Man in body armor and armed with rifle sparks panic at Missouri Walmart

  
Via:  freefaller  •  2 weeks ago  •  42 comments

Man in body armor and armed with rifle sparks panic at Missouri Walmart

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


The armed man who walked into a Missouri Walmart store dressed in body armor and fatigues and was detained at gunpoint by an off-duty firefighter is "lucky he's alive still" considering the situation he created, a police official said. No shots were fired in the incident that happened just after 4 p.m. Thursday in Springfield, Missouri, a city of around 160,000 in the southwestern part of the state, officials said.


The man who is said to be white and in his 20s was detained by the armed firefighter until police arrived at the Walmart Neighborhood Market, police said in a statement . The man in body armor had been seen pushing a shopping cart and recording video of himself on a cellphone, police told NBC affiliate KYTV . Police were called about a possible active shooter, and the store manager pulled a fire alarm and told people to evacuate, Springfield police Lt. Mike Lucas said.


"He walked in here, heavily armed with body armor on, in military fatigues, and caused a great amount of panic inside the store," Lucas said about the incident that came days after mass shootings at an El Paso Walmart and an Ohio entertainment district that left more than 30 people dead. "... Obviously, what's happened in Texas and Dayton and all that kind of stuff in the last seven days — that’s on everybody’s minds."


It was not clear what motivated the person in custody to enter the Springfield store. The open carrying of firearms is legal in Missouri, as long as the weapon is not displayed in a threatening manner, according to the National Rifle Association’s website .


Though police did not name the person, police and online jail records indicate Dmitriy Andreychenko, 20, had been arrested. The man entered the store with a tactical rifle, a handgun and more than 100 rounds of ammunition, KYTV reported, citing police. He was said to have been stopped by the armed firefighter after leaving through an emergency exit.


Walmart said in a statement that "the behavior of a customer was concerning to those inside our store and out of caution, law enforcement was contacted." When police arrived, there were "a lot of people hiding outside" behind barriers and businesses in a scene that "was pretty chaotic for a couple of minutes," Lucas said.


Tammy Lea told KYTV that she was in the checkout line when she saw people running from the store, "screaming there was a gunman in the store, shooter in the store." "I am still shaking. It is just terrifying," she told the station. Julie Belew told NBC News in a phone interview that she had parked and was about to get out of her car and go into the store when she heard someone yell, "is that a real rifle?" She said she then saw a man with his hands up. Belew said that the first thing that came to her mind was Saturday's deadly shooting at the El Paso Walmart.


Police praised the firefighter's actions amid the chaos and panic created by the armed man. "His intent was not to cause peace or comfort to anybody that was in the business here," Lucas said. "In fact, he's lucky he's alive still, to be honest."

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Freefaller
1  seeder  Freefaller    2 weeks ago

Given the story and outcome I have my doubts this guy had any intention of harming anyone (hell he may not have broken any laws) but what I do know is that he intended to be and is a complete dickhead.

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1  It Is ME  replied to  Freefaller @1    2 weeks ago
I do know is that he intended to be and is a complete dickhead.

Saw it that way myself. Stupid little Shit ! 

He's in the papers now though. jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Freefaller
1.1.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  It Is ME @1.1    2 weeks ago
He's in the papers now though.

Betcha he's got more Tweeter (or whatever) followers now, they all hate him but he's got more

 
 
 
It Is ME
1.1.2  It Is ME  replied to  Freefaller @1.1.1    2 weeks ago
Betcha he's got more Tweeter (or whatever) followers now

Twitting is the bomb. jrSmiley_89_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2  sandy-2021492  replied to  Freefaller @1    2 weeks ago
I do know is that he intended to be and is a complete dickhead.

Mission accomplished.

 
 
 
Freefaller
1.2.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2    2 weeks ago

Yup

 
 
 
Drakkonis
1.3  Drakkonis  replied to  Freefaller @1    2 weeks ago

I'm for the right to carry, own so called "assault weapons" and the rest. However, people like this think they are helping the cause by doing profoundly idiotic things like this. This guy does more to hurt Second Amendment supporters than the gun grabbers do. Just because the law doesn't prevent stupidity doesn't mean you should go out and be stupid. Just pisses me off. 

 
 
 
Freefaller
1.3.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Drakkonis @1.3    2 weeks ago
Just pisses me off.

Lol you're not alone in feeling that way

 
 
 
Split Personality
2  Split Personality    2 weeks ago

He probably wanted to sue WalMart for violating his rights...

