PDA

View Full Version : .22 Mag for self-defense concealed carry


cltinseattle
January 24, 2011, 12:19 PM
Hello. This question is not intended to start the age old "nothing smaller than a .380" or "nothing smaller than a .38 Spec" for self-defense question. What I'm actually wondering is what there is out there for decent .22 Mag concealable handguns these days. It seems like the manufacturers are making new handguns faster than I can keep up with them.

Just so you know, the person this will be for is a smaller female and I have had her try a .38 special (actually a .357 mag loaded with .38 special), a 9mm, and a .380 semi-auto. Of all of those she says the .380 is tolerable but she has arthritis and even the recoil of the .380 seems to be bothersome to her. She keeps asking about a .22 but I just don't feel comfortable recommending a .22LR for self-defense. I might feel better about a .22 Mag as long as it was comfortable for concealment but still had a long enough barrel to be accurate. Needs to have a good trigger too, some of the revolvers come with horrible triggers but a replacement trigger is not out of the question.

Oh - and if Crimson Trace makes sights for it then that's even better.

Gosh, that's not too much to ask for is it?
Thanks everyone.

Glenn E. Meyer
January 24, 2011, 12:28 PM
Most 22 or 22 mag revolvers do have crappy triggers. Lighten them may or may not work, you are to find the right ammo.

How about a 38 with wad cutters, cowboy loads or something very lightly recoiling? That's easy to do.

Or there are the 32s as there are very lighly recoiling loads. A 32 revolver isn't that common but they do exist.

booker_t
January 24, 2011, 12:33 PM
Kel-Tec PMR-30 in .22WMR, 30-round capacity semi-auto pistol.

http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/pistols/pmr-30/

A couple random thoughts:

1) .22WMR is loud, yea it's a lot smaller than a lot of other rounds out there, but it's loud and in a different way than 9mm, .357, .45 ACP, etc. If you're in a self-defense situation and are firing a .22WMR, you're likely going to discharge a series of four, five, or more of them, which could result in some hearing loss, moreso than two rounds of 9 - .45. Peak amplitude isn't what typically causes hearing damange, it is an integration, i.e., overall impulse (area under the curve) over time.

2) Rimfire cartridges have a significantly higher failure rate compared to centerfire, it's inherent in the method of initiation. I would not personally trust a rimfire round to save my life for this reason alone. There are also concerns about reliable feeding of a long, skinny cartridge like the .22WMR in a semiauto.

3) Depending on your location and how people dress, 40gr .22WMR rounds may have difficultly penetrating clothing and skin with sufficient energy to damage structures of the central nervous system, assuming they are on-target. Hence, the .22WMR round will not reliably incapacitate an attacker as will a round that penetrates deeper and delivers greater energy.

4) One more.. you can't dry-fire a rimfire pistol like you can a centerfire pistol. Dry-fire is one of the most important types of practice, especially for somebody who can't shoot a lot of rounds at the range too frequently.

Hope it helps. I agree with Glenn, a .38 special (+P if she can work up to it, at least for "carry" ammo) with wadcutters out of a 3" barrel on a metal frame may be the ticket.

nefprotector
January 24, 2011, 01:09 PM
I wouldnt recommend a .32 cal revolver. Ammo is hard to find. If you do find any it's .32 S&W Long, short @ $30 a box for round nose lead. Watered down cowboy action rounds


I wouldnt be afraid to carry a .22 mag for defense.

CWKahrFan
January 24, 2011, 01:34 PM
The S&W 351 PD in .22mag is kinda cool... 7 rds. scandium aluminum 11 oz.

Here's an old related thread:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193289

Other links:

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_764925_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_766363_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

LordTio3
January 24, 2011, 01:36 PM
I'm not saying you couldn't do the job with a .22 magnum, because I know a whole lot of people who could. I just don't like the rimfire cartridge for self defense. I've had enough of them spit on me to tell myself that I'll never trust rimfire weapons to save my life.

However, that's ME. If you've had good experiences with them, and you buy good quality ammunition, then I'd say go for it. Chances are just pulling it out will diffuse a situation anyway. Personally, if I HAD to choose to use a .22 Magnum for self defense, I'd make it a revolver, so if I did have a mis-fire, I could just pull the trigger on a new cartridge instead of running a clearing drill.

Stay safe.

~LT

Tom Servo
January 24, 2011, 01:58 PM
Kel-Tec PMR-30 in .22WMR, 30-round capacity semi-auto pistol.
I've had the opportunity to shoot one, and I cannot in any way recommend it for self-defense on the basis of unreliability. I don't blame Kel-Tec so much as I blame the loading. The long case and slow powder burn of the .22 Magnum don't seem to cycle the action on an automatic very well. I had the same issues with an Automag II back in the Wang Chung days.

As a self-defense loading in general, you could do worse. It certainly dumps a significant amount of energy. That's not the whole equation, but a couple of those will do enough damage to discourage most attackers.

I second the S&W 351. It's a light gun with good sights that's easy to control.

jmortimer
January 24, 2011, 02:05 PM
The .22 mag is really loud and not much on the receiving end. Not much better than the .22 LR - Here are results from Brass Fetcher and Walther P22 and I would get the Walther better than nothing. http://www.brassfetcher.com/WaltherP22test.html
12" plus of penetration and no expansion.

Aguila Blanca
January 24, 2011, 02:35 PM
Taurus has a number of .22 WMR revolvers. Given the rate of incidence of duds with rimfire, I would very much suggest a double action revolver with .22 Magnum.

http://www.taurususa.com/gun-selector-results.cfm

http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesThumbs/941B2.jpg http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesThumbs/941SS2.jpg

http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesThumbs/941SS2UL.jpg http://www.taurususa.com/images/imagesThumbs/941SS4.jpg

booker_t
January 24, 2011, 02:46 PM
Practically speaking, if I were to carry a .22WMR for SD, it would be one of those revolvers, and it would be a 'gut gun.' Wouldn't really consider using it beyond contact distance, unless absolutely necessary.

Is she prepared for that, mentally?

Jim March
January 24, 2011, 03:35 PM
There's been several new 22Mag guns introduced of late, including a 10-shooter by Taurus built on the Tracker frame, more J-class guns by S&W and Taurus and of course the Kel-tec 30rd "redneck cheapo clone of the FN 5.7" in 22Magnum :). (That latter apparently works pretty good...)

All these new guns have attracted the ammo makers. Up until now ALL 22Mag ammo has been optimized for rifle use, which is why the notorious fireballs. Speer and Hornady are each looking to correct that:

http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/short_brl.aspx

http://www.hornady.com/store/22-WMR-45gr-Critical-Defense

Of the two I think the Speer is more interesting. Speer owns CCI, so these are almost certainly CCI shells and primers...and CCI rimfire ignition is by far, without question the best in the world. Add a good Speer Gold Dot projectile and yeah, we maybe got ourselves a winner.

Seems very likely to me that both these rounds will top 32ACP, 32S&W/Long family and quite possibly 32H&RMag effectiveness. The 327Federal will curb-stomp them of course, but...that's a damned potent round, deep into 9mm and even low-end 357 territory.

The Kel-Tec 30rd monster has real potential as a "granny gun", something for the very recoil shy. Ditto any of the steel-framed revolvers in 22Mag.

And this new ammo might help.

booker_t
January 24, 2011, 03:37 PM
^^^^^^

This is why I read message boards, for experts like Mr. March who give their experience and knowledge away.

carguychris
January 24, 2011, 03:41 PM
I wouldnt recommend a .32 cal revolver. Ammo is hard to find. If you do find any it's .32 S&W Long, short @ $30 a box for round nose lead. Watered down cowboy action rounds
I disagree.

1) .32 Long is quite popular outside the USA and can be readily mail-ordered online for ~$15-$17/50rds in quantity. Like other relatively unpopular small-caliber cartridges such as .25ACP, it's expensive only because local gun stores overcharge for it since it's a slow seller.

2) Commercial .22WMR rounds are loaded with bullets that are ill-suited for SD against humans; they either won't expand at pistol velocities or will violently disintegrate without penetrating adequately. You're better off going the non-expanding route, and that said, a larger hole usually beats a smaller hole.

3) It's designed to work from a short barrel and lacks the .22WMR's tendency towards ear-splitting noise and blinding muzzle flash from a pistol-length barrel.

4) It's centerfire and therefore more reliable. It's also less dependent on a heavy mainspring- and therefore a heavy DA trigger pull- for consistent ignition in a revolver.

5) It lacks the .22WMR's reputation for fouling revolver cylinders.

That said, .32 Long still comes up short versus cartridges in the .380ACP or .38Spl class, but I'd take a .32 Long revolver over a .22WMR revolver any day of the week. :)

Onward Allusion
January 24, 2011, 03:53 PM
Jim March
<SNIP>
All these new guns have attracted the ammo makers. Up until now ALL 22Mag ammo has been optimized for rifle use, which is why the notorious fireballs. Speer and Hornady are each looking to correct that:
http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/short_brl.aspx
http://www.hornady.com/store/22-WMR-...itical-Defense
Of the two I think the Speer is more interesting. Speer owns CCI, so these are almost certainly CCI shells and primers...and CCI rimfire ignition is by far, without question the best in the world. Add a good Speer Gold Dot projectile and yeah, we maybe got ourselves a winner.

^^^^^
This is VERY good to know. Thank you!

Aguila Blanca
January 24, 2011, 05:21 PM
Seems very likely to me that both these rounds will top 32ACP, 32S&W/Long family and quite possibly 32H&RMag effectiveness.
Yeah, yeah. But will it top the potent .25 Auto as the "go to" self defense round of choice?

Jim March
January 24, 2011, 05:55 PM
carguychris: you didn't see my post, did you? We now have two sources of 22Mag designed for handgun barrels. If they work, and both are from VERY reputable sources, then more or less all of your complaints should be fixed.

Glenn E. Meyer
January 24, 2011, 07:28 PM
Still for someone with arthritis - check the trigger pull on the DA revolvers. They may not work.

jmortimer
January 24, 2011, 09:15 PM
"Seems very likely to me that both these rounds will top 32ACP, 32S&W/Long family and quite possibly 32H&RMag effectiveness"With approximately 100 ft lbs neither of the dedicated .22 mag handgun rounds will come close to the 32 H&R mag. Let's not get carried away. The H&R .32 mag is way more gun. Even the .32 ACP is "more gun."

skydiver3346
January 24, 2011, 09:34 PM
Sure it will work for self defense if that is what you choose to use for that purpose. Especially if loaded with the newer Federal 50 grain hollow points. Tested them and they are awesome for a small .22 caliber handgun. I have a .22 mag revolver myself (S&W model 51 w/4" barrel) and it is very accurate and reliable with nice trigger pull as well.
Main thing is, if you have confidence in it and practice shooting it on a regular basis it will do the job. Having a .38 or .357 that you don't want to shoot or practice with will do you not much good when things go south. Personally, I like a .45acp but that is another story. However, I would still feel okay with a .22 magnum if I was familiar with it and practiced shooting it regularly. But that goes for any handgun for that matter. Good luck

Jim March
January 24, 2011, 09:56 PM
Jmortimer: take another look. Start with the Speer - 100ft/lbs of energy all right, but look at the test barrel: 1.9", and almost 1,200fps.

22Mag from a handgun gains close to 100fps per inch of barrel. Shoot them out of a 4.5" Kel-tec or a 5.5" Ruger Single Six and the performance does indeed start to run into 32H&R territory, fast - 174ft/lbs energy from 1,400fps, and that's *conservative* out of a 4.5" tube. It'll probably do better than that.

And then there's effectiveness. At those speeds, expansion of a quality hollowpoint is virtually certain. So is decent penetration.

22Mag from a serious barrel length (usually a Ruger Single Six) has long been viewed as "damned effective medicine". These loads take that to a whole new level.

jmortimer
January 24, 2011, 10:11 PM
I understand your point but will the dedicated handgun .22 mags pick up steam like a "regular .22 mag? There are examples of ammunition slowing down in longer barrels. There is not much difference between the FN 5.7 and the same round in the FN "Five Seven" pistol and the P90 Carbine. No one likes the .22 mag more than I do but I would like to see ballistics of the new .22 mag ammunition in longer tubes. Buffalo Bore 75 grain hard cast FN .32 ACP in a 2" barrel gets 850 fps and 120 ft lbs. A 3" barrel gets you 1,000 fps http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=132

arcticap
January 25, 2011, 04:04 AM
If the lady has arthritis in her fingers, then she may not be able to operate the trigger of a revolver or some double action semi-auto's.
It's important that she likes shooting it enough to become good with it. And no other round promotes fun and enjoyable practice like the .22LR.
There's so many different .22 pistols to choose from verses the .22 mag. that the .22LR might be the best way to go.
Find her what she likes and then teach her how to shoot it well.
Most .22's can be fired as fast as one can pull the trigger.
And proficiency helps to develop accuracy.
No one wants to spend a lot of money to buy .22 magnum ammo for practice which is quit pricey. Just stick with the .22LR and then let her shoot reliable hyper-velocity rounds for self-defense.
Meanwhile there's standard velocity type rounds for practice.
And if she ever needs to use it a .22LR pistol can be really loud when fired indoors, especially some of the hot .22LR rounds when fired from a short barrel.
I listened to a guy shoot some Aguila Maximum ammo from a Walther P22 short barrel and there was some seriously loud blasting. I would have hated to not have had any ear protection on. Plus they come in different pink patterns that appeal to many ladies. And they can also be easily outfitted with a laser sight on their accessory rail.

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2009/jun/16/widow-pulls-pink-pistol-handyman-she-believes-was-/

nefprotector
January 25, 2011, 02:50 PM
"That said, .32 Long still comes up short versus cartridges in the .380ACP or .38Spl class, but I'd take a .32 Long revolver over a .22WMR revolver any day of the week."

Different strokes for different folks. Where do you find .32 S&W Long for $15? Pray tell...

And If anybody has a link as where to find .32 H&R Magnums "IN STOCK". I surely would appreciate it. I can see it now. Federal Premiums aka Not In Stock, Sold out, No Backorders.

carguychris
January 25, 2011, 04:06 PM
carguychris: you didn't see my post, did you? We now have two sources of 22Mag designed for handgun barrels. If they work, and both are from VERY reputable sources, then more or less all of your complaints should be fixed.
True, I did not check the links before posting, my bad. :o I'm curious about this too; the loads seem effective on paper, but I wonder if they'll solve the fouling problems.
Where do you find .32 S&W Long for $15? Pray tell...
$13.95 actually. :) AIM usually has several brands but they must have sold out of everything but Prvi Partizan.

http://www.aimsurplus.com/catalog.aspx?groupid=92&name=.32+S%26W+Long

I paid $12.95/50rds locally for Aguila in early 2009 before I sold the last .32 Long revolver I owned. You just need to know where to look. As I mentioned earlier, some gun stores overcharge for the obscure stuff because it sells slowly. OTOH other gun stores charge low prices because they want customers who like old guns to come back.

In my experience, if the odor is cosmoline is strong and there are lots of rusty vintage lever-action, rolling-block, and muzzleloading rifles hung on the walls, the store is more likely to sell it cheap. :D

threegun
January 26, 2011, 11:31 AM
I have a standing order for 7 kel-tec PMR30's. Five of these from family members who hunt. Seems the 22mag is considered ideal for dispatching wild hogs wounded or bayed up by the dogs. I know hogs are alot tougher than a human. So maybe this round will prove effective on the streets. Time will tell.

P.S. One of them is destined for my safe.

bikerbill
January 26, 2011, 12:28 PM
I carry an NAA Pug .22Mag on dog walks in my quiet little Texas town, but I wouldn't carry it for any other occasion ... .22Mag can certainly kill you, but a .38 or 9mm can be carried in a pretty small, light package and those calibers are more likely to be useful in an SD situation ... I agree that rimfires are more likely to misfire; I have that problem all the time with my 22a .22lr ... but the Pug has never had a misfire, maybe .22mags are better made (they ought to be, they cost enough more than .22lr) ...

and no offense, but I wouldn't try shooting any hog I've ever seen with a .22mag, unless it was tied up and 90 percent dead already ... those puppies can take a lot of damage from bigger rounds; I wouldn't go after one with anything less than a .357magnum ...

NightSleeper
January 26, 2011, 05:12 PM
I like the .22 Win mag. Mine's a Taurus 941 (8-shot) DA revolver. There's no recoil so your friend will probably like it. It does have a heavy DA trigger though. Inexperienced shooters may not like it. But you can always get some trigger work done.

Another option would be for a .32 ACP semi-auto. This is another round I really like due to low recoil. I have a Walther PPK/s (one of my favorite shooters) and a Beretta Tomcat. The Tomcat makes a great purse gun because of it's size, and the fact that it has a tilt-up barrel. Your friend wouldn't have to rack the slide to load it, a bonus for those with arthritis. There's a lot of different .32 semi-autos out there, look around for the right one.

Another option of course is to have your friend practice practice and practice some more on the .380 until she gets used to the recoil.

Double J
January 27, 2011, 01:57 PM
Think I'd favor a revolver such as the Ruger single six and a shoulder rig. I like squeezing a bit more accuracy rather than spray and prey. The .22 Magnum is capable of fine accuracy. Penetration is far superior to a .380ACP, .38 Spec. or a .45ACP. Yes, the .22 Mag. is hard on the ears, but that will not be a concern if the gun has to be used in self defense. For a smaller package a nine shot double action revolver with .22 Stingers will work. I think the idea here is to have personal protection, not an assualt package.

ronto
January 27, 2011, 03:25 PM
The 22WMR was designed for use in a RIFLE (period)

BGutzman
January 27, 2011, 03:53 PM
Rimfire is a poor choice for SD but hey its your life, maybe you can throw the weapon or something, use it as a club if it fails.

Aguila Blanca
January 27, 2011, 04:55 PM
Rimfire is a poor choice for SD but hey its your life, maybe you can throw the weapon or something, us it as a club if it fails.
I think the original poster is well aware that .22 Mag is not as effective for self defense as .44 Mag, but he explained the reasons why the "heavy" calibers are not appropriate in this case. Your mileage may vary, but IMHO a .22 Mag far outweighs a pointy stick and/or harsh words for someone who physicaly can't handle a big bore blaster.

BGutzman
January 27, 2011, 05:25 PM
I wasn't proposing a 44 Mag, what I was proposing is a Rim fire is not as dependable as a centerfire round. Seriously shoot whatever a person likes no problem its not my hide on the line.

I credit the thread author for acknowledging Rim fire is less reliable and that he doesnt see it as being the best choice but it is his choice.

However none of that negates the fact that it is a rim fire and I feel that regardless of you body capacity to carry or use whatever you owe it to yourself to get a gun (or in this case ammo) that will reliably shoot when you pull the trigger.

Go for 17 HMR but have a plan for if it fails. ie club or whatever you can imagine works for you. :)

jimbob86
January 27, 2011, 05:43 PM
The perfect "Grandma Gun":

http://www.impactguns.com/store/86B210.html

Almost 24 oz. empty, and chambered in .380=very little recoil

Tip up barrel=not having to wrestle with the slide if you don't want to. (Though that is not difficult if Grandma knows what she is doing ..... and the Cornered Cat 'splains it pretty well if she does not:

http://www.corneredcat.com/RunGun/rack.aspx

nefprotector
January 27, 2011, 06:30 PM
Well I see that S&H is $15.99. so $13.99 + 15.99 = $29.88 as I said $30 a box.

tileguy
January 28, 2011, 01:01 PM
i would carry a 22 mag for sd. if thats all i can handle. to the people who say its not enough power think again. my buddy who does custom slaughter uses a 22mag 90% of the time and drops 800 to 1800 lb bulls or steers with one well placed shot. i normally carry a g30 but i am still healthy i also have a colt vest pocket in 25acp for those days i am just wearing board shorts.

bigalshootmupper
January 28, 2011, 10:26 PM
I like to carry my NAA Black Widow in 22mag. It has a 2" barrel. Sure, it is not as powerful as my 40S&W, but it fits in my shorts pocket and no one ever knows I am carrying it. Dry phone bullets are penetrated 4-5". I think that is enough to do the job if the shot is well placed. Also, I have never had a single failure with this gun with many types of ammo. I have shot many armidillos, one shot one kill every time.

I definitely will look at the Hornady 45gr ammo. Right now I use the 45gr Winchester Dynapoint. I might chronograph it this weekend and post back.

threegun
January 30, 2011, 07:03 AM
and no offense, but I wouldn't try shooting any hog I've ever seen with a .22mag, unless it was tied up and 90 percent dead already ... those puppies can take a lot of damage from bigger rounds; I wouldn't go after one with anything less than a .357magnum ...


While I would agree from my limited expierience with the above quote I have been assured by experts in the sport of hog hunting that it is perfect for the task described.

Like the tireless debate over cartridge stopping power, this appears to be another case where shot placement is critical.

Some observations on the upside for the pmr30.

low recoil (for those with sensetivities)
increased power from 22lr (the only option for those listed above)
fast followups with a very deep reserve

Considering the job of a cw carrier is to simply survive an armed confrontation it would seem that the pmr30 is well suited for this.

nate45
January 30, 2011, 09:41 AM
Thanks for the info on the Speer Gold Dot .22 Mag (http://www.speer-ammo.com/products/short_brl.aspx). I was not aware of it. Should make a good load for my 3.5 inch S&W Model 51-1.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/nate45auto/100_0183-2-1.jpg?t=1296398376

the357plan
February 1, 2011, 02:46 AM
Once pulled out my Single Six and shot a water logged 4x4 fence post. The 22 Mag round just popped right on through. So I decided to see how big of a hole I could blow out of the backside with my Blackhawk. I was shocked. The 357 Mag round never made it through the fence post.

So I'm guessing the 22 Mag might be good for poking holes in your attacker.

But I'm also guessing that my 380 will deliver a bit more shock, even if it doesn't penetrate as far.

P.S. With 6" barrels, my 22 Mag revolvers don't make good CCWs.

Crazy88Fingers
February 1, 2011, 03:33 AM
A .22 mag makes a loud noise that will attract attention, can be very easy to conceal, and probably hurts like hell. Not to mention its mere presence may be able to settle a self-defense situation.

North American Arms (NAA) makes a whole line of mini-revolvers chambered in various .22 calibers.

MCCALL911
February 1, 2011, 04:20 AM
I can only comment on the .32 as I have no experience with the .22 Magnum.

As much as I like the .32 S&W Long for its accuracy, I just don't have a great deal of confidence in it for SD use. That's mainly because of its slow bullet. I don't know if the bullet could be counted on to have enough momentum to get to a vital area in case it encountered bone.

Manco
February 1, 2011, 04:43 AM
For those who have difficulty pulling a heavy DA revolver trigger, would pulling the trigger with both index fingers (one on each hand) be so terrible? Having an SA mode (exposed hammer) would take care of the potential need to shoot single-handed (probably not that advisable with these folks in any case).

IntenseJ
February 1, 2011, 05:10 AM
"I carry an NAA Pug .22Mag on dog walks in my quiet little Texas town, but I wouldn't carry it for any other occasion ... .22Mag can certainly kill you...)

