MO - Off-duty firefighter stops man armed w/ 100 rounds of ammo at S Springfield Walmart, 8 Aug 2019

[Rocky1]

Man charged with making terrorist threat for walking into Missouri Walmart with rifle, body armor

 

[TristanP]

The ones who dress up in camo and body armour, load up hundreds of rounds of ammo and go parading around Walmart brandishing their assault rifles in order to frighten the public - I consider those freaks. JMO

Just curious, but why does any sane person need that kind of gear and weaponry while shopping at Walmart or the grocery store or a movie theater, etc?

Ask the people in El Paso.

 

[TristanP]

Man charged with making terrorist threat for walking into Missouri Walmart with rifle, body armor

As far as I can tell, there are no legal grounds to stand on here. They’re going to end up being sued for wrongful arrest because he wasn’t breaking any law whatsoever.

It’s a perfect way to prove a point of how absurd and ridiculous the laws are that someone can do something like this completely within the law.

 

[Kubirai]

While many heroic legally armed citizens are saving lives it rarely makes MSM national news.
...
I feel much more protected no matter where I go out publically if I see armed police officers there or an armed citizen carrying their weapon on their side. I try to stay away from any business that advertises they are a gun free zone.

Jmho

Every single story like this is reported widely in MSM and other media. The hero is interviewed, praised, etc.

If this person started shooting right away, like the El Paso killer, our hero could have become one of many victims.

 

[LadyL]

are there people who actually support this moron?

if it was just a social experiment, why did he need ammunition?

 

[Rocky1]

As far as I can tell, there are no legal grounds to stand on here. They’re going to end up being sued for wrongful arrest because he wasn’t breaking any law whatsoever.

It’s a perfect way to prove a point of how absurd and ridiculous the laws are that someone can do something like this completely within the law.

I agree. This is going to get dicey.
Here's the statute on making a terrorist threat in Missouri.
2016 Missouri Revised Statutes :: TITLE XXXVIII CRIMES AND PUNISHMENT; PEACE OFFICERS AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS (556-600) :: Chapter 574 Offenses Against Public Order :: Section 574.120 Making a terrorist threat, second degree--penalty.
From the video I posted, this guy was carrying that rifle properly. You're supposed to either carry it the way he is, or have it strapped over your back. It wasn't up against his shoulder like he was getting ready to fire.
That takes care of subsection one. Where is the "implied threat?"
Subsection 2 does not apply.
Subsection 3 does not apply.
If the guy was not breaking any law, then one may argue that the manager should be charged with making a terrorist threat by pulling the fire alarm and causing panic.
Remember, you can't yell fire in a movie theater if there's no fire.
Subsection 3 applies.
(3) Causes a false belief or fear that an incident has occurred or that a condition exists involving danger to life.)
Here's the exception. It is also marked subsection 3.
(3. No offense is committed under this section by a person acting in good faith with the purpose to prevent harm.)
One could argue that the reason he was armed is because after El Paso, he was acting in good faith with the purpose to prevent harm to himself and the public from a real shooter entering Walmart and opening fire.
If he didn't break any law, is it his fault that the public may not be aware of the law, and what he was doing was perfectly legal?
If what the fireman did was acceptable, would it have been just as acceptable if he saw the fireman carrying a gun and held him at gunpoint?
One thing I think is safe to say. By next week, you'll be seeing signs at the door of Walmart saying "no guns allowed." IMO.

 

[Rocky1]

are there people who actually support this moron?

if it was just a social experiment, why did he need ammunition?

I don't believe there are many that support this moron.
Having said that, I do believe there are many that support exercising the constitution in general.

He didn't need ammunition. Then again, he didn't need the rifle or the vest. I believe he was testing to see the reaction he would get.

 

[Rocky1]

Here's an article about a man that was open carrying in a park in Springfield.
A cop stopped him and told him it was illegal to do that. He explained to the cop that it wasn't. Not only was it legal, but the Park board thanked the man for setting the cop straight.

After confrontation, open carry guns OK'd in Springfield parks

I wonder what the reaction would have been if this guy walked into the park instead of the Walmart?
Again, dicey IMO.

 

[Rocky1]

Suspect in disturbance at Missouri Walmart says he was testing 2nd Amendment rights: prosecutors

Here's a quote from the above article.

He said he had bought the rifle and body armor because of three recent shootings and a stabbing, and wanted to protect himself.

 

[neesaki]

If it was merely a social experiment then the firefighter didn't need to be armed, since nothing was going to happen anyway.

Regardless, lunatics is indeed the correct term and yes they do plan this stuff. Many delight when it is more than an experiment. They get away with it do to all the desperate false equivalency, similar to this thread with the repeated praising of armed citizens and assertions they save this and they saved that.

