PDA

View Full Version : The efficacy of .22 in a self defense role



SLG
12-17-2011, 10:27 AM
[SLG didn't really start this thread, it was split from an equally informative thread (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?2488-If-you-had-to-CC-a-22-snub-nose) -- Tom_Jones]


I know an extremely well known and respected instructor that carries a Smith .22 magnum J frame as a font pocket back-up -- believe it is a model 351. He is a put it in the eye socket kind of guy and likes the extra two cartridges.

Not trying to slam the well known and respected instructor, but it occurs to me that if you're the kind of guy who believes in putting it in the eye socket, just how many rounds do you need? How many eye sockets do you think you'll be putting it in?

Seriously, I'd like to hear more about the rational behind this.

Wheeler
12-17-2011, 02:54 PM
Not trying to slam the well known and respected instructor, but it occurs to me that if you're the kind of guy who believes in putting it in the eye socket, just how many rounds do you need? How many eye sockets do you think you'll be putting it in?

Seriously, I'd like to hear more about the rational behind this.

That's a slippery slope line of logic. The same could be applied to P30's Glocks, M&P's etc.

SLG
12-17-2011, 04:16 PM
Wheeler,

Then I guess my post wasn't clear. If you can put a bullet into someones eye, on demand, in a fight, then either you have a shooting ability that is pretty much unheard of, or you are thinking more along the lines of an entangled fight. Forgetting about the skill needed to do the same, on demand, in an entangled fight for a minute, if you do put a bullet into someones eye socket, presumably the fight is then over. If that's not the case, then the "benefits" of a .22 go away. So, assuming a round in the eye socket, how many rounds do you need per attacker? One. How many attackers do you think you can handle? 5? More than 5? Since 5 seems to be an awful lot of guys for one person to deal with, and even the smallest snubbie carries 5 shots, what is the benefit to carrying a high capacity .22 over a standard capacity .22, let alone something with a bit more reliability to it? Reliability in this case does not just mean "stopping power", but more literally, will the round ignite when hit by the firing pin?

Maybe I missed something, and since I've never met a trainer who advocated the above, I'd like to hear more about it.

GJM
12-17-2011, 04:36 PM
First, he didn't say he was a "put it in the eye socket guy," I did. Based on my watching him shoot a number of times, he without question has that ability. I was told about the Smith .22 magnum by someone else, saw it, but did not have a chance to ask him about his rationale for it. I never heard him advocate for or against it for others. Out of respect for his privacy, I am not going to post his name on this forum.

I am intrigued about the .22 magnum/light J frame combination, because there are a number of instances such a caliber would be useful for harvesting game when I am out in the field, and I suspect all of us would shoot the .22 magnum better at speed. I prefer a J frame to a small pocket auto, but always wish the J frame held more than five cartridges. As to the terminal performance of seven .22 magnum bullets versus five 38's, that is above my pay grade.

SLG
12-17-2011, 04:53 PM
First, he didn't say he was a "put it in the eye socket guy," I did. Based on my watching him shoot a number of times, he without question has that ability. I was told about the Smith .22 magnum by someone else, saw it, but did not have a chance to ask him about his rationale for it. I never heard him advocate for or against it for others. Out of respect for his privacy, I am not going to post his name on this forum.

I am intrigued about the .22 magnum/light J frame combination, because there are a number of instances such a caliber would be useful for harvesting game when I am out in the field, and I suspect all of us would shoot the .22 magnum better at speed. I prefer a J frame to a small pocket auto, but always wish the J frame held more than five cartridges. As to the terminal performance of seven .22 magnum bullets versus five 38's, that is above my pay grade.

Then I guess I partially misunderstood. You were referring to his accuracy, not his doctrine when you said "put it in the eye socket..." Since none of us here seem to know his doctrine, I guess I'll have to put that on hold. As before, I'd like to hear more about it.

"Based on my watching him shoot a number of times, he without question has that ability." Ability in a fight, or ability on a range? This gets back to my earlier post. I know LOTS of guys who have the ability on the range. I don't know any who think they could do it in a fight.

Being a moron, it didn't occur to me until just now that I might be derailing this thread, which is not my intention. If a mod wants to move it, or tell me to start a new thread, I will, though it sounds like there's not much more to learn about it at his time.

GJM
12-17-2011, 05:03 PM
Then I guess I partially misunderstood. You were referring to his accuracy, not his doctrine when you said "put it in the eye socket..." Since none of us here seem to know his doctrine, I guess I'll have to put that on hold. As before, I'd like to hear more about it.

"Based on my watching him shoot a number of times, he without question has that ability." Ability in a fight, or ability on a range? This gets back to my earlier post. I know LOTS of guys who have the ability on the range. I don't know any who think they could do it in a fight.

Being a moron, it didn't occur to me until just now that I might be derailing this thread, which is not my intention. If a mod wants to move it, or tell me to start a new thread, I will, though it sounds like there's not much more to learn about it at his time.

I don't think you were derailing it -- just showing the healthy skepticism which makes for a useful thread. I would be interested in hearing about how a .22 magnum might work versus a .38 J frame, considering round count, ability to shoot, and terminal performance.

SLG, check your PM's.

SLG
12-17-2011, 05:30 PM
Well, aside from healthy skepticism, I am genuinely interested in what a well respected trainer thinks about the issue. You don't get better or more knowledgeable if you don't examine others' ideas.

Now, knowing who the trainer is, and knowing quite a bit about his background, I classify him as a shooting instructor, not a fighting instructor. I've also spent a couple of hundred (literally) hours on his shooting system. As you can imagine, that changes the info slightly.

Wheeler
12-17-2011, 08:16 PM
SLG, rather than let the thread drift, I'll wait for an additional thread to be added or however the mods handle it.

Headhunter would be a good one to weigh in on this one, as he is the resident snub expert.

HeadHunter
12-18-2011, 12:11 AM
This is my 317. It has a nice trigger and runs very reliably with high quality ammo. The Velocitor ammo pictured penetrated 17 inches of gelatin under the FBI protocol from a Beretta 21A. If you fed your centerfire carry gun Aquila, S&B, or other crap, it wouldn't surprise you when it didn't work 100%. Same is true of Golden Bullet, Wildcat, and other .22 bulk crap. In any case, what's immediate action with a revolver?; press the trigger again. I would like to have a 43C but they last about 10 minutes when Bud's gets them in.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Snubs/ClipGripcrop.jpg

I know I am considered a maverick in the industry, along with the other well known instructor, for carrying .22s at times but they have worked for me on several occasions, so frankly I don't care what anyone else says or thinks. Once again, I throw down the gauntlet to demonstrate the alleged veritable multitude of mousegun caliber failures in the hands of private citizens. I have been making that challenge for years; to date, the silence has been deafening. OTOH, I can document 100s of incidents where .22s have accomplished the mission just fine.

I don't care if the villain dies, runs away, rushes to the hospital, or goes home and pushes a wirebrush soaked in Listerine through the hole in the back of his mouth. As long as he receives the message to leave me and mine alone, that's good enough. I don't care about putting the bracelets on him, that's a job for the PoPo, not me. In fact, I prefer that he die outside my home (http://www.biography.com/tv/i-survived/episodes/27-%C2%A0brentsusandenise), rather than in it, because I don't want to have to clean up his loathsome blood-borne pathogens from my house.

Even when I am sitting around in my underwear, any home invader is going to end up leaking because the 317 is on me. Also, it has 60% more ammo in it than a .38, which should be a consideration for the capacity obsessed.

Rant mode off. :)


No one complains about being shot with the wrong caliber. -- Walt Rauch
Caliber matters little, compared with competence, but no one want to hear that! --John Farnam

ToddG
12-18-2011, 08:34 AM
The Velocitor ammo pictured penetrated 17 inches of gelatin under the FBI protocol from a Beretta 21A.

Are you saying it did that in all of the tests or just one (bare gel, presumably)?


If you fed your centerfire carry gun Aquila, S&B, or other crap, it wouldn't surprise you when it didn't work 100%. Same is true of Golden Bullet, Wildcat, and other .22 bulk crap.

Even the highest quality .22 ammo is more likely to have misfires than the average centerfire round. It's simply a function of the way the cartridge and the gun work. Admittedly, as you pointed out, this problem is less grievous with the revolver because the immediate action solution is intuitive and quick.


Once again, I throw down the gauntlet to demonstrate the alleged veritable multitude of mousegun caliber failures in the hands of private citizens. I have been making that challenge for years; to date, the silence has been deafening.

As I've said before, I'm not sure that's a valid way to analyze the problem. If nothing else, there is an obvious data gathering bias against failures to stop. The person who is mugged, draws a .22, and still gets robbed, beaten, or even killed is less likely to report the ballistic effect (if any) of the gun that didn't work.


OTOH, I can document 100s of incidents where .22s have accomplished the mission just fine.

Can you define "the mission" for your purposes? Are we talking about 100s of documented incidents in which a .22 bullet caused rapid physical incapacitation or simply stories in which the mere presence of any gun correlated with the GG surviving?

SLG
12-18-2011, 10:48 AM
I don't care if the villain dies, runs away, rushes to the hospital, or goes home and pushes a wirebrush soaked in Listerine through the hole in the back of his mouth. As long as he receives the message to leave me and mine alone, that's good enough. I don't care about putting the bracelets on him, that's a job for the PoPo, not me. In fact, I prefer that he die outside my home (http://www.biography.com/tv/i-survived/episodes/27-%C2%A0brentsusandenise), rather than in it, because I don't want to have to clean up his loathsome blood-borne pathogens from my house.

Even when I am sitting around in my underwear, any home invader is going to end up leaking because the 317 is on me. Also, it has 60% more ammo in it than a .38, which should be a consideration for the capacity obsessed.

Rant mode off. :)

So, while I can't agree with most of what you wrote, it is interesting. A few quick issues, if you don't mind.

Did you link to a tv show? What does that illustrate?

Do you really clip your gun to your underwear? Your underwear must be pretty beefy.

Capacity is a good thing, though no one will call me capacity obsessed. I personally would rather have 5 rounds of .38 than 8 (possible) rounds of .22

Failures of .22 in civilian hands is not something I can quote off the top of my head. I will say that I've seen people get shot with .22's out of a rifle, and dealt with others who had been shot with .22's out of a pistol, and none of them were particularly inconvenienced by the hits. Months later, one had long term hip problems that make her limp a bit, but not much at the time.

As far as Walt and John's quotes, that's great for dabblers (in the context of your post. I doubt it/they were meant it to encourage people to carry .22's) For those of us who spend more time training than on the internet, we can have caliber and competence. On the other hand, if John is talking about 9mm vs. .45,(which I suspect, knowing John) I might be able to get on board with that, since an awful lot of noobs think they can buy competence in the form of a .45 1911.

A complete aside, what kind of accuracy do you get out of your gun/ammo at 25 yards? I'm still looking for a good pocket field gun in .22.

Ed L
12-18-2011, 01:01 PM
Certainly, if a .22 is all you have you must make the best of it.

But how many police departments, instititutions tasked with dealing with armed violent criminals, issue or authorize firearms in .22 long rifle for general use?

I've met both Walt and John and both carry around substantial handguns--I believe John is packing a .357 Sig these days.

SLG
12-18-2011, 01:01 PM
HH,

Another question, if you don't mind, since I'm now obsessed with the idea of carrying an 8 shot .22.

Even if you believe that the .22 is a good round, why not carry a 442/642? Is the .38 worse than the .22? I love snub revolvers, and have more than a few. I've even carried them extensively in years past. You'll get no argument from me about the benefits of a 2".38. But, unless you are capacity obsessed, why not go with the 5 shot .38? 1# loaded is not much more than your 351.

TGS
12-18-2011, 01:13 PM
HH,

Another question, if you don't mind, since I'm now obsessed with the idea of carrying an 8 shot .22.

Even if you believe that the .22 is a good round, why not carry a 442/642? Is the .38 worse than the .22? I love snub revolvers, and have more than a few. I've even carried them extensively in years past. You'll get no argument from me about the benefits of a 2".38. But, unless you are capacity obsessed, why not go with the 5 shot .38? 1# loaded is not much more than your 351.

I don't want to drag this off-topic, but figured I'd add in an option based on compromise.

Personally, I'd go in between. 6 shots of .32 H&R (http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/index.php/cName/pistol-ammo-32-hr-mag) or .327 Federal (http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/index.php/cName/pistol-ammo-327-federal-magnum) isn't shabby for a j-frame sized revolver. .32 H&R gets about 13" in BG (http://www.brassfetcher.com/32H&R%20Mag.html), and .327 Federal about 15" in BG (http://brassfetcher.com/index_files/Page607.htm). Both with a little expansion to around .40" or so, and less recoil than a .38 (significantly less with a .32 H&R).

Want something really weak/quiet for shooting critters in the garden instead of two-legged varmints? Load the same gun with .32 S&W, short (http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/index.php/cName/pistol-ammo-32-sw-short) or longs (http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/index.php/cName/pistol-ammo-32-sw-long).

GJM
12-18-2011, 01:57 PM
Are they making the .32 or .327 Federal in a lightweight, short barrel J frame yet? Last I looked, the .327 was only a three inch model.

While I understand the Georgia contingent is fine with the .22 lr Smith, being a Alaska resident, I am big bore all the way, and about to get a model 351 in .22 magnum. Apparently there is some Gold Dot ammo in .22 magnum designed for the short J frame.

After reading about the model 43C in HH's post, I looked and they appear to be very hard to get. I suspect SLG is running down the J frame in that caliber, so he can hold down demand while he scouts for one.

Kidding aside, I see the J frame as a hide out, as opposed to a true back-up, and you get points for having one in any caliber. Often I have a short 870 with Brenneke slugs and a .44 or 10mm, and would really like something to harvest spruce grouse while out hiking in Alaska, so the .22 lr or .22 magnum is appealing. My wife complains when I do a select shot maneuver (loaded with slugs and select a bird shot load) as there are more pellets than she likes in the birds.

TGS
12-18-2011, 02:08 PM
Are they making the .32 or .327 Federal in a lightweight, short barrel J frame yet? Last I looked, the .327 was only a three inch model.

The S&W 632 .327 Federal is in both 2" and 3". There's some less desirable brands such as Taurus and Charter that also have snubbies.

For .32 H&R, there's also snubbies and while not as impressive as .327, is still a great compromise. You can also ream older S&W .32 Longs for .32 H&R since it's really a .32 S&W Long +p and not a true magnum round. The pressure is only slightly more than a .32 S&W long and comparable to .38 Special chambered in the same frame, whereas .327 Federal is something whoa-hot like 42,000psi or so.

SLG
12-18-2011, 02:15 PM
Are they making the .32 or .327 Federal in a lightweight, short barrel J frame yet? Last I looked, the .327 was only a three inch model.

While I understand the Georgia contingent is fine with the .22 lr Smith, being a Alaska resident, I am big bore all the way, and about to get a model 351 in .22 magnum. Apparently there is some Gold Dot ammo in .22 magnum designed for the short J frame.

After reading about the model 43C in HH's post, I looked and they appear to be very hard to get. I suspect SLG is running down the J frame in that caliber, so he can hold down demand while he scouts for one.


GJM hit on most of my issue with the 32's. If it's not an airweight J, why bother at all? Also, I prefer .35 cal as a starting point for defense, but I don't know much about the newer 32's.

GJM, I know you were kidding about holding down demand, but I have no objection to the gun per se, just its intended use. I will likely get one, probably as a field gun, if it's accurate enough, and if not, then maybe as a test gun to compare to my airweight .38's. I have a steel, 6 shot .22 J, and it is pretty nice, just heavier than it needs to be to make it worth carrying.

Now bear in mind, I'm a small guy, and I manage to carry a railed, magwell equipped, steel 5" 1911 anytime I'm dressed. It doesn't go in my underwear, but I guess you have to make a compromise somewhere:-) I always find it amusing when someone tells me how serious they are, they're bigger than me, and yet they carry a sub optimal pistol. Since we all "know" that pistols are poor weapons to begin with, why not carry a gun that lets you shoot to your full ability? I can shoot a snubbie pretty well, but no one can shoot a snubbie as well as a full size duty gun.

HeadHunter
12-18-2011, 05:44 PM
Are you saying it did that in all of the tests or just one (bare gel, presumably)? one test, four layers of denim per the protocol.


Even the highest quality .22 ammo is more likely to have misfires than the average centerfire round. It's simply a function of the way the cartridge and the gun work.
That's an assumption, not a proven fact. The many anecdotes about rimfire reliability come from usage of bulk promotional ammo. OTOH, the rimfire target community, which can be quite fanatical about ammo performance reports many thousands of rounds fired from the same lots of high quality ammo sans any misfires.


