For those of you who carry .22's for personal protection

[bwframe]

A .22 with the right round can be as effective as any other load...

Really? 9mm, 45ACP, 357 magnum?

You can only kill a person once. After that then you can discuss which caliber killed him.

A bigger question is whether the BG kills you while you are waiting for the squirrel/bunny load to work.

 

[SSGSAD]

I have and DO carry, a .38 spl. +p, 9mm, .357 Mag., and a .45 ... WHEN it was all I OWNED, I carried my OLD Ruger MkI, Std. Model, see my avatar. It DOESN"T matter WHAT caliber YOU carry, it MATTERS WHERE the round HITS... A hit with a .22, is FAR MORE EFICTIVE, than a MISS, with ANY other caliber .....

 

[Mark 1911]

Sorry to get graphic, but it's not only about whether a bullet can kill someone. At close range, 21 feet typical self-defense situation, its also about knock down power. By the time a .22 takes someone down, unless you hit them in the head, they may likely be on top of you. You want something that's going to stop them before they get to you, or your loved ones. Rule of thumb is to use the largest caliber you can comfortably handle, in a gun you can comfortably carry. .45 acp is relatively comfortable round for most men to handle and carry, and has proven stopping power. On the other hand, if you don't feel comfortable with a .45, a .22 pistol in your pocket is a lot more effective than a .45 auto laying on your dresser at home.

in terms of TKOF (Taylor Knockout Factor), the 45 acp has nearly 10 times the stopping power of a 22 long rifle.

 

[ATM]

...It DOESN"T matter WHAT caliber YOU carry, it MATTERS WHERE the round HITS... A hit with a .22, is FAR MORE EFICTIVE, than a MISS, with ANY other caliber .....

If you have to compare the .22 hits with misses in the other calibers, you're kinda proving the point of it being a far less effective choice.

 

[.45 Dave]

For what it's worth:


"Bella Twin, an Indian girl, and her friend Dave Auger were hunting grouse near Lesser Slave Lake in northern Alberta. The only gun they had was Bella’s single-shot bolt-action .22 Rimfire rifle. They were walking a cutline that had been made for oil exploration when they saw a large grizzly following the same survey line toward them. If they ran, the bear would probably notice them and might chase, so they quietly sat down on a brush pile and hoped that the bear would pass by without trouble. But the bear came much too close, and when the big boar was only a few yards away, Bella Twin shot him in the side of the head with a .22 Long cartridge. The bear dropped, kicked and then lay still. Taking no chances, Bella went up close and fired all of the cartridges she had, seven or eight .22 Longs, into the bear’s head. That bear, killed in 1953, was the world-record grizzly for several years and is still high in the records today. Which only goes to show that in an emergency, strange things are possible, but who wants that kind of emergency?"

 

[Excalibur]

In an emergency, having a gun regardless of caliber is better than nothing. A .22LR is good but really for a defensive round it's better than sticks and stones

 

[richardraw316]

For what it's worth:


"Bella Twin, an Indian girl, and her friend Dave Auger were hunting grouse near Lesser Slave Lake in northern Alberta. The only gun they had was Bella’s single-shot bolt-action .22 Rimfire rifle. They were walking a cutline that had been made for oil exploration when they saw a large grizzly following the same survey line toward them. If they ran, the bear would probably notice them and might chase, so they quietly sat down on a brush pile and hoped that the bear would pass by without trouble. But the bear came much too close, and when the big boar was only a few yards away, Bella Twin shot him in the side of the head with a .22 Long cartridge. The bear dropped, kicked and then lay still. Taking no chances, Bella went up close and fired all of the cartridges she had, seven or eight .22 Longs, into the bear’s head. That bear, killed in 1953, was the world-record grizzly for several years and is still high in the records today. Which only goes to show that in an emergency, strange things are possible, but who wants that kind of emergency?"

the only problem i have with this story is she shot him in the side of the head. the bear was not looking at her, which means the bear did not consider her a threat at that moment. which means 22lr is effective if you shoot someone in the side of the head. but how often in a self defese situation is that actually going to happen. i believe a head shot with a souped up bb gun to a 50 cal bullet will be lethal. but what happens when you miss the head? if she had killed that bear with 2-3 shots to the heart, then i would be on my way to get me a 22. shoot it in the side of the head and it died, while a good entertaining story, does not prove the point that a 22 is a good sd option.

