I'm not sure why wanting to be comfortable would have anything to do with a willingness to inflict violence in a dire situation. They seem like very different things to me. I can think of a few mothers I personally know who aren't particularly pro-gun, but would probably rip a bad guys head off with their well manicured nails if their kids were even mildly threatened.
Here's the thing... The odds of ever having to draw a weapon in anger for most of us is thankfully fairly small. So when we start to play with a cost/benefit analysis it shouldn't be surprising when people say "it's hard to dress comfortably with this thing stuck to my hip. Maybe I'll just leave it home just this once. After all, what are the odds something bad will happen?" In fact, I understand this is very very common, and the majority of people who can carry, don't carry most of the time. To come on the right side of cost/benefit equation, the cost (in this case inconvenience/discomfort) has to be low enough to meet the benefit (ready availability of a weapon in the low low chance that it will be necessary).
If you want a side arm to be a regular accessory, either the inconvenience/discomfort has to be low enough that it doesn't bother you much --or-- your perceived personal risk in your daily life has to be high enough that you are willing to put up with the discomfort.
Every decision has the cost/benefit or risk/benefit part of the equation. I ride a motorcycle. I'm more likely to die in an accident than I am to be murdered. I still ride because the joy I get out of riding is high enough to balance against the increased risk. However, I'm still concerned about Violent Bad Things and I'd like to carry a gun. But I don't have G&S with our current rules, and the risk of getting into trouble with our beneficent state government is probably higher than some thug. Although I am constantly re-evaluating that risk, as we are, in fact, living in interesting times.
I have a problem with being concise. Sorry to ramble.
