.22 for self defense?

[ninjatoth]

wanted to know if there were any ammo with enough power to be a back up gun for defense.Of course the debate never ends,most people say a .22 will just make someone mad,but the fbi charts show 29% one shot stop with a .22,and with 9 shots with no recoil,might make it a viable weapon.I been using federal walmart= 77 fpe,the cci stinger is the best at 119 fpe.Ill still stick with my .357 for defense,but I was just curiouse.

[ar15chase]

CCI makes a segmented .22 bullet. I would use that.

[David the Gnome]

I don't mind carrying this little guy loaded up with some 22 Mags but I wouldn't want to depend on a 22LR for defense, or as a main carry.

[American Eagle]

I shoot .22LR and have become so proficient with it that I hit 10 out of 10 in the target at 25 feet every time.

While .22LR is not ideal for self defense, 3 of them into an attacker's chest will probably kill, but the question is, will it drop him fast enough that he will not have time to continue his attack?

If you have nothing else, .22LR is better than your bare hands, but I personally would not feel comfortable with anything less than .38 special or .40 in a semi-automatic handgun.

[levrluvr]

Use it only for your backup if you feel you must have a rimfire for SD, and at a minimum it should be .22wmr

[ar15chase]

If you are comfortable carrying a .22 for SD then do it. It doesnt matter the caliber of the handgun you have, just how well you can shoot it. If a person is more accurate and consistent with a 22 cal. than he/she is with a 44 mag, carry the .22 If you cant hit the target there is no point in carrying the gun. If you dont feel good with the gun you have. Carry bear spray or a good pair of running shoes.

[22-rimfire]

The two relevant issues with using a 22LR for self defense are: (1) Stopping power, and (2) Higher incidence of failure to fires due primarily to the priming on rimfires.

Personally I would feel perfectly safe carrying a small revolver such as the S&W 317 in 22LR. It has a 10-round cylinder and should be just as accurate as the other snubbie revolvers that are commonly used such the S&W 642/442 or similar guns by other manufacturers.

If I believed I was headed into a war, I would not carry a 22 revolver or any 22 handgun. I probably wouldn't go with any handgun. But if you live in a relatively safe area and have little to no exposure to the criminal element, I would be comfortable with a 22LR loaded with either CCI Mini-Mag solids or CCI Velocitors. As long as you understand the weakness of the caliber in general for self defensive use, then I can live with that. Keep shooting until they are down in a real situation where you fear for your life and firearm use is justified.

[nightwolf1974]

David The Gnome..........what the heck is that thing?

[.357 mag]

stingers by CCI

[David the Gnome]

It is a North American Arms PUG:



Single-action, 5-shot, 22 Magnum mini-revolver.

[ninjatoth]

its a sweet little gun,i think I would get a 22 LR myself,alot of cheap ammo choices,and leave my 357 for the dirty work,but if you can afford the .22 mags,rock on.

[treg]

When a .22 was what I had, it felt good.

[ninjatoth]

ive shot so many .22 rounds that I feel like the bullets are controlled by my mind,I can hit anything.I go up to .357 and it will take alot longer to get good with these

[44 AMP]

about "one shot stops"

the fbi charts show 29% one shot stop with a .22,

is that tabulated data cannot, and does not take into account the mindset of the attacker, nor shot placement.

Ask yourself, of those 29% stops, what pecentage were stopped because the bad guy was DRT, what percentage stopped because the bad guy was incapacitated, and what percentage stopped because the attacker simply decided what ever they were doing wasn't worth getting shot again?

No table ever supplies this info. They can't. And it applies to all calibers. A percentage of all one shot stops are because the attacker decided to stop, and not because they were physically stopped by the hit. Nobody knows what percentage this is, nobody can know, without interviewing each and every attacker (not possible), yet they are included in all the tables and statistics, right along with those numbers of cases where the hit actually physically stopped the attacker. To me, this distorts the data, and renders it meaningless for any kind of absolute pronouncments.

It ain't PC, it ain't what is taught by shooting masters, but if I was to rely on a .22LR for personal defense, the range would be ultra short, and I would aim for the eyes. And I would empty the gun (unless he fell really fast)

One fellow I knew, a retired Highway Patrolman, used a Ruger Mk I as his home defense gun. I have seen this guy (with his back to the target) turn, draw, and empty the gun in about 2 seconds, cutting the eyes out of a silhouette target at about 25 feet. No doubt in my mind that would spoil an attackers day. But few of us are that good.

Lots of people killed by the "lowly" .22LR, but not so many stopped instantly. If thats what you have, you are better off than not having a gun. But, unless you are an exceptional shot, you aren't "well armed".

[ninjatoth]

I know you can never tell,a .22 short can kill 1 shot,and a .44 mag can fail to stop someone,all circumstancial.I have a .357 snub for defense,but what if it was getting repaires or something,would my .22 help me,99.99999% chance I will never need either,but wouldnt ya know,I bet if my .357 is at the gunshop,some nut will try to break in.Maybe ill get an auto to back me up,im not a fan,but so many at cheap prices,maybe a .40 or .45?

