I’m aware of that, but it’s like many are never satisfied. If someone is without a firearm and is hurt/killed/robbed, FR is “tsk, tsk, would’ve been fine with a gun”. Then she HAS a gun and the end result was good, but it’s not good enough. “Should’ve killed him, should’ve used shotgun, should’ve had good rounds.” Geesh. Carping.
Nonsense. You're talking two very different levels of analysis; the first is like comparing football teams, the second is like comparing the line-ups of their various squads.
I haven't seen a single true rebuke of her on this entire thread, only suggestions of refinement that would have made her more effective and less the beneficiary of "luck."
Threads like this naturally attract people who have more than a passing interest in the subject matter. To them, results like this lady achieved cause legitimate questions about whether she exercised due-diligence with regard to firearms ownership.
If I might pose an analogy: it's like she learned just enough about fishing to catch one, but never bothered to find out what to do once the damn thing is on the hook....