Granted, that was somewhat tongue in cheek. However, this next example is not: Even more dangerous than those who are too volatile to carry a firearm, are those who are too timid to carry a firearm. Some people by their gentle nature, and may God bless them, simply are not prepared to bring deadly force to bear. Still more will hesitate before committing to the ultimate act of violent defense, and lose the opportunity. In both cases, all such a person would gain by carrying a weapon would be to avail the assailant with a better means to do them arm.
Weapons should only be carried by those who are prepared to use them, and that's a decision that each man or woman has to make for himself or herself. It would simply be insanity to take that decision from the individual.
All others, men and women, should be part of a militia that is sufficiently organized for the President to command it as is required by Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution.
The Militia Act, posted above, is a good guide.
Militia Duty need not really be onerous. It would bring back the apparently obsolete notion at we have duties towards our nation and fellow citizens. It might eliminate the loner syndrome.
bump for later read...
In the good old days of the Greek city-states, no one who lacked his own weapons could be a citizen.
Added it to the banglist, bump for later read.
It is not portable, but it is very effective (S&W 20 guage pump... Texas dove hate it).
I'll own one when I feel I need one. Fortunately, I live a place with a low crime rate. I have two big dogs and know how to throw a table or chair. Plus, I am fortunate to have been born with two big guns attached to my torso.