 

[Roadie]

Sorry to get graphic, but it's not only about whether a bullet can kill someone. At close range, 21 feet typical self-defense situation, its also about knock down power. By the time a .22 takes someone down, unless you hit them in the head, they may likely be on top of you. You want something that's going to stop them before they get to you, or your loved ones. Rule of thumb is to use the largest caliber you can comfortably handle, in a gun you can comfortably carry. .45 acp is relatively comfortable round for most men to handle and carry, and has proven stopping power. On the other hand, if you don't feel comfortable with a .45, a .22 pistol in your pocket is a lot more effective than a .45 auto laying on your dresser at home.

in terms of TKOF (Taylor Knockout Factor), the 45 acp has nearly 10 times the stopping power of a 22 long rifle.

Reagan and Brady did not enjoy getting shot with a .22, just sayin..

 

[ATM]

Reagan and Brady did not enjoy getting shot with a .22, just sayin..

Though neither of them were attacking anyone so it's hard to say if they could have continued an attack upon someone trying to defend themselves.

 

[Roadie]

Though neither of them were attacking anyone so it's hard to say if they could have continued an attack upon someone trying to defend themselves.

True..

But they DID attack "assault weapons" afterward, so those .22s were pretty powerful..

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Which lethal shots from a 22, would not have been lethal with a 357 magnum?

Which lethal shots from a 357 magnum would not be lethal from a 22? Some of them.

Carry the largest caliber you WILL carry. Train with that caliber/gun and actually carry it. Muscle memory, it seems to me is overlooked.

 

[Roadie]

The Myth of Handgun

Handguns are not nearly as powerful as the movies, the media, and the firearms industry itself want you to believe. Regardless of your caliber of choice, train often, shoot fast and accurately, and be prepared for a life-threatening fight that continues after you’ve emptied the magazine. When deciding on what ammo to carry, do your own research and don’t believe the hype!

 

[Bunnykid68]

The Myth of Handgun

 

[.45 Dave]

the only problem i have with this story is she shot him in the side of the head. the bear was not looking at her, which means the bear did not consider her a threat at that moment. which means 22lr is effective if you shoot someone in the side of the head. but how often in a self defese situation is that actually going to happen. i believe a head shot with a souped up bb gun to a 50 cal bullet will be lethal. but what happens when you miss the head? if she had killed that bear with 2-3 shots to the heart, then i would be on my way to get me a 22. shoot it in the side of the head and it died, while a good entertaining story, does not prove the point that a 22 is a good sd option.

Not saying it is--but it does reply to those who essentially are saying it can't kill anything bigger than a rabbit. You make a point for shot placement. I merely am making the point that even a .22 can be very lethal. Most people are not built like grizzlies. Often just inflicting enough pain makes them stop or deter their actions.

 

[bwframe]

...Often just inflicting enough pain makes them stop or deter their actions.

Why waist money on any firearm then?
Just carry a pocket full of rocks or go high $ with pepper spray?

 

[Movealongmovealong]

An untrained person can probably get off 6 accurate shots with a .22 compared to the time it takes for the same person to get off one accurate shot with a big bore (.45, 357mag, 10mm), if that. Also, not everyone has hours and hours to spend at the range every week or month, or even year. That's 5 more chances for a critically disabling shot in my book. A .22 mag has better penetration than a lot of .38 special rounds, but WAYY less recoil, so easier to shoot and pound for pound and size vs. size more shots in the gun too.

