As reported, an Agusta, GA pharmacist with a concealed carry permit was working at a CVS store (which had been robbed in the past.) A masked criminal, who was carrying a pistol, entered the store and threatened the lives of the employees near the front of the store. The robber handed the employees a bag, and demanded that they fill it with money. The pharmacist grabbed his gun, and confronted the criminal. The criminal refused to surrender, and pointed his gun at the pharmacist. The pharmacist fired 3 times, missing the robber, but causing him to flee. No one was injured. The robber left behind the bag that he had handed to the employees, which police hope will help them identify the robber.
Once again, we have a defensive gun use that resulted in no deaths or injures. Those opposed to gun rights would call this a failure because the pharmacist didn’t manage to shoot the robber, however shooting the robber is not really the goal. Instead, when using a gun for self defense, the goal is to put an end to the threat posed by the criminal. Shooting the criminal is certainly a very effective way of ending the threat, as a dead or sufficiently injured criminal is incapable of continuing to attack innocent people. However firing at criminal, even if one misses, will often accomplish the same goal, since a criminal who is being shot at will often duck or flee, preventing them from harming their victims. Here, the criminal fled empty-handed, leaving behind valuable evidence that may allow the police to find him, and no innocent people were harmed. That is what I call a successful self defense gun use.