Lady and guards shoot intruders in Kolkata

[FN-Five-Seven]

F-N,

You can indulge in your sarcasm. I am not going to engage or indulge you on that note for I do not relish wrestling with the proverbial in the mud,figuratively speaking.

So , just because I don't agree with your every comment , every single time , my comments become sarcasm . Okay , I can live with that .

So you are convinced that scaring, injuring and shooting to kill should be the logical progression?

Yes , because if we go in the reverse order , I don't think there is any point of trying to scare a corpse . It would simple not respond .

I must add your responses are starting to assume me .

Shooting into air: you are wasting ammunition.

It is not . Ammunition is not being wasted . It's being utilized in scaring the assailant .
Celebratory fire is a wastage of ammunition .
I am sure you are going to suggest that to practice shooting with live ammo is a wastage too , since nobody is getting killed .

Especially if you have a single or double barrel shotgun and reloading under stress is going to be a major challenge(Try doing that when someone times you. Even that should be stressful enough for you/ or most people to fumble)

Whether you are shooting to kill to shooting to injure , reloading a single barrel or a double barrel under stress is going to be a same thing .

the assailants construe it as your inability or lack of will to do what it takes and are only threatening. If the numbers are large, they will simply rush you or if even one or two attackers can cover the ground and snatch it from you.

Not a convincing theory . Sorry

have you shot a handgun or a rifle at anything that resembles a human target? Even a standing one?

Yes . I shot a mannequin with my uncle's Indian SxS 12 gauge double barrel . Blew off it's left leg in first attempt from a distance of 10 mtrs . I fired a Walther PPK , which belonged to a contractor who for for my Dad , at a beer bottle at approx 15 mts .Destroyed it .

Have you any idea how much time it takes for an average individual at 20 metres to get you?

Depends on the type of terrain he is covering . If you want a specific answer , ask a specific question.

Have you any idea what reaction time it takes to actually draw and shoot?Roughly 4-5 seconds. Can you draw and shoot in that time?

Never timed myself . But with practice , I am sure I will get better than my initial timing .

Do you really think that you are going to kneecap, a target the size of a tennis ball, your attackers?

I will definitely be going for his knee cap . If you are asking , will I be capable of , then with a shotgun , I think I have a good chance .

Do you think that shooting someone in the knee is going to stop them from proceeding further?

Yes . And even if they continue , they won't have the same pace .

People need not be drugged up or crazed up or psyched up to be able to withstand multiple gunshot wounds and still be operational.

Robocop Movie ; isn't it ?

Have you any idea why the 10mm and later the .40 S&W cartridges were developed?

No . And I am not interested either , because I won't be able own handguns which will chamber and fire these rounds .

Please cite one single self-defence expert that suggests the line of action that you espouse.

One of my uncles , who have served the Calcutta Police and West Bengal Police . He is retired now . During his career , he had made many enemies due his job , but due to his precautionary measures , he alive and in good health till now . That's good enough for me . May not be good enough for you , but good enough for me .

If you want to debate or discuss further, please do come up with facts or at least some informed opinions instead of mere opinions in support of your arguments.

Well , if you are hoping that I will start agreeing with everyone of your statements without questioning , as if they were gospel truths , that's not going to happen .

Finally, I am an Indian.

So from one Indian to another Indian ; don't blindly believe in every Indian statistic you find on the Web or Print .

F-N-Five-Seven

[timmy]

Its amazing how people sermonize on the course of action taken by a hapless but brave woman who choose to stand her ground.That after the state had summarily disowned her repeated plea for protection against mob voilence .I somehow feel strongly for the lady and what she stood for empowers all victims this menace of land mafia all over the country .Discounting the sermons which hardly mean anything ,some guts she has to give em back !

+1

However, I'm quickly coming to the opinion that some folks are not so much interested in sermonizing as they are in hearing themselves talk.

Apparently, some will drone on as long as they can troll here and get attention.

[Vikram]

F-N,

You can indulge in your sarcasm. I am not going to engage or indulge you on that note for I do not relish wrestling with the proverbial in the mud,figuratively speaking.

So , just because I don't agree with your every comment , every single time , my comments become sarcasm . Okay , I can live with that .

So you are convinced that scaring, injuring and shooting to kill should be the logical progression?

Yes , because if we go in the reverse order , I don't think there is any point of trying to scare a corpse . It would simple not respond .

I must add your responses are starting to assume me .

Shooting into air: you are wasting ammunition.

It is not . Ammunition is not being wasted . It's being utilized in scaring the assailant .
Celebratory fire is a wastage of ammunition .
I am sure you are going to suggest that to practice shooting with live ammo is a wastage too , since nobody is getting killed .

Especially if you have a single or double barrel shotgun and reloading under stress is going to be a major challenge(Try doing that when someone times you. Even that should be stressful enough for you/ or most people to fumble)

Whether you are shooting to kill to shooting to injure , reloading a single barrel or a double barrel under stress is going to be a same thing .

the assailants construe it as your inability or lack of will to do what it takes and are only threatening. If the numbers are large, they will simply rush you or if even one or two attackers can cover the ground and snatch it from you.

Not a convincing theory . Sorry

have you shot a handgun or a rifle at anything that resembles a human target? Even a standing one?

Yes . I shot a mannequin with my uncle's Indian SxS 12 gauge double barrel . Blew off it's left leg in first attempt from a distance of 10 mtrs . I fired a Walther PPK , which belonged to a contractor who for for my Dad , at a beer bottle at approx 15 mts .Destroyed it .

Have you any idea how much time it takes for an average individual at 20 metres to get you?

Depends on the type of terrain he is covering . If you want a specific answer , ask a specific question.

Have you any idea what reaction time it takes to actually draw and shoot?Roughly 4-5 seconds. Can you draw and shoot in that time?

Never timed myself . But with practice , I am sure I will get better than my initial timing .

Do you really think that you are going to kneecap, a target the size of a tennis ball, your attackers?

I will definitely be going for his knee cap . If you are asking , will I be capable of , then with a shotgun , I think I have a good chance .

Do you think that shooting someone in the knee is going to stop them from proceeding further?

Yes . And even if they continue , they won't have the same pace .

People need not be drugged up or crazed up or psyched up to be able to withstand multiple gunshot wounds and still be operational.

Robocop Movie ; isn't it ?

Have you any idea why the 10mm and later the .40 S&W cartridges were developed?

No . And I am not interested either , because I won't be able own handguns which will chamber and fire these rounds .

Please cite one single self-defence expert that suggests the line of action that you espouse.

One of my uncles , who have served the Calcutta Police and West Bengal Police . He is retired now . During his career , he had made many enemies due his job , but due to his precautionary measures , he alive and in good health till now . That's good enough for me . May not be good enough for you , but good enough for me .

If you want to debate or discuss further, please do come up with facts or at least some informed opinions instead of mere opinions in support of your arguments.

Well , if you are hoping that I will start agreeing with everyone of your statements without questioning , as if they were gospel truths , that's not going to happen .

Finally, I am an Indian.

So from one Indian to another Indian ; don't blindly believe in every Indian statistic you find on the Web or Print .

F-N-Five-Seven

F-N,

You still miss the point. No one asked or expected you to agree to what I or any other member wrote here. Disagree all you want. All you were asked was to back up your opinions with some verified data and evidence, especially on a subject that can mean life or death. I specifically asked you,with a please,to cite one authoritative source that backs up your claims. With that last post of yours what you have established is that you are incapable of producing any verifiable evidence to back up your opinions but deem yourself to be authoritative enough to pontificate on the virtues of your wishful thinking and condemn one brave woman who stood her ground and fought for her right to live.

I provided you the empirical evidence on one of the most famous incidents that analysed why multiple gunshot wounds could not stop the criminals from being operative and manage to kill trained FBI agents. All you could come up with was a churlish allusion to the Robocop movie. And you expect me to believe you are serious about the debate or that you were not sarcastic.

