Big Al’s Security Guard Testimony | Part 1 | Open Carry Trial PT #18 | OnTheMoveShow

Welcome to On The Move with Mack Worley. Please Subscribe! In this video, the witness starts out being questioned outside of the presence of the jury. The witness was the security guard for Big Al’s bowling alley, which by the way, has a bar and serves alcohol and could hardly be considered a “family fun center” anymore than a restaurant could; however, he gives his version of events. Mack’s lawyer tries to find out the events that led up to Big Al’s being put on “lockdown status” and in what circumstances the security company allows for lockdown measures. It is clear that the standard of “anytime there possibly could be a threat” is lower than that of reasonable suspicion and probable cause; thus, the lockdown at Big Al’s should not be used as evidence of any wrong doing on Mack’s part. This is witness number two that testifies that Mack had no threatening actions and that the only thing the witness was concerned about was the simple fact that Mack was armed, which is not illegal. This is also the second witness to say that they would feel more comfortable if it was an openly carried pistol, which, in the eyes of the law, there is no difference between a pistol and a rifle. Additionally, pistols can kill just as easily as a semi-automatic AR-15s and are involved in vastly more homicides every year than rifles according to FBI statistics. It is important to note that Mack did not enter Big Al’s, nor did he have any intention of entering it; he was simply walking across their parking lot to access the public sidewalk. Lastly, Mack did not even know what he was walking toward until he got close enough to clear the trees that were obstructing his vision.

NOTE: Please do not contact or harass this witness. The only reason her identity was revealed was for purposes of transparency and because it is public record, available through FOIA requests.

This trial essentially boiled down to a citizen walking around a city, peacefully asserting his right to keep and bear arms. As far as the jury was concerned, they never saw the police interaction and were never told that Mack even got arrested. Their job was to determine if walking around with an AR-15 in public, without touching it or being threatening to others, was a violation of RCW 9.41.270 (, “Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm—Unlawful carrying or handling”, which it clearly is not. Washington is an open carry state, Mack was not threatening anyone (the Prosecution admitted that in this video: and it is arguable that any alarm that was created was a direct result of the police’s weapons drawn arrival (

Mack’s First Trial Results:

Mack’s Unlawful Arrest:

Vancouver Police Officer Won’t Give His Name:

Eberlestock Warhammer Bug Out Bag Review:

Check us out at:

On The Move With Mack Worley’s stores:

Know Your Rights! Assert Your Rights! Get On The Move!


My story of getting unlawfully arrested for Open Carry of a firearm:

Part 1:
Part 2:

Want to donate to Mack’s Legal Fund?
Defense fund is at:


Shares 0