am so sick and tired of hysterical people. Get a grip. Stop acting like toddlers and start using some discernment and wisdom. So what if a man walks into a store with a rifle and spare magazines? What are his ACTIONS AND DEMEANOR? Is he shopping and reasonably pleasant and polite to other patrons? Then go about your business. Is he scowling and threatening people? Then (and only then) evacuate the store and call police.

    Unless and until someone is offensively pointing a firearm at people or shooting people, they are not a threat. As I replied in a comment above, someone’s actions are what really matters, not their appearance.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      ^This.

      If the rifle’s slung then it’s the same as a pistol in a holster.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        I gotta disagree with ya on that Strych9. A pistol is pretty much a defensive weapon. That rifle is an offensive weapon. Not quite the same and definately sends a different message. Something I haven’t seen pointed out in all these posts. I think it deserves some consideration.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          I don’t see that there’s a difference other than the feelz people might catch over them. If you’re close enough to see either one fairly well then you’re close enough to get shot by it and most mast shootings are actually done with pistols.

          In fact, there was a meta study that found that pistols are significantly more lethal (26% vs 2% for rifles) in the context of a mass shooting. Probably because they’re heavily correlated with heart and head “anchor shots”. (https://www.journalacs.org/article/S1072-7515(18)32192-6/fulltext)

          Both can be misused. Neither IS being misused in this case.

          It’s like saying that someone OCing a hunting knife is one thing but a Spatha (short sword) is different. No, not really. People may feel differently about them but that doesn’t mean there’s a valid reason to do so.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        Slung on your back… maybe. Slung on front like that? Nah, I would not treat that as a loaded pistol.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      The world is made up of hysterical people. What’s the old quote from Men In Black? “A person is smart, people are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it.”

      With mass shootings being replayed on the evening news every week good luck reasoning people out of a position into which they did not reason themselves. So maybe it’s useful to try and take as few actions that panic people as possible.

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        Unfortunately, yes. The panic will subside. Why? Because unlike the people they are trying to make us into, we are peaceful. We are defensive, but peaceful. Simply carrying is not a threat, and the only way to prove it is by doing it. The longer we wait, the more they take. The more they take, the harder it gets. The harder it gets, the less peaceful the “protest”.

    3. avatar John in Ohio says:

      +1

      Some gun people appear afraid of other gun people. This is my shocked face.

      Fuddism is like super-herpes.

  25. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    If this guy and held a sign that said “I’m here to Protect you.”
    “The 2A is for all good People”
    That is part of the education process for the general public. Then we could start to have a reasonable discussion about Gun Rights and Responsibilities. Or if a group of gun owners with similar signs do the same thing. That would be good as well.

    Open carry rifles without trying to educate the public is just trying to get the government to take away our guns. This guy is just like the shooter in New Zealand. He wants gun confiscation. No I don’t think he is stupid. He knew what he was doing.

    open carry a rifle. Then carry a state flag as well.
    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/open-carry-texas-lt-gov-dan-patrick-put-constitutional-carry-vote/

    This is open carry rifle education.
    https://wtvr.com/2014/07/01/long-guns-carytown/

    I still see people open carry their side arm. I did so in the food store yesterday. And I’m not the only one. I wear a T shirt that says, “Keep calm and carry guns”
    An older guy gave me a pat on the back and a thank you. I told him If everyone did the world would be a better place.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      There is NO PUBLIC EDUCATION process for the general public about gun rights. Radio advertising on all music genres stations plus a few TV ads would cost very little. But it would be a start.

      Unfortunately the NRA is buying $$$ suits and $$$ mansions for themselves instead. But they do have 6 or 7 gun safes with their grandpa’s shotgun.

      1. avatar Chief Censor says:

        Hey, now. Wayne needs a 6.66 million dollar mansion because he was threatened after Sandy Hook. Ackerman and the BoD knew of and approved the purchase, but the closest was too small for Mrs. Wayne’s skeletons, thus they didn’t buy it.

  26. avatar Fully Involved says:

    I treat open-carry rifles like I treat pistols:
    If a pistol is in a holster or if a rifle is slinged behind someones back and the person is calm, then carry on.
    If a person has a pistol or rifle in his hands at low ready, then that person has my close attention, and that might not be a good thing for that person. Next is to see the persons expression, where his attention is being drawn, is he out in the open or behind cover/concealment. Friend or foe is all in the body language. And a whispered “ay mate, what is it?” Could help.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      When I carry an AR pistol, it is slung to the front or on the opposite side from my sidearm. On the back in crowded places in the city is not really good for me regarding weapon retention and other things.