Once again on firing warning shots: From no less an authority than Massad Ayoob

http://www.tactical-life.com/combat-han ... eptions/2/

Downsides

Remember that warning shots deplete your ammunition. In Manila, an off-duty policeman was alerted by screams from a nearby marketplace, grabbed his six-shot Smith & Wesson .38 revolver, and ran to the scene. There he encountered a maniac who had gone berserk and was slashing innocent people, wielding a knife in each hand. He fired a warning shot, but it only served to focus the madman’s attention upon him. As the guy came at him with the two knives, the officer fired two more shots skyward. These were likewise ignored, and now Case Five went downhill. Turning and running, firing over his shoulder, the cop triggered his last three shots at the suspect, but missed. His feet crossed and he tripped and fell, and the man was on him like a Dervish, stabbing him madly until he was dead. Responding on-duty police officers shot the crazed blade-man to death, but it was already too late to save the life of a good, brave man who had wasted half of his entire ammunition supply on warning shots.

Having said that:

So from one Indian to another Indian ; don't blindly believe in every Indian statistic you find on the Web or Print .

F-N-Five-Seven

I prefer to believe an established source, in this case the National Crime Records Bureau,than a no name self-proclaimed expert, Indian or not, like you that cannot offer a single piece of evidence to back up your assertions.

Best-
Vikram

[goodboy_mentor]

If someone starts thinking on such lines probably he or she is risking more than necessary.

Well , you got to think on such line sometime , either before pulling the trigger or after being put behind bars . Choice is entirely yours .

Your residence is your territory. Why someone is house breaking or trespassing?

All I am saying is that after incapacitating the intruder / attacker , seize firing and call the authorities . Let them handle the situation . Let the Judge dispense punishment . Do otherwise , and face the consequences as the lady is facing now . As simple as that .

When faced with sudden intruders one does not usually have the time thinking about finer details like whether some one is armed or where to hit and the like. Usually it is the instinctive reactions for self preservation that take over.

I hope you are not serious with this statement of yours . If you skip over the finer details such as whether or not the trespasser is armed or not , and where to hit or not , your actions are nothing but indiscriminate firing . And in indiscriminate firing , you not only run the risk of missing the attacker but also the risk of shooting down an innocent bystander . The innocent bystander could even someone you were trying to protect from the attacker in the first place .
Training with your weapon , to perform to the best of your abilities under any imaginable situation is a huge part gun ownership . Without proper training your weapon is pretty much useless .
Why do you think the military , police and even civilians train under simulated stressful situations ? Why do you think people buy and practise with guns equipped with High Visibility Sights , Red Dots , Laser Sights ?

F-N-Five-Seven

You are entitled to your views no matter how much different or flawed or out of context they are. However the logic and reasoning of law of the land differs from your views.

Since there is no possibility to wait or call the authorities to invoke the legal system, the Right of Private Defense(Sections 96 to 106 Indian Penal Code) allows you to instantly take the law in your own hands and implement justice.

When faced with situations as mentioned in Sections 100 or 103 IPC, the law allows you to instantly become judge, prosecution and executioner to implement justice, because the attackers by their heinous act have lost their right to life. If you still do not want to respect the principles of law and natural justice, want to gamble with your life and liberty at the hands of your attackers, and give them a second chance, it is your personal opinion and nothing more.

[FN-Five-Seven]

What would one do when a mob suddenly enters your residence?

Scare , then incapacitate , and kill if absolutely necessary .

Now we have established that you allow Ms Agarwal the right to shoot, and to kill, to defend herself.

There is absolutely no question of me allowing someone what to do or what not to do . If you read carefully , Vikram expicitly mentioned " Your residence " And believe me Ms Agarwal is not in my residence . Your comment is totally out of context .

What you are quibbling about is that her judgment, which was exercised on the spot and under the threat, was lacking and inferior to your own, which is being exercised from some distance and from the comfort of your armchair.

Yes, it's true , I was not on the spot . But neither were you nor the Judge who is going to decide on her case . Going by your logic , even the Judge stands disqualified to handle her case . I am sure , if you had your way , the accused would be judging themselves .

Can you actually make these rational calculations other than doing what needs to be done to protect yourself?

Yes . I can do both actually at the same time . If I can't , I better start doing so .

Your statement reveals that you've never been under such a threat, and that you assert that what you would do would be a superior course of action to the person who actually was under the threat.

And your statement reveal , that you are capable making accurate assumptions of experiences I had in life , over the Internet , half way across the planet . Could we tune down the weirdness a bit less ????

This is an interesting assertion, but I am not convinced that your expertise on these sorts of issues is very great -- certainly not as great as Ms. Agarwal's, which is why I discount your judgments of her.