As I've said before, I'm not sure that's a valid way to analyze the problem. If nothing else, there is an obvious data gathering bias against failures to stop. The person who is mugged, draws a .22, and still gets robbed, beaten, or even killed is less likely to report the ballistic effect (if any) of the gun that didn't work.
No, the way I have phrased the question to over 700 caliber obsessed firearms instructors and thousands of forum observers with the same obsession is as follows:

I am looking for incidents where the would be victim shot their attacker with a small caliber weapon (.22, .25, .32, .380) and, after the shot was fired, was injured or killed by the predator.

Only incidents involving Armed Citizens are relevant to this research, NOT Law Enforcement Officers. That is to say, I am looking for "mousegun" failures in the hands of Private Citizens.

Again, the silence to my challenge has been deafening. I am open to alternate methods of analyzing the problem that do not involve mere conjecture. I am not interested in including LEOs because their METT-T is as different from private citizens as from the soldiers invading Iraq in 2003.


Can you define "the mission" for your purposes? Are we talking about 100s of documented incidents in which a .22 bullet caused rapid physical incapacitation or simply stories in which the mere presence of any gun correlated with the GG surviving?
100s of documented incidents where the villain, upon being shot with a .22, .25, or .32, remembered he was late for his root canal appointment and had to leave. As Tom Givens says: "look at the time."

HeadHunter
12-18-2011, 05:58 PM
So, while I can't agree with most of what you wrote, it is interesting. A few quick issues, if you don't mind.

Did you link to a tv show? What does that illustrate?

The link is to a synopsis of an actual event.
In a desperate attempt to save her and her husband's life, Susan grabs the .22 caliber pistol in her bedroom and engages in a gun battle with three masked men who invade their house late one night. She shot one of them, he remembered he was late for his root canal, ran out the door, and died in the front yard. I Survived is a great program, well worth watching. Incidentally, several people featured solved their problems with .22s.


Do you really clip your gun to your underwear? Your underwear must be pretty beefy.
Nope, briefs I buy at Target. You'd be surprised how easy it is to carry a 11 ounce gun. The ClipGrip from DeSantis helps a lot.


Capacity is a good thing, though no one will call me capacity obsessed. I personally would rather have 5 rounds of .38 than 8 (possible) rounds of .22
Why? It's based on the assumption that a single .38 will produce more results than a single round of .22, which is an assumption.


Failures of .22 in civilian hands is not something I can quote off the top of my head.
That's a common problem I have encountered in the course of my research.

To each his own.

SLG
12-18-2011, 06:09 PM
The link is to a synopsis of an actual event. She shot one of them, he remembered he was late for his root canal, ran out the door, and died in the front yard. I Survived is a great program, well worth watching. Incidentally, several people featured solved their problems with .22s.


Ok, my bad. It was not clear to me what you were trying to show. However, this gets back to the heart of my issue with how you look at effectiveness. I don't consider the above outcome to be desirable. It happened to work out for the lady, but if the wounded guy had chosen to fight, he obviously had enough steam left to do so. I don't want a guy attacking me in my bedroom to die in the front yard, I want him down, on the ground, as fast as possible. Other results may still suffice, but are not models that I want to emulate.

Anyway, aside from differences in opinion when it comes to terminal effectiveness, I'm still interested in hearing about the accuracy you get out of your combo.

SLG
12-18-2011, 06:21 PM
Why? It's based on the assumption that a single .38 will produce more results than a single round of .22, which is an assumption.


That's a common problem I have encountered in the course of my research.

To each his own.

Not an assumption. Small sample, no question about it, but having seen .22's fail to "stop" people, and having seen people shot with .38's who went down right away, I do have more faith in .38's. I sent a message to DocGKR, who might be better able to address the issue of terminal ballistics.

As I said above, what you consider effective, and what I consider luck, seem to be closely related. Effectiveness, for me, relates to just how fast an attacker ceases to be able to continue his attack. If an attacker chooses to leave, that's not good enough. If you attack me, you lose the ability to choose your actions, just as fast as I can make that happen.

HeadHunter
12-18-2011, 06:26 PM
It happened to work out for the lady, but if the wounded guy had chosen to fight, he obviously had enough steam left to do so.
Therein lies the rub. What everyone who has replied to me cites as "failures" are what I call SWC; Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda. "She Shoulda had a bigger gun, because if he Woulda been a more determined attacker, it Coulda turned out a lot worse for her." I haven't bothered to name the antithesis of that paradigm since no one has been able to provide any such incidents. I did find one on my own that occurred in Florida in 1996.

I don't have a ready visual for the 317's accuracy but here's my Taurus PLY22. I don't think of either as field guns. My Beretta Puma would be my choice for that type of work.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Pocket%20Pistols/PLY22FBIFreestyle.jpg

HeadHunter
12-18-2011, 06:31 PM
Now bear in mind, I'm a small guy, and I manage to carry a railed, magwell equipped, steel 5" 1911 anytime I'm dressed.
In the consulting divison of a Big Four accounting firm while you are with clients 10 hours a day?

SLG
12-18-2011, 06:44 PM
In the consulting divison of a Big Four accounting firm while you are with clients 10 hours a day?

Thankfully no.

I have carried in very similar environments, for extended periods of time, with no issue. I won't go into details about it here, but suffice it to say that it probably is not an exact parallel, for several reasons.

I've also carried in extremely non permissive environments, also for extended periods of time, with no one wiser. I'm not saying that therefor it can be done no matter what, but I do find that many people give up trying, or just decide they can't do it, because their circumstances are so unique.

In a coat-less business environment, there are at least a couple of good choices for carrying more serious guns. A full size 1911 is not needed, I can shoot every bit as effectively with a G19/Sig229, and I can carry those guns very easily.


Is the target shown above a slow-fire affair? If so, the potential accuracy of the gun seems pretty dismal, and certainly makes me wonder what would happen if shot at the speed of life.

Prdator
12-18-2011, 06:50 PM
If you attack me, you lose the ability to choose your actions, just as fast as I can make that happen.

Freaking Quote of the month right there!!!!!!!

Wheeler
12-18-2011, 07:55 PM
SLG,

Do you have empirical evidence of a would-be attacker getting shot by a potential victim with a .22 and continuing the attack/mugging? That really strikes me as something from a TV show or internet commando speculation. Not to imply that you are an internet commando, but if the same BS is stated enough people start to believe it.

I wonder if the two instructors (HH and he-who-shall-not-be-named) have a confidence edge? What I mean to say by that is they have confidence in their individual abilities rather than their caliber choice.

SLG
12-18-2011, 08:20 PM
SLG,

Do you have empirical evidence of a would-be attacker getting shot by a potential victim with a .22 and continuing the attack/mugging? That really strikes me as something from a TV show or internet commando speculation. Not to imply that you are an internet commando, but if the same BS is stated enough people start to believe it.

I wonder if the two instructors (HH and he-who-shall-not-be-named) have a confidence edge? What I mean to say by that is they have confidence in their individual abilities rather than their caliber choice.

As I said, I don't have stats like that. I have absolutely no idea if that has happened, or how often, with a .22. If you're only concerned with muggers, then I suppose any hit is a good hit. I prefer to hold myself to a higher standard. I'm also not very concerned about muggings in general. Muggers don't pick people like me, unless they're not very good at victim selection. (How's that for confidence? That's based on street experience, not range results.)

On the other hand, I know many (and of many, many more) guys who have been shot with greater calibers, who continued to fight and ultimately win. Law enforcement and military organizations get new examples of that all the time. Don't run away, get mad, crush your adversary. You can count on needing to do nothing less.

What it comes down to is this: If you believe in preparing for the best case scenario, then you can hang your hat on catchy slogans like SWC. I believe in preparing for the worst case scenario, so the fact that someone didn't continue a fight, when they were obviously capable of it, does not count as more than luck.

Another thought about confidence occurred to me. HH and the other instructor have a lot of time shooting on a target system that rewards shootable guns. I daresay that neither of them can shoot the same scores with a 2" .22 revolver. Put another way, I'm sure I'm more than qualified to feel confident about my j frame shooting ability. I feel more confident still with a full size gun in my hand. Since the attackers I'm worried about are more motivated and skilled than the average mugger, I'm not going to give them another advantage. They already get to choose the time and place.

Ed L
12-18-2011, 08:32 PM
We can find many situations where larger caliber handguns failed to stop determined criminals where they had to be shot repeatedly. Why should we assume that a .22 would have been more effective at ending the situation?

Further, we have a good number of incidents where smaller calibers skidded around the skull rather than penetrated. Check with any emergency room that sees a fair number of gunshot wounds.

It's impressive to see precise shots to the eyes delivered against paper targets, but in the end they are just paper targets shot on the shooting range who were not disruptively attacking anyone so no life and death stress was present.

Many criminals when facing a .22 might indeed run.

But many criminals are bumbling idiots.

I'm not content preparing myself to face just bumbling idiots when tools that are capable of inflicting more harm against more serious threats are available in the form of a J frame chambered in .38 special or a small autoloader in 9mm like a Kahr PM-9.

Go to a police department and propose a patrol rifle program in .22 long rifle or a new sidearm in that caliber and see what type of response you get.

HeadHunter
12-18-2011, 08:49 PM
We can find many situations where larger caliber handguns failed to stop determined criminals where they had to be shot repeatedly. Why should we assume that a .22 would have been more effective at ending the situation?

Further, we have a good number of incidents where smaller calibers skidded around the skull rather than penetrated. Check with any emergency room that sees a fair number of gunshot wounds.

I am still waiting for specific documented incidents that fit within the parameters of my original query.

Wheeler
12-18-2011, 08:58 PM
As I said, I don't have stats like that. I have absolutely no idea if that has happened, or how often, with a .22. If you're only concerned with muggers, then I suppose any hit is a good hit. I prefer to hold myself to a higher standard. I'm also not very concerned about muggings in general. Muggers don't pick people like me, unless they're not very good at victim selection. (How's that for confidence? That's based on street experience, not range results.)

On the other hand, I know many (and of many, many more) guys who have been shot with greater calibers, who continued to fight and ultimately win. Law enforcement and military organizations get new examples of that all the time. Don't run away, get mad, crush your adversary. You can count on needing to do nothing less.

What it comes down to is this: If you believe in preparing for the best case scenario, then you can hang your hat on catchy slogans like SWC. I believe in preparing for the worst case scenario, so the fact that someone didn't continue a fight, when they were obviously capable of it, does not count as more than luck.

Another thought about confidence occurred to me. HH and the other instructor have a lot of time shooting on a target system that rewards shootable guns. I daresay that neither of them can shoot the same scores with a 2" .22 revolver. Put another way, I'm sure I'm more than qualified to feel confident about my j frame shooting ability. I feel more confident still with a full size gun in my hand. Since the attackers I'm worried about are more motivated and skilled than the average mugger, I'm not going to give them another advantage. They already get to choose the time and place.

What does SWC mean?

ToddG
12-18-2011, 09:11 PM
one test, four layers of denim per the protocol.

That's the IWBA protocol, not the FBI protocol. The FBI 4-layer ("heavy clothing") test, unless it's changed, reads as follows:


The gelatin block is covered with four layers of clothing: one layer of cotton T-shirt material (48 threads per inch); one layer of cotton shirt material (80 threads per inch); a 10 ounce down comforter in a cambric shell cover (232 threads per inch); and one layer of 13 ounce cotton denim (50 threads per inch). This simulates typical cold weather wear. The block is shot at ten feet, measured from the muzzle to the front of the block.


That's an assumption, not a proven fact.

Only if your definition of "proven fact" is "HeadHunter believes it now." I worked for a company that made both centerfire and rimfire defensive weapons. Our own data using typical defensive grade ammo showed that the rimfires misfired more. Our own armorers and academy instructors would recommend against the rimfire guns as BUGs, especially to cops.

My own experience with high grade .22 ammo in conversion kits and my 22/45 seem to bear out the same conclusion.


Again, the silence to my challenge has been deafening. I am open to alternate methods of analyzing the problem that do not involve mere conjecture. I am not interested in including LEOs because their METT-T is as different from private citizens as from the soldiers invading Iraq in 2003.

You've phrased your inquiry in a way that might prove what you want, but it doesn't address the issues that others are voicing WRT choosing the .22 as a defensive caliber. We're talking about terminal effectiveness. Whether the BG shot the GG or a cop shot a kitten, the bullet does what it does. Muggers don't have different anatomy than cops than competitors, etc.

If the .22 was terminally reliable, then LE agencies would be the first ones to adopt it. Guns are cheap, never wear out, incredibly easy to shoot (and learn to shoot with), and training ammo costs would be practically zero. You can talk about mission all you want, but when it comes time to put a bullet in someone, it's all the same.


100s of documented incidents where the villain, upon being shot with a .22, .25, or .32, remembered he was late for his root canal appointment and had to leave. As Tom Givens says: "look at the time."

I don't see that as evidence of the caliber's effectiveness. Are you suggesting that those same people, had they been shot with a 9mm or .45, would not have taken flight? I'm assuming the answer is no. That being the case, we're back to an old argument: playing the odds.

Odds are, I'll never need a gun in the first place.
Odds are, if I need a gun, I won't need to fire it.
Odds are, if I need to fire it, I won't need to hit.
Odds are, if I need to hit, I'll only need one.

Once I decide to stop playing the odds at "I'll never need one in the first place," why stop with a gun that has proven ballistic "effectiveness" only against the subset of potential threats that will run away if I say boo loudly enough? That's certainly one reasonable circumstance under which I may need to use a pistol, but it's certainly not the only one. If someone is trying to hurt my wife, I don't want to rely on his poor mindset as a fight-stopper.



I wonder if the two instructors (HH and he-who-shall-not-be-named) have a confidence edge? What I mean to say by that is they have confidence in their individual abilities rather than their caliber choice.

I'd suggest you temper speculation about SLG's mindset, confidence, or capability if you don't know him or his background. I can say without hesitation that of all my skilled, talented, "combat-proven" friends and associates, if I had to pick one person to walk through a bad neighborhood with, it would be SLG.

Odin Bravo One
12-18-2011, 09:37 PM
If a 62, 70, 75, or 77 grain .22 caliber projectile at 2500+fps can hit the vital area's, and still have an asshole actively engaged in the fight for several more moments, I am not convinced the 38 or 40 grain at 950fps is going to magically fare better in terms of performance. Or am I just missing something?

TCinVA
12-18-2011, 09:45 PM
Again on terminal ballistics...

There is no shooting bad guys task for which a small .22 revolver is a better choice than say a Glock 17. If I set up an experiment where I told someone who was locked in a room that in the next 30 seconds two armed men would come in to kill them and I opened a secret panel that held a .22 revolver and a Glock 17 loaded with hollow points, nobody would pick the revolver. If you knew that continuing to live or preserving the life of a loved one depended on shooting someone it's highly unlikely you'll be going for the bare minimum.

We all have times where the choice is between a mousegun and fingernails. In those circumstances some gun is better than no gun. If my choices were between a flintlock an no gun, I'd pick the flintlock. Fortunately in most circumstances most of us don't really face the choice of little or nothing. All carry is compromise (since nobody has figured out how to make AC 130 over watch 24/7 practical) but there are still very real degrees of compromise that go along with different choices.

The untrained person who can barely point the gun in the right direction has a better chance of solving a shooting problem with a Glock 17 than with a Smith 317. That's just the objective reality of the characteristics of both weapons. Somebody at SLG's level of skill may, however, be better able to solve a problem with the 317 than the average person is with the Glock...but SLG is still going to have better odds of success with the Glock than with the 317.

The takeaway? While all carry is compromise, try to compromise as little as possible. If/when the day comes that you actually need to resort to the gun, you won't be wishing it was smaller, weaker, or harder to shoot. You won't be wishing it had fewer bullets in it.

Many often mention the importance of mindset when it comes self defense. I'd add that equipment selection is frequently as much a function of mindset as any other aspect of self defense.

Wheeler
12-18-2011, 10:06 PM
I'd suggest you temper speculation about SLG's mindset, confidence, or capability if you don't know him or his background. I can say without hesitation that of all my skilled, talented, "combat-proven" friends and associates, if I had to pick one person to walk through a bad neighborhood with, it would be SLG

The downside of internet forums, even those as enlightened as this one is that it's hard at times to interpret intent. Apparantly that's the case as I don't recall naming any names in my speculation. Sorry I didn't state it in such a manner that would preclude someone taking offense. Why just the other day I posted a couple of legitimate questions on a forum which got deleted. The sad thing in that particular case is that I was looking for a better way of doing things, rather than calling someone out. As this thread, which has drifted from OP's original question seems to have denegrated to that point, I'll bow out as gracefully as I can.

TCinVA
12-18-2011, 10:06 PM
If a 62, 70, 75, or 77 grain .22 caliber projectile at 2500+fps can hit the vital area's, and still have an asshole actively engaged in the fight for several more moments, I am not convinced the 38 or 40 grain at 950fps is going to magically fare better in terms of performance. Or am I just missing something?