 
 
 
Freefaller
2.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Split Personality @2    2 weeks ago

Ahhh the lawsuit lottery, it's possible

 
 
 
XDm9mm
2.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Split Personality @2    2 weeks ago
He probably wanted to sue WalMart for violating his rights...

He'll have to forget that idea.  It wasn't Walmart that stopped him.  It was the answer to JR's continual question "Where was the good guy with a gun?"

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
2.2.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  XDm9mm @2.2    2 weeks ago

If that offends you and your sensibilities, so be it.

Funny thing is if he had started shooting the "good guy" would have been a moot point. The only reason you can even tout a "good guy with a gun" is because it seems like this asshole didn't actually plan on killing anyone, he was just being a fucking asshole.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
2.2.2  Drakkonis  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

Yep. And the sad thing is that there's probably people out there who think he's a hero or something. I'm for open carry but there has to be a purpose for it and such purpose is far and few in between. Say, you want to walk to the gun range with a long gun that is a mile away from your house, maybe. And even then I'd have it in a case if at all possible. Walking around your neighborhood supermarket with a gun on your hip is pretty stupid, too. All it does is scare others and, if there's a bad guy around, makes you the first person he's going to shoot. It's tactically stupid. 

Some of us need to realize that it isn't just about one's rights. It's about community and the most responsible way to exercise your rights, not just smear them in someone else's face. Like this idiot. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.3  Split Personality  replied to  Split Personality @2    2 weeks ago
Prosecutors on Friday filed a terrorist threat charge against a 20-year-old man who said he walked into a Missouri store wearing body armor and carrying a loaded rifle and handgun to test whether Walmart would honor his constitutional right to bear arms. ...

"I wanted to know if Walmart honored the Second Amendment," a probable cause statement released Friday with the charges quoted Andreychenko as saying.

Andreychenko started to record himself with his phone while he was still in the car parked at Walmart. He got the body armor from the trunk of his car and put it on before grabbing a shopping cart and walking into the store, according to the statement....

His wife, Angelice Andreychenko, told investigators that she warned him it was not a good idea, adding that he was an immature boy.

His sister, Anastasia Andreychenko, said he had asked her if she would videotape him going into Walmart with a gun and she also told him it was a bad idea, according to the probable cause statement.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/armed-man-at-walmart-says-he-was-testing-right-to-bear-arms/ar-AAFxBg0?ocid=spartanntp

 
 
 
Freefaller
2.3.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Split Personality @2.3    2 weeks ago

Thanks for the follow up SP. I think his wife was closest to the truth about his stunt and him.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago
The man entered the store with a tactical rifle, a handgun and more than 100 rounds of ammunition,

That is legal in Missouri, because "freedom". 

How is that working out now in a country where tens of thousands of people are shot every year? And susceptible to panic? 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @3    2 weeks ago
That is legal in Missouri,

Wow John...

You always ask "Where was the good guy with a gun."

Then when you GET the good guy with the gun, you piss and moan about what initiated the "GOOD GUY WITH THE GUN" story.

Would you prefer we walk around all the time with rainbow shirts and have unicorns stuck up our ass?

Here's the deal John.  I carry simply to protect my loved ones and myself from the low life scumbags of society.  The VERY SAME REASON police carry.  To protect themselves, you're a secondary consideration.   

If that offends you and your sensibilities, so be it.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
3.1.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  XDm9mm @3.1    2 weeks ago

The problem is that we even have to talk about a "good guy with a gun." 

I carry simply to protect my loved ones and myself from the low life scumbags of society. 

If I ever see you carrying in public I am going to call the cops and report a potential mass shooter. Here's the deal, I have no choice but to assume that you are threat to myself and my family and I have to protect them against the next piece of shit who will decide they deserve to die just because. 

The VERY SAME REASON police carry.

GIGANTIC difference.

To protect themselves, you're a secondary consideration.   

And that is the reason I will call the cops if I see someone open carrying, to protect myself. Your second amendments rights are not even a secondary consideration, they are no consideration for me at all. Fuck your second amendments rights, my and my family's safety always comes first. 

If that offends you and your sensibilities, so be it.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
3.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Thrawn 31 @3.1.1    2 weeks ago
The problem is that we even have to talk about a "good guy with a gun." 
I carry simply to protect my loved ones and myself from the low life scumbags of society. 
If I ever see you carrying in public I am going to call the cops and report a potential mass shooter. Here's the deal, I have no choice but to assume that you are threat to myself and my family and I have to protect them against the next piece of shit who will decide they deserve to die just because. 

