Han wrote:
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in
:


"Han" wrote in message
...
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in
:


"Han" wrote in message

Perhaps one of the two should be a hero for taking the other
one
out. Let's get the rest of the story and base a decision on
facts.

Well, next time there is going to be a shooting like that, I'd
want to know who is going to volunteer to stand directly behind
one of the shooters.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Did you notice the sentence about getting the facts? Was anyone
standing behind the shooters? There are many possible scenarios
so
I'm not jumping to conclusions.

I'm just trying to emphasize that it was pure luck that no one
else
was hurt by flying bullets.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

That is exactly what I meant by waiting for facts. How do you know
it was pure luck? Is there even such a thing as luck? How do you
know there was flying bullets? How many shots were fired? Could be
shooter No 1 waited until there was no one else in range. We don't
know that and yet you say it was pure luck. I don't believe it.

There were 2 shooters who shot each other dead. That's really the
only relevant facts that I know. (Yes, they were provoked by their
wives, or whatever the relationships were). In such a case I think
it is indeed pure luck that eithere only 2 shots were fired, or all
the other shots (I don't know the number fired) went either totally
in the object of each shooter or completely wide of anyone.

If there's "pure luck" it might be that the luck was that both
shooters had been practicing regularly so that they hit what they were
aiming at.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)