The argument seems to be over thoughts about the nature of the asshole. Some argue that folks like you deal with an exceptional breed of asshole that doesn't usually show up at the local Piggly Wiggly, or that your job description requires more entanglement with assholes than what Bob the accountant has to deal with.

That's all certainly true to some extent.

...but I tend to believe that assholes are basically all the same and we tend to see differences only because of pain threshold and opportunity. Some asshole who decides during a police chase that he'd rather die than go back to jail might not be in the same frame of mind when he's trying to hold somebody up at the ATM. Then again, he may be. On another site I remember an average joe who ran into an armed bad guy and responded to the discovery that the ordinary joe was armed by instantly emptying his weapon at the good guy...deciding to beat feet only after he had been hit and had run out of ammunition while the good guy, despite being untrained and bleeding from multiple gunshot wounds, was still shooting.

In my non-professional opinion, the kind of asshole you have to pull a trigger on is by definition the exceptional asshole...and that's not the time when I personally want to aim low in terms of the tool I'm depending on to be the asshole's off switch.

Others may see the situation differently.

So as to the original question, if I had to ccw a .22 snub revolver I would ideally want one that had a better trigger and better sights than the 317 I have now. If the new Ruger offering fit that bill, or if I owned an LCR in a larger caliber already I'd buy it over the Smith.

Otherwise, I'd buy the Smith.

...but I don't have to carry a .22 snub, thankfully. I can do much better in just about every situation I find myself in.

Even leaving it out as a carry gun meant for making bad guys quit it already, I think there's plenty of utility in a rimfire revolver for training, field use, and general firearms related merriment.

Kevin B.
12-18-2011, 10:49 PM
The argument seems to be over thoughts about the nature of the asshole. Some argue that folks like you deal with an exceptional breed of asshole that doesn't usually show up at the local Piggly Wiggly, or that your job description requires more entanglement with assholes than what Bob the accountant has to deal with.

Bad assumption...

MolonLabe416
12-20-2011, 01:33 AM
There are physical stops, ie terminal ballistics shut the goblin down. There are psycological stops where the goblin quits for whatever reason - mere sight of the weapon, noise or blast, non-lethal wound, or a hit that is not immediately incapacitating. Any are a win for us.

There are many documented cases of multiple rifle hits not stopping the goblin. There are many cases of just the sight of the gun ending the attack.

There are too many variables to settle this discussion definitively. Having said that, I will carry a 1911 when I can, a 22 if I must. The determining factors will be far more heavily weighted toward my situational awareness, mindset, and a bit of luck than what wundergun and snazzo bullet I am carrying.

Tamara
12-20-2011, 08:09 AM
I can certainly understand wanting more beans in the wheel in a J-frame. I carry a 432 myself, but I don't know that I would if the only ammo choice was those Federal 85gr JHPs.

I'm not at all enthusiastic about putting in the necessary reps with +P .38 ammo in an Airweight J, and I figure that 95gr LSWC or 100gr SJHP out of a .32 Mag should work as well as most any standard pressure .38 (which is hardly, face it, the Hammer of Thor itself,) and hence my rationale. Plus an extra round.

If you're comfortable rockin' a .22, well, there you go. Myself, I'm perhaps relying on ballistic voodoo, but I know that when one googles "didn't realize he was shot" that .22 features uncomfortably often.

(In a perhaps ironic aside, I was talking with a friend recently and we were both agreeing that, given a moving target much beyond fifteen or twenty yards, we'd feel more comfortable with a self-loading .22 rifle with a decent magazine capacity than pretty much any pistol, if only because things that are verging on trick shooting with a pistol at 25 yards are practically clout shots with a long gun...)

Kevin B.
12-20-2011, 08:27 AM
...I was talking with a friend recently and we were both agreeing that, given a moving target much beyond fifteen or twenty yards, we'd feel more comfortable with a self-loading .22 rifle with a decent magazine capacity than pretty much any pistol...

Me too. It is called an M-4. :)

JHC
12-20-2011, 09:34 AM
First, he didn't say he was a "put it in the eye socket guy," I did. Based on my watching him shoot a number of times, he without question has that ability. I was told about the Smith .22 magnum by someone else, saw it, but did not have a chance to ask him about his rationale for it. I never heard him advocate for or against it for others. Out of respect for his privacy, I am not going to post his name on this forum.

I am intrigued about the .22 magnum/light J frame combination, because there are a number of instances such a caliber would be useful for harvesting game when I am out in the field, and I suspect all of us would shoot the .22 magnum better at speed. I prefer a J frame to a small pocket auto, but always wish the J frame held more than five cartridges. As to the terminal performance of seven .22 magnum bullets versus five 38's, that is above my pay grade.

If its the same legendary gent who showed it to us, he just happened to have the gun on hand, put a laser on it, likes the two extra rounds and can put them on a dime with that laser. He is not one to obsess about terminal ballistics vis a vis placement. Its not a primary, its like a 3rd gun behind a 1911 and G19. I like the idea for the versatility GJM mentioned. Five shots don't go very far.

SouthNarc
12-20-2011, 10:01 AM
Just to add some perspective, in talking to HH about this I know that he's had a bunch of older female students at the range he teaches at not feel comfortable/confident with anything else but a .22. If a .22 is the only pistol they enjoy shooting and will actually become proficient with, then at the end of the day that probably beats a sharp stick for that kind of person. That kind of person probably represents the "average" gun owner more than the regular P-F poster.

seabiscuit
12-20-2011, 11:43 AM
Here (http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866)'s a ten-year study on stopping power. Results from .22 (short, long, and long rifle):

# of people shot - 154
# of hits - 213
% of hits that were fatal - 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38
% of people who were not incapacitated - 31%
One-shot-stop % - 31%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 60%


Results from 9mm Luger (over half of these were ball ammo):

# of people shot - 456
# of hits - 1121
% of hits that were fatal - 24%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.45
% of people who were not incapacitated - 13%
One-shot-stop % - 34%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 74%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 47%


Things to consider:

Sample size for .22 is much smaller
As noted, most 9mm shootings involved ball ammo
More than twice as many people were NOT incapacitated by .22, no matter how many shots fired, than 9mm


Just figured I'd throw some actual data in here so we can stop making conjectures. The reliability of the data, as everything else, may be debated.

TGS
12-20-2011, 12:09 PM
Seabiscuit,

That's not a study. A study involves scientific method, and analysis.

That is anecdotal data, with so many unaccounted for variables, as well as unaccounted for biases and errors. You already mentioned its validity can be challenged, but call it was it is.....anecdotal. It's no more valuable than the old vet at the VFW's bar saying he saw a .45 ACP take a Vietcong's arm clean off.

Take that as you will.

Chuck Haggard
12-20-2011, 12:20 PM
I'll play, since I have a 317 2" and have actually carried it at times.



First though, to the OP; I detect that you asked your question perhaps because you are forced for whatever reason of rules or law to choose a .22lr weapon for carry. Is this accurate?





My gun has CT laser grips, and when carried for any purpose beside targets or plinking is loaded with CCI Stingers, Mini Mags or Velocitors. I have never had a failure to fire with these three rounds.

I initially bought the gun as an understudy for my 642s due to getting old/arthritis/carpal tunnel issues. Although the 317 has almost no recoil and thus many folks don't think the practice is valid, I find that my "ballistic dry fire" practice goes a long way into helping me maintain proficiency with my 642s. The .38s are carried daily both on and off duty as BUGs.

Since I found myself at times carrying the 317 when going out to the woods, and in other limited circumstances in town, I went an qual'd with it at work just to be on the safe side. Although the KS C-POST qual isn't the toughest test ever for firearms proficiency it does make one shoot back to the 25 yard line.

Link to the COF here; http://www.kscpost.org/target.htm

We use the IALEFI Q target that has the Manny with a gun picture overlaid on the scoring area. We also require different qual standards for our agency than the state to keep a job with us. All of the shooters on my job make every effort to keep all rounds during the COF either in the pie plate on the center of the target or on the head.

This long winded description is to give a bit of insight into my finding that accuracy wise my 317 stacks up OK against other small handguns on this COF. Whenever I qual with the 317 I can run the course in the time limits established with all rounds either on the face or in the pie plate (I tend to do failure drills on all of the three round strings of fire so I end up with several rounds in the face of the target during a qual).



While I won't argue that the .22lr from a snub is better, wound ballistics wise, than almost any centerfire option, I do note that placement regardless of caliber is key. Last night my guys and I worked a shooting where one of the victims took several hits, including a contact range head shot, with a large caliber pistol being used, yet the victim was completely ambulatory and didn't really express discomfort until he was in the ER and the nurses started the cath.

I do think that the larger and more powerful the round the more likely you are to have a good hit count. .22 bullets seem to deflect more than many other choices.


If you have a chance and have not done so ya'll need to watch the Trooper Coates video. In that fight a large well built man lost a fight to a disgusting fat body, even though the good guy got five hits from his .357mag. Good guy took a .22lr bullet through the arm and into the aorta, he was quickly incapacitated and died shortly thereafter.



A very real advantage already noted is recoil of the .22 systems. If I shot a .40 or .45, or my .38 snubs, daily I'd be a cripple. I could, and have, shot my 317 on a daily basis without issue. Many people are in the same boat as me in this regard.

You can also actually afford to practice with a .22 and get really good with it. I noted this years ago in my first exposure to carry of a .22 for serious purposes. Back then a Sheriff in our area had some extra funds and decided to buy BUGs for all his troops. He bought Beretta 21s and holsters for all his guys. They were required to qual and carry the Beretta unless they had permission to have a personal BUG of larger caliber. Even then some guys carried the gun as an Onion Field gun in addition to their own larger caliber BUG.
While the 21 wasn't the world's greatest BUG, is was far better than a sharp stick or harsh language.

Since the guys had access to the range whenever they wanted, I noted that some of them got really good with their 21's.


I'm starting to ramble so I'm going to get coffee and re-boot for awhile.

TGS
12-20-2011, 12:40 PM
Tpd,

You bring up a lot of good discussion points. But it still doesn't answer:

Why would I want a .22 instead of a .32 ACP, .32 H&R, .380, or 9mm?

I think we can all agree that a .22 is better than nothing, but it's not like I have to choose a .22 or nothing. For people who spend thousands of dollars on guns, training, ammo, ect, to state that "a .22 BUG is better because it's cheap and I can practice with it more"......well, that's weak-sauce.


EDIT: Like you carried your 317, I carried my war-time era Mauser HSc .32 before because I had misplaced my P2000's holster. That doesn't mean I should buy one specifically for BUG use.

seabiscuit
12-20-2011, 12:44 PM
Seabiscuit,

That's not a study. A study involves scientific method, and analysis.

That is anecdotal data, with so many unaccounted for variables, as well as unaccounted for biases and errors. You already mentioned its validity can be challenged, but call it was it is.....anecdotal. It's no more valuable than the old vet at the VFW's bar saying he saw a .45 ACP take a Vietcong's arm clean off.

Take that as you will.

I'd say it's a little more reliable than an old vet at a bar. It may not be a study, but it is data, from autopsies, newspapers, and firsthand accounts. There are always variables that will be unaccounted for. If there's more reliable data out there, I'd certainly like to see it...

The scientific method, as explained by Wikipedia:
1. Define a question
2. Gather information and resources (observe)
3. Form an explanatory hypothesis
4. Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data in a reproducible manner
5. Analyze the data
6. Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
7. Publish results
8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists)

His method:
1. Question: How well do various calibers actually stop people?
2. Gather info: from police repots, newspapers, firsthand accounts, etc
3. Hypothesize: larger calibers work better
4. Test: you can't really perform an experiment here, so the previously gathered data will have to do
5. Analyze: he compiled and did a little bit of analysis to produce the numbers he's got there
6. Interpret the data: most calibers work, .22 incapacitates half as many no matter how many shots fired
7. Publish results: you're looking at them
8. Retest: haven't seen anyone do that yet...

He seems to have done what he can. It's not the best, but it looks like the best we've got to go on...

Ed L
12-20-2011, 01:11 PM
Just to add some perspective, in talking to HH about this I know that he's had a bunch of older female students at the range he teaches at not feel comfortable/confident with anything else but a .22. If a .22 is the only pistol they enjoy shooting and will actually become proficient with, then at the end of the day that probably beats a sharp stick for that kind of person. That kind of person probably represents the "average" gun owner more than the regular P-F poster.

I completely agree that the .22 J-framed is easier to shoot and may be a decisive issue in allowing someone who is elderly, crippled, or physically limited to use it--as well as the people described who find anything more than a .22 to be too much. Just don't try to tell us that the .22s have the terminal effects of service calibers.

To expand this to police longarms, it's as if you equip a woman or a small man with a .410 guage shotgun as their in car shoulder weapon because they cannot handle the recoil of a 12 gauge or a 20 gauge. That's one thing, but don't try to tell us that they .410 gauge has near the same terminal effects as a 12 or 20 gauge.

This is what some of us are having problems with--the assertions that the .22 is a good general defense gun when service caliber handguns are an option. As already noted, if size is an issue you can just as easily carry a Jframe in .38 special or a subcompact 9mm. I've carried a full weight Jframe in a pocket holster for almost 20 years and have no issues with the weight.

Try to make the argument to any police organization that they replace their sidearms and longarms with .22 LR calibers and tell us how that goes.

David Armstrong
12-20-2011, 01:44 PM
Try to make the argument to any police organization that they replace their sidearms and longarms with .22 LR calibers and tell us how that goes.
Try to make the same argument to any police organization that they replace their sidearms with .44 Magnums and tell us how that goes. I bet you get fairly similar results. Folks, as always it depends on what you want to do, what role you see for the firearm. For defensive CCW purposes for most people the .22 really isn't any different from a 9mm, a .40, a .38 and so on. Why? Because it just doesn't matter to their situation and needs. SouthNarc already pointed it out when discussing "That kind of person probably represents the "average" gun owner more than the regular P-F poster."

Ed L
12-20-2011, 01:45 PM
Here (http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866)'s a ten-year study on stopping power. Results from .22 (short, long, and long rifle): (stuff omitted for space.

The problem with that collection of data is it includes lots of situations where an argument between punks or drunks escalates to a shooting with the shooter being the agressor and the person who is shot wisely decides to back off, acquiece, submit, or drops in surprise the way he sees people do when shot in the movies.

Shooting someone who isn't serious and may not be armed isn't the same as shooting the type of objective driven violent criminal attacker who most of us are concerned with.

Shooting Otis the Drunk isn't the same as shooting Jake The Muss (watch the whole clip):


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCHe-0w9KX8

David Armstrong
12-20-2011, 01:52 PM
I'd say it's a little more reliable than an old vet at a bar. It may not be a study, but it is data...
Sadly, it is not. Folks often make that mistake, but the plural of "anecdote" is not "data" it is "anecdotes." As you said, "There are always variables that will be unaccounted for." In this case, however, not only do we not know what variables are unaccounted for we also don't know what variables WERE accounted for, or even if the same variables were used for the different anecdotes. I sympathize, I really do, as this is a research area of mine and trying to put the information into a valid and/or reliable form for anything outside of the most general claims is just a mess.:(

Ed L
12-20-2011, 01:54 PM
Try to make the same argument to any police organization that they replace their sidearms with .44 Magnums and tell us how that goes.

No one is advocating .44 magnums as service guns, just normal service calibers. If a .22 LR is adequate in terminal effects we would see LEO agencies issueing it and approving it as standard sidearms.


I bet you get fairly similar results. Folks, as always it depends on what you want to do, what role you see for the firearm. For defensive CCW purposes for most people the .22 really isn't any different from a 9mm, a .40, a .38 and so on. Why? Because it just doesn't matter to their situation and needs. SouthNarc already pointed it out when discussing "That kind of person probably represents the "average" gun owner more than the regular P-F poster."

A Law Officer is using lethal force in the same situations that a private citizen is using lethal force--in defense of human life against dangerous people.

The violent criminals who the citizens are likely to have to shoot are the same that the police are likely to face.

These criminals exhibit extreme violence toward their criminal associates, including shooting and stabbing them during disputes. So I would not expect them to turn into cowardly lions and flee when facing an armed citizen any more than they would if they were embroiled in a violent dispute with someone who pissed them off. A citizen shooting at them or facing them with a gun would certainly piss them off.

I don't know anyone who has ever shot someone who wished they were armed with a weaker gun or less ammo. Therefore, I think it is important to carry an effective antipersonel gun and caliber within the limits of what you can effectively conceal and use.

David Armstrong
12-20-2011, 02:39 PM
No one is advocating .44 magnums as service guns, just normal service calibers. If a .22 LR is adequate in terminal effects we would see LEO agencies issueing it and approving it as standard sidearms.
No, for the same reasons we don't see LEO agencies issuing the .44 Magnum. It does not meet their particular needs as well as some other caliber. That does not mean the other caliber does not meet the needs of some other person or some other role.

