I understand and agree with what you are saying. I'm simply looking to prevent others from taking the same old line I've heard far too many times, a line designed specifically to frighten citizens into not carrying.

As for when, the obvious answer is when absolutely necessary. Except when hunting or as a Marine, I don't carry in the backcountry. But in light of the occasional incident, particularly regarding women, I would not oppose their carrying when hiking solo. I'm speaking in regard to two-legged predators of course.

But when? When facing threat of imminent harm. Should one brandish? Only if one is about to use the weapon and they brandish as they draw and fire. Of course the previous posts principally address the issues involved frontcountry issues. The idea that one must immediately dial 911 when using a weapon must be amended to "one must [as soon as possible] contact authorities when using a weapon".

The real key is that particulars vary from state to state. They also vary in terms of the make-up of those who would sit on a jury. A reasonable case of self-defense would not likely result in criminal or civil conviction in the rural areas of Tennessee though things would be much dicier in a courtroom in downtown Nashville. It would be worth bearing this in mind before heading into the backcountry in various regions. I would be less inclined to use a weapon in the Sierras than in the region around Big Bend (outside the park) in Texas.

So when? In circumstances where one decides it is better to fire and risk court/jail than be assaulted and possibly killed.

Beyond this point, you could discuss regional peculiarities, but I wonder if we'll see much discussion to add to the debate.