Has national park carry saved its first lives?

None of this, obviously, proves the hikers' claim of legitimate self-defense, but I think it lends some credence to it, and to the assertion that one or both hikers would very likely be dead if they'd both been unarmed, as the law had required until this February. When the national parks rule change was being debated, opponents of the change heaped ridicule on the idea of needing to defend oneself in national parks. [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a read (and a digg?) and tell a friend.