A Law Officer is using lethal force in the same situations that a private citizen is using lethal force--in defense of human life against dangerous people.
But the need for force and the goal is different. As a LEO I needed to catch the BG and control him. As a non-LEO I just have to convince him to go bother someone else.

The violent criminals who the citizens are likely to have to shoot are the same that the police are likely to face.
Yes, but that is only part of the picture. Police face the BG under different parameters, usually far more offensive than defensive. Big difference there.

These criminals exhibit extreme violence toward their criminal associates, including shooting and stabbing them during disputes. So I would not expect them to turn into cowardly lions and flee when facing an armed citizen any more than they would if they were embroiled in a violent dispute with someone who pissed them off.
What you would expect and what we tend to see are not necessarily the same. For one thing few BGs are pissed off at their victims, they want to get something from them. Few BGs who are trying to engage in the typical mugging, house-breaking, robbery, etc. tend to stick around when being shot at. One doesn't have to be a cowardly lion to not want to get shot.

I don't know anyone who has ever shot someone who wished they were armed with a weaker gun or less ammo.
And I have yet to meet anyone who was shot (or shot at) who said they would have continued the attack if only the other guy had a smaller gun.

Therefore, I think it is important to carry an effective antipersonel gun and caliber within the limits of what you can effectively conceal and use.
That is fine, but as I often point out the person who is prepared for 99.999% of the posssible situations isn't that much better off than the person who is only ready for 99.99%. Selecting and carrying a handgun is always going to be a compromise, and arguing "my compromise is better than your compromise" is usually rather questionable.

Chuck Haggard
12-20-2011, 03:36 PM
Tpd,

You bring up a lot of good discussion points. But it still doesn't answer:

Why would I want a .22 instead of a .32 ACP, .32 H&R, .380, or 9mm?

I think we can all agree that a .22 is better than nothing, but it's not like I have to choose a .22 or nothing. For people who spend thousands of dollars on guns, training, ammo, ect, to state that "a .22 BUG is better because it's cheap and I can practice with it more"......well, that's weak-sauce.


EDIT: Like you carried your 317, I carried my war-time era Mauser HSc .32 before because I had misplaced my P2000's holster. That doesn't mean I should buy one specifically for BUG use.


One, my question to the OP was to determine if he was in a position that his choice was a .22lr or nothing. He may not be in the US and some places have weird laws about such things.

If the question is; "What's the best way to go about using a .22lr and only a .22lr weapon as your CCW piece?" then the rest of the stuff we are debating is a waste of time.


I concur that I'd rather have a 9mm than a .22, which is why I carry a 9mm daily while off duty (on duty this is mandated). I would, after some experience with various pistols, rather have my 317 than almost any .32 auto that I have shot. I'd love to have an airweight Centennial style snub in .32H&R or .327 but no one is making such a gun anymore.


I use my 317 as a training tool due to my .38 snubs being too much for my hands to shoot in volume. If I get to the point that I am down to using wadcutters because I can no longer handle +P ammo at all then I will likely get a brace of those 42c and practice even more than I do now. This comes down to your question as to why a .22 over a larger caliber; some folks can no longer handle recoil.

I recently tried a Scandium 340 trying to get the lightest BUG I could buy to fire .38s, it was just too much of a good thing for my hands.


For many people there is no spending of money for practice ammo. They buy the gun, shoot it a bit here and there due to cost, and hope for the best. My comment on practice ammo was more towards folks being able to actually afford .22 ammo and being able to pull off high volume training as opposed to no/little practice at all.


On the occasions my 317 is carried "for serious" it is one of two roles;

BUG to another far more capable pistol due to me going to the woods and wanting a plink at bunnies gun on me that doubles as a BUG if I get into a serious OK Corral event while stopping for coffee on the way home.

Clipped into the waistband of my shorts while running.


That I am already clothed to GTFOOD while working out is a good thing since I am carrying my least capable handgun. While running will be my primary defense mechanism since I am already geared for such, I am ready just in case.

Over the years I have been accosted by dogs twice, gang-bangers four times, and have jogged up on break-ins in-progress twice.

I've got 25 years on the street, 18 in SWAT and almost 2000 entries in that time period. I have met a few bad guys along the way, and some of them are not happy with me. I like having an 8 shot 10oz gun along with me on my runs for days when my knees are not happy and I don't feel like wearing the fanny pack with the G19 inside of it, or those days when I am feeling great and doing speedwork and the fanny pack bounces way to much on the Mr. Happy zone while sprinting.

"Mission dives the gear train" and all.

ToddG
12-20-2011, 03:51 PM
The .44 Mag issue is a red herring. LE agencies don't select it for a variety of reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with terminal performance. The issue at hand was the terminal performance of the .22 and it is lacking by most standards.

I can hit an eyeball sized target at 7yd with enough time... when my feet are planted and the eyeball doesn't move so much as an inch. In that same amount of time, even if I'm moving a bit and the target is moving a bit, I can put a few rounds into the head or many rounds into the upper thoracic cavity. A good service caliber handgun will have a decent chance of being terminally effective under any of those circumstances, while the ".22 for the eyeball" will not.

Craig, how many "eyeball" shots do you see in AMIS? I'm not even talking about the chaos of ECQC, just realistic room distance fights.

If "OMG I've been hit! Runaway! Runaway!" is the only level of threat you're worried about, buy yourself a cheap airsoft gun.

If a .22 is all you can manage due to laws, physical infirmity, etc. then by all means carry a .22 ... it's better than nothing. But don't turn a necessity into a religion and convince yourself that it's somehow just as good.

SouthNarc
12-20-2011, 05:12 PM
Craig, how many "eyeball" shots do you see in AMIS? I'm not even talking about the chaos of ECQC, just realistic room distance fights.




None. I don't think it's doable outside of somebody like you or Claude. I certainly don't have the skill to do it.

JAD
12-20-2011, 05:27 PM
If "OMG I've been hit! Runaway! Runaway!" is the only level of threat you're worried about, buy yourself a cheap airsoft gun.

Or as Clint says, "If I'd'a wanted to scare 'em, I woulda wore a ugly mask."

ToddG
12-20-2011, 06:22 PM
I don't think it's doable outside of somebody like you or Claude. I certainly don't have the skill to do it.

Speaking only for myself, I don't consider it doable under AMIS circumstances. On the final FOF exercise, I managed to miss the entire head of a threat moving in a fairly predictable back-and-forth motion at what, 7-10yd? Now, I'd like to think that if the scenario had allowed for it I would have fired and scored a decent head shot in followup, but not a guaranteed or even purposeful eyeball shot.

For clarity, when I'm talking about an eyeball hit, I mean taking the time necessary to guarantee a hit to the eyeball. If the eyeball is what I need to hit, I need to exercise a degree of precision in my sight picture and trigger press that delivers such a hit. It's not just "aim at the eyeball!" in the sense that some people used to teach aiming for a shirt button. We're not talking about using the eyeball as an aiming reference, we're talking about using it as a target area. Two different things.

Another thought about the .22 as a viable defensive choice: Who would put a .22 slide on their Glock 19 and carry that instead of the 9mm? Anyone? Same size, same trigger, does anyone seriously think the .22 is ballistically equal?

Chuck Haggard
12-20-2011, 06:36 PM
I don't think anyone thinks the .22 equals a 9mm or .38, the issue is; will a .22 be enough to get you by? Should you even consider this option at all?

David Armstrong
12-20-2011, 07:30 PM
The .44 Mag issue is a red herring.
The entire "...we would see LEO agencies issueing it and approving it as standard sidearms" is the red herring IMO. Selection of an LE duty weapon is somewhat irrelevant when discussing carrying a firearm for self defense/CCW use.

The issue at hand was the terminal performance of the .22 and it is lacking by most standards.
Is the issue terminal performance or is it ability to serve for CCW/self defense? The two are very different. My experience has been that very few (handgun) self defense situations are solved based on terminal performace, most are resolved with the BG still quite capable of acting.


If a .22 is all you can manage due to laws, physical infirmity, etc. then by all means carry a .22 ... it's better than nothing. But don't turn a necessity into a religion and convince yourself that it's somehow just as good.
Doesn't have to be just as good to perform the job, though. That is what many folks seem to forget.


Another thought about the .22 as a viable defensive choice: Who would put a .22 slide on their Glock 19 and carry that instead of the 9mm? Anyone? Same size, same trigger, does anyone seriously think the .22 is ballistically equal?
Does it have to be ballistically equal to do the job?

SouthNarc
12-20-2011, 07:35 PM
Speaking only for myself, I don't consider it doable under AMIS circumstances. On the final FOF exercise, I managed to miss the entire head of a threat moving in a fairly predictable back-and-forth motion at what, 7-10yd? Now, I'd like to think that if the scenario had allowed for it I would have fired and scored a decent head shot in followup, but not a guaranteed or even purposeful eyeball shot.

It was actually just a little over 6 yds. straight line distance from right at the edge of the doorway.

seabiscuit
12-20-2011, 07:43 PM
Doesn't have to be just as good to perform the job, though. That is what many folks seem to forget.

Correction: doesn't have to be just as good to perform some jobs.

True story: The father of one of my classmates had his house broken into by a man with a .22. In trying to defend his home and his pregnant wife, he was shot six times with the 22. He kept fighting, grabbed a shotgun from the closet, fired and missed. The man ran away.

So maybe a 22 woulda worked on the BG, if he ran from a miss. But it clearly didn't work on a motivated individual.

Yep. It's an anecdote. Take it for what it's worth. A 22 won't stop everyone. Of course, neither will a 9mm. But a 9mm is more likely to kill them.

Ed L
12-20-2011, 09:50 PM
The police need a gun that can incapacitate a deadly physical threat as quickly as possible, the same thing a citizen needs when confronted with a threat that justifies the use of deadly physical force.

If someone’s actions justify the use of deadly physical force against them you should be trying to incapacitate them as quickly as possible, not hoping that they will run away. However you try to spin it, .22 LR is inadequate in this regard when compared to the terminal ballistics of standard service calibers.

ToddG
12-21-2011, 09:22 AM
The entire "...we would see LEO agencies issueing it and approving it as standard sidearms" is the red herring IMO. Selection of an LE duty weapon is somewhat irrelevant when discussing carrying a firearm for self defense/CCW use.

Selection of a weapon is different. Selection of caliber or ammo is not. The uniformed officer and the discrete CCWer may have different needs in terms of size, weight, ergonomic flexibility, maintenance, etc. But as ed l keeps saying, rightly, when it comes time for bullets to be inside BGs no one's bullets need to be "better" than anyone else's.

A LEO may be more likely to confront a determined attacker, but he's also more likely to confront someone who simply wants to commit suicide (by cop). Heck, he's probably more likely to shoot anyone, period, than the average CCWer is. But that doesn't change the fact that there are circumstances beyond the simple low-level low-motivation mugging that a CCWer may face. I'll say it again: if someone believes that the mere appearance of a gun or the mere impact of any projectile will be "enough" then save yourself a lot of money and legal hassle and carry an airsoft.


Is the issue terminal performance or is it ability to serve for CCW/self defense? The two are very different. My experience has been that very few (handgun) self defense situations are solved based on terminal performace, most are resolved with the BG still quite capable of acting.

"Very few" and "most" aren't really the ideal I'm reaching toward, though. Again, if the .22 was all I could get or all I could handle, sure, it's better than nothing. But since I can carry something far more effective with relatively little extra effort, why wouldn't I?

To repeat a simple question already asked: if you had your favorite .22 pistol and your favorite 9mm pistol sitting on a table and someone kicked your front door in, which would you grab?


Does it have to be ballistically equal to do the job?

You won't know that until it's too late. For all the Easy Button muggings you guys want to focus on, I'm constantly reminded of William Aprill's lecture on violent criminals actors and how quickly certain people can go from calm to enraged when challenged.


It was actually just a little over 6 yds. straight line distance from right at the edge of the doorway.

No way. It was a mile, easy. :o

David Armstrong
12-21-2011, 11:39 AM
So maybe a 22 woulda worked on the BG, if he ran from a miss. But it clearly didn't work on a motivated individual.
And that is the essence of the issue. Very few BGs that most honest folks are going to encounter will be particularly motivated, and those that are motivated are not likely to be stopped by a 9 or a .45 or .40 or a .38 or anything else that doesn't create a physical stop, which is far more the result of placement than caliber. I would hazard a guess that in your anecdote the father would have kept on fighting if he had been shot 6 times with a 9mm.

David Armstrong
12-21-2011, 11:42 AM
The police need a gun that can incapacitate a deadly physical threat as quickly as possible, the same thing a citizen needs when confronted with a threat that justifies the use of deadly physical force.

If someone’s actions justify the use of deadly physical force against them you should be trying to incapacitate them as quickly as possible, not hoping that they will run away. However you try to spin it, .22 LR is inadequate in this regard when compared to the terminal ballistics of standard service calibers.
I agree, the .22 is not as good as a full service caliber when it comes to incapacitition. What seems to be missing is that incapacitation rarely is needed to solve a self defense/CCW situation which is a good thing because handguns across the board are relatively poor performers when it comes to actual physical incapacitiation.

Tamara
12-21-2011, 12:18 PM
Very few BGs that most honest folks are going to encounter will be particularly motivated, and those that are motivated are not likely to be stopped by a 9 or a .45 or .40 or a .38 or anything else that doesn't create a physical stop, which is far more the result of placement than caliber.

I haven't needed a pistol since 1996, so if we're going to play the probability game, I could probably just leave it at home every day anyway.

David Armstrong
12-21-2011, 12:27 PM
Selection of a weapon is different. Selection of caliber or ammo is not. The uniformed officer and the discrete CCWer may have different needs in terms of size, weight, ergonomic flexibility, maintenance, etc. But as ed l keeps saying, rightly, when it comes time for bullets to be inside BGs no one's bullets need to be "better" than anyone else's.
I would suggest that such logic would lead to the idea that everyone, everywhere, needs to be using the same caliber with the same bullet design by the same manufacturer or within the same narrow performance envelope. It's an argument that I see regularly and always reject..the person who is prepared for 99.999% of the problems is not that much better off than the person who is prepared for 99.99%.

A LEO may be more likely to confront a determined attacker, but he's also more likely to confront someone who simply wants to commit suicide (by cop). Heck, he's probably more likely to shoot anyone, period, than the average CCWer is. But that doesn't change the fact that there are circumstances beyond the simple low-level low-motivation mugging that a CCWer may face. I'll say it again: if someone believes that the mere appearance of a gun or the mere impact of any projectile will be "enough" then save yourself a lot of money and legal hassle and carry an airsoft.
I don't see where anyone has suggested the mere appearance of a gun or the mere impact of any projectile will be enough to save yourself. What I have suggested is that looking at the use of firearms for defensive purposes in the usual non-LE/military context we find little indication that caliber is a significant factor in the outcome.

"Very few" and "most" aren't really the ideal I'm reaching toward, though. Again, if the .22 was all I could get or all I could handle, sure, it's better than nothing. But since I can carry something far more effective with relatively little extra effort, why wouldn't I?
That is not my argument. I find the whole "my gun/caliber/bullet/holster is better than...." arguments to be rather silly because it is always situational. I can construct a scenario where the best choice will be a .22 derringer wrapped in a handkerchief carried in the left front pocket. That doesn't mean that a .22 derringer in the left front pocket is more effective than anything else. We have a tendency to think the ideal we are reaching for is the ideal that others hould also reach toward but so often that is not true.

To repeat a simple question already asked: if you had your favorite .22 pistol and your favorite 9mm pistol sitting on a table and someone kicked your front door in, which would you grab?
Assuming you are referring to favorite carry guns, in that scenario I would grab my 9mm, a Glock 17, instead of my favorite .22, a Beretta Mdl 21. But that is an example of what I'm talking about. One can design a scenario to mandate just about any outcome they want. Allow me. You have a Ruger Mk II and a Cobra 9mm derringer that has a history of unreliable ignition. Same scenario, different guns. Which do you pick?

Personally when discussing general issues I prefer to discuss them from a general perspective, and from an historical perspective when posssible. IMO that leads to a more accurate conclusion. It doesn't mean that is the conclusion that everyone should adopt or use. But it does suggest that no one option is the best response for all situations, and that a wide range of options will all be adequate in most situations.

seabiscuit
12-21-2011, 12:30 PM
If I hung my hat on "rarely," I'd say, "I'll rarely need my pistol," and leave it at home.

David Armstrong
12-21-2011, 12:35 PM
I haven't needed a pistol since 1996, so if we're going to play the probability game, I could probably just leave it at home every day anyway.
Yes, you probably could. And that is the essence of the problem....how far down the road of likelihood do we wish to draw our own personal compromise line. For each movement down the line the likelihood changes by huge amounts for most of us. Arguing that A is better than B because of size/caliber is so far down the line it is rather like arguing winning the lottery is a financial plan. True, some folks do win the lottery, but if someone was basing their entire economic well-being on "I will win the lottery today" most folks would say that really doesn't seem like a really good way of planning.

