I generally don't feed trolls, but I figured I could respond to a recent one. He/she/it strongly implied that I might be an insane individual with a firearm.
I won't try to argue the point. After all, a sociopath is hardly sane, but would argue quite eloquently that he is. Believe what you'd like about my sanity.
The idea we must consider here, in my opinion, is the rational response to the possibility of dangerous and unstable insane individuals. Some argue for disarmament because some unstable individuals are able to acquire weapons.
If they are truly a danger to society, they will be a danger with any tools at their disposal. Laws will not limit their choices in many cases, but even if we could somehow get rid of guns altogether, they'll still be dangerous with knives, axes, household chemicals, and automobiles.
The rational response is to attempt to separate those who are potentially dangerous until they can be determined safe to release. Since one can't expect 100% success in that endeavor, there must be a system in place to protect individuals from each other. The most effective way to protect yourself from dangerous people is to use the best means of self-defense available. A handgun is perfectly appropriate.
The anonymous commenter knows I'm armed. He/she/it may believe I am mentally unstable. If this is a scary prospect, he/she/it should then level the playing field, so to speak. Of course, I am applying reason to a situation that most anti-gunners love to cloud with emotion.