Are there really anti-gun people...

who live in isolated locations like that depicted in this movie, in the deep mountains of northern california, who don't own even a single firearm. And would be upset if even one firearm is brought on their property. I realize, in the movie, a firearm ended up saving a particular character who was anti-gun, which I thought was great, but that is not my point.

My question is, do these people really exist, in the middle of nowhere, miles from any help, with response times from authorities measured in hours. It is simply unimaginable to me, in this day and age, that anyone could be so naive to expect that they would be left alone, to never think they would need to be prepared to defend themselves, when no one else will be there to help.

In my mind, any man, who would choose to live with his wife and small child so far from help, and not have the means to protect them, is no man at all. Or how could a mother, for that matter, not demand that she have the means to protect her family, if the worst type of threat came to their land.

I know in a perfect world, people should be safe to live on their own land, free from the threat of violence, but that is just a fantasy. And to not be prepared for the worst, is just asking to be victimized.

I'm really trying to grasp the thinking that would go into living that way, because it is a completely foreign concept to me. Just doesn't compute. I realize people have their own principles, but principles won't protect your child from predators.