The BTK Killer and defenseless victims

Art DeVany has an interesting discussion on this on his website:

had any of the BTK killer's victims been armed she might have ended his string of victims. I don't carry a gun or own one, but there is a case to be made that females would be safer if more of them were armed and lethal. There would be fewer BTKs, Green River Killers, and Ted Bundys in this world.

A few armed females makes these murderous chain killers uneasy when, at present, they have little to fear of their victims. It increases the chances their run of victims will end in their death rather than in their chosen victim's. And victims are spared down the chain. Don't just mourn the victims of this serial killers, let them take measures to stop these depraved and mad men.

The media bear responsibility for the bias against guns and the female body count of these chain killers. It is a simple case to make; females are easy targets for determined and experienced killers (we all are, but they are even easier). Why are instances where guns protect victims almost never reported (John noted one story buried far back in the NYTs that reported this fact)? How many victims are the result of this bias?