Regardless of the merit or lack thereof of marijuana laws and any nonequivilent comparisons between marijuana and firearms, the fact is that (in most states) and according to the Federal government, the cultivation and consumption of pot is illegal. In the case of Trunk, he admits that even in the case of a legal and objective process to obtain a permit he’d still ignore the law and carry a gun as he saw fit, because it’s just too much of a hassle. (Implicit in that is that he doesn’t consider carrying a concealed firearm a hassle, which says that he either knows not of what he speaks, or is unacquinted with a little thing some of us like to call “reality”.) Then there’s his apparently idiot brother-in-law who illegally carries a firearm in Paris because it makes him feel “good” or “safe” or whatever it does for his self-esteem.
Anyone who appreciates the ramifications of actually using a firearm in self-defense–especially in a nation like France with restrictive gun laws–is going to have not just a small amount of concern about the value of carrying a firearm. There are credible reasons for wanting to be armed–for instance, if you carry large sums of money at night as part of your job, or if you are forced by circumstances to live in an unsafe neighborhood–but the primary purpose of a firearm and especially something as weak and inaccurate as a handgun isn’t to make you “safe” but to give you space to escape from a bad situation that you were not otherwise able to avoid outright.
Trunk’s casualness about violating laws that were fought for by people advocating that (most) gun owners are not irresponsible, unlawful yahoos who worship at the alter of Dirty Harry just reinforces the public opinion that, in fact, this is an accurate perception.
Also, he’s a twit.
Everything else I have to say on the topic has already been said in the previous thread.