As eluded to above accurately getting a shot through glass is deceptively easy in Hollywood but in real life not so easy. Especially difficult when it's safety glass at an angle. Supprised the anti-gun mob haven't explained that yet. They're experts on everything shooting related.

And shooting someone who isn't immediately threatening anyone yet is a line crossing in itself. If we're going to shoot people before they physically threaten then how early would the preventionists have us act? When they're doing questionable finger paintings perhaps?? That's a path best left unexplored.

A bullet through the window that missed it's mark would simply be a signal to the dropkick it's time to get on with it.

David Leyonhjelm is the only one talking sense. Point is if there was a possibility one of the customers there or more likely the manager was armed the chances of successfull completion of a nutters plan would be so uncertain the nutter'd be less inclined to try it on in the first place. Ambiguity is the key to deterrence. At the moment there's certainty. Certainty hostages will be powerless.

Does anyone remember the message in the childrens movie "karate kid"?
Danielson learned karate not so he could fight but so he wouldn't have to.

Anyway, the idea's out there now. Wannabe martyrs know the population's vulnerable. They know their acts will attract media sensation. They know there'll be a grand firey finale. And they know the nation will set upon itself in the aftermath.
So expect more to come.

Hmmm, let's see.
Do we want to arm our citizens with more guns to make our society safer, like in the USA?

Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year in Australia in 2011 was 0.86. (According to Wikipedia).

Firearm related death rate per 100, 000 population per year in America in 2011 was 10.6. Violent crime rates are much higher in the USA.

Ooh yes, that sounds much safer....

As I understand it, to take out someone behind glass two shots are required, and probably two highly coordinated and professional shooters. The first takes out the glass, the second takes the mark.
The hostage taker in the coffee shop had already established himself as a threat. He had placed himself in that position.
David Leyonhjelm is not talking sense.

Suse,

More guns means a safer society,

"The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people
• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people
• Puerto Rico tops the world's table for firearms murders as a percentage of all homicides - 94.8%. It's followed by Sierra Leone in Africa and Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean"

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

Ok Is Mise, but where is Australia on that list, and do we want to join the rest of those countries at the top of the list?

I like Australia as it is, and as one of the most prized immigration destinations in the world, so does everyone else.
So why would we want more killing machines out there in the community?

Suseonline so you speak for "everyone" do you. Wow.

As one of the "everyone" I must say I do fear the same things you fear.
Difference is I realise things aren't always going to work out the way we wish they would no matter how hard we wish.

A society free of "killing machines" would be nice but it just doesn't exist and frankly it never will.
Bad guys will always exist and they'll always seek an advantage. Only thing we can do is reduce potential advantages. In other words we should work to ensure equality can exist. In this case that would mean defending the right to posess a viable means of self defence.