  27. avatar Kyle says:

    I’m married, Happily.

    Should my wife die, I could then send her dog to the pound, go find a hot babe and take her around and introduce her to all our old friends and show everyone how crazy happy I am.

    It would be legal, it would also be completely poor taste and judgement.

    1. avatar Ton E says:

      BOOM even if you’re exercising your rights and it’s done in a manner which makes the community as a whole look like crap said community is going to offer criticism. To those conflating criticism to people having issues with OC in general. No one is immune from criticism believe it or not. Just criticism of this particular situation doesn’t equate to being against open carry.

      1. avatar Kyle says:

        Being an ahole may be legal, but it still not a good idea. The guy had the right to do what he did, and should not have done it.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          if not now, then when? What are you doing to change the perspective? Because it isn’t working either. The only way to change it is to force them to see it.

  28. avatar B.D. says:

    If you are not open carrying after this, you are not going to change anything.

    an open carry march on DC is the only thing that will change things.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      you sound like the FBI agent who convinced Randy Weaver to shave a couple inches off that shotgun

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        Or a fucken patriot with your freedom to carry as my best interest….

        Take that rebel out of your name. You should be called a turncoat.

  29. avatar Pie Pie says:

    Questions to those who support open carry:
    Should what this guy did be legal?
    Should it be legal to wear body armor?
    If it should be legal to open carry rifles/rifle pistols, who gets to decide what’s threatening and what isn’t?

    If you see someone open carrying that looks threatening to you, but the law says is not threatening, what would you do?

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      throughout history, laws have been passed with the intention of infringing upon peoples freedom. Everything nazi germany did was part of their law.

      AS for the peacefulness of simply carrying… well, it defines itself. Carrying is not a threat. If you disagree, please explain how it is.

    2. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

      Leave.
      We have had a guy carry a holstered Tec 9 here in Jefferson City, Missouri.
      Nobody looked twice, well maybe looked, but certainly didn’t panic or call the cops.

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        lol. Come on… a tec 9? prove it.

        Also, wonder why? (whatever it actually was he was carrying) because it was holstered.

        no threat.

      2. avatar Pie Pie says:

        These are just questions. If they are somehow triggering you, what about just this one:

        Should it be legal to wear body armor?

        1. avatar Mark says:

          IIRC armor has been inherent in RTKABA in anglo jurisprudence since the Northampton Statutes (1328).

        2. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Not it Connecticut.

    3. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “Should what this guy did be legal?”

      Of course. I can’t even believe that would be a question.

      “Should it be legal to wear body armor?”

      Of course. I can’t even believe that would be a question.

      “If it should be legal to open carry rifles/rifle pistols, who gets to decide what’s threatening and what isn’t?”

      As to threatening, it’s not rocket surgery… The same bar for open carry as any other threat. It has to imminent and credible. The perceived threat was not credible in this case from the details released so far.

      As to legal or not… There are elements of a crime that would have to be satisfied. That doesn’t appear to be the situation here from the details released so far.

      “If you see someone open carrying that looks threatening to you, but the law says is not threatening, what would you do?”

      I’ve been there before. I observed and then decided if I wanted to create distance or if, after further observation, I determined it was just me or the person was a bit of doofus (or a little of both).

  30. avatar Carl B. says:

    I’m with my daughter and wife at Wal Mart and I see you enter the store wearing a chest rig carrying/slinging an AR or any other long arm like a clueless f**kwit, I have my hand on my holster ready to put holes in your moron ass.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      Your daughter will miss her father. Because you’d be in prison for murdering someone for open carrying and not posing a threat.

      You should just stop carrying all together.

      1. avatar Dev says:

        You need to reread what he wrote, more slowly and deliberately this time.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          I think you should. He is scared by someone open carrying causing NO threat. The OP is more of a threat for having his hand on his sidearm ready to shoot someone innocent. Rethink your philosophy.

