For a civilian in a self defense situation it's different. Your opponent does not initially see you as a deadly threat. Your opponent is a criminal who has picked you, the victim, for any number of reasons, but most of all because he see's you as a 'non-threat' who will offer very little, if any, resistance. He/they do not expect or desire armed resistance from you, nor do they desire a gunfight. They would almost certainly not have targeted you in the first place if they thought that would be the probable outcome. This is were, I think, 'shooting on the move' offers an advantage, primarily as a shock tactic within the parameters of a civilian self defense encounter. Instead of being a relenting victim, you the shooter are now aggressively and actively engaging your attacker, catching him off guard by momentarily reversing roles and making HIM the victim. If this buys you a couple seconds to effectively get good hits on your opponent before he can react, then the tactic is sound. Even if you are wounded in the process but win, it is still sound, or at the very least worth exploring.
If you are shooting, you are already in a fight. There are a lot of variables associated with any fight they are dynamic and rapidly evolving. Every bullet you fire has a price tag attached to it. I am all for taking the fight to the BG.
Too many people seem to get lost in the minutia of a "gun" fight. Once the bullets start flying the context is largely unimportant unless they are shooting at you with something that turns cover into concealment.