I'll try again:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-11/milton-snow/fairclough-life-and-death-on-thai-burma-railway/6927656?nw=O

Sorry - I meant to say that Sir Weary may have had
his own private guns - hidden in his coat pockets
in Java, but he would not have used them in the POW
camp when he and his men worked on the Thai -Burma
railway. H would not have risked his men's lives
by using the guns. He was there as a doctor - trying
to save their lives not put them at any further
danger. Yes he stoodd up to the Japanese as a doctor,
but he would not have used guns to do it.

Foxy,

Read what I said and try to comprehend.

".. do you think that he would have used them [his pistols] to save the lives of his patients, or do you think that he would have just looked on as the Japs solved the prisoner problem by murdering them all?"

His intention was, if the worst came to the worst, to shoot Japanese soldiers so that the fittest among the prisoners could take their rifles and fight to save their own lives and the lives of their fellow prisoners.

There was every likelihood that the Japanese would murder all the prisoners as it became apparent that Japan was losing the war; or do you think that the Japanese were too noble to do such a thing?

HI Foxy and Issy,

Not much point going over the "what ifs" of nearly 75 years ago. I read the story Foxy posted of Milton "Snow" Fairclough a touching story of survival, and something no one should ever have to go through. It goes to show the inhumanity of man towards his fellow man. The ending where "Snow" was able to travel to Japan with his son and other POW's and tell their story to the Japanese was heart warming. The fact he seemingly held no great animosity towards his tormentors, including the one they called "The Lizard", shows the sprite of the human being can be that strong, despite what horrors comes its way.

Paul,

There are no "what ifs" about Colonel Dunlop keeping his pistols whilst a POW and Foxy, despite being given a reference citing page and book that refers to a part of the fact, still says "... Sir Weary may have had his own private guns - hidden in his coat pockets"
Note the use of "may" as if the author, with Weary's consent, wrote a lie about him.

Well, I'm 101% sure that he had his pistols during the entire time of his captivity and after, and that he would have used them in a last-ditch attempt to save the lives of his men from being murdered en mass by their captors.

How the former prisoners regarded their Japanese captors years after the war is completely irrelevant to events during the war.

Just as a by-line it's interesting that he was recommended for an OBE for his bravery and his exploits in saving so many prisoners' lives but it was downgraded to a Mentioned in Dispatches.
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-heroes/weary-dunlop.htm

Is Mise,

The only mention of Weary Dunlop's pistols is in
the one sentence you cited earlier where he
was travelling in Java prior to the Japanese
occupation. I listed for you the logical reasons
he would not have had the pistols in the camp
or would have used them.

If you have evidence to the contrary - kindly provide it.

Weary Dunlop has been commemorated in various ways
in this country. There's statues of him - including the
famous one outside the War Memorial in Canberra.

His funeral was magnificent - with full honours.

And just like Milton "Snow" Fairclough - Sir Weary spoke
about his time on the Thai Burma Railway and the Japanese
with no hatred in his heart.

You can continue to bang on about pistols, guns, and
killings. I happen to know that Sir Weary was more
concerned with saving lives than taking them. He did not
share your mentality or obsession with guns.

If he did prove it.

I'm done!