        2. avatar Dev says:

          You’re just being stupid now. The point of carrying a gun is for protection against the unknown threat. Now you’re saying the man who is ready to react to what he perceives as a threat, i.e. someone entering Walmart wearing tactical gear and a rifle right after three terrorists attacks is NOT a potential threat? Ok pal.

        3. avatar B.D. says:

          Again… How was he a threat?

      2. avatar Huntmaster says:

        I think that would be up to the jury. Probably a sympathetic jury.

    2. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

      Just time too leave.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Yeah…

  31. avatar route66paul says:

    Open carry of an AR or AK with body armor is a little much. A pistol on your hip is a little different. But, if LE can wear body armor daily, so should any other resident. Even LE(except special units on special details) do not carry rifles as every day carry.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Not in Connecticut.

  32. avatar strych9 says:

    I don’t have to support what you say to defend your right to say it.

    I don’t have to think that what this guy did was incredibly intelligent given the current situation but I’ll defend his right to do it on both 1A and 2A grounds.

    A side note: I don’t get the fascination the media has with plate carriers/body armor. They’re purely defensive in nature. It’s not like he’s rocking an s vest FFS.

    1. avatar Ton E says:

      Well Said!

    2. avatar SoCalJack says:

      I think the media has little understanding of what threat assessment is. Given the guy is in an open carry state, and its legal to have a plate carrier he was not a precieved threat. No waving around a rifle, no yelling, no panicked or couched running. The guy’s stuff was stowed and he was calmly, I believe, walking around making a statement. That’s why the fireman did not shoot at first contact. But was his goal achieved?

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Actually, was using his phone to video the event. Filming people in Walmart. Oh well no big deal. But he was all geared up in a tactical outfit. Not organized and professional like a SWAT operator. He looked like a nut job who threw a bunch tactical odds and ends together. Disorganized and decidedly unprofessional and in a manner that would indicate a mental instability. At least that’s what it looked like to me. Clothes make the man and all, you know. He topped it all off with a couple of pounds of ammo and a slung rifle. While he was walking around filming people and families in Walmart. I thought it was supposed to be the liberals who are defending these people.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          What does “looking organized” have to do with anything?

          First, there’s a zillion ways to organize a PC. Mostly it’s personal preference and dictated by what you’re actually doing.

          Second, no one in the media, and probably no one in that Walmart knows fuck all about setting up a PC.

          Third, even if people there did know, none of that knowledge went into this decision making process. No one was thinking “Fuck man, this dude is dangerous because his kit is disorganized! Look where he put his dump pouch in relation to his mags and IFAK! Oh, shit, see that frag pouch? ONLY a terrorist puts one right there!”.

          Forth, from the other people’s perspective, which is actually worse? A disorganized carrier or an organized one that indicates that this guy knows his shit and probably swaps mags lightning fast? Like a sorority girl after five shots of Everclear, that could go both ways.

          I assume body armor and OC are legal in this jurisdiction. If that’s the case then he didnt do anything worthy of this kind of response. It’s not really legal if you have to do it in the closet so there no point in being “allowed” to do it if no one can see it. The 2A doesn’t have a “don’t ask don’t tell” clause.

          Look, I don’t think what this guy did was necessarily wise but SoCalJack has a valid point here. The media entirely lacks a realistic risk assessment capability and therefore they blow shit out of proportion. That normalizes out of proportion responses on the part of the public, and that is a problem.

  33. avatar Rusty - always carry - Chains says:

    This idiot is lucky someone didn’t panic and shoot him. Perfectly legal (assuming he isn’t a felon) and dumber than a bag of hammers.

    1. avatar edward kenway's ghost says:

      This guy is lucky some idiot (the firefighter) didn’t get nervous and shoot him.
      See how this works? It’s exactly the opposite perspective on the same situation. Either way it’s provoked a debate on what or who’s reasonable and what constitutes personal common sense or good judgement.

      1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

        An off-duty firefighter with a concealed carry permit is being hailed a hero tonight, after he held an armed suspect wearing tactical gear at gunpoint at a Missouri Walmart. Guy is VERY fortunate to be breathing….

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          And the firefighter is very lucky to not have charges filed against him for kidnapping and brandishing. If regular civilians who “patrol the border” cannot hold the illegals who walk right past where the wall ends is the exact same thing, then how is a firefighter who held a man at gunpoint for his choice in attire and open carrying not the same thing as well?

          See where that gets you? Nowhere. The firefighter should have used better judgement.

