Actually, if you go back and reread the descriptions of the Defense Mechanisms, there is a tendency by the author to describe the mechanism and then state "Anti-gun people do this". It comes across sounding like this is a diagnosis being applied to all, or at least most, anti-gun people, and I dont think that is accurate or a fair assessment. And given the medical credentials of the author as a psychiatrist, I think it implies a certain authority to make these judgements, but I think it is a gross exaggeration. It gives me the impression that the author is using his credentials to push a political agenda by making dubious claims. In my opinion, that is irresponsible.
I do see your point. I don't think his claims are dubious, but I do think that he may be over-generalizing, as I have stated before. I think that his assessment may fit for some people, but certainly not all or most people.
Well, I think it is easy to infer that someone who wishes to be armed all the time is afraid of something, or worse, paranoid. Carrying a weapon for self defense implies that one is concerned that they might be attacked at any given moment, in any location. This can easily be interpreted by others as a fear of the world around him. That was my motive in getting involved in this thread - to see if I could get some clean answers and understand this issue better. I think I have, and I appreciate everyone's willingness to discuss this in a courteous manner.
This is where our opinions differ.
Objectively speaking, an attack may happen to anyone at any moment, even if it isn't likely. This is a fact, not really a subjective opinion. Some people deal with this fact by increasing their preparedness. This could mean arming oneself with something, taking self-defense courses, and so forth. That is one way of handling it. Some may choose to be armed all of the time because to them it represents freedom and personal responsibility for their own defense and for that of their environment. Others may choose to arm out of paranoia or antisocial behavior; but I don't think it is fair to assume that this is the majority of CCW/CPL holders.
And others may choose not to be armed out of denial, or a victim's mentality, or a lack of personal responsibility. Others may choose not to be armed due to a spiritual ideal and resolve, or simply because it is a hassle and not practical for them.
In all cases, as long as one is willing to be responsible for their choice and not impose it on others, then I cannot say, at least on the surface, that one is flawed for making that personal choice.
So, in the same sense that it wouldn't be fair to judge everyone who chooses to not carry a weapon as being irresponsible or in denial, it wouldn't be fair to judge those who are armed at all times as fearful or paranoid.
Case in point, we can look at Sikhism.
Sikhs, as part of their spiritual beliefs, are armed all the time. Usually it is with an ornate and traditional knife; some are armed with the traditional knife and firearms as well. They are armed at all times, according to their religion.
In Canada, there was some controversy because a high school student wanted to carry his traditional knife in school when he became of age in tradition to do so, but the rules wouldn't allow it. In an interview, his response was interesting. He said [paraphrase], "Our people aren't violent, and the tradition is not a violent one. We carry our traditional armament because in our culture it represents freedom."
You see, in Sikhism, the philosophical belief is that every male (and some females take this option as well) has the responsibility of defending themselves, their families, and their communities. It isn't about paranoia of fear for them; the traditional armament (of which they are bound to use if defense is needed) represents the freedom of defense and the responsibility to do so for them.
Interesting to note that regardless of this ideal, Sikhism is a very peaceful religion. This is especially in comparison to Muslim, Hindu, and Christian histories and beliefs.
I don't think that we can typecast all Sikhs as being fearful or paranoid for their beliefs. Nor, do I think we can typecast the armed citizen in that way either.
For me, I never suggested that I wanted to impose my own personal decision on others. I still disagree with the desire to carry all the time, I just don't see it as necessary. But I don't wish to take that right away from others, and I respect the choice to carry so long as it is done responsibly, safely, and legally.
And for that, I respect your opinion, even where we differ.
Paul
. Don't know if I would if I could, just would like the opportunity to decide for myself. I am pretty sure my husband would have one, whether or not he carried everywhere is questionable. 