Reality check , timmy . I have absolutely no interest of convincing someone I don't know , half way across the planet ( that would be you ) of anything . Conversation was strictly between Vikram & me .

1. When you are facing a mob of over a dozen, how practical is it to offer warning shots or aim for the legs?

So , you are implying , if a mob is intruding into my property , and I fire a warning shot , they will not be intimidated and think of retreating ? Are you suggesting that even after blowing someone's knee off , he still going to come at me ?
Seen too many zombie movies , have we ?

Yes, and apparently you have seen too many movies, yourself, old chap.

Well , nearly not as much you have seen Rajnikant movies . Okay , I know a little about you .

Perhaps you need to scroll back and read Mr. Farook's story of the farmer, and how the same warning shots you have suggested did not deter his attackers. Your "method" of deterrence takes no account of assailants, and whether they may be under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, under which case(s), such an attacker can and has continued an attack under the circumstances you have suggested -- this, in fact, is why the US Army developed the .45 ACP and 1911: because Moro tribesmen in the Philippines would take drugs before attacks, and, unless they were anchored by a large caliber, powerful bullet, they would keep on charging. This is not some rare occurrence; as any policeman of any town of size who has pulled over a car load of drug addicts can attest.

On the contrary , you need to read farook's post , more carefully . farook's incident took place in rural Karnakata and this thread is about an incident in urban Bengal . Two different states , two different scenarios . In farook's incident , there were harden criminals , here there were Security Guards of a legitimate Security Agency , acting on the instruction of a lawyer who came along them to the spot .

I don't know about you , but I am certainly not in the habit of comparing chalk with cheese .

And what is the point of discussing the merits of a .45 ACP , 10 mm or the .40S&W in an Indian situation , since those calibres are out of reach for Indian civilians ? Why don't you guys mention the merits & demits of calibers , which Indian civilians can legally possess ?

2. What if they rush you construing that you lack the will to cut them down should they not desist from continuing their attack?

I want to see a person "rush" at me with his knees blown off . I will it will be worth the risk .

This is what passes as logic to you? Ms. Agarwal saw this happen, but you didn't, so on that basis, her judgment was wrong?

Okay , again you need to read my previous posts carefully , multiple times if needed . Kolkata Police released the statement that the lady and her guard shot the security guards in their heads , NOT KNEES , after they went hiding for their life . I was not there , but this incident was recorded on the CCTV cameras .
So , my question is , are you , on the record , going the challenge the statement of the Kolkata Police ?
A simple Yes or No will be fine .

Most murders in India are committed with cleavers, knives, sickles, chopper etc.

How in the world did you come up with this conclusion ? I guess , when I read about cache of illegal arms and ammo being seized by Police , every now and then , they were to be used for bringing in gold for India in the Olympics .

Vikram has come to this conclusion because he reads about such things and consults the data of such events before forming his opinions (which many of the rest of us have, as well) -- and from your views, this is a step you do not feel necessary.

I believe I asked Vikram that question . Why are you answering it ?

[FN-Five-Seven]

You still miss the point.

The thing is Vikram , unless an until I blindly agree with your views & thoughts , I will keep "missing the point " , according to you that is .

No one asked or expected you to agree to what I or any other member wrote here. Disagree all you want.

If that's the case , why are you trying to convince me to reports & incidents , of what FBI or CIA did or did not ?
I never asked to back your theories with evidence . All I said I don't agree with you . Let's keep it at that .

I prefer to believe an established source, in this case the National Crime Records Bureau,than a no name self-proclaimed expert, Indian or not, like you that cannot offer a single piece of evidence to back up your assertions.

Good for you .

[FN-Five-Seven]

You are entitled to your views no matter how much different or flawed or out of context they are. However the logic and reasoning of law of the land differs from your views.

Again , sing in my tunes or you are wrong .

When faced with situations as mentioned in Sections 100 or 103 IPC, the law allows you to instantly become judge, prosecution and executioner to implement justice, because the attackers by their heinous act have lost their right to life.

Only if things were this easy in reality .

[bennedose]

You tell me? Did the system succeed in protecting her pleas for protection? If not, do you blame her for standing her ground instead?

