re: 4: I am skeptical that the fraction of reported self-defense situations in which “someone would have died” are actually situations in which someone would have died is 100%. I would ballpark it at 25%-50%, but I wouldn’t be terribly shocked by any number in the range 10%-150%. Citation definitely needed on this one, especially as my “reasonable range” is wide enough to cover everything from net positive to net negative.
They explain how they found that number here. I’m pretty impressed with their methodology, though I’m also sure you have a point about people exaggerating their chances of dying regardless of what clever study authors do.
re: 4: I am skeptical that the fraction of reported self-defense situations in which “someone would have died” are actually situations in which someone would have died is 100%. I would ballpark it at 25%-50%, but I wouldn’t be terribly shocked by any number in the range 10%-150%. Citation definitely needed on this one, especially as my “reasonable range” is wide enough to cover everything from net positive to net negative.
They explain how they found that number here. I’m pretty impressed with their methodology, though I’m also sure you have a point about people exaggerating their chances of dying regardless of what clever study authors do.