This is just a thought. I don't know that it's ever been an issue or how likely it is that it would ever be one.
After nearly EVERY police shooting I've heard about in the recent past I've heard the contention that " there must have been something else" the officer could have used. Some type of "less than lethal tool", pepper spray, rubber bullets, taser, etc.
I don't believe it's a stretch to assume that an armed citizen, using deadly force (even justifiably), when having "less than lethal" tools in their possession, might be subjected to the same assertions.
Should I need to use deadly force to protect myself I don't want the water muddied more than necessary. I won't pick a fight with you, I don't want to engage in a physical altercation with you, if you attack me physically I'll fear that you may gain access to my gun and therefore be in fear for my life.
I don't do police work any longer and I don't believe that it is reasonable to expect that I'll carry "less than lethal" tools, on my person, to protect myself from severe bodily injury or death.