If all you practice is at 7 yards, and you think you have it covered, you may want to think it over some more. Being able to make decent hits at 50, or even 100 yards with a handgun, really isnt all that hard, but does require some practice. If you dont practice those type shots, what do you think Murphy will throw your way when your turn happens to come?
I often miss the days of revolvers being used in police work. People had to work harder to develop their skillsets using DA revolvers, and it wasn't uncommon for them to have to learn to shoot with better accuracy (bullseye targets often used) and at longer distances.
Sure, nowadays we're commonly incorporating a wider range of important tactical considerations, (movement, shooting/moving, a wider range of barricade use, non-shoot decisions, full-size picture targets without obvious "scoring zones" or generous frontal views, multiple threats, etc), but learning to run the revolvers within a wider distance envelope really helped people learn to better run handguns better.
Nowadays you can hear some folks express how it's too difficult, or "unfair", to ask them to shoot at 15, 25 or 50 yards with a handgun.
Im not saying to limit yourself in your experiences here though. Being familiar with as many types/platforms is a good thing, and if possible, should also be practiced. You never know when you might have to pick something up and use it. A lot of this just comes from the normal progression of finding what it is you want too. Every new type of gun is a learning experience, be it a positive one or not so much. Its easy enough, to have one of each "type", to occasionally practice with to stay familiar with them.
Some folks just find shooting different handguns once in a while to be a fun range experience, too.
If someone enjoys recurrent training, it's possible to sometimes have to be familiar with running other types of handguns than just some "favorite" make/model. Going to training where the sim-guns are older duty weapons of another make/model isn't impossible to happen, for example. Being thrown into an unrehearsed, fast-paced sim-gun scenario, using the equipment of "someone else", may work out better if someone can rely upon a better ingrained, well-rounded foundation skillset, than just something being heavily dependent on the use of just a particular gun.
People can certainly get a bit weird when it comes to guns, though.
People, being human, have always had a strong streak of ingrained atavistic behaviors, and sometimes a tendency to animism, thinking to imbue objects with attributes of life, consciousness, soul, etc.
Humans also tend to like ritual and ritualistic behaviors, and creating little rituals around the ownership and use of their possessions and gear (including guns) isn't a complete surprise.
I don't love my guns, nor do I give them names. (I know a guy who named his issued duty weapon, and liked to talk about it.)
It's gear, either mine, or just something loaned (issued) to me by someone else.
I like many of my guns, but I don't love them.
I love freedom, but that doesn't translate into love of the tools needed to safeguard it. Maybe I'm just getting old. Dunno. I sometimes look back on the youngster I was in my 30's, from the perspective afforded by being in my 60's, and I wonder who the hell that kid was, and why he thought about a lot of things the way he did.