I don't think you read that article well enough, it goes to great length to say that brandishing requires both the person being threatened, and bearer having the intent to threaten:

Another subjective factor is also usually involved, based on my limited and lay background. In addition to acting in an unsafe manner, the prosecution usually needs to prove that the people who witnessed the improper exhibition behavior thought it was unsafe at the time (in their terms.) Very subjective

And this makes sense - if someone just "feels" threatened, that's not a crime. I'm sure most people feel threatened by people with open carry permits. So no, you're misquoting a very specific part of a long document

And I didnt think I'd have to explain this, but it's a crime to attack someone. And he attacked them and tried to take their gun with the intent to shoot them. I think you'd have a tough time trying to prove that someone trying to wrestle a gun, out of someone's hands that's not threatening them, is not trying to use said gun to shoot