PICTURED: Haul of weapons man brought into Atlanta supermarket - before sharp-eyed employee called 911 after hearing someone loading weapons in the store bathroom A sharp-eyed Instacart worker is getting credit for helping offic

AP via Daily Mail (UK) ^ | 03/26/2021

[Lazamataz]

Silly of me to think a guy wearing a bullet proof vest, who sneaks in a bag full of guns into a supermarket, who then loads ammo into the guns in a bathroom stall, and emerges wearing a ski mask, is just a misunderstood good guy who really had no bad intentions?

Corrected to fit the facts of this case.

[Chainmail]

Thanks anyway - but I've probably been in more firefights than you have.

You just stay all comfy on the floor..

[Secret Agent Man]

against this type of attack a weapon isnt enough

you need body armor as well, wearing a vest

[snoringbear]

Maybe, maybe not. I’m a Vietnam vet, central highlands, 65 - 66.

[Chainmail]

"Maybe, maybe not. I’m a Vietnam vet, central highlands, 65 - 66."

Guess I'll have to revise my statement -MAYBE I've been in more firefights - and maybe not!

Welcome home! (and where'd you get that lying on the floor stuff?)

[Irish Eyes]

Wow, interesting

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

That sounds reasonable and not that hard to set off somebody who is on the edge anyway. Good post.

[snoringbear]

“ Welcome home! (and where’d you get that lying on the floor stuff?)”
**************

Thanks. Yes, let’s start over. Personally, if I should be in a completely dark environment and hear what I perceive to be a gun, any gun, being racked, cocked, etc, I would minimize my silhouette, locate and assess the source then decide what action to take. That’s all.

[BDParrish]

I cannot speak for others so please ignore me, but I believe as the debate continues that question will hinge on what the law actually states. If the second amendment can be ignored in certain situations then those situations would have to be stipulated by a lawmaking body. But so then Congress can infringe the right after all, just don’t allow the word “infringe” to be used. (My personal view on this is irrelevant to my point, but I feel it is naïve to think that the 2A can actually protect our rights.)

So I consider from your comment how some laws could be written to reflect your attitude:
—”No person other than law enforcement personnel, duly sworn etc. etc shall ever at any time wear a bullet proof vest in any bathroom...
—”An act prohibiting the loading of more than two firearms in any public restroom, etc etc.
-—”That when bags of firearms are brought into a public restroom to be loaded, those bags must contain no more than two handguns and two long guns etc etc...
-—”That when bags of firearms are brought into public restrooms, they shall not be carried in any manner that can be described as sneaky unless etc etc...
-—the right of the people to keep and bear ski masks shall not be infringed except when that exercise is silly or sneaky, or when also carrying a bag of guns in a manner that is sneaky or silly or said bag only contains handguns and contains no long gun, or said bag contains only weapons and not ammunition etc etc...

All this could be incorporated into a broad sweeping “common sense” gun reform package, The Pissing With Pistols Act.

Pardon me I realize I sound like I am mocking or scolding you. I don’t mean to, I just go off into joking and teasing quite naturally. I do think you are a patriot but it would take too long to rewrite more respectfully. I don’t want to delete because I would be very interested in your further comments if there is more for you to add. Please correct me with my thanks.

[Rebelbase]

The toilet stall armorer is obviously an educated man simply trying to express his 2A right.