Meanwhile I don't deal with theoretical. Family trees are being destroyed everywhere. Quite ironic that this site tries to patch together old wounds from family trees. An identification is made once in a while. That's wonderful. Then we lose exponentially more than that via the latest armed lunatic, chopping off one branch after another.

A “social experiment “? Quite a dangerous undertaking for a Social Experiment, don’t you think?
At least we do agree on the term “lunatic”.

Beyond that, there seems some confusion on your part concerning Family Trees. I do realize it’s an interesting topic, but, that’s not our focus here.
Here’s a link if you’re interested in family trees:
Ancestry® | Genealogy, Family Trees & Family History Records

 

[Betty P]

are there people who actually support this moron?

if it was just a social experiment, why did he need ammunition?

JMO, he's a killer who lost his nerve and was flushed out by the manager setting off the fire alarm. You can't believe anything he says. People this jacked up and unbalanced are going to say whatever they can to save their hide.

Can you imagine if a black person or someone of Middle Eastern origin walked through a Walmart doing the same thing? They would have been shot dead within a few minutes.

ETA: Reminds me of the murder of John Crawford III

Shooting of John Crawford III - Wikipedia

Black guy playing around with a BB gun in a Walmart in Beavercreek, OH. You can guess how that story ends. Officers shot him dead without giving an verbal warning. Just walked up and Bang! He was huddled on the floor, wounded and begging for his life. The officers just blew him away. For playing with a BB gun.

 

[Gardenista]

JMO, he's a killer who lost his nerve and was flushed out by the manager setting off the fire alarm. You can't believe anything he says. People this jacked up and unbalanced are going to say whatever they can to save their hide.

Can you imagine if a black person or someone of Middle Eastern origin walked through a Walmart doing the same thing? They would have been shot dead within a few minutes.

ETA: Reminds me of the murder of John Crawford III

Shooting of John Crawford III - Wikipedia

Black guy playing around with a BB gun in a Walmart in Beavercreek, OH. You can guess how that story ends. Officers shot him dead without giving an verbal warning. Just walked up and Bang! He was huddled on the floor, wounded and begging for his life. The officers just blew him away. For playing with a BB gun.

Just saw a youtube video of a black guy doing a 2nd amendment audit in WM. He was fine.

 

[Betty P]

Just saw a youtube video of a black guy doing a 2nd amendment audit in WM. He was fine.

Sorry, no offense intended, but I don't believe you tube videos.

 

[Boxer]

As far as I can tell, there are no

I agree. This is going to get dicey.
Here's the statute on making a terrorist threat in Missouri.
2016 Missouri Revised Statutes :: TITLE XXXVIII CRIMES AND PUNISHMENT; PEACE OFFICERS AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS (556-600) :: Chapter 574 Offenses Against Public Order :: Section 574.120 Making a terrorist threat, second degree--penalty.
From the video I posted, this guy was carrying that rifle properly. You're supposed to either carry it the way he is, or have it strapped over your back. It wasn't up against his shoulder like he was getting ready to fire.
That takes care of subsection one. Where is the "implied threat?"
Subsection 2 does not apply.
Subsection 3 does not apply.
If the guy was not breaking any law, then one may argue that the manager should be charged with making a terrorist threat by pulling the fire alarm and causing panic.
Remember, you can't yell fire in a movie theater if there's no fire.
Subsection 3 applies.
(3) Causes a false belief or fear that an incident has occurred or that a condition exists involving danger to life.)
Here's the exception. It is also marked subsection 3.
(3. No offense is committed under this section by a person acting in good faith with the purpose to prevent harm.)
One could argue that the reason he was armed is because after El Paso, he was acting in good faith with the purpose to prevent harm to himself and the public from a real shooter entering Walmart and opening fire.
If he didn't break any law, is it his fault that the public may not be aware of the law, and what he was doing was perfectly legal?
If what the fireman did was acceptable, would it have been just as acceptable if he saw the fireman carrying a gun and held him at gunpoint?
One thing I think is safe to say. By next week, you'll be seeing signs at the door of Walmart saying "no guns allowed." IMO.

legal grounds to stand on here. They’re going to end up being sued for wrongful arrest because he wasn’t breaking any law whatsoever.

It’s a perfect way to prove a point of how absurd and ridiculous the laws are that someone can do something like this completely within the law.

It belongs to the "your rights end where my nose begins."
Where is that line? It needs to take into account the killing power of modern arms.

 

[Boxer]

I don't believe there are many that support this moron.
Having said that, I do believe there are many that support exercising the constitution in general.

He didn't need ammunition. Then again, he didn't need the rifle or the vest. I believe he was testing to see the reaction he would get.

MOO Since was prepared to kill, I suggest he intended to, then decided not to. Lucky Walmart Shoppers that day. Testing his 2nd Amendment Rights sounds like a defense attorney throwing out alternative explanations. MOO glad he decided not to go through with it.

