All of that makes sense. And you're right about the anecdotes, which is why I think the larger the data set, the more reliable the conclusions. In the various studies of officer involved shootings, some of them had 100% accuracy, but they only fired one shot that happened to hit. Similarly, some had 0% accuracy for the same reason. But in the aggregate, the numbers start to reveal something more reliable.
For a long time, finding any real data on guns was very difficult. The reasons for which could be perceived as political. So, I'll just leave it with I'm glad that over the last dozen or so years, we're starting to get some meaningful, statistical data that supports more objective analysis.