|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
somebody wrote:
> When someone goes on a rampage in a civilian setting, gun nuts are quick to
> point out that had the other people had guns as well, the shooter would have
> been stopped before he could inflict any serious damage. I wonder about
> their angle now.
As a retired member of the US military, I can affirm that by military
regulation, the victims were prohibited from bearing firearms in the
place where they were killed.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |