His major point is that individuals need to use major caliber weapons to respond to situation like the Mumbai attacks. The police in the Victoria Terminus Station were armed with bolt action rifles capable of taking out the terrorists at long distance. They ran for cover because they had never been trained to engage an armed opponent with superior firepower. The men and women on the platform were unarmed. Had 10 percent of the people on the platform been armed with a .32 or .38 caliber weapon, the attack could have been thwarted with less loss of life.
The people of India are generally speaking an unarmed populace. The victims at the restaurant were set to fail as they were unarmed and in that neighborhood of Mumbai people have had a false sense of security.
The Oberoi and Taj hotels had great front door security but lacked security on the doors entering the Kitchens. This was a major failure on the part of the hotels. At the same time hotel residents did not have an escape plan for them to use as the events unfolded.
No one faced a dozen riflemen as purported by Mr. Suarez. There were two sent to the Victoria Terminus Station, two were at the restaurant, two at the Oberoi and two at the Taj. The final two were at the Jewish Community Center. The two at the restaurant left there and stole an automobile and threw grenades at two location towards central Mumbai. Had a few people been armed at any of the locations things might have turned out differently.
Now let's look at the situation in the U.S. Less than one percent of the people eligible to have a concealed carry permit have one. We need to begin a campaign to increase that number to ten percent.
The model for this position is the nation of Israel. In the late sixties few men carried and terrorists could shoot people down at will. Today when you walk down a street in Jerusalem you will see men routinely carrying weapons openly. Few people are shot by terrorists now as the terrorist knows he will be shot in the process. Today bombs are the tool.
After achieving the ten percent goal, training in marksmanship and how to engage the armed opponent is necessary. I would rather see a dozen men with keltecs and Smith snubbies that one or two with a major caliber.
By the way, Mr. Suarez indicates the .45 caliber weapon has too few cartridges to be effective, I offer the Springfield XD-45 with 14 rounds as an effective tool.
The campaign to move to the 10 percent could be done by members of the Lion, Optimists, Sertoma and other service organization speaking on the value of an armed populace in these tough times.
Suarez has small hands... ;-)
I thought the same thing you did about that statement regarding the .45. I like my 13+1 Glock 21.
Regards,
Raven6
I suspect that we are already seeing some deterrence effect with even 1% of the citizens armed.
10% would be wonderful.