Would you walk into a gun store and think "this poses a threat"?
Of course not. Bombs, sure. They can go off any time. The gun threat is a person threat. When the threat is neutralized, the gun still exists.
This obvious distinction gets glassed over in these types of conversations, as if the gun itself is the issue. Granted, someone who wants to kill would have an easier time with a gun than without it, but the issue is that the person wants to kill you and that the person is able to kill a lot of you because you are herded into a box under the guise of being safe. You're not safe. You cannot get rid of guns, not you as an individual. Therefore if you want to have the best survival chances, you avoid being trapped and you avoid being unable to defend yourself. That seems like simple survival sense.
Since it's not feasible, I don't want to be on the victim side of the equation because I wanted to make a gun free zone personal statement by being vulnerable.
Because hurdles aren't barriers. I don't care to add another sandbag to the breached levy just to watch it wash away, and pretend I tried. Like you said, you cannot guarantee my safety from guns, so you cannot remove my right to defend myself with equal force.