[levrluvr]

if you can afford the .22 mags,rock on

These days, especially when compared to some other small center-fire pistol calibers, .22wmr is a deal, and unlike pistol ammunition lately, it can be found nearly everywhere. I can buy the original Winchester 40 grain HP's for $8.99/50. Fiocchi is sold locally for $5.99. Not really all that expensive for practice or hunting. Most rough comparisons for .22wmr to 22lr are that a .22wmr has the about same energy/speed out of a 5" barreled pistol as a 22lr HV has out of a 20" rifle barrel.
I'm saving for that Smith 48........

[ninjatoth]

some 9mms are about 8.99/50,I can get fiocchi .357s for $18.50/50.,reloaded .38s for $13.I personally would get a .38 over a .22mag in that power area,200ft lbs.but one nice thing,I believe that i could get a different cylinder for my taurus .22lr that will hold mags,if i am not mistaken,than a gun with 2 cylinders would be great in that aspect,practice for pennies and kick butt with the same gun,the power of a .38spl but practice ammo for $1.39/50,when bought in 500round bulk.

[strangebrew613]

use to carry a 22 snub nose as back up, if all else failed, it was there

[fast-eddie]

The times I've shot my PT22, I was shooting with a 2/8 board backing the targets and it make lots of little holes in that 2/8. I was using mini mags, and Win bobcats most of the time.

[Double Naught Spy]

but the fbi charts show 29% one shot stop with a .22,

Just curious, where did you get the FBI stats?

What the stats also tell you is that 71% of the time, the attacker pressed on the attack after being shot.

with 9 shots with no recoil,might make it a viable weapon

Okay, here you are assuming that everything will work just fine. Don't count on it. .22 lr has a history of not being reliable for ignition. Even if you do get off your shots initially, if the BG isn't DRT with any of them, he very well may be shooting you with a comparable number of 9mm holes. Who do you think is going to win that exchange?

I liked the statement made by one of the agents after the FBI Miami shootout who noted the bad guys were dying, but that they weren't dying fast enough. While dying they managed to kill several agents.

Winning the fight ain't no good if you end up dead anyway.

[Re4mer]

Yea I think it can be used if you have the right ammo and good shot placement. I still prefer a 9mm, 38 or .40, but hey, a .22 is better than nothing.

[ninjatoth]

Yes,i know that 22 has less reliability,but I am talking a revolver.out of all .22s,a revolver is your best bet,just keep pulling if it duds,and with the right ammo,tested to have a very low misfire rate,it could be a viable weapon.I know the fbi charts dont mean much,but several holes in someone would do some damage.and with less recoil you have a better chance of making more hits.I'm not reccomending a .22 by no means,I wont trust less than .357,and even that makes me worried its not enough,i'm only making a point.

[Nigelcorn]

I'm not making any judgment about carrying a 22lr, just a thought I had:

I often read about the 22lr and its propensity for unreliable ammunition. I have to say that I have fired countless bricks of 22 (at least upwards of 20,000 rounds) and had not many misfires (probably 4 or 5...maybe higher, but not high enough that I remember them). It just doesn't happen to me often. Maybe I have the world's best ammunition by pure luck, or maybe I just don't remember it happening.

I have fired a relatively small amount of 9mm (probably only 500 rounds) and had 2 misfires due to ammunition.

Now, I was using the cheapest ammo possible for both the 9 and the 22. I guess I don't trust any ammo to be 100% reliable, but in my (limited) experience 22 hasn't been significantly more unreliable than center fire I have used.

I can honestly say that I would grab a 22 if I heard a noise in my house. Or my 9mm. I would feel safe with either, and the thought of ammo not functioning wouldn't cross my mind for either.

[22-rimfire]

The one 22 ammunition I wouldn't choose is Remington Thunderbolts. They really do seem to have a higher failure to fire (FTF) incidence than other brands. This is a skism that Remington may never shake regardless of improvements in quality control at their factory. I still commonly shoot them even with the FTF's. I mostly shoot them in non semi-autos however unless I'm testing ammo. I find clearing a FTF a bit of a pain with semi-autos.

[Double Naught Spy]

I know the fbi charts dont mean much,

But you used them to make a point about effectiveness.

but several holes in someone would do some damage.

Yes, and several holes in someone with a larger caliber would do even more damage.

and with less recoil you have a better chance of making more hits.

For those who practice, it isn't going to be the recoil that keeps them from hitting their target. I guess if you can't handle recoil more substantial than a .22, then a .22 is your best bet.

Just what 9 shot revolver are you talking about. I would bet there is a comparable-sized gun in larger and better centerfire caliber that would work a lot better for SD.

I'm not reccomending a .22 by no means,I wont trust less than .357,and even that makes me worried its not enough,i'm only making a point.

And what is your point? Are you restating something already obvious that a .22 can harm people? We know that. If you are stating that folks are going to be landing all 9 shots on target because of the light recoil, let's see your stats on that aspect.