I was wondering if anyone was going to bring up NAA. I got a NAA widow maker with the folding grip/clip a couple years ago. I LOVE that little gun. Perfect for things like dog walks or trips around town where you don't intend to end up in a situation where you'd need a gun, but if you do you've got it in your pocket/on your belt, and it's no bigger than a cell phone. Shockingly accurate too for a little barrel like that.

mes228
February 1, 2011, 06:28 AM
I am not recommending a .22 mag for self defense. I do believe that it is woefully under estimated as a pistol round. My personal experience says the paper "figures" on the .22 mag is not the whole story. The gentleman in a prior post wrote of shooting through a fence post with his and the failure of a .357 mag. With a .22 mag round from a Ruger Single Six (4 5/8 inch barrel). I've had a similar experience shooting a cast steel sign. A 38 Special +P would only leave a gray spot on it. A .22 mag round would penetrate it easily. Anything is deadly if it will penetrate to the "vitals" of a creature. I've killed large whitetail deer with a .22 mag pistol. A youthful, stupid, illegal act that I would not repeat today. However, at 16 and a farm boy - if it "got up" and stopped long enough for me to get a bead on it I'd probably shoot it. Statistics and paper power equations are not the real world. I like the .22 mag from my real world experience with it.

egor20
February 1, 2011, 10:12 PM
I was just over on Cheaper than Dirt;

North American Arms Wasp Snub Revolver
.22 Long Rifle and .22 Magnum
1-5/8" Barrel 5 Rounds
Rubber Grips
Stainless Finish
Price: $248.89

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/69891-1.html

mjbskwim
February 4, 2011, 03:01 AM
All this great info and not a one person talking about shot placement?

IF the lady has a 357/686 S&W and can't hit anything with it because she can't really lift it to aim it,the gun is useless.
Same with any gun someone is afraid of.

If I have to shoot someone with my Buckmark in 22lr (and 22mag is WAY more potent than a 22lr) ,and I put all 10 round into the chest cavity,the person will go down.
Period.
I can shoot it that well and ten rounds will destroy and stop most organs functioning.
In the forehead they will most definitely stop brain function.

You always want to use the biggest (practical) caliber you can shoot accurately and consistently,(consistently accurate?) If this is a 22lr in a 8 shot revolver,it is a very fine defense weapon.
I would definitely trust a 22mag S&W (don't like tauruses) with my life.Looking to pick one up too.

Glenn E. Meyer
February 4, 2011, 11:44 AM
Hey, I got mine for about $100 cheaper years ago. :D

I also have the NAA 22S - it's so cute!!

It's a Bug's bug!

S_Constitutionist
February 7, 2011, 11:30 AM
I vote for something like the .32 ACP Beretta.

You just cant chance it with rimfire ignition IMO....

ripnbst
February 7, 2011, 12:48 PM
If you want something with a great trigger how about a 1911 chambered in .22WMR? I don't know about WMR but I know that in LR they are starting to sprout up.

bighead46
February 7, 2011, 02:59 PM
I run a trapline. I need 22LR solids. If I shoot a coyote through the lungs with a 22LR hollow point it blows a 1" to 1 1/2" hole out the other side and there is a lot of blood under the hide on the far side that making skinning the yote a PITA. Yotes are a PITA to skin anyway. In any event- if it is summer and the perp has light clothes on- I think a 22 magnum ought to work- not as good for sure as the big stuff but it should be okay. If it is winter and heavy clothes, etc- then go for a head shot. They shoot hogs and gators in the head with 22LR's and they're dead before they hit the ground.
The 22, not just for squirrels :D

Ben Towe
February 7, 2011, 05:16 PM
As someone's signature says on here... "A hit with .45 beats a hit with a .22 every time. A hit with a .22 beats a miss with a .50 BMG every time." Any gun is better than no gun. Let her use what she can use. I would feel much safer if she had to back my play with a .22 she was comfortable with than a .357 she was afraid of.

Rufus T Firefly
February 12, 2011, 10:50 PM
Let's all forget caliber for a moment. We are going thru a situation similar to yours. If she is comfortable with a 22, go with it. Try to move up gradually. Even a bad 22 is better than a great plan on paper and no protection.
Why do I feel like this? I have a friend with the same RA as you talk about. She has used a 22. She is comfortable with that rather than nothing.

I like a 9mm. I certainly would not stand in front of someone with a 22 and let them fire while I tell them how ineffective it is. I do understand certain calibers are better. I just think given a certain situation anything is better than nothing.

My 2 cents. It is worth what I charged you for it and no more. It is your decision. Best of Luck.

milkrun49
June 16, 2012, 03:08 PM
For the last 12 years of my 30 years on the police force I have carried my American Arms. 22 mag every day while working. I called it my "Get The Hell Off Me" gun. Now that Hornaty has their new V-Max round out I love it even more. I have taken it to the police range and shot everything I could come up with. Their new 30 gr. Round with 2200 fps out of a rifle does wonders out of my 1 1/8 barrel. Their polymer tip kills a 2x4. Has to do damage to a bad guy. Still love my Sig 220 though.

bikerbill
June 17, 2012, 02:04 PM
Hey Milkrun, wondering if you have your rounds confused ... Hornady's new Critical Defense FTX is the one with the plugged tip, it's 45gr. In a magazine test it did over 1,000 fps from a one-inch barrel ... I think they do make a 30gr rd, but it's for squirrels and plinking, the FTX is far superior for "getting somebody off" you, IMHO ... If you're looking for some alternatives, Speer has a 40gr Gold Dot JHP for .22mag ... and Winchester has also joined the club, tho I haven't seen their rounds in stores yet ... have fired both the Hornady and Speer from my NAA Pug and both are very accurate at 7yds with no recoil to speak of ...

dayman
June 17, 2012, 04:01 PM
I don't think anyone can argue that the .22 is a great round for dispatching game/slaughtering livestock, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good SD choice.
I'd repeat what someone else already said about trying a lighter shooting 38spcl first. Or try a sp101. They weight about 14lbs and as such soak up far more recoil than the air-weight j-frames.
That being said if all she can handle is .22 it's far better than nothing.
I'd go with one of the j-frame size Tauri - or one of the S&W's if you can find it. I definitely think that with rimfire you'd want to go with a double action revolver. If you have a misfire, just pull the trigger again.

scrubcedar
June 17, 2012, 05:04 PM
I've shot thousands of 22mag rounds out of my Single Six. As I've stated before I was perfectly comfortable carrying it as a defense against Cougars. I've seen the effect of this round downrange on various objects and can personally testify that it penetrates better than any non-magnum round I've seen. I know that's a strong statement but while my buddies were moving upward in caliber I kept the same gun. I think most of you can guess the result of that, I ended up more accurate, faster, etc. THAT is the whole point here. I could reliably and quickly place my shot in a VERY small area. In short my shots were more likely to kill than theirs. Get her a high capacity 22mag revolver, run a few thousand 22lrs through it, stand back and let HER defend YOU:D

scrubcedar
June 17, 2012, 05:22 PM
Here's another thought that I'm sure will rile up a few people here. If the gun I'm shooting has allowed me to practice that much and get that good and the bad guy in front of me has a short range weapon (knife, club metal bar etc.) do I need to kill him? On my worst day at self defense ranges I could keep all six shots inside of a quarter with my Ruger. Knee capping a bad guy no problem. Before anybody starts to inform me you can't shoot accurately when you have Adrenaline in your system keep two things in mind, I've made two different headshots on rattlesnakes about to strike in those type of conditions, and I'm a grouchy old retired night shift nurse who has started IV's in the middle of coding patients who were more dead than alive at 3AM in semi darkness. I'm not superhuman. Both things were a result of enough practice to make what you're doing instinctive.

HALL,AUSTIN
June 17, 2012, 09:47 PM
On the caliber note... Ya,.22 is small, but would you stand at arm distance and take a few .22 to the chest, neck, or head? I wouldnt. Plus most crime is based on how easy it is to commit. Most women are an easy target, but once they pull a gun, grandma isnt an easy target now.
I say .22lr is better than a kick or bite. If you want to test this then take some 6x6 and hit it till your blue in the face. Now shoot it with even .22lr promise you will think differently. (Except you Mr. Norris, you dont count)

Frank Ettin
June 18, 2012, 10:19 AM
Remember that the goal is to quickly stop an assailant before he can hurt you (or someone else). So the real question is how quickly and reliably being shot with a particular cartridge will force an attacker to stop whatever he is doing to try to hurt you (or someone else).

So while a .22 can certainly kill someone; but whether, if he's attacking you, a .22 will stop him quickly enough to keep him from hurting you badly is another question entirely.