I believe this discussion is being carried out with access to media information only. Unless we know the exact circumstances and facts it is, in my view, not possible to take any sides on the issue. The system may well have failed her and she may well have been right. But I am not going to say that i know that unless I have direct access to facts outside of media reports.

I do think that if one supports the right for people to bear arms for self defence_and_wants to be law abiding, it is incumbent upon one to not jump to any conclusion without having all the facts at hand. This is especially true in a case where people have died and there has been a simmering dispute for some time aboout which we know very little. If I take a stand about anything without knowing the facts, and I am proven wrong, I would certainly be embarrassed. I also believe that a forum such as this, that purports to stand for the right to bear arms must not be judgemental in cases where lives have been lost by the use of firearms. That judgement must come from within the legal system no matter how painful or prolonged that may seem to us. Not on here.If the conclusions reached here are wrong, it would be a self goal.

All I know is that a woman was allegedly attacked in the wee hours of the morning by a gang of men intruding on property that she occupies that is apparently disputed. She was ready for such an attack and had guards and weapons and seemed alert and ready to use them at that time. Nothing wrong in all this, but I believe I am missing some vital information. If she asked for protection and the police did not provide it, then her action may turn out to be justified. It is definitely NOT up to the police to judge whether she was justified or not. Nor is it up to any one one of us. That will happen in a court of law. The police's duty is merely to enforce law and order based on the provisions of the law that they have to act by. What was the reason for arrest? What is the section under which she was arrested? What was the exact complaint made? And by whom?

[Vikram]

Bennedose,

Though we disagree on a few points, I think you do make a fair case in the last post.

Best-
Vikram

[bennedose]

Fair enough - I am going to let this matter drop because emotions are already running high.

[Vikram]

You still miss the point.

The thing is Vikram , unless an until I blindly agree with your views & thoughts , I will keep "missing the point " , according to you that is .

No one asked or expected you to agree to what I or any other member wrote here. Disagree all you want.

If that's the case , why are you trying to convince me to reports & incidents , of what FBI or CIA did or did not ?
I never asked to back your theories with evidence . All I said I don't agree with you . Let's keep it at that .

I prefer to believe an established source, in this case the National Crime Records Bureau,than a no name self-proclaimed expert, Indian or not, like you that cannot offer a single piece of evidence to back up your assertions.

Good for you .

FN,

You again miss the point. One is not asking you to agree or disagree. One is asking you to provide empirical evidence to back up an assertion you repeatedly made. Otherwise, it remains an opinion and nothing else. There is a difference between making judgemental statements about someone's actions under tremendous threat and merely offering opinions on a harmless issue. It is the former in your posts that are being questioned. When we discus self-defence here, it is not a trifling subject, not on this forum. You were asked to back up your statements. If one cannot answer, one can say so, remain silent or prevaricate and circumlocute. Unfortunately you chose the last. Your choice.Since you do not wish to engage in a constructive debate, this is the last post by me on this topic with respect to you.

I believe I asked Vikram that question . Why are you answering it ?

That is so lame you know. The last I heard,it was when I was in high school from a kid who could not brook intervention in a playground argument and did not have an answer. This is an open forum and any post that is posted here can be answered by any member irrespective of at whom a post is directed. For a more personal one to one communication, there is a PM feature.

Best-
VIkram

[Vikram]

Fair enough - I am going to let this matter drop because emotions are already running high.

Honestly not,Bennedose. Do continue to share your views. Seriously, it has been a pleasure.

Best-
Vikram

[bennedose]

Thanks. I will never hold back if I have something to say but as things stand I can think of so many possibilities in this case that I just hope that justice is done soon and fairly.

[timmy]

quote="Vikram"What would one do when a mob suddenly enters your residence? unquote="Vikram

Scare , then incapacitate , and kill if absolutely necessary .

Now we have established that you allow Ms Agarwal the right to shoot, and to kill, to defend herself.

There is absolutely no question of me allowing someone what to do or what not to do . If you read carefully , Vikram expicitly mentioned " Your residence " And believe me Ms Agarwal is not in my residence . Your comment is totally out of context .

Hardly. I merely pointed out the logic of your own words, which you have now verified. A fact is a fact.

What you are quibbling about is that her judgment, which was exercised on the spot and under the threat, was lacking and inferior to your own, which is being exercised from some distance and from the comfort of your armchair.

