"Not saying it has to be a $2000 gun..."
You missed the point.
Restricting yourself to a $400 gun if a $500 product can do a better job is foolish, if you're doing it because you can tolerate the idea of losing a $400 gun, but you can't tolerate losing a $500 gun.
My point is that selecting a defensive tool based solely on how much you're willing to lose if you ever have to use it is not a valid consideration in the process.
You'll look at $450 products, but won't even consider something any higher, no matter how good it may be or how much more effective/efficient.
You set an arbitrary limit.
I think that's ill-advised & counterproductive if price is your primary consideration.
Denis