There are four ways in which shooting someone stops him:

psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."
massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function
breaking major skeletal support structures
damaging the central nervous system.

Depending on someone just giving up because he's been shot is iffy. Probably most fights are stopped that way, but some aren't; and there are no guarantees.

Breaking major skeletal structures can quickly impair mobility. But if the assailant has a gun, he can still shoot. And it will take a reasonably powerful round to reliably penetrate and break a large bone, like the pelvis.

Hits to the central nervous system are sure and quick, but the CNS presents a small and uncertain target. And sometimes significant penetration will be needed to reach it.

The most common and sure physiological way in which shooting someone stops him is blood loss -- depriving the brain and muscles of oxygen and nutrients, thus impairing the ability of the brain and muscles to function. Blood loss is facilitated by (1) large holes causing tissue damage; (2) getting the holes in the right places to damage major blood vessels or blood bearing organs; and (3) adequate penetration to get those holes into the blood vessels and organs which are fairly deep in the body. The problem is that blood loss takes time. People have continued to fight effectively when gravely, even mortally, wounded. So things that can speed up blood loss, more holes, bigger holes, better placed holes, etc., help.

So as a rule of thumb --

More holes are better than fewer holes.
Larger holes are better than smaller holes.
Holes in the right places are better than holes in the wrong places.
Holes that are deep enough are better than holes that aren't.
There are no magic bullets.

The bottom line is that a lower power cartridge with a smaller caliber bullet will make smaller holes and may not be able to as reliably penetrate to where those holes need to be to be most effective.

Or to put it another way, why would anyone think that a .22 will be enough when sometimes a .357 Magnum isn't necessarily enough. LAPD Officer Stacy Lim (http://www.lapdonline.org/inside_the_lapd/content_basic_view/27327#Stacy%20Lim) was shot in the chest with a .357 Magnum and still ran down her attacker, returned fire, killed him, survived, and ultimately was able to return to duty.

BGutzman
June 18, 2012, 11:20 AM
Im not being overly critical but text doesnt convey tone... I never understand the thinking that 22 anything is a good choice for anything but small game, targets and plinking.

By default most self defense situations are very, very close ranged affairs where stopping the threat is at a premium and time is very short and finite... Its your life, carry what you will but I would never recommend 22 for a self defense anything.

pax
June 18, 2012, 07:08 PM
Here's another thought that I'm sure will rile up a few people here. If the gun I'm shooting has allowed me to practice that much and get that good and the bad guy in front of me has a short range weapon (knife, club metal bar etc.) do I need to kill him? On my worst day at self defense ranges I could keep all six shots inside of a quarter with my Ruger.

Legally, it does not matter if you aim at his upper center chest, at his cerebral cortex, at his pelvis, at his kneecap, or at his right big toe. In EVERY case, when you use a firearm, you are using lethal force.

Morally and practically, the law is written that way because any time you launch a bullet at someone, you run a strong risk of either killing them or crippling them for life. This is true even if you aim at some "non-essential" body part and hit exactly what you aim at.

If you are not at peace with the idea of killing someone who is trying to kill you, then carrying a firearm is not for you.

pax

jason_iowa
June 18, 2012, 07:17 PM
I would try a 38 in a poly frame yes it is lighter but it also flexes and in my experience reduces felt recoil more then the weight of a steel frame.

I would never recommend anything smaller then a 38 and personally would never carry anything less then 357 mag for SD. Hope you find something that strikes the right balance.

scrubcedar
June 21, 2012, 12:38 AM
I agree pax that the moment you start carrying a ccw, let alone draw it, you should be resigned to the thought of killing with it. While I respect your experience with firearms and see this as undeniable truth, I may have a little more insight into what happens to humans after they kill another human. In 20 years of spinal cord and brain injury rehab nursing I saw hundreds of veterans as well as normal everyday joes off the street after they had killed someone. In most cases it mattered surprisingly little whether the other persons death was justified, it was still devastating. A huge number of veterans ended up with us because of their substance abuse problems led to horrible accidents. I'm not shooting his knee for him, I'm shooting it because I know for sure what it's going to do to me. That being said, me or my loved ones dead, or me carrying a burden? Easy simple decision.

btmj
June 21, 2012, 08:23 AM
For some people (i.e. my 78 year old Mother in Law), their physical condition severely limits their choice of weapon.

My Mother in Law has arthritis in her hands, and she has lost hand strength over the years. She used to be quite nimble and able, and has enthusiastically played golf her whole life.

She can't load rounds into a magazine. She has difficulty racking a slide... therefore, she shoots a revolver. But she doesn't have the hand strength to shoot DA for more than a few rounds, even when using a S&W K-22 with a fabulous trigger. Her preferred method is to shoot SA, with a two handed grip, and use the left hand to cock the hammer. She is actually pretty good shooting this way. It has to be a fairly light weight weapon, and low recoil. For her, the choice came down to a 22 LR revolver.

After reading this thread, I may see if she is interested in a 22 mag revolver.

zukiphile
June 21, 2012, 08:44 AM
Remember that the goal is to quickly stop an assailant before he can hurt you (or someone else).

That can be a goal, but but on the way to it, other matters must be addressed first. The most prominant of those is finding an item a person can and will shoot. I am positive that my wife could not safely shoot a .357 snub nose revolver, so I wouldn't suggest that she carry one.

Or to put it another way, why would anyone think that a .22 will be enough when sometimes a .357 Magnum isn't necessarily enough.


Because "enough" at the receiving end may be "too much" at the delivering end. I would imagine that a gentle .22lr semi-automatic would be better protection for a woman than, say, pepper spray.


One topic I've never seen addressed is whether simply having a firearm, even one that may not be the most effective, would change the way a woman non-verbally communicates weakness to a predator. As I understand the predatory mindset, it is the signal of weakness that draws predation, and knowing that she may have options might influence her demeanor.

OldMarksman
June 21, 2012, 09:59 AM
Posted by scrubcedar: If the gun I'm shooting has allowed me to practice that much and get that good and the bad guy in front of me has a short range weapon (knife, club metal bar etc.) do I need to kill him?Pax has addressed the deadly force issue.
On my worst day at self defense ranges I could keep all six shots inside of a quarter with my Ruger.What you can do on a stationary target at the range has nothing at all to do with where you bullets wii strike a rapidly moving attacker.

Knee capping a bad guy no problem. Ya think?

Madcap_Magician
June 21, 2012, 10:06 AM
Understand that caliber is not the only or even necessarily the biggest determinant of recoil. Recoil between different guns in the same caliber and different loads in the same gun varies wildly, too.

A 4" DA/SA K-frame (S&W) or Six (Ruger) or the equivalent with 148-gr. wadcutters is an extremely light-recoiling load, but effective for self-defense.

Some 9mm guns like the M&P have a reputation for being light recoiling for caliber.

Also full-size guns like the Sig P226 or Beretta M9.

Frank Ettin
June 21, 2012, 10:06 AM
...Because "enough" at the receiving end may be "too much" at the delivering end. I would imagine that a gentle .22lr semi-automatic would be better protection for a woman than, say, pepper spray.... There may of course be circumstances in which a small caliber firearm must be pressed into service for self defense. If all one has at a time of need, one will need to make do with what he has. If one has physical limitations, one must make do with what he can manage.

But one also needs to be realistic about the limitations of that cartridge choice. He is trading possible effectiveness for other attributes -- such as that it's what he has or it's all that he can manage.

scrubcedar
June 21, 2012, 07:02 PM
Quote:
Posted by scrubcedar: If the gun I'm shooting has allowed me to practice that much and get that good and the bad guy in front of me has a short range weapon (knife, club metal bar etc.) do I need to kill him?

Pax has addressed the deadly force issue.

Quote:
On my worst day at self defense ranges I could keep all six shots inside of a quarter with my Ruger.

What you can do on a stationary target at the range has nothing at all to do with where you bullets wii strike a rapidly moving attacker.


Quote:
Knee capping a bad guy no problem.

Ya think?

