I’m not asking for your personal views, though of what’d youd do, but for an argument supporting gun ownership through self-defense. I have no problem with what you said above on any sort of moral or ethical level, but it’s not part of an actual argument for why gun ownership is an outgrowth of self-defense. As I said, other countries have self-defense AND strong gun limitations; the two are not synonymous.

For many people a weapon would be needed to prevail. Those places that ban guns and allow self defense put the victim at profound disadvantage. Bats and knives and chains are powerful weapons best overcome by a weapon with a little more reach than a cane or club. The physically weak and disabled should have a better chance to prevail in an attack than unarmed provides.

Having a taser or pepper spray or a bat against a bad guy with a pistol is a losing proposition. Needlessly so.

Defenseless may not be a good plan for all.