While large companies may not hire a person who had defended themselves. I personally know of two cases that went just the other way. In both cases, a hold up of a convenience store and the other a franchise pizza place, the clerks were fired and quickly hired by competitors. The justification for the firing and the hiring were the same- they stopped a crime. In fact in the case of the pizza place the clerk was specifically given permission to carry a pistol at work (the clerk had a concealed weapon permit). The major difference between the hiring and the firing was that the businesses that fired them were owned by large franchise owners and the businesses that did the hiring were owned by independent owners.
"The major difference between the hiring and the firing was that the businesses that fired them were owned by large franchise owners and the businesses that did the hiring were owned by independent owners."
No, the major difference was that the large franchises owners had lawyers while the indepenents had common sense.
It comes down to whether the potential new employer has deep or shallow pockets, and would be an easy mark for a big-money lawsuit.