Why is it? (UPDATED)

Why is it that when someone - say a disgruntled 18 year-old - uses a firearm to commit mayhem it makes all the news shows and headlines, yet when a law-abiding properly-permitted citizen uses a concealed firearm to protect others and save lives, the national media, in fact any media other than the local one, ignore this.

There is little reason to wonder why people seem to think that firearms are only ever used by civilians for evil.  For one, they see only what they want to see, they know the truth and thus are immune to new data.  Second, they only hear what others want them to hear, few of them will know that a firearm in the hands of a fellow citizen is more likely to save lives than to take them. [Few know that they are more likely to be shot by police than by an armed citizen].

Lastly we have to realize that wishing that this law-abiding citizen had been prohibited from having his firearm in his possession, is tantamount to wishing that the people he defend would have been killed.

UPDATE:  Well, if the victim in this home invasion had been armed,perhaps he would have been able to save himself from being stabbed and the alleged invader from a terrible death.  (Not that the invader did not deserve a terrible end, but the bleeding hearts who are so afraid of firearms might also find his avoidance of bisection a good thing - and, in this case, a positive reason for armed self-defense.)  Remember that most successful defenses with a firearm do not even involve its discharge. If the victim had had a firearm and held the perpetrator for police, he would never have made his fateful unsuccessful leap.