David Armstrong
12-21-2011, 12:49 PM
If I hung my hat on "rarely," I'd say, "I'll rarely need my pistol," and leave it at home.
See above. Again, how far down the road of compromise do you (generic you) wish to go? That is a personal decision, and thank goodness we can all make it, but let's not assume it really matters that much. Assuming a non-gun job and a normal work environment, yes, you will rarely need your pistol. It is even rarer that you will need it on any given day. It becomes even rarer that if you need your pistol you will need to do anything other than display it. It is even rarer that you will have to shoot it. It becomes even rarer that if you shoot it that you need to hit anyone. If you need to hit anyone it becomes even rarer that you need to hit them with a particular caliber, or in a particular place, or with a particular design. If you have to hit them it is even rarer that you will need to shoot them more than once. If you do need to shoot them more than once it is even rarer that you will need to reload the gun to continue shooting. If you need to reload it is even rarer that you will need to save unspent rounds and execute a tactical reload. It is even rarer that if you do need to execute a tactical reloadd that you will need to reload an empty magazine with spare rounds carried loose in your pocket. And so on. Someplace along the line it sort of becomes like carrying around shark repellent in a Kansas cornfield.

We all hang our hat on "rarely" the only difference is which rarity hook we pick to hang our hat.

ToddG
12-21-2011, 02:26 PM
I would suggest that such logic would lead to the idea that everyone, everywhere, needs to be using the same caliber with the same bullet design by the same manufacturer or within the same narrow performance envelope.

On the contrary, this demonstrates exactly why the pro-.22 argument is so silly. Lots of intelligent, educated, experienced people differ on the issue of whether a 9mm is better or worse than a .45, or whether either is better or worse than .40, etc. Lots of LE agencies choose all of those options. None choose a .22, because out of all the wild and varied reasons and justifications, no one seriously thinks the .22 is meaningful in terms of terminal performance.


It's an argument that I see regularly and always reject..the person who is prepared for 99.999% of the problems is not that much better off than the person who is prepared for 99.99%.

It's not like you to make up silly numbers like that. I could just as easily say the 9mm is 99% and the .22 is 22%.


That is not my argument. I find the whole "my gun/caliber/bullet/holster is better than...." arguments to be rather silly because it is always situational. I can construct a scenario where the best choice will be a .22 derringer wrapped in a handkerchief carried in the left front pocket. That doesn't mean that a .22 derringer in the left front pocket is more effective than anything else. We have a tendency to think the ideal we are reaching for is the ideal that others hould also reach toward but so often that is not true.

You're not saying anything that hasn't been said before. If the .22 is all you can carry, then of course it's the best choice. But no matter how many crazy strawman scenarios that get thought up, the reality is that when it comes time to rely on a handgun to have a physical impact on someone's ability to harm you, no one is going to wish his .45 was a .22...


Assuming you are referring to favorite carry guns, in that scenario I would grab my 9mm, a Glock 17, instead of my favorite .22, a Beretta Mdl 21. But that is an example of what I'm talking about. One can design a scenario to mandate just about any outcome they want. Allow me. You have a Ruger Mk II and a Cobra 9mm derringer that has a history of unreliable ignition. Same scenario, different guns. Which do you pick?

So again, you have to add a completely new facet -- the firearm's reliability -- into the equation to make the 9mm a worse choice. I'm not sure how many different ways I can say "if a .22 is all you've got..."

If I made a .22-cal gun that worked exactly like your G17 with the same reliability, accuracy, and capacity and you had to choose one of them to carry into a bad neighborhood or to keep by your bedside, which would it be?

Sean O
12-21-2011, 03:45 PM
I always think of this with these sort of discussions:

I have debriefed a lot of people after gunfights, and I’ve never had a single one say to me, “You know, when the bullets started flying I wished I had a smaller, less powerful gun, with less ammo in it.” - Tom Givens

David Armstrong
12-22-2011, 04:50 PM
On the contrary, this demonstrates exactly why the pro-.22 argument is so silly. Lots of intelligent, educated, experienced people differ on the issue of whether a 9mm is better or worse than a .45, or whether either is better or worse than .40, etc. Lots of LE agencies choose all of those options. None choose a .22, because out of all the wild and varied reasons and justifications, no one seriously thinks the .22 is meaningful in terms of terminal performance.
But it seems you are missing the point, which is that a .44 Mag is very meaningful in terms of terminal performance, yet no LE agency chooses it as a duty weapon. So the terminal performance issue is only one part of the selection process, and as was pointed out .22s HAVE been chosen at times for the UC/off-duty firearm, which is more within the role being discussed.

It's not like you to make up silly numbers like that. I could just as easily say the 9mm is 99% and the .22 is 22%.
And it is not like you to try to twist statements like that. I didn't attach values to any specific item I presented a rather specious argument that is often made when it comes to preparation, that of small fractions mattering. This is one of those arguments, where some are arguing that tiny differences matter. If we want to discuss exactly what those differences are that is a another discussion.

But no matter how many crazy strawman scenarios that get thought up, the reality is that when it comes time to rely on a handgun to have a physical impact on someone's ability to harm you, no one is going to wish his .45 was a .22...
While I think your position debatable I will grant it for purpose of discussion. But again, that is not my position, which for some reason folks keep trying to change into a comparison of X versus Y. It is not. My position is simple.....for most situations (non LE and military personal defense) X and Y both perform adequately.

So again, you have to add a completely new facet -- the firearm's reliability -- into the equation to make the 9mm a worse choice.
Whoa now, if you get to make up scenarios with factors that favor your position I get to make them up that favor my position. That is the problem with that sort of stuff and why I prefer to deal with large numbers of what happens rather than individual events that might happen when discussing issues. If you would prefer you may leave the Cobra derringer with normal reliability.

If I made a .22-cal gun that worked exactly like your G17 with the same reliability, accuracy, and capacity and you had to choose one of them to carry into a bad neighborhood or to keep by your bedside, which would it be?
Two different situations would probably lead to two different choices. FWIW my current bedside handgun is a .22 S&W Mdl 18 because I'm having varmint problems and my 10/22 is on loan. Again, preference has nothing to do with anything that I'm discussing, but I'll ask you the corollary question....given your two firearms which one are you going to decide it doesn't matter if you get shot by it?
HeadHunter established the baseline earlier, and I'll just re-post what he said:
"I know I am considered a maverick in the industry, along with the other well known instructor, for carrying .22s at times but they have worked for me on several occasions, so frankly I don't care what anyone else says or thinks. Once again, I throw down the gauntlet to demonstrate the alleged veritable multitude of mousegun caliber failures in the hands of private citizens. I have been making that challenge for years; to date, the silence has been deafening. OTOH, I can document 100s of incidents where .22s have accomplished the mission just fine.
I don't care if the villain dies, runs away, rushes to the hospital, or goes home and pushes a wirebrush soaked in Listerine through the hole in the back of his mouth. As long as he receives the message to leave me and mine alone, that's good enough."
It is not an issue what is better, it is simply an issue of does it work good enough. If you want it to work more than good enough that is great. We both enjoy high performance autos. But in all honesty when it comes to the daily commute and grocery getting the old Taurus is going to work good enough even though the 911 might make the difference between having an accident or not one day.

David Armstrong
12-22-2011, 04:54 PM
I always think of this with these sort of discussions:

I have debriefed a lot of people after gunfights, and I’ve never had a single one say to me, “You know, when the bullets started flying I wished I had a smaller, less powerful gun, with less ammo in it.” - Tom Givens
"No one complains about being shot with the wrong caliber." -- Walt Rauch
:cool:

seabiscuit
12-22-2011, 05:04 PM
What factors favored ToddG's position in his scenario? Everything about the firearms was equal, except caliber.

David Armstrong
12-22-2011, 05:32 PM
What factors favored ToddG's position in his scenario? Everything about the firearms was equal, except caliber.
First, he didn't have equal firearms. The position was my favorite .22 and my favorite 9mm. A Beretta 21 and a Glock 17 are not equal in many areas. Second, the scenario posits someone has kicked down my front door in my home. That scenario implies (to me) a non-random targeted attack and a dedicated type of opponent. Guns on table at home negates any issues concerning carry and concealement. And so on.

seabiscuit
12-22-2011, 11:37 PM
I was referring to an earlier post when he suggested putting a 22 slide on a G19.

It's not hard to conceal a G26. Or a 19. So why not? It'll handle a wider range of scenarios.

ToddG
12-23-2011, 12:49 AM
It is not an issue what is better, it is simply an issue of does it work good (sic) enough.

:p

This is what the whole discussion boils down to (errr.. to which it boils down... errr... down to which it boils): what is good enough?

Since I cannot know in advance the motivation, physical condition, or mental state of a future attacker, or what he may be hiding behind, or what he might be wearing, or what part of his body I'll be able to hit in the available time, "good enough" for me requires something that meets widely respected standards like the full FBI protocol and has a good track record of causing rapid physical incapacitation. That's certainly no guarantee, but it's about as close as it gets.

Tamara
12-23-2011, 06:29 AM
The whole "the cops face real bad guys while civilians just face wimps that'll run off at the sound of the gunshot" line is spurious on its face anyway. See, usually the real bad guys face a civilian or two, which is what results in the cops getting called in the first place. To use the Mandatory Exemplar, Platt and Matix faced the shit out of a bunch of civilians before the cops ever laid eyes on them.

digiadaamore
12-23-2011, 12:33 PM
there a humorous old quote im going to interject for brevity. it goes something like this.

"If you shoot a guy with a .25 hes going to be awfully pissed off when he finds out":D

SLG
12-23-2011, 03:15 PM
there a humorous old quote im going to interject for brevity. it goes something like this.

"If you shoot a guy with a .25 hes going to be awfully pissed off when he finds out":D


You obviously haven't been paying attention. Everyone knows a .25 is less effective than spitting at someone. We're talking .22's here, not puny .25's. Sheesh.

TCinVA
12-23-2011, 04:43 PM
The whole "the cops face real bad guys while civilians just face wimps that'll run off at the sound of the gunshot" line is spurious on its face anyway. See, usually the real bad guys face a civilian or two, which is what results in the cops getting called in the first place. To use the Mandatory Exemplar, Platt and Matix faced the shit out of a bunch of civilians before the cops ever laid eyes on them.

Bingo. The sort of dude the cops send a SWAT team to go get is the sort of dude that Mr. Ordinary Joe has to face on his own with no body armor and no backup. When you look at the criminal record of the bad guys police shoot, kill, or who manage to kill police officers you find out that they have an extensive record of violent crime against people who don't wear a badge. Now were they in a kill or be killed mindset in every instance where they victimized an average citizen? Probably not...but if they could engage that mindset the instant they see the blue lights behind them odds are they're capable of shifting into that mode of thinking if an intended victim is uncooperative.

...and that's to say nothing of the scores of examples of bad guys who have simply popped somebody who was completely cooperative, because it was never about the money/car/whatever...it was about them killing somebody because they thought it was fun.

Might a guy like that be scared off by somebody popping shots from a .22 at them? Sure. Is that the tool anyone who is charged with hunting down and stopping that kind of predator would take? Hell no.

Cops do not face an exceptional breed of criminal. They face the sort of criminal who is walking around your town right now breathing free air. The dude who came at local police with a knife and got himself shot a few weeks ago came to the attention of law enforcement after he came at some people walking down the street. He was as committed to stabbing them as he was to stabbing the police officer...only the police officer had a gun and could do something about it.

Al T.
12-23-2011, 07:29 PM
If you shoot a guy with a .25 hes going to be awfully pissed off when he finds out

That's a pretty poor statement. Many years back, a lady friend killed her attacker with one shot from a .25. :eek:

Couple of years later an ND struck one soldier in my battalion and the struck one had to be physically restrained to keep him from attacking the shooter. The .45 ACP 230 grain FMJ broke the victims right arm and punched through his chest.

FWIW, I've found .25 ACP more reliable (centerfire vrs. rimfire) and penetrates deeper than .22 LR from comparable barrels.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/CCI%20Blazer%20and%20Sellier%20and%20Bellot%20FMJ. html

http://www.brassfetcher.com/WaltherP22test.html

That being said, I'm a proponent of carrying the biggest caliber with highest capacity one can shoot and hide effectively. Nothing handheld is a death ray. :)

SLG
12-23-2011, 08:35 PM
That's a pretty poor statement. Many years back, a lady friend killed her attacker with one shot from a .25. :eek:

Couple of years later an ND struck one soldier in my battalion and the struck one had to be physically restrained to keep him from attacking the shooter. The .45 ACP 230 grain FMJ broke the victims right arm and punched through his chest.

FWIW, I've found .25 ACP more reliable (centerfire vrs. rimfire) and penetrates deeper than .22 LR from comparable barrels.



I think you missed this part: "there a humorous...."

How anyone can keep a straight face while reading this thread is beyond me. Then again, I like to laugh at myself too.

"Many years back, a lady friend killed her attacker with one shot from a .25." Since she killed the "typical attacker that a private citizen will face", either no one has anything else to worry about, or everyone left is a lot tougher now:-)

GJM
12-23-2011, 08:44 PM
You wouldn't think this thread was so funny if your name was listed as the originator (after it was split). I am waiting for it to go away.

SLG
12-23-2011, 09:24 PM
Merry Christmas, SLG is now the "originator" of this thread. Happy now? :)

Thanks Tom, now it's much less funny.

GJM
12-23-2011, 09:32 PM
Merry Christmas, SLG is now the "originator" of this thread. Happy now? :)

Awesome! This, a Gadget, and a Shaggy or two and my 2012 is made!

SLG
12-23-2011, 09:43 PM
Awesome! This, a Gadget, and a Shaggy or two and my 2012 is made!

I'll trade you a gadget and a shaggy for that .260.

I'm here to help.

SLG
12-23-2011, 09:44 PM
True, but it still is hilarious. Maybe I can find a way to blame it all on Todd.

Sounds good. Are you coming to SHOT? I want to check out the latest in defensive .22 ammo...

Joseph B.
12-23-2011, 09:44 PM
I am a big proponent of headshots and the need to be skilled at doing such, but the idea of hitting the eye socket in a gunfight is extremely unlikely (especially with consistently) IMHO.

Can a .22 caliber pistol be effective in self defense? Sure, someone shot several times with .22 could die as a result of such and many people have used .22 calibers for defense for roughly a 100 years or so.

Is it a caliber I would recommend for self defense? Not really, I think there are many more calibers that offer better penetration, wound damage and ability to break or punch through bone. However, if the person can only handle a .22 due to injuries and or physical limitations, it would be better than nothing at all. Just not the best option IMHO…

Just my $0.02

SLG
12-23-2011, 09:50 PM
You can carry an 84M in a shaggy?


As I'm sure you've heard before, its the butt that's tough to conceal, not the barrel... The real problem, since the 84M is striker fired, is how to attach a gadget to it?

SLG
12-23-2011, 10:07 PM
With a baby boy due the week of SHOT, I won't be able to make it this year. I'll be there in 2013 if you'd still like to shoot me then.


Shoot you? Certainly not. If I change my mind though, I'll be sure to use a largish, centerfire round so that it won't hurt you too much.

Al T.
12-23-2011, 10:19 PM
SLG, thanks for the correction. It is a bit of a sore point with me when platitudes get bandied about. Perhaps too many years of policing the bubblegum boards. :eek:

:p

SLG
12-23-2011, 10:51 PM
SLG, thanks for the correction. It is a bit of a sore point with me when platitudes get bandied about. Perhaps too many years of policing the bubblegum boards. :eek:

:p



I'm pretty sarcastic, but in all seriousness, I don't think anyone here wants to get shot with a .22, .25, or anything else. I've seen 7.62x39 hit a guy in the head, and after he regained conciousness, he was fine except for the cuts to his scalp. Does that mean that .22 is better than 7.62? Yeah...

However, to choose to carry a weaker round, when other options are available TO YOU, is beyond my comprehension. IMHO, any pistol caliber bullet only hurts what it actually touches. Any bigger, heavier bullet is going to damage more flesh, through diameter and penetration. Can a small caliber do the job? Sure. Will a bigger caliber do it more reliably? That's certainly what actual, respected experts in the field will tell you.

9mm vs. .45/.40/.357? Who cares. Modern bullets mostly make up for those differences. .22 vs. any of those? No comparison.

Jeff Cooper once said that he'd rather carry a hatchet than a .25. Maybe, maybe not, but a hatchet has true stopping power. A handgun bullet only "stops" though damage, not shock and awe.

Anyway, enough seriousness. Anyone who wants to carry a plinker, when they could carry a serious handgun, is welcome to. It is America, after all.

Joe in PNG
12-24-2011, 12:09 AM
A handgun bullet only "stops" though damage, not shock and awe.


You know, back when I dual wielded Baby Brownings, I thought... well, I didn't, but it felt kinda awesome. I may have been in for quite a shock, however...

ToddG
12-24-2011, 11:33 AM
At least in terms of modern centerfire small arms, it's pretty well decided that 2H beats Dual Wield, and both of those totally trounce sword & board.

(if you do not understand the above sentence, it simply means you have a life... walk away while you still can)

Tamara
12-24-2011, 11:36 AM
(if you do not understand the above sentence, it simply means you have a life... walk away while you still can)
It's good to see someone at peace with their inner nerd. :cool:

johnemckenzie
12-24-2011, 03:50 PM
At least in terms of modern centerfire small arms, it's pretty well decided that 2H beats Dual Wield, and both of those totally trounce sword & board.

(if you do not understand the above sentence, it simply means you have a life... walk away while you still can)

Well, it depends Todd! You haven't accounted for the real combat proven effectiveness of Dual Wield REVERSE GRIP if you are involved in a tight circle melee engagement.

BWT
12-24-2011, 07:35 PM
Here's the most over looked part of this.


Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
I know an extremely well known and respected instructor that carries a Smith .22 magnum J frame as a font pocket back-up -- believe it is a model 351. He is a put it in the eye socket kind of guy and likes the extra two cartridges.

I carry a .380 as a BUG (I did today anyway, to .45 ACP, the man's caliber of choice :D, kidding, about of choice, I'd rather carry a 9mm double stack, but anyway).

That being said, there are thinner, more powerful, smaller, centerfire handguns out there. Or heck even centerfire revolvers.

I carry a Ruger LCP as a BUG in a front pocket.

But anyway, I almost regret posting like I may stir the pot on this thread and get it fired up again (for that I apologize).

I'll also say this, in the numbers cited, .22 LR handgun/rifles were cited, how many were rifles? Because frankly, to compare a .22 LR or Winchester Magnum rifle with a 16''+ barrel to a sub 2'' DAO Revolver and accuracy on demand is... a stretch.

How many people have been killed compared to let's say a 9mm rifle, such as an AR in 9mm or an HK MP5 versus a .22 LR or WMR rifle.

ETA: That would be a fair comparison, IMHO.

ETA 2: Keeping in my tradition of not modifying data, It was .22 Short, LR and WMR, I can't confirm that it was handguns/rifles as I don't know the data source.

will_1400
12-24-2011, 10:29 PM
(if you do not understand the above sentence, it simply means you have a life... walk away while you still can)

I would walk away... but it'll have to wait. I'm in the middle of calibrations.

Mitchell, Esq.
12-24-2011, 10:47 PM
At least in terms of modern centerfire small arms, it's pretty well decided that 2H beats Dual Wield, and both of those totally trounce sword & board.

(if you do not understand the above sentence, it simply means you have a life... walk away while you still can)

Obtenebration trumps all of that stuff...

Joe in PNG
12-24-2011, 11:38 PM
At least in terms of modern centerfire small arms, it's pretty well decided that 2H beats Dual Wield, and both of those totally trounce sword & board.

(if you do not understand the above sentence, it simply means you have a life... walk away while you still can)


I know what "Neon Genesis Evangelion" was all about. Movies and manga included. I am SO far from having a life.

ToddG
12-25-2011, 10:32 AM
Well, it depends Todd! You haven't accounted for the real combat proven effectiveness of Dual Wield REVERSE GRIP if you are involved in a tight circle melee engagement.

At about 0:30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PX4UYN_a9I

Tamara
12-25-2011, 11:40 AM
How many gun nerd points do I get for having driven from K-town to Nash Vegas to see Equilibrium on opening weekend in a theater with Oleg Volk?

ToddG
12-25-2011, 11:47 AM
How many gun nerd points do I get for having driven from K-town to Nash Vegas to see Equilibrium on opening weekend in a theater with Oleg Volk?

I just find it hilarious that the advertisement I see in the YouTube window for the clip from Equilibrium is for Sensodyne. "Your teeth... they're all Sense Offenders!"

David Armstrong
12-25-2011, 02:31 PM
I was referring to an earlier post when he suggested putting a 22 slide on a G19.
If you mean where he said
" If I made a .22-cal gun that worked exactly like your G17 with the same reliability, accuracy, and capacity and you had to choose one of them to carry into a bad neighborhood or to keep by your bedside, which would it be? "
You will not I said "Two different situations would probably lead to two different choices."


It's not hard to conceal a G26. Or a 19. So why not? It'll handle a wider range of scenarios.
Again, I'm not saying "don't". I'm saying that it doesn't matter much if you do.

David Armstrong
12-25-2011, 02:37 PM
:p

This is what the whole discussion boils down to (errr.. to which it boils down... errr... down to which it boils): what is good enough?

Since I cannot know in advance the motivation, physical condition, or mental state of a future attacker, or what he may be hiding behind, or what he might be wearing, or what part of his body I'll be able to hit in the available time, "good enough" for me requires something that meets widely respected standards like the full FBI protocol and has a good track record of causing rapid physical incapacitation. That's certainly no guarantee, but it's about as close as it gets.
No disagreement, but again it is a matter of where one wants to draw their line. You want to focus on the response to a bad-case dedicated aggressive BG that has to be engaged and physically stopped. That is fine, but it is not a common scenario. Someone who chooses a different compromise point has said it is good enough for them at that point. What is good enough for them is a different point of protection in exchange for a different level of training/concealement/size/weight/other factor.

Tamara
12-25-2011, 02:38 PM
I'm still trying to figure how Jose Collazo probably could have gotten by with a deuce-deuce, while 9mm didn't have enough wheaties for Agent Dove? :confused:

David Armstrong
12-25-2011, 02:46 PM
there a humorous old quote im going to interject for brevity. it goes something like this.

"If you shoot a guy with a .25 hes going to be awfully pissed off when he finds out":D
And sadly the problem with that brevity is that we get those cases like Officer Richard Riggs form OKCPD, who was a one-shot stop DOA from a .25 ACP. So I'll counter with a quote from an Outlaws MC Club member when I was working undercover, when I commented on the large number of bikers carrying .22s and .25s: "Nobody likes getting shot. I'll work just as hard to avoid a .25 as I will a .45."

David Armstrong
12-25-2011, 02:51 PM
Cops do not face an exceptional breed of criminal. They face the sort of criminal who is walking around your town right now breathing free air.
And that is the big difference. The police get the job of taking that criminal into custody so that he cannot breathe that free air. That is the difference in need. The non-LE just has to convince the BG to go bother someone else. That is not particularly difficult with a gun, any gun. LE has to apprehend the BG and take him to jail. Very different dynamics between the two issues.

TCinVA
12-25-2011, 03:48 PM
And that is the big difference. The police get the job of taking that criminal into custody so that he cannot breathe that free air. That is the difference in need. The non-LE just has to convince the BG to go bother someone else. That is not particularly difficult with a gun, any gun. LE has to apprehend the BG and take him to jail. Very different dynamics between the two issues.

Some are, some aren't. Civilians don't need to spend a lot of time learning proper cuffing technique.

...but taking a bad guy into custody or convincing him to go bother someone else both rely on the bad guy's state of mind. There are some bad guys who may go quietly if confronted by a SWAT team standing over his bed with muzzles in his face while he's still reeling from a flashbang wakeup call, but who may well kill the lone cop on the side of the road or the average joe who doesn't comply/doesn't comply quickly enough/just plain looks fun to kill. Bad guys are opportunists that frequently size up their situation and the people they face in the situation and if they see an opportunity, they're likely to try for it.

From the perspective of ensuring that you are the one who goes home at night, relying on the bad guy's state of mind is unsatisfactory unless you can reliably project the idea into his head that messing with you is certain death and at the same time guarantee that he's interested in living to see another day. (Plenty of examples of bad guys who don't care about their own existence or don't care for the downgrade in the quality of it that surrender would ensure) You want to have what you reasonably can to make that sucker cease and desist because there are plenty of examples of bad guys who don't piss themselves and run at the sight of some scared to death cop/civilian/whatever who is waving a gun around to try and make the bad man go away. Some of them don't care if you have a gun, or a badge and a gun...they're going to play for keeps.

That's the kind of dude you're most likely to have to shoot, and that's not the kind of dude you want to be shooting with something that barely qualifies as a gun or with barely-keeping-it-on-the-B27 levels of marksmanship and mindset. The guy who is going to run like a scalded dog when met with the slightest resistance doesn't worry me nearly as much as the more sophisticated criminal who is a real predator and isn't impressed by the mere display of fangs. If I'm loaded for T-Rex and I'm attacked by an asthmatic Chihuahua, so be it. Better to be in that situation than the reverse, you know?

David Armstrong
12-25-2011, 05:43 PM
...but taking a bad guy into custody or convincing him to go bother someone else both rely on the bad guy's state of mind.
And caliber of the gun doesn't change that state of mind. But I would suggest that there is quite a difference in potential for problems when the choices are "this guy is going to hurt me if I continue to bother him" and "This guy is doing his best to make me do something I am dead set against doing." In the first case you have an easy and open option to avoid the conflict by going somewhere else. In the second the conflict is forced on you and the only option is agree or fight.

Some of them don't care if you have a gun, or a badge and a gun...they're going to play for keeps.
Yes, we see them show up every now and then, taking multiple hits from 9s, 40s, 45s, etc. That is the type of person waaaay up on that option list that requires the actual physical stop that we see so rarely. Yes, there are some real bad guys out there that are really tough bring downs. But for most of us the chance of running into that BG is much like the chance of being attacked by a man-eating tiger. Is it nice to be prepared for the tiger? Sure, but you really don't lose much in the overall scheme of things if you compromise someplace lower on the scale than that. We go back to HeadHunter earlier in the thread: "...I throw down the gauntlet to demonstrate the alleged veritable multitude of mousegun caliber failures in the hands of private citizens. I have been making that challenge for years; to date, the silence has been deafening. OTOH, I can document 100s of incidents where .22s have accomplished the mission just fine."

TCinVA
12-25-2011, 10:37 PM
But for most of us the chance of running into that BG is much like the chance of being attacked by a man-eating tiger.

Or, perhaps, higher:

361

JHC
12-25-2011, 11:01 PM
Deleted for not adding anything to this erudite debate. lol

SLG
12-25-2011, 11:10 PM
[QUOTE=David Armstrong;41717... We go back to HeadHunter earlier in the thread: "...I throw down the gauntlet to demonstrate the alleged veritable multitude of mousegun caliber failures in the hands of private citizens. I have been making that challenge for years; to date, the silence has been deafening. OTOH, I can document 100s of incidents where .22s have accomplished the mission just fine."[/QUOTE]

Except...HH has continuously disregarded anecdotes that disagree with his premise, on this board and on another. I understand not basing an actual study on what some guy on a forum said happened. No one here has done an actual study, regardless of what they, or you, think. When known members of a board, who are legit mil/le guys (or gals), say that they saw X happen, that's fine with me, AS AN ANECDOTE. If you disregard their actual experience, either you are calling them a liar, or you have a particular position you're pushing, regardless of reality. I'm not short tempered, but if someone calls me a liar, it better be to my face, and they'd better be willing to accept the consequences.

SLG
12-25-2011, 11:11 PM
Deleted for not adding anything to this erudite debate. lol

Since this thread jumped the shark a long time ago, that's not really fair of you. Following your example, we should all delete our posts.

David Armstrong
12-26-2011, 02:30 PM
Or, perhaps, higher:
Or, perhaps, lower. Thus the idea that it is appropriate for different people to compromise at different points, given different needs and concerns.

David Armstrong
12-26-2011, 02:41 PM
Except...HH has continuously disregarded anecdotes that disagree with his premise, on this board and on another. I understand not basing an actual study on what some guy on a forum said happened. No one here has done an actual study, regardless of what they, or you, think. When known members of a board, who are legit mil/le guys (or gals), say that they saw X happen, that's fine with me, AS AN ANECDOTE. If you disregard their actual experience, either you are calling them a liar, or you have a particular position you're pushing, regardless of reality. I'm not short tempered, but if someone calls me a liar, it better be to my face, and they'd better be willing to accept the consequences.
I don't know the history behind the whole thing with HH, but if I were to offer several anecdotes about the 9mm failing would that be considered indicative of the 9mm as a failure and inadequate as a defensive caliber? Or would we think it better to look at a broad picture of the 9 in use for defense? That is my point. We know that all calibers have some rate of failure, we know that most stops with a handgun are psychological in nature rather than physical, what we don't seem to know is that there are significant differences in those based on caliber.

ToddG
12-26-2011, 03:05 PM
...but if I were to offer several anecdotes about the 9mm failing would that be considered indicative of the 9mm as a failure and inadequate as a defensive caliber?

No, but it would certainly make it impossible to suggest that I've never heard of a failure of the 9mm.

JHC
12-26-2011, 05:23 PM
Since this thread jumped the shark a long time ago, that's not really fair of you. Following your example, we should all delete our posts.

ROFL! What about the Mosaad? What about Sam Giancano? And then, there was a series of publications in the '80's, (Pistolero) by Phil Engledrum arguing the the .22lr pocket pistol was very viable for SD. You see what those mini-mags did to that tangerine?

will_1400
12-26-2011, 08:42 PM
I seriously do not consider a .22 lr to be a viable defense round when compared to most calibers. If it's all you've got, by all means carry it. But I'd sooner carry a .32 or heavier caliber round, given the choice. If I were to go with statistics, I can say from personal experience that my ability in hand-to-hand is 100% sufficent for the encounters I've had and would have no need for a firearm, based on previous experience. Unfortunately, Murphy has a tendancy to show his ugly mug at the worst possible time, so I'm planning on carrying a weapon in at least .38 Special as a bare minimum.

Tamara
12-27-2011, 07:14 AM
You know, I remember the days when, in certain situations, the choice was something like a Baby Browning or an NAA Mini-Revolver or nothing at all. My choice back then was the Beretta Jetfire, And I justified it with all those statements of "I'll just screw it into his eye" and "It's easier to win a footrace with a guy leaking from a few quarter-inch holes" and "Nobody wants to get shot with any caliber."

But in a day and age of .380's you can CCW anywhere this side of a nudist colony and 9x19 autos smaller than a J-frame, those rationlizations are starting to sound a little thin.

Should I have to pull a gun, and the guy doesn't run off at the sight of it, I'd really rather not shoot him just a little bit, you know what I mean?

SLG
12-27-2011, 10:23 AM
Should I have to pull a gun, and the guy doesn't run off at the sight of it, I'd really rather not shoot him just a little bit, you know what I mean?

"Never do your enemy a minor injury." ... He may not know he's supposed to be weak and run away:-)


In recent years, I helped track a killer, who used a .22 rifle to shoot three people, killing one of them instantly. The other two were basically fine, and one of them ran to his truck, retrieved his 9mm pistol and 308 hunting rifle, and shot back at the guy. The killer was wounded shortly after that from a .223 to the hand, fired by a responding cop. He then took us on a 6 hour manhunt in the dark, in the woods, in the snow, in 10 degree temps. He constantly circled back on us, and was always attempting to ambush us, when he was finally introduced to 8 of 9 00 buck pellets. Loser, no doubt. Tough guy though, no question.

Le Français
12-27-2011, 10:43 AM
"Never do your enemy a minor injury." ... He may not know he's supposed to be weak and run away:-)


In recent years, I helped track a killer, who used a .22 rifle to shoot three people, killing one of them instantly. The other two were basically fine, and one of them ran to his truck, retrieved his 9mm pistol and 308 hunting rifle, and shot back at the guy. The killer was wounded shortly after that from a .223 to the hand, fired by a responding cop. He then took us on a 6 hour manhunt in the dark, in the woods, in the snow, in 10 degree temps. He constantly circled back on us, and was always attempting to ambush us, when he was finally introduced to 8 of 9 00 buck pellets. Loser, no doubt. Tough guy though, no question.

Can you provide more information about exactly where on their bodies the three victims were hit, how many times they were each shot, and how far the bullets penetrated? Depending on these factors (and possibly others as well), using a more powerful firearm might not have resulted in different results.

SLG
12-27-2011, 11:03 AM
Can you provide more information about exactly where on their bodies the three victims were hit, how many times they were each shot, and how far the bullets penetrated? Depending on these factors (and possibly others as well), using a more powerful firearm might not have resulted in different results.

The deceased victim was shot under her arm, bullet traversed her whole body side to side. Classic .22 death shot. Another was shot in the hip and the hand, though I don't know any more details off the top of my head. Not sure about the third one, the one who shot back.

I'm not asserting that a larger caliber would have done more damage, though my recollection of what I thought at the time led me to believe that it likely would have. All I'm showing is an anecdote to illustrate Tam's point about minor injuries.

David Armstrong
12-27-2011, 01:02 PM
No, but it would certainly make it impossible to suggest that I've never heard of a failure of the 9mm.
True, but I'm not following that line. Has anyone suggested that any caliber never fails? I think I may have missed something in the conversation?? Again, I don't claim the .22 or the mousegun bretheren are the best choice for defensive purposes, I suggest that given the dynamics of CCW and self defense the difference between calibers is very low on the importance list, as any caliber is adequate for most situations and all calibers fail in some situations.

Al T.
12-27-2011, 02:03 PM
First rule of a gunfight - have a gun.

http://www.thegunzone.com/have-a-gun.html

http://www.thegunzone.com/gunfighting.html

will_1400
12-27-2011, 02:16 PM
True, but I'm not following that line. Has anyone suggested that any caliber never fails? I think I may have missed something in the conversation?? Again, I don't claim the .22 or the mousegun bretheren are the best choice for defensive purposes, I suggest that given the dynamics of CCW and self defense the difference between calibers is very low on the importance list, as any caliber is adequate for most situations and all calibers fail in some situations.

By this logic, I could justify relying solely on hand-to-hand and leave carrying firearms for when I deploy. Ideally, being skilled in combatives should be all you need for most situations. After all, most conflicts happen at very short range and often times the attackers flee at the first sign of resistance from what I've read in the past. The problem with this logic train (to me) is that I need several variables to go my way all the time and by following the "everything will be ok" mindset I have no contingency plan for "shit happens". Also, if one of the variables goes against me (the attacker being outside of my reach with no safe way for me to close the gap and/or is armed), my life just got a hell of a lot more complicated.

My rambling aside, I want to remove as many variables from the self defense equation as possible. Carrying a firearm in a service cailber helps skew the variables in my favor by giving me a higher probablity of a) hitting my target and b) neutralizing my target when I hit it.

SLG
12-27-2011, 04:37 PM
First rule of a gunfight - have a gun.

http://www.thegunzone.com/have-a-gun.html

http://www.thegunzone.com/gunfighting.html

I won't be able to find it now, but in the 80's, when THE RULES were first coming out, rule number 2, was "Carry the biggest gun you can control." I think Cooper said that, and I believe he meant caliber more than physical size of the gun, but I could be mistaken. Dean Speir (sp?) used to write about that pretty regularly in the 90's.

Of course, since we live in an age where many instructors seem to think they invented combat with firearms, I suppose it's not fashionable to follow Cooper's ideas anymore, especially among those of us who only know weaver as an obstacle in an O course.

JAD
12-27-2011, 05:18 PM
I think this is what they call a 'slippery slope.' The 'not much difference between .22 and 9' argument starts to sound an awful lot like 'not much difference between 9 and .40 / .45 ACP / .45 Colt' lines of reasoning. Reasoning is fine; in this discussion, the data is so cluttered with variables that I tend to feel that sound theory backed with factual factoral data (for example, how far a given bullet penetrates in gelatin) is more authoritative than direct empirical data.

The only theoretical perspective regarding handgun ammunition that has convinced me runs like this:
The best way to survive the fight is to stop it right now -- not in a minute, not in ten seconds, right now.
Only CNS hits stop all fights right now.
The head is hard to hit (I can vouch for that one).
If you pound the centerline of the body with accurate fire you have a good chance of striking the CNS and disabling the aggressor IF your bullets can penetrate bone, muscle, and fat and retain enough momentum to smash the spinal column.
Some bad guys are pretty big. On a frontal shot, their CNS is behind a total of an inch of bone and more than 20" of fat, organs, and muscle.

The conclusion is that I should carry a bullet that has that much momentum. Diameter is secondary, but desirably so; diameter means that I will core sample more bits that might shut the fight down in ten seconds, if I fail to shut it down right now. Momentum is the solution; diameter is insurance. I like gravy with my potatoes; give me some of both, please.

I do not think anything short of 9 ball will retain momentum well enough to satisfy condition 5. 9 ball is actually pretty ducky in that regard, but does not do us much good for diameter; it tends to slip through without cutting much, I read. Heavy, highly integral 9JHPs have a good sectional density and will often produce a good diameter. They cut bunches and I like their odds of breaking the spine of a fat guy. .45 ACP JHPs do it better; damn near twice better, both in terms of cutting and in terms of momentum. I do not feel undergunned with a 9 mm (I carried that bore diameter out the door this morning); I will not question someone, including myself on many occasions, who feels better armed with a .45. The 9 guy is hedging his bet with controllability and capacity, planning to put more rounds in the CNS probability zone quicker. The .45 guy is hedging his bets by choosing a cartridge that has a better chance of being effective in this very specific sense.

I think that's a small difference and I don't like much to fault anyone for going one way or another. However, I won't feel good about going out the door with a cartridge that doesn't have a good chance of meeting condition 5. For me, that eliminates .380 and below. I could be wrong.

TCinVA
12-28-2011, 12:07 AM
I think that's a small difference and I don't like much to fault anyone for going one way or another. However, I won't feel good about going out the door with a cartridge that doesn't have a good chance of meeting condition 5. For me, that eliminates .380 and below. I could be wrong.

We actually have a significant body of real-world data on terminal ballistics in all the major service calibers that shows pretty convincingly if you use good loads that the bullets will do whatever you can reasonably expect handgun bullets to do. In other words, it's easy to find police departments that have shot a lot of bad guys with good 9mm loads with good results in terms of making bad guys stop obnoxious behavior, and also with .357 sig, and also with .40 S&W, and also with .45 ACP. There are, of course, some differences in all those loads which may make them a better choice in some circumstances than others, but in general if you had to pick a caliber among those choices by throwing darts blindfolded you'd come up with something that you can reasonably expect to get the job done.

None of them are a death ray by any means...but there's plenty of evidence to show that if you shoot them with reasonable accuracy they'll penetrate and expand and do damage to enough important stuff to make bad guys stop even if they're generally not inclined to because of mindset or chemical assistance. Whether one believes that police shoot super bad guys or super-determined bad guys that the public doesn't often interact with or that the cops shoot the same breed of scumbag that ordinary citizens would shoot if they had ready access to a sidearm when being victimized, there's lots of real dead bad guys who left real corpses that show a very real, tangible, provable, concrete record of the calibers and loads that pass the generally accepted ballistic standards getting the job done.

If I chose to carry a Glock 19 in 9mm loaded with decent ammo, for example, I'm carrying a pistol/ammo combination that has proven effective in the hands of everybody from the NYPD and LAPD to S.F. groups hunting bad guys in Iraq and Afghanistan. There's a great big pile of evidence that demonstrates rather conclusively that the combo will do what you can reasonably expect a handgun to do. There is also data available on other loads based on what we've learned about terminal ballistics since the Miami shootout turned ballistics from a pursuit equivalent to alchemy into a real scientific discipline which shows that some of the other handgun choices on the market are not as good at getting the job done. With the massive amount of information we have on terminal ballistics to show what does work pretty good it seems rather peculiar to insist on anecdotal evidence of why X caliber won't work. We've got tons of evidence that points pretty clearly to what does work.

There's a hell of a lot of things good guys can't control in a fight...(like whether or not there's going to be a fight in the first place) but one thing you can do ahead of time is pick a reliable pistol in a caliber and load that all the aforementioned data shows to be effective and carry it in any situation where you aren't forced to choose between a less capable option and fingernails. Whatever level of control you have over everything else that happens, you've ensured that at least the kinetic bits of your self defense effort are highly likely to be up to the task.

So in short, yeah...I think based on all the data that's out there you're on pretty solid ground with the calibers you're comfortable with.

LittleLebowski
12-31-2011, 09:11 AM
If a 62, 70, 75, or 77 grain .22 caliber projectile at 2500+fps can hit the vital area's, and still have an asshole actively engaged in the fight for several more moments, I am not convinced the 38 or 40 grain at 950fps is going to magically fare better in terms of performance. Or am I just missing something?

Excellent data from combat, thanks for sharing, Sean.

HeadHunter
01-04-2012, 12:02 PM
I have to say I have enjoyed this thread and found it highly educational.

David Armstrong
01-05-2012, 03:14 PM
By this logic, I could justify relying solely on hand-to-hand and leave carrying firearms for when I deploy.
Not using the logic I provided.:confused:

Ideally, being skilled in combatives should be all you need for most situations.
Don't know about that . Back when I was being deployed skill in combatives was used for when the firearm was unavailable or when the firearm failed, not as an alternative to a firearm.

My rambling aside, I want to remove as many variables from the self defense equation as possible. Carrying a firearm in a service cailber helps skew the variables in my favor by giving me a higher probablity of a) hitting my target and b) neutralizing my target when I hit it.
Don't think anyone has suggested otherwise. Again, the issue is not "is A better than B in Situation C" it is "will either A or B usually work in Situation C."

gringop
01-06-2012, 09:37 PM
Just to stir the pot, my new years day gun show purchase. Who else has a frigging Zoro embossed on their pistol.

http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/gringop/IMGA0359a.jpg
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/gringop/IMGA0361a.jpg

My first Jennings FAST, from concealment.

13.1 0 PD 13.1
14.96 1H 2B PD 18.96
12.57 0 PD 12.57

Beat it.

Who will accept my Bryco-Jennings-Jimenezarms challenge?

Gringop



"In all things have no preferences."

“You should not have any special fondness for a particular weapon, or anything else, for that matter. Too much is the same as not enough. Without imitating anyone else, you should have as much weaponry as suits you.”

--Miyamoto Musashi, The Book of Five Rings

HeadHunter
01-06-2012, 09:53 PM
Who will accept my Bryco-Jennings-Jimenezarms challenge?
That will be fun.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Pocket%20Pistols/JA22DuoLeft.jpg

gringop
01-06-2012, 11:11 PM
Two-Tone! damn.

BOLO for some gold paint and bedazzled grips on my Zoro.
Too bad the pics are gone from the Arfcom Pimpmatic thread.

On a serious note, my biggest issue is slide to thumb rub with my Lana monster hands. With a revolver thumbs down grip it's dead reliable.

Gringop

Chuck Haggard
01-07-2012, 12:41 AM
That will be fun.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Pocket%20Pistols/JA22DuoLeft.jpg

Yours has been customized, I think you are trying to cheat :D

HeadHunter
01-07-2012, 06:06 PM
On a serious note, my biggest issue is slide to thumb rub with my Lana monster hands. With a revolver thumbs down grip it's dead reliable.

That's how I have to shoot it also. Thumbs forward makes the slide drag on my thumb, too. Not enough to make me a casualty but it does affect reliability.

GJM
01-07-2012, 06:13 PM
This has been a costly thread, as I have a 43C and 351 waiting for me. Just hit Home Depot for #4 dry wall fasteners, which are apparently the hot ticket for dry firing the .22's.

LeeC
01-07-2012, 06:41 PM
My EDC Gen4 G19's firing pin froze at the range today, so I switched to my Advantage Arms .22LR for the rest of the hour. As I was ending the 1-hour range limit, I set aside three topped-off (CCI mini-mags) 10-round magazines for my ride home.

I've never been in a gunfight and hope that I never am, but if that happens, I suspect that I'll put 4-6 rounds COM and then assess if the BG is still a threat. Carrying the AA kit, I'm programmed to assess the BG after the first reload, and I still feel under-armed.

gringop
01-07-2012, 09:26 PM
This has been a costly thread, as I have a 43C and 351 waiting for me. Just hit Home Depot for #4 dry wall fasteners, which are apparently the hot ticket for dry firing the .22's.

This is what makes the United States the greatest country in the world. Dry wall fasteners will soon be protecting my zamak aluminum alloy Jennings from dry fire damage.

Tack så mycket

Gringop

SLG
01-08-2012, 11:59 PM
This is not really the right place to post this anymore, but starting a new thread seems like a really stupid idea.

Today, I met a dog named Guinness, who was shot twice in the head with a .22LR from an unspecified pistol. Guinness was shot several years ago, and I assure you, I did not dig him up to meet him. He seems to have suffered a minor injury to his sinus cavity that makes his breathing sound like growling, but other than that, the two rounds did not inconvenience him. To be fair, he's a Rottweiller, and not a small one. I don't know if his head is tougher than a person's, but I imagine it is. Either way, Guinness is tougher than most people I know.

Since dogs get shot very often in defensive scenarios, this seems like yet another good reason to carry a real caliber. Normally, "real" calibers start with a 4, or at least, that's how the line always seems to go. In this thread, maybe we should say that real calibers start with whatever you think would put a beast like Guinness down. If you said "eye shot with a .22", can I keep your gear when Guinness eats you?

ToddG
01-09-2012, 12:53 AM
What if Guinness eats the gear, first? Do you still want it?

Al T.
01-09-2012, 09:39 AM
Having head shot several hogs with a 9mm, most folks botch the "head shot" as they lack the understanding of where the brain actually is on a critter. Imagine a football with ears towards one end and teeth at the other. Eyes are about mid-line.

Between the eyes is sinus cavity.

Roughly between the ears is the brain. If you draw an imaginary line from left ear to right eye and visa versa, where those imaginary lines intersect is usually the brain pan. From the side, the ear hole works just fine or a slight bit behind it, depending on target orientation.

The poor doggy was shot in the nose, not the head (brain). I hope the doggy got a mouthful of the shooter. :mad:

SLG
01-09-2012, 09:57 AM
Having head shot several hogs with a 9mm, most folks botch the "head shot" as they lack the understanding of where the brain actually is on a critter. Imagine a football with ears towards one end and teeth at the other. Eyes are about mid-line.

Between the eyes is sinus cavity.

Roughly between the ears is the brain. If you draw an imaginary line from left ear to right eye and visa versa, where those imaginary lines intersect is usually the brain pan. From the side, the ear hole works just fine or a slight bit behind it, depending on target orientation.

The poor doggy was shot in the nose, not the head (brain). I hope the doggy got a mouthful of the shooter. :mad:

What you say is true, but you missed the entire point of my post.

BTW, he was not shot in the nose, he was shot just under the eye.

Al T.
01-09-2012, 12:03 PM
No, it was obviously my lack of clarity. Sorry about that. :(

My point is that the dog was not shot in the brain, but the snout. I am assuming a downwards shot, not an "on your knees" shot where his head was inline with your firearm.

I think the corollary would be shooting some dirtbag through the mouth or nose - but from side to side as opposed to a line from teeth to spine.

.22LR has enough penetration, but must be precisely placed. My experience shooting critters with handguns leads me to believe that handguns are closer to bows than rifles in "stopping power". IMHO, with the handgun, bleeding out is the more likely cause of making the bad guy quit rather than the shock effect you can get with something like a .30-30.

HeadHunter
01-22-2012, 10:14 PM
Just hit Home Depot for #4 dry wall fasteners, which are apparently the hot ticket for dry firing the .22's.

That's good intel. Thanks.

I am going to try that with my Jimenez JA22. I tuned it up a little before SHOT by replacing the safety spring with one from an original Jennings. It makes the safety a little more positive. If I can find more original Jennings springs, I am going to tune up all of my Jimenez guns with them.

Al T.
01-23-2012, 09:12 AM
I am going to tune up all of my Jimenez guns

Now that's something you don't read everyday. :eek:

And I thought I was weird for buying extra magazines for my S&W 2214. :p

LittleLebowski
01-23-2012, 01:36 PM
Now that's something you don't read everyday. :eek:


Yeah, I thought it was a joke at first.

TGS
01-23-2012, 04:44 PM
Now that's something you don't read everyday. :eek:

For reals.

I had a thought about buying a Jimenez just to see how awful they are, and to see what kind of scores I'd get on a FAST or Dot Torture.

Then, I read about how they have a tendency to come apart with pieces flying at your face.

TGS
01-23-2012, 04:51 PM
This is not really the right place to post this anymore, but starting a new thread seems like a really stupid idea.

Today, I met a dog named Guinness, who was shot twice in the head with a .22LR from an unspecified pistol. Guinness was shot several years ago, and I assure you, I did not dig him up to meet him. He seems to have suffered a minor injury to his sinus cavity that makes his breathing sound like growling, but other than that, the two rounds did not inconvenience him. To be fair, he's a Rottweiller, and not a small one. I don't know if his head is tougher than a person's, but I imagine it is. Either way, Guinness is tougher than most people I know.

Since dogs get shot very often in defensive scenarios, this seems like yet another good reason to carry a real caliber. Normally, "real" calibers start with a 4, or at least, that's how the line always seems to go. In this thread, maybe we should say that real calibers start with whatever you think would put a beast like Guinness down. If you said "eye shot with a .22", can I keep your gear when Guinness eats you?

This is one of the most well written, entertaining, yet sensible things I've had the pleasure of viewing on the internet.

HeadHunter
01-23-2012, 06:39 PM
I had a thought about buying a Jimenez just to see how awful they are, and to see what kind of scores I'd get on a FAST or Dot Torture.

Then, I read about how they have a tendency to come apart with pieces flying at your face.