Even experienced shooters often severely underestimate their own ability to shoot under pressure, which in a personal defense situation could include a fistfight (with a few punches to the head and guts, or slamming of head on the ground.... VERY DISORIENTING) and potentially some running, quick moving, extremely hard exertion (e.g. ground fighting), etc. Most untrained, out-of-shape people can't fight at full strength more than a minute, if that, without becoming very, very exhausted. Hell, most Americans (70%) are overweight and/or obese, and might have a heart attack just trying to exert themselves if an assailant gets the jump on them (a very possible scenario).

With that in mind, the idea of having a large caliber gun, to me, seems much, much less important than a gun you could reliably fire even under extreme duress - for ex: A gun you can fire EASILY one handed, with your weak hand and off-balance. Try doing a 5 HEAVY, WEIGHTED squats, imagine someone punching you in the guts or face (sucker punches do happen!), then imagine getting your gun out and up and trying to fire, because that's potentially what a person is looking at potentially trying to do.

Of course, if won't go that way every time for every person... but are you preparing for the BEST case, or the WORST case?

 

[cobber]

An untrained person can probably get off 6 accurate shots with a .22 compared to the time it takes for the same person to get off one accurate shot with a big bore (.45, 357mag, 10mm), if that. Also, not everyone has hours and hours to spend at the range every week or month, or even year. That's 5 more chances for a critically disabling shot in my book. A .22 mag has better penetration than a lot of .38 special rounds, but WAYY less recoil, so easier to shoot and pound for pound and size vs. size more shots in the gun too.

Even experienced shooters often severely underestimate their own ability to shoot under pressure, which in a personal defense situation could include a fistfight (with a few punches to the head and guts, or slamming of head on the ground.... VERY DISORIENTING) and potentially some running, quick moving, extremely hard exertion (e.g. ground fighting), etc. Most untrained, out-of-shape people can't fight at full strength more than a minute, if that, without becoming very, very exhausted. Hell, most Americans (70%) are overweight and/or obese, and might have a heart attack just trying to exert themselves if an assailant gets the jump on them (a very possible scenario).

With that in mind, the idea of having a large caliber gun, to me, seems much, much less important than a gun you could reliably fire even under extreme duress - for ex: A gun you can fire EASILY one handed, with your weak hand and off-balance. Try doing a 5 HEAVY, WEIGHTED squats, imagine someone punching you in the guts or face (sucker punches do happen!), then imagine getting your gun out and up and trying to fire, because that's potentially what a person is looking at potentially trying to do.

Of course, if won't go that way every time for every person... but are you preparing for the BEST case, or the WORST case?

I got exhausted just reading this. Time for a beer.

 

[bwframe]

An untrained person can probably get off 6 accurate shots with a .22 compared to the time it takes for the same person to get off one accurate shot with a big bore (.45, 357mag, 10mm), if that. Also, not everyone has hours and hours to spend at the range every week or month, or even year. That's 5 more chances for a critically disabling shot in my book...

What do you base this statement on? What about 9mm?

 

[jve153]

i carry 9mm, i am a decent shot with it, follow up shots are somewhat quick and back on target. however, i am more accurate and quicker with follow up shots on my sig mosquito. the 9mm holds more ammo (kinda kills one of the .22 strengths this time) and does more damage per impact. my 9mm is MY choice for edc. that being said, i WOULD NOT hesitate to grab my .22 in a home defense situation where it is a few feet closer. 10 shots, quickly, IMO should be enough to get me to my shotgun or rifle and/or make the other guy think twice.

for a really cool .22lr round, check out the cci velocitor. a couple of the gel tests i have seen put it pretty close to a federal jhp .380.

 

[Hookeye]

I'm slight of build and getting older by the minute.......... and carry a .45 acp. I also shoot it very well. But then I have shot 1911's well since I was a kid.

I don't see what the big deal is..............why folks are wussing out and trying to justify a .22rf.

Maybe if injured or of ailment, then something so small might be all that is tolerable.

But for an able bodied person...............yeah, whatever.

Geeesh, sounds like a bunch of old geezers with their NAA mini revolvers sitting at the wafflehouse.

Best yet is when one of those guys says he uses birdshot for personal protection because it's superior