Basically if you argue that one needs more rounds in the mag to deal with more attackers, it backfires as "active shooter needs more rounds in the mags to deal with more victims". And I doubt the stats will help us to refute that...
And one more thing. It's not about me "liking it". It's about using the strategy that will give us a win. Do lawyers grab onto a bunch of mismatching straws when they argue a case ? Gene Hoffman himself often brings up Alan Gura as an example of how it should be argued.
Again, use whatever argument you think is most effective. But if you think you are going to dictate to others which argument is "best", I don't think people want to hear that from you. I certainly don't.