|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 31, 2009, 03:45 AM | #76 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 17, 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,857
|
I battled a psychopathic woodchuck with a .22 one time. I don't know if it was rabid or what, but it was unhealthy looking and extremely aggressive. It's a good thing they don't turn well in a full charge or I would have been badly chewed on. I must have shot the damn thing eight or ten times before it keeled over. Needless to say I was not impressed by the effectiveness of the .22lr. That critter was swiss cheese before it had enough.
If it won't stop a determined woodchuck, it's a little light for heavier tasks as I see it. |
January 31, 2009, 04:05 AM | #77 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2008
Location: the object towards which the action of the sea is directed
Posts: 2,123
|
The opposite extreme
Just playing the opposite side of the coin:
Christopher McCandless, from the non-fiction book Into the Wild, shot and killed a cow moose in Alaska with a .22 rifle. The natives used to hunt polar bear with single shot .22 rifles successfully. Now, I live in Alaska and I hunt moose and would never condone moose hunting with a .22lr. One of my big rules that I abide by is matching caliber to game. However, it does really illustrate that shot placement is critical.
__________________
The lowest paid college major/degree in this country after graduation... Elementary Education. Now, go figure... |
January 31, 2009, 06:20 AM | #78 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,117
|
Using a .22LR beats being completely unarmed. It is not my first choice for self-defense nor is it my last. The downside to the .22 is that against a determined attacker it is not very debilitating. That includes someone determined through rage, intense desire, psychosis and potentially drug use. There is too much "luck" involved with the .22 stopping someone.
The .22 Magnum, however, is an underestimated round that can and does do plenty of damage. At close range it is suprisingly effective. It's hard enough to make bullets go where you want them, but add in adrenaline, fear, movement and emotions it can be incredibly hard to make an incapacitating hit. With the .22LR, your desireable hit zones are smaller than when using more powerful cartridges. .22 Failures In summer of 1967, a friend and I were returning from the local creek when we heard popping sounds. Rick was ahead of me and I heard a sound like an angry bumblebee pass by when Rick slapped the back of his thigh and uttered a few bad words. A few seconds later we realized he'd been hit by a bullet. We got to the street only to have a cop stop us due to Rick's bleeding leg. They found two young boys (11 and 13) about 40 yards further down the creek with a Hi-Standard revolver. The .22LR hit the back of Rick's thigh but was easily removed at the hospital with no lingering damage. At no time was Rick really unable to walk or fend for himself. It was painful but no more than a charley horse might be. A woman I knew in the mid-70's drove cars from one car dealership to another up and down California. This was before Interstate 5 existed so she used Hwy 99, a truck-route. After being beaten and robbed of one car, she armed herself with a small .380 and a .22 pistol. One night at a rest stop south of Modesto, despite half a dozen other people present, she was assaulted as she was getting into her car. She pulled the .22 out of her pocket and fired twice, point blank. One round in the forearm and one in the upper left lung. He continued his attack, trying to grab the gun. Another round penetrated his right hand/palm. Diane saw the next round hit him in the left cheek which made him recoil (it broke two teeth off). When he raised his left hand in a fist, she fired three more times. The hits made him break off and she fired the last two at an oblique angle to his back. One round clipped his spine and disconnected his legs. CHP called it a clean SD shooting. Subject was tried and sentenced to 13 years due to a substantial prior record. Success Stories 1983: Two men burst in to a shop and tried to rob a downtown jeweler. The Jeweler's wife fired twice at each robber with a .22 S&W kit gun, hitting each one once. Robber #1 fell to the floor from a hit just forward of his right ear. Robber #2 fled the store but was found DOA in his car. A bullet had entered between two ribs and bounced off the rear ribcage penetrating both lungs and stopping in his spleen. Proving That Nothing is 100% Dept. 1976: After a night of binge drug use, a 24 year old man walked into a donut shop just before 6 am and pulled out a .38 revolver to hold up the store. An off duty armed security guard was finishing coffee at a table and when the robber turned the gun towards him, the guard fired a single round of .44 Special, impacting just to the upper right of the sternum. The robber looked surprised, dropped his gun and then looked down at his chest. He calmly walked outside and sat down on the curb then lay on his back to die a minute or so later.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately) |
January 31, 2009, 08:44 AM | #79 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
|
I'll say the same thing about the .22 LR handgun as I do the .25 ACP, it is not better than having nothing, its better than not having a gun. They both fire a projectile that is capable of reaching the heart, brian and spine. That fact gives them a significant advantage over knifes, impact weapons and bare hands. If fact in all actuality they are no less deadly than a .45 ACP or 9 mm Para, it just takes greater skill and shot placement to utilize that lethality. Ironically the .22 and .25 are most often selected and carried by the least skilled users.
