If I see a person with a gun and I assume, not that it would be an assumption because I don’t know without other clues from their behavior, that it’s not for protection then it could be a bunch of things. Maybe they just like guns, maybe they think it makes them look cool, tough, or something else, maybe they shoot for fun, hunt, shoot competitively, and so on. I agree that if people are clearly trying to intimidate people that is wrong but do you agree that the armed people rioting, looting, and whatever else in cities like Portland, Philly, etc. are wrong for doing so? You’ve defined them as terrorists so I assume you would deem their actions inappropriate. Someone simply carrying legally, even if not for protection, can’t be deemed terrorism on its own. There had to be some action of intimidation with it.