@ Alan Esworthy
You're kidding right?
I have no problem with poking fun at Adv.Karkhanis and his ilk for all the reasons already discussed.
I also have no problem with you choosing a tragedy of this magnitude as a platform for your gun ownership views. Bad timing, I would be tempted to say, but it's your opinion and you have a right to it.
(Let's leave aside the fact the US, where most gun rights advocates hail from, has more urban gun crime and related fatalities than the rest of the world put together, yet there is no known occurrence of civilian gun ownership having thwarted a terrorist attack)
But claiming that Indian law enforcement refused to engage? Do you have any facts at all, or are "one eyewitness told" type anonymous references the best you can do? Do you have any idea how offensive (and ignorant) you sound to someone like me, an Indian who knew one of the cops who died fighting?
There's a lot of questions we're asking ourselves.
Like why it took the authorities 8 plus hours to send out commandos from the Navy and the National Security Guard who're trained for precisely this kind of situation.
Like why city police forces don't have the resources to raise elite commando forces of their own.
Like why, as one of the other readers pointed out, city policemen still have antiquated equipment like .303 rifles.
Like why questions are being asked if a batch of bullet proof jackets was in service even after failing tests (and what kind of human being would strike a corrupt deal on substandard life jackets).
Like when will the politicians finally get their heads out of their ___s and their hands out of the till and work on a real crisis response system.
Questioning the bravery of our fighting men, though, is not one of them.
It's sad that people choose to make a soapbox out of a tragic incident like this. It's even sadder that the loudest people on the soapbox are also the most ignorant.