'A .22 looks small, till someone points one at you'- Elmer Keith If someone points a .22 at you with obviously deadly intent and you aren't afraid, you are either stupid, ignorant, mentally ill, on drugs, or possibly all four. So lets suppose your assailant fails into the not afraid category, thats when you have to back up the threat of your .22 with deadly marksmanship. Back in the day when I regularly carried a .22 or .25 as a BUG or sometimes even a primary weapon, I constantly practiced making rapid, accurate head shots from two or three yards. If you know someone that can take getting shot six to nine times in the face with a .25 or .22 in 2 seconds or less, I'd like... on second thought I don't want to meet them.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ (>_<) |
January 31, 2009, 09:51 AM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 30, 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,952
|
I enjoy shooting my .22lr firearms, both rifle and handguns. My .22 handguns are a revolver and an autoloader. I can fire both pretty well, as the lack of recoil makes the sight picture pretty consistent from shot to shot.
Would I consider either for self defense? Only in a terribly unlikely scenario. Something like one of them was the only thing within reach while I'm under assault. And I keep them unloaded and stowed away when not in use. The .22 can serve for self-defense, but it's a poor choice. It beats harsh words, but almost any other firearm is going to do a better job. I think the likelihood of a .22 stopping a determined attacker is very slim. |
January 31, 2009, 12:52 PM | #81 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
January 31, 2009, 01:19 PM | #82 | |||||||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||||
January 31, 2009, 01:25 PM | #83 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
January 31, 2009, 01:31 PM | #84 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
January 31, 2009, 04:01 PM | #85 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
|
Many years ago near San Jose, CA a woman was shot five times, point blank in the head with a .22 ( I think they may have been shorts). Not one penetrated her skull and she survived. Then again, a friend of mine was killed with a few .25 auto shots to her torso.
Never know.
__________________
grym |
January 31, 2009, 04:11 PM | #86 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,222
|
.22 for self defense?
No way, (if at all possible) but it is better than no gun at all.
Bottom line, I would suggest a .38 Special as the least potent round for self defense. Low recoil and a more proven manstopper more than a .22 round. But if all you got is a .22, then its better than nothing. Personally, if it doesn't start with a .4 in front of it, I don't use it. Just my thinking and wish you the best. |
January 31, 2009, 05:07 PM | #87 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
January 31, 2009, 05:10 PM | #88 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
|
|
January 31, 2009, 05:33 PM | #89 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 13, 2009
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
Since very few police officers (like armed citizens) ever need to fire their gun, they only need the deterrent factor to be effective. Since the deterrent factor is based only on the sight of a gun, any gun, and not the size or caliber, it would seem that an LEO would be just as well served carrying a .22 as a larger caliber. Sure there is a chance an LEO may have to fire their gun, but heck, given the odds, why bother carrying a big clunky gun and all that extra ammunition day after day just for the maybe one time in a 20 or 30 year career when you have actually shoot someone. This is especially true when you consider that LEOs also carry batons, tasers, pepper spray, etc. Seems to me that the gun is kind of overkill for average cop on the street. |
|
January 31, 2009, 08:19 PM | #90 | ||||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by David Armstrong; January 31, 2009 at 08:25 PM. |
||||||
January 31, 2009, 08:24 PM | #91 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
February 1, 2009, 10:44 AM | #92 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The question asked by the OP has been answered. 22s have been used successfully for self-defense.
It is better to have a 22 than nothing. My crystal ball sees bickering about the perennial issue of since a 22 isn't an atomic cannon and I want to carry an atomic cannon, then no one should ever carry a 22. So, we've learned all that's possible this sunday morning.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|