Don't know if that qualifies as "pocket" in the OP's case since the term is somewhat subjective.
Perhaps my response was a little too tongue-in-cheek; this is part of what I was getting at.
In any analysis of "what gun for me?" The combination of shooter, weapon, and caliber is what makes that gun (and so, recommendation) effective or appropriate.
Better said, and to the point.
Typical firearm recommendation discussions center on the biggest caliber that the shooter can still shoot effectively. This time, it's more a matter of the smallest frame that the shooter can shoot effectively.
Again, well said. It's a worthwhile question; on the basis of the comments from genuinely knowledgeable people here, it seems the "best" gun is the one you like because you're more likely to have it when you need it -- "like" including "does it fit me?"
We know for sure that not all primates or canids experience fear or pain during a committed attack, we know that reaction time varies greatly with situational awareness and mental preparation, we know that shot placement weighs heavily in effectiveness, and we know shot placement varies greatly with training and experience.
Thinking about this, I'm wondering at what range of distances does this all happen?