  34. avatar SoBe says:

    I “open carry” body armor once in a while. I am not as svelte as I was in my 30’s and considering my profession, daily rollerblading in an overcrowded metropolis is no longer an option. However, jogging with a carrier loaded with four plates is less likely to lead to a serious long bone fracture. The local police are anti everything here and after recent events are on pins and needles. So, no I am not jogging around the neighborhood with my body armor; at least not while everyone is sitting on top of a powder keg and looking for a spark. Last time I worked out with a plate carrier (granted I also was wearing an empty drop leg holster), I received mixed reactions from the police, but none aggressively negative. Yet, there is not anything evil nor illegal (at least in my very, very blue neighborhood) about wearing body armor while conducting oneself legally.

  35. avatar anon says:

    I noticed a remark in the article, something I have to ask the Walmart where I spend much too much money—–when the flashing lights, alarms and bells start going off that it sounds like a pin ball machine–does that means what I could I read——-I noticed the customers and the cashiers are more annoyed then worried—perhaps the should put out a memo—-

  36. avatar MaddMaxx says:

    Post after post of what ifs and maybes, atta boys and wtfs. Has anyone who has posted here actually talked to, read about and/or actually knows what this guy was trying to do.. There is the possibility that he was being an asshole, trying to (successfully) instigate a panic situation in order to record his results and get his 15 minutes (again successfully) of fame… It is also possible that he is a responsible(?) gun owner trying to make a statement (failed) that not everyone with an AR pistol and body armor is a deranged mass killer… Personally I can’t wait to see how the story gets treated by the MSM, that will speak volumes about his true intentions.. I don’t care for open carry as a personal choice but do not disagree with those that do, I believe open carry makes you a primary target for any wanna be mass killer “nut case” looking to cause maximum damage in a minimum time frame with the least chance of resistance at least that would be my thought process.. I do feel that in light of recent events (combining the Ohio shooters choice of weapon and use of body armor and the Texas shooters choice of location) was at best in poor taste and at the very worst a senseless display of ignorance and disregard for public safety.. If someone was seriously injured trying to leave that store in the panic who would be held responsible? Would it be the guy with the gun or the store manager who may have prematurely overreacted?

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      Store manager. End of story.

    2. avatar Joatmon says:

      I’m with you too on this.
      Not enough information yet to know what his motives are.
      It’s one of 2 things tho.
      #1. He was raising awareness that being armed does not mean you’re a mass murderer.
      #2. He’s anti gun and wanted to show that rifles, guns, whatever cause panic.
      To me, he succeeded in both. Have to see where he stands.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        #3. He could’ve believed that he was actually free and decided to go shopping. I’ve had people attribute motives to my open carry when I was just picking up some groceries.

        There are more than just 2 or 3 possibilities here.

        1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          This story is about open carry of a rifle. In your response are you saying you also open carry a rifle when grocery shopping?

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I have done it multiple times.

  37. avatar Otto Lode says:

    when I first moved to Phoenix near 9th and Broadway I went into a Circle K around 2am there were 4 people in line at the back a Phoenix Cop then a guy carrying a machette full size in a belt holder in front of him a guy with an AR-15 on a sling and in the front of the line was gramps with a six shooter open carry on his belt! I asked the cop when we were back outside at the gas pumps if that was normal and he said yes for that neighborhood it was lol

    1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

      I’d keep a close eye on the cat with the machete.. Who carries a machete for personal defense?

      1. avatar Otto Lode says:

        all blades are legal in AZ including automatic knives, butterfly you name it. Swords and knives are not uncommon carry items in AZ, not my preference but it is what it is

        1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          Was not commenting on the legality, I’m more concerned about the mindset.. Blades are great defensive weapons against a stick or another blade, but are far more effective as an offensive stealth weapon, in other words stabbing someone in the back… Common carry or not I’m afraid they wouldn’t last long in my world…

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Common carry or not I’m afraid they wouldn’t last long in my world…”

          Care to clarify?

        3. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          Simple everyone I know carries a gun.. Start shit with a knife (or machete or sword or a sharpened toothbrush) and you are going to be in a gunfight… Clear enough?

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Simple everyone I know carries a gun.. Start shit with a knife (or machete or sword or a sharpened toothbrush) and you are going to be in a gunfight… Clear enough?”