Yes, it's true , I was not on the spot . But neither were you nor the Judge who is going to decide on her case . Going by your logic , even the Judge stands disqualified to handle her case . I am sure , if you had your way , the accused would be judging themselves .

What absurd bilge, to try to pull some pseudo-philosopy here! This reveals the bankruptcy of your thinking on the matter. I never claimed to be there, and have not disputed the issue one way or another. I have, however, disputed your sharp judgment of Ms Agarwal. For this, I don't need to be there. That I don't know what happened is not under dispute. My contention is that you weren't there, either, and therefore are not fit to judge.

As for the magistrate in charge, it is the legal system that specifies how these matters are resolved: in a court of law, under due process, where both the prosecution and the defense have access to all evidence and may challenge it in court before it becomes part of the record and forms the basis of the legal judgment. No, the judge wasn't there, but he/she is provided with the best evidence that is available and which has been challenged in open court by both parties. This is the best procedure that open societies have devised for getting at the truth in these kinds of instances. It works well enough and better than anything else devised, if corruption is not involved.

However, you do not have access to what the judge will have in this matter, so drop the infantile "you too" arguments and the cheap amateur philosopher "can anyone really know" bunkum. You have just admitted by your juvenile dodges that you don't know, and this would give you enough reason to cease your unconsidered and unfounded assertions on this matter, if you could take a hint...

quote="Vikram"Can you actually make these rational calculations other than doing what needs to be done to protect yourself? unquote="Vikram

Yes . I can do both actually at the same time . If I can't , I better start doing so .

Your statement reveals that you've never been under such a threat, and that you assert that what you would do would be a superior course of action to the person who actually was under the threat.

And your statement reveal , that you are capable making accurate assumptions of experiences I had in life , over the Internet , half way across the planet . Could we tune down the weirdness a bit less ????

Really now? You get tagged for being responsible for your own words, and try to call names and act like the rest of the world is "weird"? You are running out of depths that you can sink to very quickly.

This is an interesting assertion, but I am not convinced that your expertise on these sorts of issues is very great -- certainly not as great as Ms. Agarwal's, which is why I discount your judgments of her.

Reality check , timmy . I have absolutely no interest of convincing someone I don't know , half way across the planet ( that would be you ) of anything . Conversation was strictly between Vikram & me .

I see. So if your statements don't make sense and if the basis of your logic doesn't hold water, it doesn't count, because you addressed it to Vikram?

Here's some news for you, old chap: you expressed it on an open forum, so what you said was addressed to everyone who reads it, both half way around the world and to all points in between.

As for what your interests are and as for who you are trying to convince, I really don't know and don't care, but I am mystified that you should choose a site dedicated to gun rights in India to express your peculiar viewpoint.

quote="Vikram"1. When you are facing a mob of over a dozen, how practical is it to offer warning shots or aim for the legs?unquote="Vikram"

So , you are implying , if a mob is intruding into my property , and I fire a warning shot , they will not be intimidated and think of retreating ? Are you suggesting that even after blowing someone's knee off , he still going to come at me ?
Seen too many zombie movies , have we ?

Yes, and apparently you have seen too many movies, yourself, old chap.

Well , nearly not as much you have seen Rajnikant movies . Okay , I know a little about you .

Let me get this straight: exactly what are you saying about people who enjoy Rajinikanth movies? What behavior or lack of thought process do you attribute to us, or try to imply by your statement?

You know, it is one thing to open your mouth and bray, but quite another to be held to account for your words. Heaven forbid that you should wield a firearm with the same irresponsibility that you use to handle your words. I admit, I do see a similarity between your innuendo and bluffing way with words, and your espousing the waving of guns around and the promiscuous discharge of them.

Perhaps you need to scroll back and read Mr. Farook's story of the farmer, and how the same warning shots you have suggested did not deter his attackers. Your "method" of deterrence takes no account of assailants, and whether they may be under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, under which case(s), such an attacker can and has continued an attack under the circumstances you have suggested -- this, in fact, is why the US Army developed the .45 ACP and 1911: because Moro tribesmen in the Philippines would take drugs before attacks, and, unless they were anchored by a large caliber, powerful bullet, they would keep on charging. This is not some rare occurrence; as any policeman of any town of size who has pulled over a car load of drug addicts can attest.

