I’d like to know more about the MO Walmart clown

When I heard about the idiot who went “shopping” at the Springfield, MO Walmart in body armor and carrying two AR-pattern rifles, I was immediately suspicious. It didn’t sound like the usual open-carry activist simply slinging a rifle as he went about his business.

My guess was that he’d turn out to be a left-winger trying to make a statement about how the ready availability of “assault weapons” is dangerous, so we need more gun control.

Today, I saw this report identifying him: Dmitriy Nickolayvich Andreychenko, with two interesting data points.

The first is that he’s charged with “making a terroristic threat in the first degree.”

Open carry is lawful in Missouri. Previous witness reports said he wasn’t doing anything overtly threatening, but was just going through the store with a shopping cart and phone. That doesn’t warrant the charge. If he was an OC demonstrator, I’d expect nothing but a disorderly conduct charge of some sort, and a stern lecture about judgement.

But… if he told cops he was doing as I surmised above — scaring people to make an anti-gun political point — that supports the terroristic threat charge.

The next data point comes at the tail end of the report. He’s from Portland, OR, home of the more virulent Pantifa types.

Heavy.com‘s report of his social media accounts (everything seems to have been scrubbed by the time I looked), does make him sound more like an RKBA type, but I wonder…

A 20 year-old from Portland deliberately doing something that makes honest gun owners look bad, at the worst possible time, charge with 1st degree threatening. Who likes to go masked.

Who do we know who like to do that?

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

4 thoughts on “I’d like to know more about the MO Walmart clown”

    1. “Robbing a bank is not lawful just because the robber used a gun and was “simply exercising his Second Amendment rights.” Similarly, committing a terroristic threat is not lawful just because the person doing so is armed with a rifle and claiming to be “simply exercising his Second Amendment rights.””

      I stopped reading right there.

      The argument/strawman being made is that it can’t be lawful to rob a bank (illegal) because you use a gun in that robbery (also illegal), as if the act of using a gun for illegal crimes and the act of carrying a gun legally is the same.

      What a retarded argument.

  1. If you piss ants wet yourselves in fear because someone correctly went about their daily business while bearing arms (arms = both armor and guns), then you’re the problem with 2A.

    Next it will be people who open carry a glock on their hip after someone does a mass shooting with a glock.

    Imagine it. Some people in a picture, minding their own business, while wearing a glock, and someone from behind took that picture, and its the day after a terror attack with handguns.

    Will you all be calling for “omg that’s too soon! omg dont use your right to carry in such poor taste! omg bad optics!” then as well?

    If you’re afraid of looking bad for wearing body armor or rifles in public, you’ve already lost the war against 2A, because your chilling effect will translate into future erosion.

Leave a Reply

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