I have no problem with that.  I'll present my LTC to the responding officers and proceed merrily on my way.   I don't give a shit what you ASSume by the way. 

The VERY SAME REASON police carry.

GIGANTIC difference.

To protect themselves, you're a secondary consideration.   

Really?  Tell me EXACTLY how it's a "GIGANTIC" difference.   Is their life in some way more important than mine to my loved ones and my extended family and friends?   Actually, all LEO's I know, on a local, state and federal level agree with my sentiment.  THEY know that if the SHTF, their primary concern is keeping themselves alive and functioning to engage the threat.  While they have concerns about 'civilians' in the area, they are in fact a secondary concern.  

And that is the reason I will call the cops if I see someone open carrying, to protect myself. Your second amendments rights are not even a secondary consideration, they are no consideration for me at all. Fuck your second amendments rights, my and my family's safety always comes first. 

If that offends you and your sensibilities, so be it.

That's your right.  Call whoever the shit you damn well please.  Oh when the lowlife scumbag thugs (LLSBTs) come knocking, just call the police and hope they arrive in time to protect you and yours.  At least the police will have the ability to do so.   You'll be relegated to watching the carnage the LLSBTs do to your loved ones in sheer helplessness.

If that offends your sensibilities, I don't give a shit.  Just deal with it.

 
 
 
Kavika
4  Kavika     2 weeks ago

As the LEO said in an interview later, ''The guy is lucky he is still alive''....

 
 
 
Freefaller
4.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Kavika @4    2 weeks ago

Lol well he's still a dickhead, but at least he's a lucky one.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5  Tacos!    2 weeks ago

Asshole. This is just like the proverbial shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. He put on this unnecessary show knowing it would throw everyone into a panic (and justifiably so). What a dick.

 
 
 
Freefaller
5.1  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Tacos! @5    2 weeks ago
Asshole

Yep

put on this unnecessary show knowing it would throw everyone into a panic

But he gets his 15 minutes of fame so that makes it ok /s.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.3  XDm9mm  replied to  Tacos! @5    2 weeks ago
Asshole

Please.  Try to remember for future reference.  ASSHOLES have a distinct and very useful purpose in life.   

SHITHEADS on the other hand are absolutely useless to not only themselves, but society in general.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
6  Thrawn 31    2 weeks ago

Big shock, a young white male.

Honestly, I will call the cops on anyone, especially if you are a white male, who is in public and armed with a firearm. I have no choice but to assume you are the next piece of shit who had a bad day and wants to take it out on the world that you feel owes you something. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6    2 weeks ago
Big shock, a young white male.

And he was doing something that is LEGAL.  Oh the horror!!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
6.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1    2 weeks ago
LEGAL

Debatable.  We have First Amendment rights, too, but they don't extend to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

 
 
 
Freefaller
6.1.2  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1    2 weeks ago

No one is arguing the legality of what he did (although I believe he's being looked at for terrorist threat charges) just does the manner in which he exercised his legal rights makes him a dickhead or a shithead?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

There is noting debatable about it.  It was legal.  He wasn't a threat to anybody.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Freefaller @6.1.2    2 weeks ago
although I believe he's being looked at for terrorist threat charges

And if true, he's being looked at for something that is legal.  

just does the manner in which he exercised his legal rights makes him a dickhead or a shithead?

Maybe in the eyes of those who are deathly afraid of firearms and paranoid.

 
 
 
Freefaller
6.1.5  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.4    2 weeks ago
Maybe in the eyes of those who are deathly afraid of firearms and paranoid

Well unlike you I won't pretend to be privy to the motivations or thoughts of others.  But speaking for myself I am neither of those things and am still quite certain this guy was being a dickhead.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6.1.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Freefaller @6.1.5    2 weeks ago
Well unlike you I won't pretend to be privy to the motivations or thoughts of others. 

Never made the claim to know what anybody is thinking.  I have the same resource you have - the seeded article.  The seeded article that states the police reported he was pushing a cart and on his phone.

But speaking for myself I am neither of those things and am still quite certain this guy was being a dickhead.

That's a matter of opinion.  One we differ on.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
6.1.7  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.3    2 weeks ago
He wasn't a threat to anybody.

He was a threat to anyone who felt threatened.  That's how it works.

 

 
 
 
Drakkonis
6.1.8  Drakkonis  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1    2 weeks ago
And he was doing something that is LEGAL.  Oh the horror!!