I understand where you're coming from. If you read the post it came out of more carefully you will find no mention of a RUNNING attacker. I don't frankly care at that point what court defines deadly force a certain way, I'm trying to effect a certain result with a lighter than normal tool. The rattlesnakes I shot would have left me just as dead as a human I assure you, head shots on both IMMEDIATELY stopped the attack. No I was not saying to try for that precise of a target on a running human. That's not how most muggers etc. operate. They threaten you from a set distance to get you to hand over your valuables. If I have a .22 chest shots are not likely to be immediately effective. I've seen enough GSW's to state that easily. If he is threatening me rather than tackling me, Immoblizing his leg makes more sense. A head shot is the next choice but listen to the old Brain injury nurse, I've seen more people live through a .22 to the head than you think! In the tackling/rushing scenario I wouldn't be confident of any of my.22 slugs being accurate and effective. I might very well wait until first contact and try to put multiple rounds in his head. Chest shots from a .22 would be as far down on my list of actions as possible, people can die from them but it doesn't happen quickly. In the scenario where he hasn't rushed you yet your best chance to stop him is to CRIPPLE HIM. I shoot his knee, you shoot his chest, which of us is more likely to have to continue to fight him? This post is probably what I should have written in the beginning. If I mislead anyone I apologise. There is no way to count the number of GSW's I've seen in 20 years of Trauma Nursing in a big city. My strongest contribution at this point may be what happens after the trigger is pulled. If I say something that doesn't make sense ask me to clarify I'm new here and I may be saying something different than you think.

youngunz4life
June 21, 2012, 07:40 PM
I disagree with choosing a 22 to be your go-to self defense firearm, but every individual needs to make his/her own choice on the matter. my mouse gun is a 38 and my primary is a 357 and that is only my choice.

pax
June 21, 2012, 07:52 PM
scrubcedar,

My point was that the law is written the way it is because putting a bullet into someone else's body -- even if it is "just" their knee! -- is very likely to kill them or to cripple them for life. If you aren't willing to accept that possibility, you should not be carrying a gun.

This doesn't say anything about whether or not the person's death is a desirable outcome, or whether the shooter really wanted him to die. It simply recognizes that death is in fact a very likely possibility whenever you pull the trigger... no matter where you aim to hit.

Killing someone is tough. It changes you. This is particularly and most heart-breakingly true for people who did not count the cost in advance.

If you're not willing to accept the possibility of killing another human being when you launch that bullet, you should not carry a gun at all. If you carry it, you may be tempted to use it. If you use it, you may kill someone. And this is true no matter what part of their body you aim at.

pax

scrubcedar
June 21, 2012, 08:34 PM
Fair enough. I couldn't agree with you more. I've unfortunately nearly had to fire at someone who was trying to harm my daughter within the last few months. We were at home so I grabbed the shotgun because it was far more likely to kill him quickly before he harmed anyone (we had reports he had a pistol of some sort.) I would have pulled the trigger without hesitation. We called the police, they intercepted him Thank God. It wasn't until that point that I TRULY knew whether I could pull the trigger. My first thought was not about mercy,wounding,or the Law. My first thought was the maximum amount of force I could bring to bear to protect my Family. Sort of puts the debate about using a .22 in perspective.

Bill DeShivs
June 21, 2012, 08:42 PM
Expecting blood (pressure) loss to immediately incapacitate anyone is a very bad move. People can do very destructive things in the time it takes to bleed out-regardless of what caliber they have been shot with, or where they have been shot-no matter WHAT caliber you use.

OldMarksman
June 21, 2012, 09:07 PM
Posted by scrubcedar: No I was not saying to try for that precise of a target on a running human. That's not how most muggers etc. operate. They threaten you from a set distance to get you to hand over your valuables.If he has a "short range weapon '(knife, club metal bar etc.)' ", he will have to be quite close to you to credibly pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury. So close that when you start to draw, he will most likely close the distance very quickly indeed.

And if he does not try to do so, you will have a very hard time justifying pulling the trigger.

Have you considered taking some training?

kilimanjaro
June 21, 2012, 09:48 PM
"Quite close" when an assailant is armed with a knife or club is about 21 feet, not much more than the length of a car or SUV. The distance can be closed in one or two seconds, about the length of time needed to react, draw, present, and fire a weapon. You will need to shoot instinctively to stop him, not shoot deliberately to wound.

Tom Servo
June 21, 2012, 10:23 PM
And this is true no matter what part of their body you aim at.
Absolutely. A few years ago, we had an ND at an oudoor range. The guy put a round of .380 ball through his arm just above the elbow. He knicked an artery and we very nearly lost him. Same goes for the kneecap. There's a big artery right there, and "knee capping" could cause a fragment of bullet or bone to puncture it.

If I shoot someone, there is no way I can guarantee what level of injury I will inflict. Therefore, I must assume that any shot will take a life.

And I have to think and act accordingly.

scrubcedar
June 21, 2012, 11:15 PM
You're assuming a person who immediately reacts when presented with a gun by running toward you full speed with an inferior weapon. I'm sorry that just doesn't make any sense. Most criminals are cowards. If you assume that such a person exists then I assure you any handgun you carry will not stop them before they reach you unless you shut off their central nervous system (brain or spinal cord). The only other effective tactic is breaking bones they need to run. I was always the one to who had to be first in on a takedown on an adrenalized or drugged patient let me assure you their pain receptors did not work at all, they could toss you around like a rag doll while horribly,even fatally injured. I was first in on the team because I could survive the beating that was unavoidable at that point. I'm a certified instructor in self defense/patient restraint under these circumstances. We taught our students what these people were capable of and why they could do it. That is the only person in my experience that reacts that way druggies or psych patients. Until you've seen it it's hard to even imagine humans being capable of the things I've seen. Unless what you are shooting these guys with leaves a hole the size of a baseball they are perfectly capable of killing you while bleeding to death. That being said yes some training is on the agenda for me when I get the time and money. My advice if you're dealing with these guys involves running like deer if at all possible. Since opinion is running so solidly against me I'm certainly willing to rethink this but can anyone rufute the points I made?

SIGSHR
June 21, 2012, 11:20 PM
Not my 1st or even 2nd choice but beats fists, feet and foul language.

Frank Ettin
June 21, 2012, 11:39 PM
You're assuming a person who immediately reacts when presented with a gun by running toward you full speed with an inferior weapon. I'm sorry that just doesn't make any sense. ...I don't really see that anyone is assuming that. What can be expected is that an assailant with a contact weapon may charge you before you have drawn your gun. And of course that puts you well behind the curve.

And even if you start to draw the gun first, there are some who will think that they can still beat your draw and brain you or stab you before you can fire. Often they will be right.

...If I have a .22 chest shots are not likely to be immediately effective. I've seen enough GSW's to state that easily. If he is threatening me rather than tackling me, Immoblizing his leg makes more sense. A head shot is the next choice but listen to the old Brain injury nurse, I've seen more people live through a .22 to the head than you think! In the tackling/rushing scenario I wouldn't be confident of any of my.22 slugs being accurate and effective. I might very well wait until first contact and try to put multiple rounds in his head. Chest shots from a .22 would be as far down on my list of actions as possible, people can die from them but it doesn't happen quickly...This is a pretty good outline of some of the limitations of a .22.

And while immobilizing the leg might sound good, it's a small target and would be shot under significant stress. I've trained with some very fine shooters, and I don't know that I've every trained with anyone who could reliably draw and hit a knee quickly, especially if the assailant were moving.

...In the scenario where he hasn't rushed you yet your best chance to stop him is to CRIPPLE HIM. I shoot his knee, you shoot his chest, which of us is more likely to have to continue to fight him?... As far as that goes, in a high stress, dynamic violent encounter hitting with a shot to the torso is far more likely than hitting with a shot to the knee. And that conclusion is based in part on my experience with dynamic training where things happen quickly. Note that even if both of you are static at the same time, that state of affairs in highly unlikely to continue for long.

