The difference, among other things, is that one could reasonably determine while taking the totality of the circumstances. Into account, that someone who is printing most likely has a permit and at minimum has gone through some level of training and background check.
That is completely different than someone walking down the street with a public ally recognizable "assualt rifle" with the specific and visually recorded intent to cause alarm and fear to incite a police response.
Apples or oranges.... Your preference.
Firearm ownership, use, and carrying requires no training. Is it a good idea? Yes, but not a requirement.
How can you judge intent by the fact that a man is simply carrying a rifle?
See, I have no problem with the fact that the police stopped the guy to talk to him. I have a problem with all of the supposed gun lovers on here that begrudge this man for using his 2nd amendment right whatever his motivation may have been.
*Edit* Actually i do have a problem with being stopped for exercising a constitutionally protected right. I guess I should say that I understand why the cops did it, because people aren't educated and aware enough of those rights. Could it be possible that was the original intent of the guy who made the video?'
Last edited:
