What matters is shot placement. Actual bank robbery shooting.

[Double Naught Spy]

+1 and +1

[markj]

Several of us think, with good reason, that you're wrong; and we reserve the right to say so.

So I dont have that option? to say I belive you are wrong?

I said my part, and will stick to it.

a 22 isnt somthing to laff at, it kills a lot of folks every year. I am not afraid to use one in sd which I have had exp in. When Iwas a bouncer I took a few guns off of guys brought em in to cause trouble. One guy shot me, one guy stabbed me, another emptied his 25 at me and missed each shot. I for one am not a violence virgin.

Wish I had a gun each time, as a bouncer I was unarmed while working.

[threegun]

Markj, If one of your bounced customers had returned to shoot you and you could select the caliber they used which would you select to be shot with?

Please simply answer the question with a handgun caliber that you would select.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by markj

So I dont have that option? to say I belive you are wrong?...

You have your opinion. You've expressed it. I've dismissed it and challenged it.

And you've given me no reason to give your opinion any serious attention.

[zachkuby87]

The 22 isn't optimal at all but it WILL do the job in one shot if its really needed I have a friend serving life in prison that will attest to that. He used his 22 when he was in an unstable state of mind "drunk and higher than a kite" it took one shot from 10 feet guy dropped like a sack of bricks. He plead guilty and got life because of a "violent" history for an assault that happened 10 years earlier. Now point being when I personally asked him what the hell he was thinking he said dude it was a ****in 22 I didn't expect it to kill the guy. Just because its small doesn't mean it doesn't work. Now I'm not saying my friend is a nice guy or good person by any means all I'm saying is a 22 will kill an attacker given the shot is placed correctly and I would carry one anywhere anyday rather than carry nothing.
I prefer my .45 but sometimes carry my pf9 on hot days. So I'm not saying the 22 is th best round but it is sufficient if its the only option for whatever reason.

[threegun]

Zach not a single one of us has argued that the 22lr isn't capable of killing instantly with a single shot. All we are arguing is that the 22lr is not the best choice for self defense. It simply doesn't have the barrier penetration that larger calibers have. Shot for shot almost everything else is better.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by threegun

...not a single one of us has argued that the 22lr isn't capable of killing instantly with a single shot. All we are arguing is that the 22lr is not the best choice for self defense....

And that's the point.

The question is not whether the .22 lr is capable, under some circumstances, of instantly killing with one shot. It is.

The question is not whether people shot with a .22 lr have eventually died. They have.

The question is what handgun cartridges are, overall and under the widest range of circumstances, most likely to reliably and quickly stop an assailant. The .22 lr isn't in contention.

[Vartarg]

Very interesting....thanks for posting.

[Double Naught Spy]

The 22 isn't optimal at all but it WILL do the job in one shot if its really needed I have a friend serving life in prison that will attest to that.

Well, gee, you can get this sort of result with a bb gun, too. BB guns certainly can be lethal, but that doesn't make them great for self defense.
http://www.wpxi.com/news/24829585/detail.html
http://www.nazarethdailynews.com/low...-gun-incident/
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10245...ghborhoods.xml

Heck, even a fork can be lethal, but I don't see too many folks talking about it as a primary self defense tool.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/5021627/detail.html

[Obambulate]

I dunno, the 7-shot J-frame in .22 Mag might be a nice little carry piece. Two extra rounds would be comforting, and with the low recoil you might even get to use 'em.

[OldMarksman]

Posted by fiddletown: The question is not whether the .22 lr is capable, under some circumstances, of instantly killing with one shot. It is.

The question is not whether people shot with a .22 lr have eventually died. They have.

The question is what handgun cartridges are, overall and under the widest range of circumstances, most likely to reliably and quickly stop an assailant. The .22 lr isn't in contention.

Very true, and threegun pointed out why way back in Post #14 on page 1:

Shot placement is what matters once you have a cartridge that can reach the vitals even through appendages.

Of course, one may not comprehend that unless one realizes that one's bullets might strike the assailant in the arm, and that unless the bullet is capable of going through the humerus, or perhaps both the ulna and the radius, and then through a rib, with sufficient energy afterwards to reach and destroy something vital, the shot will not be effective in stopping the assailant.

And, of course, it is also necessary to know that a .22LR fired from a short barrel is most unlikely to do that.

It is true that during the Civil War, some officers purchased the first S&W cartridge revolvers as backups for their .44 cavalry revolvers. I doubt that any of them relished the prospect of trusting their lives to the effectiveness of a black powder .22 Short. The sons and nephews of some of these same men later had the opportunity for use the .38 Long Colt in combat, and the results led to the abandonment of that weapon and in fact to the development of the more powerful .38 Smith and Wesson Special.

A century ago, the .32 Smith and Wesson was by far the most popular cartridge for personal defense in this country. For police use, however, the more powerful .32 S&W Long was preferred. I have one. Its performance in the hands of a sworn officer against a fleeing felon (long before Garner v. Tennessee) convinced the officer that, had the man been attacking, the officer would have died. He got rid of the revolver at the first opportunity and acquired a .41 Colt. I have that .32 now, but I would not like to depend on its effectiveness.

Regarding the .22, I might choose a .22LR over a .25 ACP (even though the rimfire ignition is less reliable), but I would choose a .22 WMR over the LR any day. Bill Jordan did praise the .22 WMR. However, the .22 WMR would not meet my threshold, either.

I consider the .32 ACP to be better but still questionable. I would feel better armed with a .380 ACP, but there are better choices for personal defense. Among them are the .38 Special, the 9MM Parabellum, and the .45 ACP.

Most police departments seem to use the .40 S&W these days, but I do not see the need. The .357 Magnum is popular, but I do not like the noise, the flash, or the recoil, nor do I see the need for the additional penetration for civilian use.

This paper is worth bookmarking and studying.

Here's the end of the concluding paragraph:

Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, "too little penetration will get you killed." Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable. Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet.

As fiddletown said, "The .22 lr isn't in contention".