As far a a crippling shot, a shot to the pelvis might be a better choice than the knee. But reliably breaking the pelvis will require a solid hit with a round capable of meaningful penetration and able to hit the bone hard. Sort of takes the .22 out of the running for that purpose.

youngunz4life
June 22, 2012, 12:01 AM
there is always a better chance you will miss the target/assailant if you try to wound too. This isn't just because of a smaller target rather than 'center mass'...slight adjustments from norm cause misses you might not think would occur. If you aren't an expert shooter, one day while firing your pistol center mass change all of a sudden and try a head shot as an example(many targets don't have limbs and this is only an example). Don't be shocked if you clearly miss the target. It has already been mentioned, but if you don't shoot center mass and shoot to wound it is considered deadly force just by firing the weapon at someone. This is always the case. You would also have other unmentioned variables and worms climbing out of the can if you tried to wound. Either way people are trained to say they aimed center mass to stop a threat regardless of the outcome(you wouldn't say I aimed for the head as an example). One is playing with fire when not aiming center mass(In My Opinion)

OldMarksman
June 22, 2012, 06:19 AM
Posted by scrubcedar: You're assuming a person who immediately reacts when presented with a gun by running toward you full speed with an inferior weapon. I'm sorry that just doesn't make any sense. Most criminals are cowards.

Since opinion is running so solidly against me I'm certainly willing to rethink this but can anyone rufute the points I made?



Even is it is true that "most criminals are cowards", one has to ask whether you want to bet everything on that assumption.

And even though a person who is not armed with a firearm is unlikely to start an attack after having been presented with a firearm (police and parole officers I have spoken to tell me that users of methamphetamines may be exceptions), that's not the real question.

There are two real questions; Frank Ettin has already addressed the first, which has two parts:


Do you really think you would have any material chance of hitting in the knee someone who has charged you before you have either started or completed your draw; and considering your comment that hits in the chest are likely to be inneffective, do you really think it wise to choose a .22?
If he does not attempt to charge you, just how would you justify shooting him in the knee?

scrubcedar
June 22, 2012, 10:47 AM
I thought we were assuming a .22 for the purposes of the thread. In Colorado as well as Utah if someone threatens you with a deadly weapon you can defend yourself and we all know even from that far away they're still a threat. In the scenario I was assuming, a mugging, at that point you have every right to stop an armed robbery of you or anyone else with deadly force. In my experience bad guys, even drugged up bad guys, threaten you first then attack only when it's clear you're not cooperating. I've talked to a lot of assault victims over the years. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the game changes as soon as he is rushing towards you but to me it's two different scenario's. In your scenario my advice is RUN! Do anything to change the circumstances to where he must approach you slowly and you have the chance to shoot at his head from point blank range. A gun, especially a.22, is not a magic death ray it will not insure that you win the fight. I will say this again clearly, the second he is a moving target what I discussed is not an option. The point I'm making is that ANY pistol caliber weapon is marginal against a drugged up opponent. Random center of mass hits may kill him, but whether he dies in time to save you or others is the question. Choose your shots as carefully as you can and remember its better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

OldMarksman
June 22, 2012, 01:05 PM
Posted by scrubcedar: In Colorado as well as Utah if someone threatens you with a deadly weapon you can defend yourself and we all know even from that far away they're still a threat. In the scenario I was assuming, a mugging, at that point you have every right to stop an armed robbery of you or anyone else with deadly force.You may lawfully use deadly force if you have reason to believe that it is immediately necessary to stop an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.

If you have to do so, someone else will judge whether your belief had been reasonable, knowing what you knew at the time.

A man with a contact weapon at close range has the ability and the opportunity to cause death or serious bodily harm; if he has indicated an intent to harm you, you are in jeopardy; at that point, if you have no other alternative available, you would be justified in the use of deadly force.

But not if he should cease and desist.

If you were to fire at someone mugging you who had quickly stopped, you could argue that things had happened so quickly that you fired before it was clear that the attack had stopped. And you might well prevail.

But not if you had time to aim for his knee.

Your testimony that you had delberately aimed for the knee of a stationary man who was no longer making any overt attempt to harm you as you pointed your gun at him would likely defeat your own defense of justification.

Look at it this way. The law does not permit you to shoot someone because he might harm you, or because he had indicated an intent to rob you if the circumstances indicate that it not his intent to so at the time.

Rather, the law will excuse you if you reasonably believed at the time that you had had no choice but to use deadly force to defend against a clear and very immediate threat.

Have you considered getting some good SD training? They will explain these things to you.

And they will almost cerainly advise you to fire at center mass.

scrubcedar
June 22, 2012, 03:16 PM
I finally checked with a local LEO on the facts about The laws in my area. He assured me by the letter of the law I was correct. He also assured me that here in Utah the laws were set up to protect armed citizens defending themselves and others. In my town I probably would have no trouble. He went on to say that any of the bigger cities I was in (in other words where I'm likely to defend myself) hate those laws and would find some way to prosecute me anyway!!! Even if I was found innocent I would likely ruin my life. He was quite critical of my CCW instructor over not helping me understand this. I was wrong. It is what it is. I'm probably going upgrade what I'm carrying now, 38 special rounds to the chest don't cause the massive blood loss needed to kill quickly. .45 Colt anyone?

OldMarksman
June 22, 2012, 04:37 PM
Posted by scrubcedar: I finally checked with a local LEO on the facts about The laws in my area. He assured me by the letter of the law I was correct. He also assured me that here in Utah the laws were set up to protect armed citizens defending themselves and others.Nothing wrong with your recitation of the black law. But you have to understand what it means.

You have to be able to explain why you thought you had to shoot. Had too.

If a man threatens you with a contact weapon from a reasonably close distance (and there's no really set distance, the Tueller drill notwithstanding), it is widely accepted that should he attack you, you could be in a world of hurt. If he starts to do so, you would be justified in drawing your firearm, and if necessary, firing. If you are sufficiently fast and well practiced, you have a chance.

You were speaking of deliberately opening up on a person who has not started to move. Not a man with a gun, but a man with a club, who is giving you time to aim at his knee. Bad idea. Trying to explain why firing had been immediately necessary at time would not go well, particularly under cross examination on the same points raised by you.

By the way, running backward and to the side could give you an extra margin.

And don't rely on a police officer for having much of an understanding of self defense law. They do not make the charging decsion and they do not present the case to a grand jury (if applicable) a trial jury. And it is unlikely that they have much if any experience in self defense cases.

I'm probably going upgrade what I'm carrying now, 38 special rounds to the chest don't cause the massive blood loss needed to kill quickly. .45 Colt anyone?You're objective is not to "kill quickly". It is to stop the attacker quickly.

Reread Post #59 (http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5119078&postcount=59).

The only thing that I would add is that injury to nerves, tendons, joints, and ligaments can impair you attacker's ability to get to you anh hurt you.

Excerpt:

So as a rule of thumb --
More holes are better than fewer holes.
Larger holes are better than smaller holes.
Holes in the right places are better than holes in the wrong places.
Holes that are deep enough are better than holes that aren't.
There are no magic bullets.

I don't think there's anything wrong with your .38 (it makes deep holes that are reasonably large), but I might suggest a (mm or .40 cal semi auto (more holes).

scrubcedar
June 22, 2012, 09:02 PM
Thanks Old marksman, I actually made the same point about the central nervous system in one of my posts as well. As badly as I've been wrong about this PLEASE do not give lighter weight to my statements on an what adrenaline and drugs do to a bad guys abilities and stamina. I've never seen a broken pelvis from a bullet. That would undoubtedly slow the attacker enough. A head shot stops but also kills (normally, seen a few that didn't even know it, scary). A spinal column shot is probably the most sure, the shock from the bullet shuts down the nerves, then normally the swelling kills them (the nerve cells). I'm not sure what else you could reliably hit to stop them. A femur (upper leg bone) perhaps? The rest of the nerves are too small of a target, the rest of the bones too small, the rest of the joints not important enough. If I'm limited to the chest, I promise you if he is in good enough shape to be conscious he is still capable of killing you. Adrenaline, the true wonder drug. Are there other targets/scenarios I'm missing?

jeeplover1
June 23, 2012, 12:13 AM
I carry a 22 NAA pug in the summer.

seeker_two
June 23, 2012, 08:16 AM
Question: Is there a significant difference in performance b/t the .22Mag and the .25ACP in short-barreled pistols? I just wonder if the .25ACP's characteristics of better bullet construction, centerfire case, & semi-auto reliability might make it a better SD choice......

