One of the problems faced by anyone considering this question is that the more you read about it, the more conflicting opinions one will find. One magazine writer several years ago suggested that neither military exprience nor hunting experience (sucessful hunting, I presume) adds much to one's self-defense capability. I wonder about the first claim, not so much about the other.
Zombietactics response is good. Participants in some competitions have complained that often the rules are highly artificial and nonsensical in some of the details, or so they say. Yet I'm sure they are better than nothing. I still wonder if any competition can prepare one's self for the ultimate challenge, which is not winning the gunfight but rather being mentally prepared to kill someone. That is not to say that winnng the gunfight is not important, only that the fact that this is about killing someone seems to be either ignored or assumed away. Naturally, this is only a problem to the good guys reading this forum. The bad guys reading this forum have probably already come to grips with that dilemma.
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.