          Not really clear enough. The discussion was someone simply carrying and your response was ” Common carry or not I’m afraid they wouldn’t last long in my world…” Well, no shit, if they were actually doing something other than just carrying. But the same would go for any weapon. So, it didn’t and doesn’t really make sense for you to single out one mode of bearing arms and beat your chest on the interwebs. lol

          I guess what you are saying is that if someone acts with malice while using a knife (or machete or sword or a sharpened toothbrush), you will draw and shoot but other weapons won’t get the same treatment. What about spiders? (rhetorical question, BTW).

  38. avatar Dan W. says:

    A lot of people here are missing the fact that there is sometimes an overlap between legal and being an asshole that needs a talking to.

    1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

      What this guy did is a lot like walking into a crowded theatre and yelling FIRE…

        1. avatar MaddMaxx says:

          Yeah the tired old “fire in a theatre bullshit” Truth is what it is… Wow you use the fuckin Atlantic as a source? Liberal or Troll or just a Libtroll? That you Vlad? Nah not enough bullshit in the post…

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          There are plenty of other sources, Maddmaxx. Get off your ass and go look.

          Instead of refuting, you simply posted bullshit and doubled down.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      Well, there was a time when it’d be legal for someone to smack this idiot around a few times, but since that’s no longer an option, all we can do is hold him (and everyone) to the legal standard. So it’s either defend his actions insofar as they remain within the law, or advocate for more restrictive laws.

      Your decision.

    3. avatar pwrserge says:

      What you’re missing is that when we give a shit what out rights “look like” is when we lose them. We should take a page from the degenerates. Armed pride parades.

      1. avatar Dan W. says:

        It’s true that being peaceful has only been seen as weakness so far.

      2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Guns + 2A rights signs= educating the public about their rights as well.

        Btw
        If most of the “degenerates” would support the 2A, the world would be a better place.

  39. avatar Bigus Dickus says:

    This is equivalent to walking into a crowded bar at night and screaming “FIRE!”.

    The intent was to cause mayhem.

    1. avatar CLarson says:

      So the problem was the store manager pulling the fire alarm? I mean there was no fire.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        LOL, excellent point. Pulling a fire alarm when there’s no actual shooting occurring doesn’t rise to the standard of a false alarm meant to instill panic? Why not pick up one of countless phones throughout the store, and calmly ask everyone to exit the building in an orderly fashion over the intercom, if there’s not yet any actual emergency?

        This would be like me pulling the fire alarm in a crowded restaurant when I catch sight of the flambe in the kitchen area and am momentarily startled by it.

      2. avatar Bigus Dickus says:

        No dipshit, the problem was this genius going full tactical AFTER a significant shooting incident in a walmart….just to see what would happen. What did he think would happen? Quite frankly, he should be thankful *HE* wasn’t shot.

  40. avatar DaveL says:

    When it comes to the game of being an assh*le and making trouble for people, while staying just on the windward side of legal accountability: Nobody. Beats. The State.

    Remember that the next time you feel like playing their game.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Just git on to the back of the bus like a good negro.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “Nobody. Beats. The State.”

      Except when they do; American Revolution ring a bell?

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        lol. Just proves how complacent these FUDDS are.

        All talk, no action. Even if it’s peaceful action they will criticize it. It’s not like we are going out and blocking highway traffic… like some “peaceful” protests. Every open carry protest I have been to and places I have open carried rifles has never hindered anyone else from doing anything. How they perceive someone simply carrying, is their own confliction. That’s why we do it. To aide them in overcoming their phobias. Clearly, even half of these “law abiding citizens” here who carry, are ones that would end up in prison for poor judgement. Threatening someone for their choice in attire and carry while trying to shop? Sounds like a lawsuit to me. Granted, you would need a good lawyer, because wal-mart can sure afford one and instead of blaming their own employee for being the one who caused panic by pulling a fire alarm, they would obviously try to manipulate the law in their favor. All this guys has to do is prove he was never a threat and had no intention of causing panic. It’s very easy to prove. We do it all the time when we open carry. I hope he wins, and sues wal-mart.

  41. avatar PITD says:

    I ask you; do I or anyone lose their rights because it hurts someone’s feelings or is distasteful, or Makes people uncomfortable?
    Kind of goes with that pesky 1A, it’s not there to just protect the things you agree wit.