Aikibiker
June 23, 2012, 08:45 AM
If you really wanted a semi auto and money isn't to tight, how about an FN five-seven? They are light, recoil is negligable, and hold 20 rounds of much more capable ammo then any .22 magnum loading. Also since the OP wanted a LASER sight option the accessory rail will easily accomodate a ton of aftermarket LASERs and flashlights.

This is assuming lady in question is willing and able to put the time in to learn to use a semi auto. Some females just are not interested enough in guns to learn how to run a semiauto even if they want to carry a handgun. My mom is that way. She is accurate enough with any handgun she can control (has nerve damage making her very recoil sensitive), but does not have the mindset, desire, or time to learn how to load and unload , clear malfunctions, load magazines, dissaemble and reassemble, etc a semi auto. With her revolver all she has to do is know where the cylinder release and the trigger are. When picking out a weapon for someone else their willingness and ability to learn the ins and outs of that particular weapon is an important consideration. More so then caliber in my opinion.

Running Dog
July 15, 2012, 02:10 AM
I carry an NAA .22mag ALWAYS......Will it stop an attacker like my .454 Ruger Alaskan? Not even! It fits in my pocket and even with a 2" barrel my .454 doesn't and weighs about 4lbs. I live in Fla. most the year and it's hard to hide my .45 auto ,.454, 92sf,Single Six, .45 SAA, T/C .44mag. ....You get the idea. I have a Ruger LCR 38spl.that fits in some pockets, but it's hard to hide anything under a t-shirt. I figure if someone gets ahold of me they might have a real problem with a.22 mag lighting up while pressed against their chest,neck,head or wherever I can get it. I'm too old to take a whippin' and too young to die and a.22Mag beats the heck out of knife or empty hand. Just my 2cts.

gorin
July 15, 2012, 04:45 PM
If it is a choice between the .22 and nothing, any gun is better than nothing. If she can practice enough it will make a big difference.

skoro
July 16, 2012, 06:27 AM
I personally don't feel that a 22 is a good choice as a SD caliber, be it magnum or LR. But it's certainly better than nothing and will deter most attackers interested in grabbing your wallet or car.

Against a drugged up or determined foe, it could well be inadequate.

Each of us has to do our own assessment on the likely dangers we face and prepare accordingly.

GunByte
January 13, 2013, 05:27 AM
The problem with all these caliber discussions is that they assume that you have to physically incapacitate a bad guy. However if you look at the NRA and other numbers the odds of even needing gun are tiny, however if those tiny odds catch up with you, the need to shoot that gun are even tinier. Then having to hit the bad guy are smaller yet and having the caliber matter even smaller than that. So much time and discussion is spent arguing about something that is either not going to matter because the great majority of people do not want to be shot with anything and will retreat at the mere sight of the gun or that most or all of us will never use our guns in our lives. Some are quick to point to 20 articles about this and that happening but they forget we are a nation of over 300,000,000 people so even 100 car jackings is not enough to warrant much concern. The real reason is that men like to carry weapons to feel powerful or to ease their fears. Most guys I know carry guns to feel safe rather than to be safe because they carry small guns in places that it would take them a long time to get to and either never have shot them or shot them rarely. Men always wanted weapons with them since discovering the rock and even then they argued about which size rock was best. :)

Too much focus in put on Bigfoot, I mean that elusive drug addict who will not stop at anything. That kind of person is extremely rare and we are talking about a chain of events whose odds keep getting smaller and smaller to the point that they do not deserve our concern. I bet most of you do not even know anyone who used a gun to safe their lives as a civilian. Personally other than in combat, my 2 civilian encounters with bad guys ended abruptly when they saw my gun. They did not ask what caliber it was (both times a .38) and were not willing to risk being shot to see just how much money was in my wallet. That is usually goes and even if you have to shoot, not many criminals will want to hang around and engage into a shootout with you knowing that someone has called the police and they have to get away real quick. The fact that they know that if shot by anything they will have to go to the hospital is a major deterrent.

Some call me stupid or silly for carrying a 5 round snub nose .38 but know what? The odds are overwhelming in my favor and yours that I willnever have to shoot that gun at someone and in the end the great majority of us will be in the same boat. Who is stupid then, the guys who went through life lugging around big and heavy guns (yeah they all say it is no bother but it is) or those of us who choose to live our lives in comfort rather than pretend we are office clerks by day and Rambo on the street with the skill and training to take on multiple armed attackers. That is one of the reasons I hear for carrying a lot of rounds. As if the multiple attackers are going to wait for you to finish shooting the first guy before they shoot at you. One thing I have learned is that most guys have a mental picture of their gun fight. Inevitably it involves them prevailing using their gun of choice despite the fact that 99% receive no training. No one has a mental picture of themselves soiling their pants and being frozen with fear and yet I have seen that happen all too many times, even with tough guys who never came under fire before.

My advice is to stay away from the wrong places and people and use common sense and you will be fine. I lived the first 64 years of my life in bad places and never needed a gun. I carry now because I am older and do not run so fast and seniors are frequent targets in Florida. I actually felt safer in NYC than I do in Florida where the newspapers are full of shooting every day which the local fourms are quick to point out as a reason to carry a 1911 or two. However if you read the articles the people involved are low lives, drug addicts and slum dwellers. You rarely read about upstanding middle class people being victims of violent crime. Sure it happens but so does winning Mega Millions and the odds of you needing a gun are worse than winning that. I am pro gun and like guns can carry them but I am not gun centric and do not carry uncomfortable guns. My gun is like my spare tire only it will probably never been used. Even if you shoot someone in a justified shooting your life will be hell. Heck it took me years to get my head straight coming out of combat. Most of us are not wired to kill people and doing so takes its toll. Then there is the financial cost which will bankrupt most, put stress on the family and even beak them up.

My point is that all this talk on calibers is for very rare instances if you actually have to shoot to physically stop someone and for civilians that is not all that common. Since moving to Florida I have been keeping track fo shooting when they mention calibers and it seems that those with .22's are the majority and do pretty darn good. Have not read about any one shooting someone with their .22 and having them laugh at them or ignoring it. It seems that they all run away. But then again there is Bigfoot the drug addict who will not quit and the reason why guys buy .45's or bigger. Almost the same reason why so many guys I know buy big .464 or .500 guns for bear and have never stepped foot in the woods in their life. I admit that carrying a gun fills a basic need in most men of the warrior class. It empowers me and I do not have to fear those more powerful than I am. I am honest with my reasons for carrying a gun and will not say it is because the world is a real dangerous place in my upscale neighborhood where the worst that has happend since 1980 is a few petty home burglaries of the homes of snow birds. Not one violent crime in all that time and if I am stupid for carrying a snub nose of NAA Pug then what is the guy who carries two pounds or more of gun on his belt daily and will never need it?

therealdeal
January 13, 2013, 07:44 AM
.22 Mag for self-defense concealed carry

"No."

CurlyQ.Howard
January 13, 2013, 09:17 AM
During all the rioting (in Chicago) during the sixties, my father, who worked all over the city, purchased a Hi Standard Sentinel revolver that shot .22 long rifle as its most potent load. He could shoot the eyes out of a snake with it, but never had to use it against anybody. Dad felt it was enough gun for his needs (and this was a guy with the hand, wrist, and arm strength of a blacksmith). During WWII he carried a .45 autoloader as his sidearm, and he said that he practiced as much as he could with it during training, so he was comfortable shooting a .45. Personally, I'd want more gun than a .22 LR or Magnum for a potential life and death situation, but I'm not about to tell anybody what gun to carry; I know that I never questioned my father's choice in a handgun.

therealdeal
January 13, 2013, 02:56 PM
GunByte,

I thought you might be interested in this thread too since your post mentioned you carry a 38:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=511487