Is Indian gun control partly to blame for Mumbai?
A couple of terrorists armed with machine guns went to a McDonald's and
opened fire. They killed one Israeli, before someone in the crowd pulled out a
gun and killed one of the terrorists, and others subdued the other terrorists.
The captured terrorist said they had not known that Israeli civilians carry
firearms. They had hoped to kill many in McDonalds, before moving to other
locations to carry out more murder [familar to Mumbaikars].
Our draconian gun control laws have ensured that large cities filled with millions of Indians have no way to defend themselves. We are among the softest victims in the world - we have no compulsory military service (unlike Israel, Germany, Switzerland, etc.), and no access to firearms. Consider that the US has 96million gun owners for a population of 300million. India has almost no gun owners compared to its large population. You think 10 terrorists could hold an American city hostage for 3 days? Not a chance. Any of the 600 odd guests at the 2 hotels in America might have had a handgun, which would have ended the siege pretty quickly.
Here are 3 great articles on Indian gun control:
Here is a website about Indians who feel the same way - that Indians ought to own guns, just like Americans do, and that an armed citizenry is the best guarantee of public safety