Very interesting discussion.
I'm a new ham who was considering eventual involvemenet with a local ARES group.
Frankly, I wouldn't trust anyone to even communicate effectively if I couldn't trust them with a gun.
Frankly, I will not participate in a SHTF role without being armed.
Frankly, the local sheriff and his deputies will have their hands full during such event and it is absolutely naive to believe there will be adequate law enforcement presence in all areas. I assisted in the aftermath of Katrina in a FEMA info center in a town 75 miles away from Katrina'a ground zero where some folks we were assisting were very distressed and violence was possible. No law enforcement was anywhere near.
Frankly, I will carry to protect myself, not someone else. And anyone who suggests that I will carry to play Joe Cop is using a red herring argument to promote his own mis-informed and liberty-eroding agenda.
Any organization that applies restrictions to all based on the possible bad behavior of the worst is not, for me, an organization to associate with. That sounds like a kindergarten.
There is no other organization I belong to or meetings I attend that prohibit me from carrying if I were so inclined. Why should that prohibition be imposed on members of an organization who are more likely than the Kiwanis Club to be in a vulnerable position?
Finally, organizations that successfully impose such rules do so only because their particpants agree to give up their rights. That is what our whole nation is gradually doing. Refer to frog in pot of water, slowly heated.