On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 18:11:24 -0500, Wes wrote:

Ignoramus11056 wrote:

What they forgot to say that it relied also on the fact that the
Indian citizens who were attacked, were not armed. Somehow, I have
hard times visualizing this attack happening in, say, Oklahoma City.

Do you think the results would be much different if the same number of similar armed
terrorists stormed a Cook County luxury hotel?

Of course not. Chicago has a handgun ban. Only the drug dealers and
other criminals could defend themselves. ;-)

On a more serious note, there would probably be a very similar outcome
in most American cities. Even though a fair number of people have
carry permits, probably the majority who have them don't carry on a
daily basis. The one or two citizens who were armed would defend
themselves and others close by, but it's unlikely they'd be out
creeping around corners hunting the terrorists with their handguns.
There might be a little less loss of life, but not much.

Now an attack on a roadside restaurant at 4:30 AM on the opening day
of Buck season in PA - that might be a different story. There are
approximately 1 million licensed hunters in PA, the majority of which
will be out there this Monday AM - a small standing army at no cost to
the populace.

RWL