http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?37490-quot-Alarm-quot-and-Terry-Stop-Court-Ruling
http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/index.cfm?fa=opinions.showOpinion&filename=353334MAJ
http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/gunstuff/legal/State_v_Casad_(unpublished).pdf
A similar case of open carry has been ruled on ... of course, in the Casad case (that's not a cite-able case??) the defendant motioned to suppress the evidence, won, and they had no hard evidence that he was carrying a rifle ... I wonder if the current guy's lawyer motioned to suppress..if not, then its waived.
I assume Casad did not talk to the cops at all....unlike in the current case. (I think that the defendant in this case made a statement that he was openly carrying a rifle ~ not smart---why it may seem obvious, to a third person, it would not ~ and may have killed his chances of a suppression motion being successful).
So the Casad case really did not rule that open carry of a rifle cannot be the basis of "causing alarm" but suppressed the evidence available in the case.
Not having the transcript of the guy's trial, so I'm guessing ... I would guess that no such motion was made in the current case. It may be the first one then to answer the legal conclusion that carrying a rifle can be enough in itself.
Again, answer no questions..none. You never know what will be used against you and what you tell cops will certainly not be used to help you, for sure.
Of course, its state specific when it comes to carry of long guns ... in CT, here is a state police bulletin on the subject of carry openly, including long guns ... note.. its specific to CT ... but is interesting reading even to others & possibly visitors
http://ctcarry.com/Document/Download/a034b530-1221-425d-a99f-53af710ff219