I have described the only type of person we are protected from with a gun free zone. That person is mostly law abiding, but faced with enough provocation, they will shoot with no thought toward the consequences or the morality of their action. The shooter at Johns Hopkins hospital, Paul Warren Pardus, is such a man. By all the accounts I have read, he was law-abiding and pretty normal. Some accounts say he was licensed to carry a concealed weapon. When the doctor explained what could and could not be done to treat his mother, Mr. Pardus snapped. He shot the doctor, killed his mother, then killed himself.
Antigunners will howl about how this proves nobody is qualified to carry a concealed weapon, and that it is proof that the evil spirit of a gun eventually suffuses the person carrying it. As I have said before in earlier columns, don't be distracted from a basic truth by the tiny fraction of exceptions. If we have between 3 and 5 million people who can legally carry a concealed weapon in America and maybe 120 million who own a gun, this example hardly impugns the rest of us. Advocates of gun control zero in on all the details of an event such as this, wringing all the emotion and horror from it they can because it is memorable. It is much more memorable than the dry statistic that he represents one three millionth of the gun carrying public, and a wild outlier. He is truly the one-in-a-million fluke.
We must not let the people seeking to disarm us frame the issue in terms of terrifying anecdotes. We must show that in the overwhelming majority of cases, we who carry deadly weapons do so with great responsibility. It never hurts to refer to the thousands of times a month citizens avoid harm and defend themselves from criminals with their weapons. That is a right and proper use of responsibility. Remember to defend the forest , not fixate on one bad tree.