On Nov 30, 7:26 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
wrote in message


I readily concede that point Ed - if, after the attackers had used
Tactics 101 (ie, throw some grenades then spray the area with
automatic weapons fire, just in case anyone was armed) and hopefully
the armed civilian would be still able to hide with his pistol and
take out at least one of them if threatened, before the attackers
colleagues sprayed the area again to take care of the armed citizen
(and anyone else nearby) ....then I guess it would be good argument
for an armed civilian population.

Still, its all academic, it might have been you who said that no one
would know how they would react in such a situation, bull**** aside.
And we sit here in front of our PCs being sage and wise about
situations that I, at least, hope I never encounter. And we can vote
for whoever promises to take care of the "bad guys" so we can keep on
being armchair experts without having to expose ourselves to any real
danger.

Its 12.30 here in Melbourne, Sunday, all is peaceful, I will have
another coffee, then go and do some gardening while the weather is
nice, thinking of the poor *******s who got killed because they were
in the wrong place at the wrong time and Global Politics intercepted
with their daily lives....I am sure their families will take comfort
from these "how it should have been" discussions here and no doubt in
other forums.

Andrew VK3BFA.