I have three Jimenez JA22s and four Jennings. The JA22s each have almost 1000 rounds a piece through them. I received one of the Jennings as a Commissioning present in 1982 and the other is my late father's, which predates mine. Both have over 5000 rounds a piece through them. None of them have auto destructed yet.

I'm looking forward to shooting the FAST with a JA22 this week.

Al T.
01-23-2012, 09:01 PM
Commissioning present in 1982

Our paths have crossed. Building Four calls your name. :)

HeadHunter
01-23-2012, 09:27 PM
Our paths have crossed. Building Four calls your name. :)

Actually, my name was posted in Building Four prior to the renovation. I couldn't get in when I down for Ranger Rendezvous last year so I don't know if it still is or not.

Al T.
01-24-2012, 09:09 AM
Just to totally derail the thread. :)

Last time I was in Bedroom 4 was Jan 2008, didn't wander much, but looked about the same as it did in '82 and '86. Let me guess - O6 from OCS? Do I get a prize? :p I'm sure we know some folks.....

I have a Raven .25 that just runs and runs. I do like my Beretta 950 and S&W 2214 better though.

HeadHunter
01-24-2012, 07:47 PM
Last time I was in Bedroom 4 was Jan 2008, didn't wander much, but looked about the same as it did in '82 and '86. Let me guess - O6 from OCS? Do I get a prize? :p I'm sure we know some folks.....

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Vignette/IronMike.jpg Although I was an enlisted man for 10 years, my source of commission was ROTC.

Back to the thread. I really enjoyed shooting the FAST today with my JA 22s. That's a fun drill; I have never shot it before. I used an old Bucheimer clip-on IWB rig at 2 o'clock with a sweat shirt for cover garment. Winchester M22 ammo worked really well; it's good ammo.

My times were generally in the 8.50 second range, but I did get one in at 7.68.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Pocket%20Pistols/FASTJA22.jpg

I will have to bevel the mag wells to do much better. It's hard to get the magazine in the way they are now. But I think 7 seconds is do-able with a little work.

Al T.
01-25-2012, 10:17 AM
Soon as my spare magazines get here, I'll try the S&W out.

Tamara
01-25-2012, 05:14 PM
I keep waiting for the "Trained Professionals On A Closed Course. Do Not Try This At Home" disclaimer... ;)

HeadHunter
01-25-2012, 08:13 PM
I keep waiting for the "Trained Professionals On A Closed Course. Do Not Try This At Home" disclaimer... ;)

A buddy of mine just equipped his ladyfriend with a Beretta 21A in .22LR (her choice). I did my Product Improvement Program for the sights and ejection tool. He has trained her to shoot business cards at 7 yards with it, which piques my interest in how well she can shoot the FAST with it.

jlw
01-25-2012, 08:25 PM
This is not really the right place to post this anymore, but starting a new thread seems like a really stupid idea.

Today, I met a dog named Guinness, who was shot twice in the head with a .22LR from an unspecified pistol. Guinness was shot several years ago, and I assure you, I did not dig him up to meet him. He seems to have suffered a minor injury to his sinus cavity that makes his breathing sound like growling, but other than that, the two rounds did not inconvenience him. To be fair, he's a Rottweiller, and not a small one. I don't know if his head is tougher than a person's, but I imagine it is. Either way, Guinness is tougher than most people I know.

Since dogs get shot very often in defensive scenarios, this seems like yet another good reason to carry a real caliber. Normally, "real" calibers start with a 4, or at least, that's how the line always seems to go. In this thread, maybe we should say that real calibers start with whatever you think would put a beast like Guinness down. If you said "eye shot with a .22", can I keep your gear when Guinness eats you?


I shot a rabid raccoon four times with a .45 and then had to drown it...

Tamara
01-25-2012, 08:37 PM
A buddy of mine just equipped his ladyfriend with a Beretta 21A in .22LR (her choice). I did my Product Improvement Program for the sights and ejection tool. He has trained her to shoot business cards at 7 yards with it, which piques my interest in how well she can shoot the FAST with it.

No doubt she can smoke me.

(Out of curiosity, what's the penalty time on the FAST for using a cartridge with less oomph than a 9x19? 'Cause I know I'd smoke my best time if I was running my 22/45... ;) )

jlw
01-25-2012, 08:42 PM
The one time in my private life that I have had to deploy a firearm in a real situation the firearm I deployed was a S&W 422 in .22lr. Why that pistol? It was one of two pistols that I had at the time, and the other was a Ruger Super Single Six.

Both were better options that a rolled up newspaper and yelling "No! Stop that!"

The .22lr is far from my first choice for a defensive pistol these days, but I would still deploy it before resorting to said rolled up newspaper and verbal commands.

Tamara
01-25-2012, 09:09 PM
The .22lr is far from my first choice for a defensive pistol these days, but I would still deploy it before resorting to said rolled up newspaper and verbal commands.

No doubt. A .22 beats a handful of nothin' any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

OTOH: I am reminded of somebody relating a tale of a friend of theirs, an older guy, who had been menaced by three young toughs in a roadhouse parking lot. The old guy busted one off from the High Standard .22WMR derringer in his pocket and the three punks decided to seek life elsewhere.

I told the friend relating this tale that it was a good thing his buddy was using a two shot derringer, because that way, if the three young guys hadn't elected to split at the sound of the first shot, he could have used the other barrel to put himself out of his misery after the inevitable curb-stomping he took following the unsuccessful bluff...

Thinking of the seven-on-one beating story up-forum, there are indeed situations where having no gun might be preferable to not having enough gun... :o

Al T.
01-25-2012, 09:31 PM
First rule of a gunfight - "have a gun".

HH6, if that Beretta 21 runs, it's the first one I've heard about. Any secrets to share? Lady friend had one, tried every trick in my (small) book to over come a lack of reliability...

HeadHunter
01-25-2012, 10:37 PM
HH6, if that Beretta 21 runs, it's the first one I've heard about. Any secrets to share? Lady friend had one, tried every trick in my (small) book to over come a lack of reliability...

Between my buddy, the women he has gotten started, me, and my late father, we have (9) 21As. They all run. Unfortunately, my brother has my Dad's gun now. Two of them have done duty on some of the Rogers drills. Most have the PIP sights and tool.

Magazines can be an issue so I number all of mine and have sold a couple that didn't work with my guns. Another possibility is to break the edge of the chamber mouth with emery cloth wrapped around a pencil.

Like any .22, they can be particular about ammo. When I first get them, I will fire 6-8 different types of high grade ammo, not Thunderbolts or Gulden Bullet, to find out what runs best. Federal Premium Gold Match HV Target (http://www.midwayusa.com/product/675253/federal-premium-gold-medal-target-ammunition-22-long-rifle-high-velocity-40-grain-lead-round-nose-box-of-50) is probably the all around best but you have to order it from Midway; WalMart doesn't carry it. Stingers tend to work well, as do Velocitors, which penetrate 17 inches of gelatin covered with four layers of denim.

http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Pocket%20Pistols/blocks.jpg

I am also pull maintenance on a regular basis. Part of my .22 range kit is a boresnake and a stiff .22 bore brush. Small .22 autos like this get the bore brush and boresnake approximately every 50 rounds. I re-lube them every 100.

Most people can't run these guns with a thumbs forward grip. The firing thumb knuckle rides too high and causes slide drag. You can get away with that on a centerfire but not a .22.

HeadHunter
01-25-2012, 10:39 PM
(Out of curiosity, what's the penalty time on the FAST for using a cartridge with less oomph than a 9x19? 'Cause I know I'd smoke my best time if I was running my 22/45... ;) )

I have not seen any caliber stipulation thus far. There's none on the target.

GJM
01-25-2012, 10:46 PM
I shot my 43C today for the first time today, and the sights were well regulated. Overall, it was a hoot, and I blasted thru 100 rounds as fast as I could reload the cylinder. The 351C was less fun, because the trigger is SO heavy. May need to call S&W and tell them either it needs to be lighter or traded on another 43C for my wife.

If a fellow wanted the best load for potting rabbits and birds, and be best possible for use as a BUG, what load would that be?

ToddG
01-25-2012, 10:47 PM
As a general test/drill, obviously one can shoot it with whatever gun one chooses. The skills it tests are certainly not caliber specific.

Having said that, while it's not become an issue yet, I imagine I'd have a hard time giving away a coin or pin to someone who shot it with something smaller than a 9mm (maybe .380) or .38 Special.

TGS
01-25-2012, 11:54 PM
If a fellow wanted the best load for potting rabbits and birds, and be best possible for use as a BUG, what load would that be?

GJM,

Take a look at Brassfetcher's section on .22 (http://brassfetcher.com/index_files/22LRHandgun.htm). It might help.

Nephrology
01-28-2012, 09:45 PM
As a general test/drill, obviously one can shoot it with whatever gun one chooses. The skills it tests are certainly not caliber specific.

Having said that, while it's not become an issue yet, I imagine I'd have a hard time giving away a coin or pin to someone who shot it with something smaller than a 9mm (maybe .380) or .38 Special.

Honestly based on most of the .380s I've given a whirl I'd say 9x19mm is probably gonna be easier anyway .

TR675
01-29-2012, 04:28 PM
Honestly based on most of the .380s I've given a whirl I'd say 9x19mm is probably gonna be easier anyway .

Yeah, if someone can do a sub-7 with an LCP they should get TWO coins.

Chuck Haggard
02-05-2012, 10:11 AM
I shot my 43C today for the first time today, and the sights were well regulated. Overall, it was a hoot, and I blasted thru 100 rounds as fast as I could reload the cylinder. The 351C was less fun, because the trigger is SO heavy. May need to call S&W and tell them either it needs to be lighter or traded on another 43C for my wife.

If a fellow wanted the best load for potting rabbits and birds, and be best possible for use as a BUG, what load would that be?


The Velocitors are my pick from my 317. They shoot to POA, and although they don't expand they are among the fastest .22lr rounds you can buy, and are still a 40gr bullet. And they are quite accurate. My 2nd choice is the Stingers.

From a rifle my choices might be different, depending on the target.



Completely "unscientific" type testing, but while the .25 tests better in gelatin I have notes that both of these .22s do better on hard targets. An example would be one day at the range I needed to pop some holes in a 55 gallon steel drum to make a new burn barrel. .25 FMJ from a Beretta went through the bottom of the barrel, but then when I tried to poke a few holes in the sides I got a small dent a a welt on my shin. Of course I tried it again to see if it was somehow a squib round, but no, I ended up doing a very short version of the river dance dodging another ricochet.
Stingers from a Beretta 21 and my 317 would poke right through the sides of the barrel and leave a dent on the far side.

What does this prove? Maybe nothing, but if I have to face shoot a bad guy with a micro caliber handgun I would prefer to be launching Velocitors or Stingers than .25acp FMJ.


On FAST with a .22 pistol;

I would think that hitting the reload might be far more difficult with a skinny little magazine being inserted into a skinny little mag well. That alone might negate the time advantage from the lack of recoil.

Tamara
02-06-2012, 11:34 AM
I would think that hitting the reload might be far more difficult with a skinny little magazine being inserted into a skinny little mag well. That alone might negate the time advantage from the lack of recoil.

Good point. That, and I still need to take that verdammt mag disconnect safety out of mine... (Also, my forward thumb has a tendency to foul the slide stop and prevent it from locking back.)

Still, I shoot it well enough that if it was all I had, I wouldn't feel unarmed with it. Just stuff it full of Velocitors and plan on going cyclic on the bad guy.

Doc_Glock
12-01-2016, 06:26 PM
A buddy of mine just equipped his ladyfriend with a Beretta 21A in .22LR (her choice). I did my Product Improvement Program for the sights and ejection tool. He has trained her to shoot business cards at 7 yards with it, which piques my interest in how well she can shoot the FAST with it.

Can you explain the what the bolded part means please? A blog post would be fine if it is useful to you. Thanks.

Malamute
12-01-2016, 08:53 PM
Can you explain the what the bolded part means please? A blog post would be fine if it is useful to you. Thanks.

I believe hes covered it in his blog. Doing a site specific google search may turn it up. Perhaps "ejection tool" site:https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress.com/

Another search term may be "old man gun" with the site specified again.

Edit: Or perhaps not. I didn't find it in a search. It may have been a thread somewhere else. I recall reading it, just not where...

Velo Dog
12-01-2016, 09:43 PM
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4090-Beretta-21A-Experiences

Doc_Glock
12-01-2016, 10:14 PM
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4090-Beretta-21A-Experiences

Thank you! Still interested in what he does to the sights.

Eric_L
12-01-2016, 10:28 PM
Thank you! Still interested in what he does to the sights.

I believe- blacken rear sight with sharpie. Front sight is either painted with nail polish over white enamel (Claude said he gets it at Home Depot- the white enamel, not the finger nail polish. In appliance section he wrote). OR a small piece of 3M reflective tape. Degrease front sight then affix tape. Actually sticks well. If you need a piece of tape pm me and I will mail it to you. It is on amazon. Below is one.

https://www.amazon.com/3M-Reflective-Tape-1-Inch-36-Inch/dp/B000BOB18A/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1480649108&sr=8-7&keywords=3M+reflective+tape

nycnoob
12-01-2016, 10:38 PM
Thank you! Still interested in what he does to the sights.

He Also widens the rear notch with a file.

Velo Dog
12-01-2016, 10:50 PM
HeadHunter also mentioned the Crimson Trace LG-490 Lasergrip

http://www.crimsontrace.com/01-1800

HeadHunter
12-02-2016, 03:05 PM
Can you explain the what the bolded part means please? A blog post would be fine if it is useful to you. Thanks.

I cut a shallow groove in the underside of the grip and put a piece of stiff wire in with the end folded at about a 30 degree angle below the grip.

BehindBlueI's
12-04-2016, 12:23 PM
Wow, necro-thread.

So, yeah, for random violence a starter gun would deal with the majority of situations. My own stats show that many robbery attempts are foiled by the sight and/or sound of a gun (ie, the victim missed fast enough to win) so caliber is completely irrelevant there. I still don't get that as a reason to carry a rimfire, and particularly not to use capacity as an argument to do so. If people flee as soon as the shooting starts, what good is capacity? They are either fleeing as soon as you pull the trigger or they aren't. If they aren't fleeing...well, I'd rather have a caliber that will more rapidly incapacitate. An officer here a few years ago was struck through the upper heart with a .380 and while the wound was non-survivable he did put effective rounds on the bad guy as he went down. An officer more years ago was shot at near contact with a .25 to the back of the head, thought he'd been punched, and subsequently killed his attacker in a gunfight.

On the civilian side, during a disturbance between neighbors, Hillbilly A and Hillbilly B are on their respective porches arguing over some hillbilly shit, yelling at each other across their yards. B begins to threaten A. A goes in the house, comes out with a revolver (.32, IIRC, I can look in the case file if anyone actually cares), shoots B in the gut, then goes back in his house when B falls down. B didn't fall, he took cover behind his porch. Once the shooting stopped, he goes to A's house, kicks in the door, and beats him unconscious. B then goes ahead and calls 911 to report he was shot. It ended up as a SWAT call out on A's house, because B neglected to mention he'd beaten the guy unconscious. Once A woke up, he complied with PA commands and stumbled out of his house with a face that looked like a burst tube of sausage.

On the other hand, my grandmother protected herself with a .22 revolver via a show of force. The ultra-tactical H&R 9-shot .22. We were hillbillies in the back end of nowhere, a literal shack in the woods. My grandfather had died, I'd left for the Army, and she was home alone when a drunken "friend" of my grandfather decided to show up and wanted a "date". She pointed the gun at him and told him if his foot hit the top step he was a dead man. He decided he was just joking and left. Note a few years before that my grandmother, using the same revolver, also shot a wild dog that was chasing her favorite rooster. On the run. Through the eye. At about 35y from the back porch, or at least that's where the carcass was when I got home from school. I firmly believe she'd have done the same to the drunken suitor had it come to that.

So all that typing later, I agree the .22 can be effective...but so can a starter pistol. I also agree that duty calibers are more effective in situations were terminal ballistics matter, and that those situations do exist (particularly if you are targeted, say a domestic situation gone awry, etc where the attacker is more dedicated). I see no compelling reason to carry a rim fire unless physical limitations demand it of you.

Hi-Point Aficionado
12-11-2016, 01:43 PM
I cut a shallow groove in the underside of the grip and put a piece of stiff wire in with the end folded at about a 30 degree angle below the grip.

I'll have to steal this idea for my wife's old pocket gun turned my range toy:

http://i.imgur.com/SpCt67al.jpg

BN
12-11-2016, 03:19 PM
I learned a new word in this thread. I thought you had a typo and misspelled efficiency. I had to look it up. ;)

Duelist
06-24-2018, 02:26 AM
I learned a new word in this thread. I thought you had a typo and misspelled efficiency. I had to look it up. ;)

Pistolforum: for teachers and students of the pistol, and some other stuff.