There's a video doing the rounds in which a pro-gun group from the U.S re-enact the Charlie Hebdo shootings only with some of the actors playing the victims being armed,in every scenario the armed "civilians" are killed within seconds of drawing their weapon and the outcome is the same.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/15/texas-gun-group-charlie-hebdo-paintball
The Gendarme who was guarding the journalists was a trained shooter and reports suggest he only got off two shots from his pistol before he was killed, both of which missed the attackers.

Its obvious that if thousands of people were carrying handguns around Martin Place ready to shoot terrorists it would be a safer Place.

Yes some downsides - misfires and toddlers pulling a handgun out of a Mummy's handbag and shooting Mummy - and most gundeaths being suicides and other family members and all - but still...

Ain't carrying guns our Constitutional Rarght? It was in Gympie! Who won the war anyway?

The first fault in the Charlie Hebdo shootings was that security failed, the attackers got into the offices.

One might reasonably ask why, as the journalists and staff were under threat of death, from a known violent and murderous broad group, that they were not armed.

Australia's gun laws are being reviewed, there is a Senate Inquiry on at the moment, but it's not going well for its initiators, the Greens.

RISIBLE RHETORICAL RUBBISH!

Had there been a few Gun owners, trained ex-service personal perhaps, owning a few concealed weapons; the Port Arthur killings could have been significantly limited, and included Bryant!

A sure and certain method to prevent further deaths at his hand, and even more so, in the cafe, when Man Monis held hostages for hours!

Perhaps someone with a little testicular fortitude, having seen the sawed off shot gun and understood that a raving lunatic was holding it, could have limited the loss of life to just Monis!

As always, when a crim or a nutter is lose in the community, with an obviously illegal weapon, the anti gun parade yet again call for tighter gun laws.

Perhaps we could disarm the defense forces as well, and instead, issue them with wet tram tickets!

In Japan, with ostensibly, the worlds toughest gun laws; at least 40% estimated, of the law abiding population, owns (illegal guns) for personal protection, which possibly explains the very low break and enter crime rate in that country.

Finally if any of the anti-gun control freaks believe that tough gun laws will lower the crime rate?

Well, thus far they haven't made one iota of difference to gun toting crims, who now feel empowered to use our suburban streets as battle grounds to settle their differences. And with the weapon of choice!

Perhaps if we were allowed to shoot back as self defense as the bullets flew, there'd be less of this.

I mean, in almost any street in suburban Australia, there's several ex-servicemen/trained marksmen, able to react when it's needed, as opposed to police arriving minutes after the event, and then investigating yet another crime!

Who is going to tell them anything, if the armed criminal element is able to seek reprisals; and only because current gun prohibitions mean they can and with complete impunity.

Why not just disarm the entire law abiding community, leaving the lawless element with even greater opportunities, to conduct their street wars, among our homes and our kids!

Such logic and from such powerful thinkers!
Rhrosty.

Rhrosty can you give us few examples for say the US where conceal carry has stop a terror attack?

Well Rhrosty

You're still writing rubbish - but at least its almost grammatical - in paragraphs.

Putting aside your God, Guns and Guts Make Australia Great message - what about realities? That the vast majority of gun deaths are:

1. suicides

2. family members killed in domestics

3. murders by criminals holding guns, and

A very distant 4. honest folk (legally?) shooting back at criminals commiting crimes?

Ponder and reconcile the above.