  42. avatar Mad Max says:

    I think we should all kit out in Level IV armour and helmets every time we must go into a “gun free” zone.

    If that is illegal in your State, I think that case is winnable. Body armour is part of the “arms” covered by the 2nd Amendment and the State would be hard-pressed to justify the ban as a “public safety” issue.

    Well, I guess they could argue that you are a hazard if you fall over onto someone with all of that weight on you😊.

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      Some states already ban it.

  43. avatar Joatmon says:

    I really hope TTAG follows this story and lets us know why he did this.
    I have open carried and no one raised an eyebrow over it. It was only a pistol though. Got gas, went grocery shopping and went home.
    I don’t have a problem with someone open carrying.
    My problem is what this person’s motive(s) are.
    As the article reads, he walked into the Wal-Mart and started shopping. He was recording himself but for what purpose?
    He didn’t wave the pistol around so he wasn’t threatening anyone.
    I replied to a post and commented that this is one of 2 things.
    – Raising awareness that POTG are not mass murderers.
    – He’s anti gun and wanted to show what happens when panic sets in regarding firearms.
    The fire alarm was pulled by the store manager so we know what he was thinking.
    The off duty fireman that drew down on the guy? I can’t condemn or condone. Not sure what I would have done and I wasn’t there.
    What if this was all a stunt by the left? The person geared up in the parking lot I presume? Drove to the Wal-Mart with gear on?
    I’m not going to side with the person or attack him for what he did until more information is known.

    1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

      Exactly! I wish more people were as cautious about jumping to conclusions as you are!

    2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      This story is about the open carry of a rifle. Do you open carry a rifle when you go shopping?

  44. avatar nik says:

    Fool is real lucky he didn’t get lit up!

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Indeed, him and countless bystanders, too; there’s a lot of stupid, panicky animals out there ready to bring a hail of semi-aimed police gunfire down on the general direction of anyone that looks out of the ordinary but isn’t actually doing anything illegal or threatening.

  45. avatar barnbwt says:

    Our constitutional rights are not meant to be enjoyed at the whim of the lowest common denominator out there; neither the most fearful coward nor the most brazen asshole get to set the limits of our liberties. I sure hope all you Fudds condemning open carry & this man’s lawful if uncouth actions realize that before your fellow Edith Bunkers fret away what little freedom we have remaining.

    BTW, the articles about the chain of events are consistently misleading (shock). He walked in & began tooling through the store with a slung rifle pushing a grocery cart with one hand & phone-camera in the other, panicked manager pulls the fire alarm instead of calling the cops (you think he’d have done that if the store were being robbed?) The carrier then exited through the nearest fire door like everyone around him and waited for FD/LEO to arrive same as everyone else who had evacuated, and eventually was confronted minutes later by a fireman who drew down on a guy who’d been harming no one for some time & held him at gun point until officers could arrive & charge him with nothing before releasing him. Even then, at no point did the fireman/cop’s deem the man’s conduct threatening, or they would have shot him/arrested him. The article is written to make it sound like the guy slipped out the firedoor in an attempt to escape, but was intercepted by a waiting first responder hero.

    In reality, the series of events are eerily similar apart from choice of equipment, to the guy shot dead by authorities in a big box store after his concealed weapon became visible & spooked an idiot.

    IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT HE WAS SCARY TO PEOPLE. THERE ARE TOO MANY STUPID PEOPLE SCARED BY NON-THREATENING THINGS FOR US TO ALLOW THAT TO BE THE STANDARD. IT DOES NOT MAKE WHAT HE DID WRONG. IT DOES NOT JUSTIFY FURTHER RESTRICTIONS.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      People who are scared pass very scary laws. It would be nice if the gun Community would educate people then perhaps they wouldn’t be so frightened about something they don’t know anything about. They’re gun civil rights.

  46. avatar Pete says:

    I am reminded of the Jack Handy quote.
    “I think a good gift for the President would be a chocolate revolver. And since he’s so busy, you’d probably have to run up to him real quick and hand it to him.”.

