I would bet many of the fantasies being posted here would go away if the poster actually was involved in a serious social situation. Almost everyone I know that has been shot in situations like this and/or has shot someone would agree.
Shoot someone and then learn to live with the nightmares and guilt;
Shoot someone and get arrested and go through a jail visit and an expensive trial;
Shoot someone and find yourself being sued by the individual or his family;
Shoot someone and experience embarrassing publicity and an inability to make a living.
Any or all of those things will change attitudes and lives forever.
Me? I have plenty of military and law enforcement training. I carry an “enforcement weapon”. I’m going to hide and call 911 if I can. Other than active duty LEOs (which I am not at age 70) I think anyone that would get involved in a shooting situation (that does not involve a direct threat to self or others you care strongly about*) willingly is inexperienced and naive.
Don’t get me wrong, there are times when failing to respond is not an option one can live with. But I have no impulse to play hero either. The cost is sometimes just too high.
That means that small guns in lesser calibers often are the best choice for most people. They are more likely to need a close range weapon unless they have a hero complex. The close range mouse gun is enough to persuade aggressors to stop or run which is all the gun handler should want anyway.
For those of you who think a .22 or a .25 is insufficient for this job, ask yourself this question: Would I indemnify a shooter against criminal or civil action and then let him/her shoot me at 3 feet or less with a .22 or .25 for $10,000.00 if I survived?
* Willing to go bankrupt and to prison for constitutes carrying strongly for.