I don't believe that carrying a gun and being a good shot necessarily qualifies one to be a "gunfighter". Although I believe men like Jerry Miculek and Rob Leatham for example, are absolutely extraordinary in their skills with a handgun (and whom I would love to take lessons from) I would not place them in the category of being a gunfighter. Men like Wyatt Earp, Jim Cirrillo, Bill Jordan and John Wesley Hardin for example would fit the category. These are men who not only carried and used a gun in their line of work or in their everyday travels, but also engaged in combat with other men using a firearm. Just because a person is a good shot and/or carries a gun daily does not make him/her a gunfighter.
For the most part when we think of gunfighters we conjure up the image of a man with a six-shooter slung low in his hip on a dusty street in some western town. But what about men like Chuck Mawhinny, Carlos Hathcock or Simo Häyhä? These men used rifles and were probably some of the deadliest men to ever walk the earth. Both Mawhinny and Hathcock were both accomplished Marine snipers during Vietnam. Mawhinney never spoke of his exploits as a sniper but research revealed that Mawhinney actually had 103 confirmed kills and 216 "probable kills", which led to his replacing Carlos Hathcock, who had 93 confirmed kills, as the USMC sniper with the second greatest amount of confirmed kills on record.
Häyhä, a soldier with the Finnish Army during WWII was credited with 505 confirmed kills of Soviet soldiers, and 542 if including the unconfirmed deaths. The unofficial Finnish front line figure from the battlefield of Kollaa places the number of Häyhä's sniper kills at over 800. A daily account of the kills at Kollaa was conducted for the Finnish snipers. Besides his sniper kills, Häyhä was also credited with over two hundred kills with a Suomi KP/-31 submachine gun, thus bringing his credited kills to at least 705. All of Häyhä's kills were accomplished in less than 100 days.
These men were gunfighters in every sense of the word!
There are many military personnel and law enforcement officers who are lesser known but have still used a firearm in the performance of their duties. They too would be considered gunfighters in my opinion. However just because a person fires a gun at someone, that does not qualify them as a gunfighter. I don't consider gang members, thugs or other criminals who use a gun to shoot at other gang members a gunfighter, anymore than I would consider someone who punches a bag and gets in a fist fight a boxer. I think that if a person (a) carries a firearm in the performance of their duties and/or daily (b) is trained proficiently in the use of a firearm and (c) has used a firearm in a combative situation at least once, in my book, would qualify that person as a gunfighter.