  47. avatar jon says:

    while what this man was doing was stupid it worked, he successfully showed that we have lost the right to open carry. he has showed that the masses have successfully been brainwashed into attributing guns with violence and therefore the next logical step will be a direct attack on the 2a.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      what he did was make all gun owners look bad….not helpful in the current political climate…

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        bullshit. He was peaceful and compliant. The gun owner who looked bad was the firefighter. Get with the program, or hand em over. We will need the ammo with FUDDS like you throwing us under the bus.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I agree, jon. This incident shows where the end of the chain is for some POTG slaves. On the other hand, it is refreshing to read more than a few POTG that actually get the liberty thing.

  48. avatar DingDongDitch says:

    Sounds like a really good way to get shot.

    1. avatar Mastro says:

      I’m glad the firefighter didn’t shoot him and face legal/civil actions.

      Good example of proper use of a gun versus idiocy.

      1. avatar CWT says:

        Proper use? Drawing and pointing at someone who presented no credible imminent threat of bodily harm seeing as he had no weapon in his hands? Firefighter has no more power of arrest then any other non law enforcement citizen.

      2. avatar tdiinva says:

        And if no charges are filed against the lad he can file charges against the firefighter since he had no justifiable reason to draw his gun. Looking like a threat is not posing a threat.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      People said the same thing about open carrying a sidearm in Ohio. Later, they said the same thing about open carrying a long gun in Ohio. I open carry almost always. Sometimes, that is a long gun too. 😉

  49. avatar Buck says:

    Update on this. He’s been charged with making terroristic threats (pending). This was not just open carry. Here in Missouri some people may get their panties in a wad about open carry but they don’t normally call the cops on you. You have to be doing something else to be arrested. Now depending on what city you’re in your mileage may vary.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Everything I read today looks more like they are still fishing.

    2. avatar B.D. says:

      it’s a suspicious. not a pending charge. They have nothing and are fishing because they are wrong. I hope this young man sues wal-mart, the fire department, and the police.

  50. avatar Wally1 says:

    Still thinking about what actual crime did this person commit? I hope he takes this to a jury trial, just takes one juror to negate this type of BS. I agree he is not promoting our cause and he should just have carry concealed, but once again what crime? The only crime here was the store manager pulling the fire alarm and inciting panic.
    I always conceal carry in Walmart, however I am more concerned about contracting a disease from all the illegal immigrants.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      To walk into a crowded public space outfitted like that at this time is reckless, stupid, and deserving of every misery he receives for his actions. He hurt us with that stunt. With all the pressure to stomp our rights into the mud, with all the blaring news stories no where close to falling in volume, he walks into a Walmart like that!?

      Fuck him, he may get off but I hope he’s financially destroyed.

      PS: I was in a Walmart and a Home Depot yesterday evening. My Ruger SR9 on my right hip, openly as is legal where I live. Nobody cared about that, it is normal.

      What he did was so fucking beyond reason he’s lucky to be alive.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        Yeah, but if turns out to be an idiot he just may have won the lottery. He will sue both the City and Walmart.

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Good luck with that!

        2. avatar tdiinva says:

          Walmart allowed him in. If they didn’t want armed individuals in than post no guns. False arrest usually has a reasonable payout.

        3. avatar enuf says:

          He’d lose. His only hope against the criminal charges now filed against him is that the prosecutor or the judge and jury realize he’s merely a moron and not worth making an example of.

  51. avatar George Washington says:

    He’s causing a problem doing this….. We all know what open carry is, but alarming the public is another problem in itself…
    What a moron…. He’s a liberal trying to make the AR look bad…. This is a liberal stunt!!!

  52. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

    first-degree making a terroristic threat, I’m f*cking pissed and I let my lawmakers know it, dammit!

  53. avatar Crabbyoldguy says:

    Obviously, this was done in poor taste. The video taping suggests intent deserving a disorderly conduct. But, what about the multiple felonies committed by the fireman? Aggravated kidnapping as he led him away from the store at gun point, for example. What about the false statements by witnesses about an “active shooter”? Seems like the populace should be educated to respect, not fear, firearms and their appropriate use.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      If not now, then when?

      And yes, they apply the same kidnapping charges to civilians open carry patrolling the border where there is no fence and illegals simply walk right by. If they detain them, it’s kidnapping and brandishing. The fireman is wrong, the wal-mart employees are wrong, the false reports (obviously wrong) and the police are wrong. No surprise. I hope he wins and sues the fuck out of these idiots.

