> The danger is well known, not unknown: it's people with guns.

well, apparently not well known to you. The danger is criminals with guns. Law-abiding people carry guns everyday and demonstrably present no significant additional threat to the public. The thesis that law-abiding people could suddenly become dangerous gun criminals at a Rust event simply because they possess a firearm seems unsupportable.

Apparently the Rust Foundation wants us to accept the premise that lawfully armed people are intrinsically dangerous to fellow Rust enthusiasts, doubly so if they dissent.

I’d like to know what is it about Rust that makes lawful behavior and public dissent over Rust foundation dicta so hazardous...? Can someone address this directly?

Dude would be praying to all gods known and unknown that there's a law-abiding person with a gun around to save their ass if someone who doesn't give a single flying fuck about the conference's gun rules shows up to shoot the place up, someone who could respond before the police finally show up also armed with guns but too late to do anything but drag their dead corpse out.