The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 22, 2006, 10:30 PM   #1
Join Date: January 22, 2006
Posts: 22
.22LR Ammo

What is the most non-lethal bullet for a .22LR Pistol?
I know every bullet will give damage to the receiver, but some bullets give more damage so which one gives the least damage?
Ziostilon is offline  
Old February 22, 2006, 10:50 PM   #2
Join Date: November 15, 2005
Location: Cold, Barren Northland
Posts: 17
.22 shot shells.
ChiefPilot is offline  
Old February 22, 2006, 11:21 PM   #3
Senior Member
Join Date: July 6, 2000
Posts: 1,322
And how Pray Tell Does A " Bullet " Do Damage To The Receiver ???

This makes no sense to me at all, but I've only been shooting for 55 years so what do I know ??
WIL TERRY is offline  
Old February 22, 2006, 11:32 PM   #4
Senior Member
Join Date: August 30, 2005
Location: Damascus, Maryland
Posts: 921
I think he means the person who receives the bullet. Not the receiver of the gun.

You could probably make a bullet out of resin or plastic that would do minimal damage. What you want is something that won't fragment or blow up in any way...
270Win is offline  
Old February 22, 2006, 11:38 PM   #5
Join Date: January 22, 2006
Posts: 22
good idea with the plastic bullet and the shot shells, but do any of them immobilize the victim with non-severe bleeding?
Ziostilon is offline  
Old February 22, 2006, 11:53 PM   #6
Senior Member
Join Date: July 6, 2000
Posts: 1,322
Oh Brother.

You, Sir, have a LOT to learn about the terminal dynamics of shooting living things. You can't poke holes in 'em without a LOT of bleeding, even little itty bitty holes !!!
You cannot have your cake and eat it too ie: you cannot shoot someone just a little bit, as it were.
WIL TERRY is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 12:19 AM   #7
Join Date: January 22, 2006
Posts: 22
well, i guess not stopping severe bleeding.
Okay, there was this scenario not long ago made by someone else, about someone breaking into your home while you're in it or something along that line. If you have a .22LR Pistol, you don't want to kill the person who tresspassed your property, you want that tresspasser to serve time in jail so you wouldn't want to give him extensive damage but rather just a shot or two so he wouldn't get crippled or anything like that.
Ziostilon is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 12:28 AM   #8
Mal H
Join Date: March 20, 1999
Location: Somewhere in the woods of Northern Virginia
Posts: 15,463
I'm not sure why this is in the Handloading and Reloading forum ... and, like Wil, I'm not sure why the question was even asked. Nevertheless, I'll move it to the General Discussion forum.
Mal H is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 12:31 AM   #9
Senior Member
Join Date: July 6, 2000
Posts: 1,322
The Other Half Of The Equation Is This :

If you have to shoot someone you do it so they'll stop what they are doing. Since your choise of a defense weapon is NOT known as a " stopper " when you are done shooting him and find all it did was seriously piss him off, he will probably take the gun from you and shoot you right between the horns with it, or if he's really really irritated, beat you to death with it.
In either case there will be more blood than you've ever seen in your life.
WIL TERRY is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 01:41 AM   #10
Senior Member
Join Date: January 25, 2005
Location: Texas of course
Posts: 277
Hi Zio,

Why listen to a bunch of 'net commandos ?

There is MUCH published info, produced by qualified authorities on the subject of stopping power with regard to handgun ammunition.

Do a Google search on 'Dr. Marvin Fackler' and another on 'Evan Marshall' and another on 'Ed Sanow'.

These three people are believed by some to know more about real world wound effects of handguns than any others throughout history. None of the three referenced have been shy about sharing their findings.

Do a little searching and get your info from the real 'pros'.

Most gun board commandos would simply call your question stupid, tell you YOU are stupid for asking or try to imply you are sadly naive with regard to a self/home-defense scenario.

I'm not an accredited authority on the subject by any means, I think if someone comes in your house with intent to do you or yours harm, he should be met with sufficient force to change his mind and prevent anyone from being hurt. But again, I stress, I'm not an authority, a scientist or published expert on ballistics.

Get the real info from the pros, who can undoubtedly give you enough food for thought to find just the right ammo to give your intruder a ballistic sissy-slap.

Why kill or permanently injure the guy, when you could probably just slow him down with a couple of well placed, light shots and reason with him, so he could mend his ways in prison. I see your point of view.


Nobody likes war, but if you find yourself in one - fight for those you serve with and to make the trip home. Show mercy to those that deserve it and a relentless, ruthless, cunning evil to those who don't.
BigSlick is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 02:03 AM   #11
Senior Member
Join Date: November 26, 2004
Location: Washington... Land of the apple, and the apple maggot!
Posts: 803
You'd think if such a thing as an effective deterrent .22LR round existed, it would be in more common use by law enforcement... All I've seen are beanbag shotguns, rubber balls from over-priced paintball gu... Err... "ranged deterrent devices", and those wierd disc-shooting contraptions.

Oh yeah, and the classic net gun. Those things make me smile.

Wolfe... (Freeze, or I'll net you!)
[Your ad could be here! Call 555-0122 for details.]

(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into
(")_(")your signature to help him gain world domination.
Cowled_Wolfe is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 02:07 AM   #12
Join Date: January 22, 2006
Posts: 22
screw all that other stuff, now all I want is that book by "Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow". It looks pretty interesting, but the latest publishing date was 2001, so I think that this might be a little outdated. Comparing with today's efficient and fast changing world. And the first publishing date was back in 1992. quite alot of stuff happened between that time.
Ziostilon is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 02:26 AM   #13
Optical Serenity
Senior Member
Join Date: June 23, 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 513
Uhhm, bullet ballistics and the human body have not changed much in the last 5 years.

That being said, people die from .22LR all the time. if you think it'll ever make a good man-stopper, show me one law enforcement or military agency that uses .22LR as their main duty weapon!
Optical Serenity is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 06:33 AM   #14
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,882
Sorry but - someone has to say it - -

Jeff Cooper's Rules of Gun Safety:





Reread Rule #2.
Using a firearm will be considered using deadly force,,regardless of the load.
You may know the load is less-than lethal, but the target won't.
Once you've displayed the intent to use deadly force, you had better be prepared to defend yourself, both then and there, and later, in front of a jury.
Hal is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 09:14 AM   #15
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2005
Posts: 1,231
+1 for .22 shotshell. But there is no guarantee that you might not kill the guy your trying to wound. The Israeli army used 10/22's to wound lead protestors and found that the .22 round is too lethal to use in a non-lethal way. The only other firearm I can think of is using a shotgun (.410 would probably be best) and use a birdshot or target round at long range, but even that can kill. I don't know your situation but if you are "legally" shooting at trespassers and you do not want to kill them, I would use blanks or a paintball gun. Everything else has the possibility of kill or severely wounding.
Mikeyboy is offline  
Old February 23, 2006, 10:36 AM   #16
Senior Member
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell
Posts: 2,647
What or who are you trying to non-lethally shoot?

If you have the need to shoot a humanoid, you need to shoot them alot and get them to bleed alot.
Any other reason and you're probably not justified in shooting.
Herman Cain '12

Squished bugs on a windshield is proof the slow/heavy bullet theory works.
stevelyn is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09009 seconds with 7 queries