  54. avatar J says:

    Everyone one I knew growing up in Kentucky opened carried and opened car carried with their firearms. Kentucky is an open carry without many restrictions of other states that claim to be open carry. You don’t need a permit to open carry in Kentucky like in other states. You can carry any type of firearm openly if it is not posted otherwise. People are just not accustomed to seeing firearms these days like years ago. We just need to make it routine again seeing someone with a firearm in public.

  55. avatar enuf says:

    Reports now in the news is what he’s told the cops. He wanted to find out if Walmart supported the Second Amendment. He wanted his sister to help him by making a video, she would have been recording it. But his sister told him it was a bad idea and she would not help, that’s why he had the smart phone in hand.

    So, at least the sister has some functioning brain cells.

  56. avatar Ozzallos says:

    There’s a lot of people pumping how his actions weren’t against the law, and they’re right.

    But this guy is dumb. He’s not a 2A activist, he’s an attention whore. An activist does this every day. You see their name in the news. You read about them on sites like this. Walmart bro is not that person. Walmart bro is looking to selfishly capitalize on a tragedy under the guise of the second amendment. At best he’s a narcissist that makes us all look bad. At worst, he’s tragically stupid and really is lucky he didn’t get shot. At very least, the safety on my carry could have been off as I ushered my family to the exit furthest away from him.

    News flash– You don’t have to break the law to get shot. You just have to be stupid. This guy was a Darwin award waiting to happen.

    1. avatar ozzallos says:

      As to the fireman, did he break the law? Quite possibly yes. And no matter how much you want to compare him to Walmart Bro, nobody is going to pursue charges because fucking common sense says you don’t walk into a Walmart in full kit days after a fresh tragedy. Nobody is going to charge Fireman Guy after California and Ohio get shot up within days of one another and the odds of some basement emo copy cat is still high. Who the hell is going to pull a guy in full tac aside and tell him he shouldn’t be doing that after two recent, like incidents? The best, optimally lawful outcome just wasn’t going to happen and Walmart Bro is lucky he got somebody that wasn’t trigger happy to stop him.

      Sure we need to make carry in public a regular thing again. I agree. But this was not the way or time to do it.

  57. avatar Huntmaster says:

    The guy went into Walmart by his own admission to cause a disturbance and using a firearm to do so. That is a crime. He succeeded far beyond his wildest dreams and he will have a couple years to admire his work without any distractions.

  58. avatar Chief Censor says:

    This is the kind of report that the media wants to propagate to make gun owners look like crazy uncaring dumbasses.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Notice how this man fits the exact profile of the Walmart gunmen in El Paso?

      He is a young white male, carrying a rifle ready to go, multiple magazines, wearing a black shirt and khaki pants. Oh, and he decided to add “body armor” like the Ohio gunmen.

      Imagine you’re a cop sitting in your car waiting for calls to respond to when you hear a call saying: a young white male is entering a WalMart with a rifle and a handgun, he has multiple magazines, he is wearing body armor, a black shirt and khaki pants. He is now in the store. People are fleeing and the alarm has went off.

      Just because he was filming doesn’t mean he wasn’t going to do something bad. It’s not like that anymore because of the Christchurch gunmen decided it was best to film himself so the government couldn’t hide what happened. Don’t think that GoPro or cellphone is going to protect you like it did a couple of years ago. There has been two mass shootings in a year where the shooter filmed himself during his attack.

      1. avatar Chief Censor says:

        This guy looks like a copy cat.

        https://jimheath.tv/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/el-paso-shooter.jpg

        I can’t see how pro 2A guys can defend this act. This was a stunt at the very least. The only good person with a gun made sure he couldn’t commit an attack, he didn’t run away from the man with the gun. The employees evacuated the store before any shots were fired just in case. The police arrived to detain him and investigate him, having probable cause he was about to commit a crime.

        His sister told him not to do it. She said it was a dumb idea (considering the shooting that happened a few days ago at WalMart). He had previous beef with Walrmart. He wanted to prove a political point. He wanted to know if WalMart supports the 2A. He had posted on his Facebook that he was not happy with WalMart’s policies. He decided to go through with his stunt on his own since his sister was willing to aid him.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          * since his sister wasn’t willing to aid him.

  59. avatar MDH says:

    Complete moron. This is what happens when an entire generation learns common sense, morality, ethics, and judgement through video games, social media, and pocket sized personal computers.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email