Eugene Kane has another poorly thought out editorial in today's Journal:

There is an exception to every rule. At least, there should be.

Which brings me to V.O. Goins.

Goins is the 64-year-old Arkansas man who shot and killed a 20-year-old Racine man in Milwaukee after being attacked by a group of would-be robbers on April 3.

Goins stopped at a gas station on North Ave. that morning to ask for directions when he was assaulted by a group of young males apparently in search of an easy mark.

Goins managed to pull a gun from under his front seat and shoot one member of the group, Kendall Moss.
...
If you don't approve of concealed-carry laws, Goins might represent the rare exception to your particular belief system.

I am one of those who think there are way too many handguns in this country and that more concealed weapons will only encourage more people to think of themselves as Clint Eastwood and create more grieving families.

What Goins did was exceptional for crime victims in this country, turning the tables on his attackers in such a decisive fashion. It usually doesn't happen that way.
...
What Goins did was illegal, according to the letter of the law. But he's also a logical exception.

I wish more people realized there are logical exceptions to just about every firmly held belief, whether it's abortion, gun control, affirmative action, whatever.

You spend the majority of your article explaining how this man should be commended for his actions, and agree with the prosecutor for not charging this man with a crime. So far so good. But then... because apparently the Journal doesn't allow you to mention a gun self defense case without bringing up Clint Eastwood, you talk about how he is the "exception to the rule". Just one problem Eugene... you fail to prove the rule! According to this website there are 35 states which grant concealed carry permits to state residents in some form or another. That's 35 states full of potential Clint Eastwoods looking for their own brand of justice against criminals. You're telling me that you couldn't find a single statistic to back up your claim that this gentleman was the exception and not the rule?

The fact of the matter is that the statistic aren't very conclusive in concealed carry states. Some studies by some groups, like this one in Utah show some decrease in crime against personal property after they passed a concealed carry law. Of course you could probably take this with a grain of salt given where I found it. Here is a similar study from Cato regarding a significant drop in crime in Florida after their law passed. It wasn't hard to find these either... just a few minutes with my trusty friend Google. I'm sure that a little more hunting might find contrary statistics in those states as well. What's interesting is the anecdotal lack of evidence here. While recently there have been a few news items regarding people who have successfully defended themselves with guns... I haven't seen any news items about Clint Eastwoods roaming the country side. Have you? Given the liberal media's general hatred of guns, I'd think that they would be shouting from the hill tops with the news if there were.

My personal viewpoint is that the ability for a law abiding citizen to carry a concealed weapon is their right. Would I carry one? Probably not, and neither would a lot of other people. But I certainly don't think my views on this ought to stop someone else from exercising their right. I also think that just having the law on the books... making criminals wonder whether I do have a gun or not is enough to make someone think twice. The statistics seem to bear me out on this. Where are your statistics Eugene? Mr. Goins is the rule... not the exception.

Update 4/18/2005: Owen over at Boots & Sabers has fisked some letters to the editor that were in the Journal regarding concealed carry. It's amazing how knee jerk people can be against law abiding citizens being able to do what criminals already do with impunity.