They don't all result in a shooting.
The problem with Kleck's figures is what they
do say.
According to Kleck, there were 2,500,000 crimes prevented by people with guns a year.
However, according to Kleck's figures, in 24% of those incidents the person defending themselves fired their gun, which means about 600,000 fired.
Further, according to Kleck, 8% of the 2,500,000 incidents resulted in the defender shooting at, and hitting, the criminal. That's 200,000 criminals shot.
However, the FBI records justifiable homicides, and says about 250 occur each year by private citizens. That means that only 1 in 800 of the criminals shot according to Kleck died, and that's a ridiculous figure.
There are other inconsistencies with Kleck's figures. For example, he reported 2,500,000 defensive gun uses in the year up to his survey. But at the same time he asked people about the previous 5 years as well. According to the responses, the yearly rate for the previous 5 years was half that, about 1,250,000 a year.
It's unlikely the figures actually doubled in a year. It's far more likely that respondents reported more recent incidents to increase the drama.
All Kleck did was telephone people at random, and ask them questions. If any of them lied, and claimed to have defended themselves with a gun when they hadn't, it increased the reported rate. If just 1 in 100 lied, it accounts for almost all Kleck's reported incidents. Hasn't this board recently seen an example of that? (I can't recall the details of the thread, but I think someone claimed to have killed an attacker, and been wounded themselves).
There are people who will lie about such things everywhere. Telephone a few thousand people at random and you will probably find 2,500,000 Americans were Navy Seals active in Gulf War I or II.
(note I'm not suggesting you are lying about your incident, just that asking people at random will uncover a certain proportion who will lie.)
