One of the big stories in the news recently was the bear attack on the Ohio family vacationing in the Cherokee National Forest Chilhowee Recreation Area in Tennessee.

The Clyde, Ohio family's 6-year-old girl was killed, their 2-year-old son was injured, and the mother remains in critical condition.

During the attack, the mother attempted to drive off the bear with rocks and sticks before she was mauled. The little girl fled during the initial attack, but was found 100 yards from the  trail by a rescuer.

The rescuer was then attacked by the bear, but he was armed and shot at the bruin twice before it fled.

In a strange twist of fate, this family was attacked in a park in Tennessee which allowed firearms to be carried for personal protection; yet their hometown is currently involved in a lawsuit with Ohioans For Concealed Carry due to their efforts to illegally ban firearms from their own parks.

This tragic incident clearly shows why self-defense proponents are opposed to bans on firearms for personal protection in public parks. While odds for a bear attack in Clyde are remote, recent incidents with wild dog or coyote attacks have been reported in Ohio parks the last couple of years.

The chain of unfortunate events in this incident are similar to the ones that played out in the Cleveland Metroparks last April. In the North Chagrin Reservation, two coyotes attacked parkgoers on several occasions. When park rangers investigated, a coyote attacked them as well, but was shot and killed.

In Tennessee,  the bear attacked a family who only had rocks and sticks to defend themselves with and the family sustains serious injuries. The bear then attacks a rescuer who is armed and drives off the bear, enabling the man to rescue the girl from being eaten.

Law-abiding citizens deserve the right to defend themselves and their loved ones against both four-legged and two-legged predators. One can only imagine this story having a very different ending had the mother been armed with a firearm instead of a stick.