On the contrary , you need to read farook's post , more carefully . farook's incident took place in rural Karnakata and this thread is about an incident in urban Bengal . Two different states , two different scenarios . In farook's incident , there were harden criminals , here there were Security Guards of a legitimate Security Agency , acting on the instruction of a lawyer who came along them to the spot .

I don't know about you , but I am certainly not in the habit of comparing chalk with cheese .

And what is the point of discussing the merits of a .45 ACP , 10 mm or the .40S&W in an Indian situation , since those calibres are out of reach for Indian civilians ? Why don't you guys mention the merits & demits of calibers , which Indian civilians can legally possess ?

First of all, both Vikram and I were making a point by bringing up the .40 S&W and the .45 ACP. You have chosen to disregard the point being made by saying that both calibers are prohibited bore in India, which is a cheap argumentative dodge on your part, because the point of .40 S&W and .45 ACP in our discussions has nothing at all to do with whether they are PB/NPB, it has to do with why the rounds were developed in the first place. You figure on addressing that point by introducing something that's not at all germane, and then smugly congratulate yourself with your cleverness -- but you have established nothing, nor refuted the point.

OK, so Farook's story took place in rural Karnataka and this one took place in urban Bengal: Are you saying that people in rural Karnataka are not frightened by warning shots, but people in urban Bengal are? If so, I would like you to establish the reason for this difference.

Secondly, you state that the criminals in Farook's story were hardened criminals, but the people in Ms. Agarwal's incident were "Security Guards of a legitimate Security Agency." Now please continue and explain to us how Ms Agarwal was responsible for knowing the difference when these "Security Guards of a legitimate Security Agency" came, invading her premises in the middle of the night?

BTW, since these Security Guards of a legitimate Security Agency" are such consummate trained professionals in your view, tell me: would you feel complete safety in their gentle hands? A simple yes or no will suffice.

quote="Vikram"2. What if they rush you construing that you lack the will to cut them down should they not desist from continuing their attack? unquote="Vikram"

I want to see a person "rush" at me with his knees blown off . I will it will be worth the risk .

This is what passes as logic to you? Ms. Agarwal saw this happen, but you didn't, so on that basis, her judgment was wrong?

Okay , again you need to read my previous posts carefully , multiple times if needed . Kolkata Police released the statement that the lady and her guard shot the security guards in their heads , NOT KNEES , after they went hiding for their life . I was not there , but this incident was recorded on the CCTV cameras .
So , my question is , are you , on the record , going the challenge the statement of the Kolkata Police ?
A simple Yes or No will be fine .

No.

So, now you answer me, and "A simple Yes or No will be fine": is the natural aiming point one would point at, the one even predators watch and the one it is embedded in our DNA by millions of years of evolution to watch, the head and eyes of attackers, rather than a pair of knees moving about in the dark? As you say, "A simple Yes or No will be fine."

BTW, it really isn't necessary to imply that someone is to stupid or dull to get your points by telling them to reread your tortured logic and juvenile implied insults. Having to read them at all is painful enough as it is.

quote="Vikram" Most murders in India are committed with cleavers, knives, sickles, chopper etc. unquote="Vikram"

How in the world did you come up with this conclusion ? I guess , when I read about cache of illegal arms and ammo being seized by Police , every now and then , they were to be used for bringing in gold for India in the Olympics .

Vikram has come to this conclusion because he reads about such things and consults the data of such events before forming his opinions (which many of the rest of us have, as well) -- and from your views, this is a step you do not feel necessary.

I believe I asked Vikram that question . Why are you answering it ?

Because I wished to point out (again, on an open forum, as opposed to a private conversation -- you can always use a PM if you feel you are being interrupted) that the basis for your assertions is suspect, while Vikram's assertions are well-founded and studied. Because you cannot answer this point, the only way you can maintain your assertions is to say you were talking to Vikram alone? Too bad.

[FN-Five-Seven]

Since you do not wish to engage in a constructive debate, this is the last post by me on this topic with respect to you.

The penny finally dropped !
Thank you !

Now only if you could refrain yourself from the will to engage me in " Constructive " debate in other topics too , that would be great .

And I am hoping , timmy does the same .