He was doing something that was stupid, whether or not it was legal. Two back to back mass shootings and somehow this idiot thought this would be a good idea. I'm willing to bet that 99% of second amendment supporters would have been pooping out kittens had they been there and saw this idiot approaching. I'll bet a significant portion of them would have drawn on this idiot too, just like the fireman did. And they would have been right to do so. 

I'm pro second amendment. Unfortunately, there is some portion of those who support it who do stupid stuff like this who, in my opinion, don't seem to understand that with that right comes responsibility. This guy did not care about responsibility and because of that he shouldn't have the right to have firearms, in my opinion. He swings his "right" around like a big club, beating everyone around him with it and thinks it's okay. I'm not exaggerating when I say that what this guy did was no different than thinking he has a right to go around with his dick hanging out and pushing it in everyone's face. 

There is noting debatable about it. It was legal. He wasn't a threat to anybody.

The fact that you are defending what he did makes me think you're the same kind of person. The whole world is all about you. According to your argument, the victims at the El Paso Walmart should have just assumed the killer was just exercising his second amendment rights. And it would have been true, right up until he started shooting people. Don't you get that??? How would anybody know that the idiot this seed is about wasn't a threat? What? Do you think the fireman should not have drawn his weapon on this guy until after he started shooting people? That in order to protect this idiot's second amendment rights, he should have waited until after he killed someone? 

This guy does more damage to the second amendment than any gun grabber could ever do. Anyone who understands responsibility cringes at this guy's lack of responsibility. When people try to take the right of open carry away they are going to point to guys like this as the reason and those of us who would use open carry responsibly will be hard pressed to argue. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
6.1.9  sandy-2021492  replied to  Drakkonis @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

Hear, hear!

 
 
 
Freefaller
6.1.10  seeder  Freefaller  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.6    2 weeks ago
That's a matter of opinion.  One we differ on.

So do tell us what your opinion on this young mans motivation for only a couple days after two big mass murders driving to Walmart, putting on his armour, camo, grabbing his rifle, gun, a bunch of ammo, going into the store, taking a big long cell movie of himself wandering around the store and finally trying to flee out the emergency exit was?  Was it a dickhead move or a test to ensure Walmart still respected the second amendment rights of it's customers or somewhere between the two?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
6.1.11  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.4    2 weeks ago

You make a good point that it was legal, but he reportedly had a hundred rounds on him.  Why would he need to carry that many rounds?  I've seen many pictures of those open carrying where it was legal but they were not wearing body armor or carrying massive amounts of rounds, just what was loaded in whatever gun they were carrying.  This idiot had to know that the country's nerves were on edge right now over the recent mass killings.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6.1.12  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @6.1.7    one week ago
He was a threat to anyone who felt threatened. 

So what you are saying is that he could have been a "threat" without the firearm.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
6.1.13  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Drakkonis @6.1.8    one week ago
He was doing something that was stupid, whether or not it was legal.

I didn't say is was a smart thing to do.  I said it was legal.  

The fact that you are defending what he did makes me think you're the same kind of person.

What I'm doing is trying to get people to understand what the real problem is.  After 26 years in the military, I KNOW a firearm is an inanimate object and no threat to anybody.  I will do NOTHING unless something causes it to do something.  People need to quit sugar coating all this and discuss the real problem and find a way to deal with it.  Stricter background checks is the equivalent clapping with one hand.  It's senseless and won't work.  People need to pull their heads from their 4th POC and take a look around them and pay attention to what's going on around them.  These can be preventable but not if people are more worried about what some self-centered fucktard in Hollywood is wearing.

 
 
 
Ronin2
6.1.14  Ronin2  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1    one week ago

Yes, it was legal; but given what has happened with mass shooters definitely not smart. 

They have charged him; but they will have a tough time making it stick since there is ample evidence he didn't intend to shoot anyone.

Maybe they get him on public endangerment, at best.

 
 
 
bugsy
6.2  bugsy  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6    2 weeks ago

What if you saw a black guy walking in a Wal Mart with an open weapon in search of rival gang members? Usually, when one sees the other, they just throw rounds at each other, mostly sideways. There is no restraint and no sense of aim..just shoot in the general direction. Absolutely no different than anyone else walking around with an open firearm looking to fire on someone....you just didn't have to separate your post by race...but I understand that's what liberals do.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
7  Paula Bartholomew    2 weeks ago

This reminds me of a scene from Demolition Man.

"You would use weapons against innocent civilians?" (police chief)

"Hell we use them to shop." (good/bad guy)

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Ed-NavDoc
Freefaller
Freedom Warrior
DanSchmidt1959
JumpDrive


26 visitors