 

[PayrollNerd]

POLICE: Suspect told his sister he wanted to conduct a social experiment

JMO, they'll drop the charges or bargain down to misdemeanor, then we'll have to tolerate dozens of copycats every week.

Driver, Officer injured in crash responding to Springfield Walmart incident

Driver, Officer injured in crash responding to Springfield Walmart incident

Which came first, the sister's story? or the attorney's defense story? Someone putting defense ideas in his head from the get go? Sure sounds like premeditated behavior. He was mad that he was too young (under 21) to buy a gun at Walmart based on his Facebook post - so in his screwed up brain - lets terrorize and punish others? Makes no sense whatsoever. I hope they can pin something, anything on him in order to keep him out of society, long enough for the neurons in his immature brain to finish connecting, if they ever do.

"She told investigators that Andreychenko said he wanted to see if Walmart would respect his second amendment rights. Angelice referred to Andreychenko's actions as those of an immature boy.

Anastasia Andreychenko, the suspect's sister, said she received a call from him just after 3:00 p.m. Thursday. Andreychenko asked her if she would videotape him going into the Walmart with a gun, and that he referred to the action as a social experiment on how his second amendment right would be respected in a public area. Anastasia told him it was a bad idea, and that she did not want to help him take video."

 

[Rocky1]

MOO Since was prepared to kill, I suggest he intended to, then decided not to. Lucky Walmart Shoppers that day. Testing his 2nd Amendment Rights sounds like a defense attorney throwing out alternative explanations. MOO glad he decided not to go through with it.

I would have thought he intended to kill as well, however, my belief is that if that was the case, he would have started shooting when he first entered the door to kill as many as he could before LE showed up.
But he didn't. He grabbed a shopping cart, and started walking around the store, and exited with everyone else.

 

[Rocky1]

Which came first, the sister's story? or the attorney's defense story? Someone putting defense ideas in his head from the get go? Sure sounds like premeditated behavior. He was mad that he was too young (under 21) to buy a gun at Walmart based on his Facebook post - so in his screwed up brain - lets terrorize and punish others? Makes no sense whatsoever. I hope they can pin something, anything on him in order to keep him out of society, long enough for the neurons in his immature brain to finish connecting, if they ever do.

"She told investigators that Andreychenko said he wanted to see if Walmart would respect his second amendment rights. Angelice referred to Andreychenko's actions as those of an immature boy.

Anastasia Andreychenko, the suspect's sister, said she received a call from him just after 3:00 p.m. Thursday. Andreychenko asked her if she would videotape him going into the Walmart with a gun, and that he referred to the action as a social experiment on how his second amendment right would be respected in a public area. Anastasia told him it was a bad idea, and that she did not want to help him take video."

You Tube is loaded with videos of people that want to "exercise their second amendment rights" and strap on an AR15 and walk down the street, or walk into a Starbucks etc, just waiting for LE to show up so they can interact with them.
I believe most of these videos are made to get clicks and ratings.

 

[Inthedetails]

Which came first, the sister's story? or the attorney's defense story? Someone putting defense ideas in his head from the get go? Sure sounds like premeditated behavior. He was mad that he was too young (under 21) to buy a gun at Walmart based on his Facebook post - so in his screwed up brain - lets terrorize and punish others? Makes no sense whatsoever. I hope they can pin something, anything on him in order to keep him out of society, long enough for the neurons in his immature brain to finish connecting, if they ever do.

"She told investigators that Andreychenko said he wanted to see if Walmart would respect his second amendment rights. Angelice referred to Andreychenko's actions as those of an immature boy.

Anastasia Andreychenko, the suspect's sister, said she received a call from him just after 3:00 p.m. Thursday. Andreychenko asked her if she would videotape him going into the Walmart with a gun, and that he referred to the action as a social experiment on how his second amendment right would be respected in a public area. Anastasia told him it was a bad idea, and that she did not want to help him take video."

I think he was mad at Walmart for not selling him a certain weapon so he went into the store with his gun with the intention of proving that Walmart was hypocritical? That doesn't make much sense, but I think that is what he was doing.

I think it was smart to pull the fire alarm to calmly get people to exit quickly. No one will fault the manager for that move - it is not the same as shouting fire in a theater, imo.

jmo

 

[Boxer]

I think he was mad at Walmart for not selling him a certain weapon so he went into the store with his gun with the intention of proving that Walmart was hypocritical? That doesn't make much sense, but I think that is what he was doing.

I think it was smart to pull the fire alarm to calmly get people to exit quickly. No one will fault the manager for that move - it is not the same as shouting fire in a theater, imo.

jmo

MOO that he was going to "test his rights" is a good cover story to have arranged before hand in case he changed his mind.