[booker_t]

I imagine responses to this loose survey question would fall into one of the following bins:

1) Pulled gun, opponent ceased, no fire.

2) Pulled gun, opponent continued, fire to stop.

3) Pulled gun, opponent continued, fire failed to stop, citizen injured/killed.

4) Didn't pull gun, opponent ceased, no action.

5) Didn't pull gun, opponent continued, physical action to stop.

6) Didn't pull gun, opponent continued, physical action failed to stop, citizen injured/killed.

#4 and #6 would not likely respond to your thread if they read it, particularly if they were deceased.

#2 would not likely respond because generally it is not something they want to talk about, considering the legal issues. If you've read the TFL archives going back to 1998, you'll find scant few postings from people sharing their personal story about stopping an attack with gunfire.

#1, #3 and #5 people may post about, either because they want to inform others, are proud of their successful defense, or some other reason.

We could further break this down into opponent types (home intruders, rapists, street muggers/druggies, car jackers, bar/public house patrons, terrorists, etc).

Regardless, while anecdotal information from a self-selective community of gun enthusiasts (such as TFL) might make for an interesting read, it does not sufficiently provide significant (statistical or otherwise) evidence for the formulation, validation or verification of tactics theory. In the end, gun enthusiasts will come to the same conclusions:

1) Having it is better than not having it and

2) Using it responsibly is of key importance both for effectiveness and to preserve the right to continue having it.