.22lr, effective round for self defense

Awhile back, I argued in support of the Kel Tec PMR-30 as an ideal defense weapon. My argument was based upon four things. 1) I actually witnessed firsthand, a man shot and killed in self defense with a .22lr. He was stopped dead in his tracks. 2) The PMR-30, being a 22 mag, packs a fair deal more punch than the standard .22lr. 3) 30 f'n rounds, in a handgun, without having to reload! 4)Low recoil.

The best argument against my claim was 'bigger is better'. While it's true that a large round with greater velocity obviously has greater potential, people often forget to consider the effects of recoil. This problem with recoil only compounds the problem of performing under stress, especially when you're completely caught off guard. If you claim to be a tough guy who can handle a 9 or .45 like it's a water gun, well, a .22 mag should be like a laser guided missile in your 'Thor like' hands of awesomeness.

Observe, as a conservative pundit explains the virtues of the .22lr.

[video=youtube;hdr14xVetXM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hdr14xVetXM[/video]

Here is a link to the study.

 

Don't get a .22 if you intend to drop your target.

 

Why not? Who says you have to only put one round in the target?

You empty a clip of .22 magnum rounds into center mass, your target isn't going to be a threat anymore.

Remember we're dealing with the average home defense situation. A gangster thug, probably a kid. You aren't dealing with a body armor equipped military veteran.

The whole "stopping power" debate is really about "whose dick is bigger" not about actual efficacy.

I'd rather my girlfriend fire 10 rounds she can put into center mass reliably than 2-3 big rounds that she'll probably miss with.

 

There is never going to be a "perfect" self defense round because people are different. A .22 lr or magnum in the hands of someone who is unable to handle a larger round is still better than a bat or knife and way better than nothing at all. If anything the report from a .22 magnum should scare them to death! My wife is perfectly content with her .357. Only five rounds, but she's good, practices a lot, and I have no doubt she can hit whatever she is aiming at. A .357 revolver for her wouldn't have been my first choice at the start, but it is what she picked and is what she is comfortable with. Forget about a semi-auto with her, though. They still intimidate her even though she is good with them. A self defense weapon should be whatever the most effective weapon the person is most comfortable with. For some it is a .44 magnum. For others, a bat. Anything so long as you are not completely unprepared and defenseless.

 

Doesnt a small caliber .22lr bounce around once it enters and can cause much damage that way? I'm not talking about m16 type ammo that tumbles at distance; but instead of clean in/out, the .22 can deflect & cause additional damage..

 

Any bullet beats no bullet. The gun you can use and be accurate under stress beats the cannon that you will miss with. Having qualified "expert" with the .45 when I was in the Navy, and having used it for over 30 years since then, I am very comfortable with it. My wife needs something smaller and easier. Her bedroom nightstand gun is a Walther .22lr.

 

It's not about the type of defense you use, it's about how you use it.

 

I keep a Ruger 10/22 under the bed. I told my girlfriend if she ever needed to use it. Aim for their belt buckle and pull the trigger until it clicks empty.

 

That's one reason why my only shotgun is a 20 gauge youth model. #3 buckshot, of course. Easy for the ladies to handle, easier to maneuver in hallways, and good penetration at household ranges, as the Box o' Truth site confirms.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot22.htm

Incidentally, if you haven't visited Box o' Truth before, you want to check it out. It's a guy who goes out and shoots all kinds of objects with all kinds of guns, documenting the results.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm

I learned many things there. Such that, unlike what's commonly shown on TV, a pistol round will not be able to shoot off a lock. And that most common rounds can penetrate one side of a car, but not both sides. Meaning taking cover behind a car is a good idea, but taking cover inside a car is not.

 

Kinetic energy arguments favor larger caliber and higher velocity rounds. That being said, has anyone been hit in the head within 10 feet with a 0.22LR and made a comment on this forum?

 

Yes, the .22lr is notorious for never exiting, but tumbling around while damaging organs and arteries. The self defense case I mentioned in the OP resulted in death from internal bleeding. I don't know if the round was ball ammo or hollow point. Either way, both type of round will tumble internally. A hollow point though, will of course fragment and cause greater cavitation as well.

 

When I was a kid my father's home defense gun was the pump action 20 gauge I used to hunt deer with. Loaded with buckshot it'd stop anything human. If it could take down a deer at 70 yards, it'll take down a human at 10. It was much lighter and easier to handle than his Mossberg Lawman 12 gauge and he knew even his teenage boy could use it. So he kept it where I could easily get it. His bedroom gun was a Colt Python .357. lol

 

We're not dealing with "average" scenarios, we're being prepared for the worst. And that's multiple armed assailants. While you're "emptying" your peashooter into one of them, he and the others are going to be doing likewise, and you are going to be dead. However, I do agree that a .22 is better than nothing.

I'd go for a slug loaded 12 gauge for home defence myself, then the highest calibre pistol you can handle. If that's just a .22 so be it.

 

Good video but I read the study (your link) and it is not so glowing as to the 22LR. From the study:

Some people will look at this data and say "He's telling us all to carry .22s". That's not true. Although this study showed that the percentages of people stopped with one shot are similar between almost all handgun cartridges, there's more to the story. Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful.​

The study is a compendium of actual shootings and is not perfect. For example, the author notes that many shootings using 9mm used ball ammo, not hollow point, and that skewed the data (showing less effectiveness of the 9 mm).

The idea of no recoil for a 22lr and therefore more hits/better accuracy doesnt show up in the study.

I think the study shows a couple of things:
1 - there isnt much difference between calibers 380 and above
2 - there are adnvantages to 380 and above
3 - 22lr is effective as a self defense caliber

 

My wife is 4'11" tall and small framed. She can use a 20 gauge, but has a hard time keeping centered after shooting it. However, she has no trouble dumping a clip from a 10/22 into a target. She has told me that she likes that weapon because she can handle the recoil better, but prefers a shotgun (20 gauge mossberg w/ buckshot) for home defense,says she can't hardly miss. But I do agree with some that size and velocity can make a difference in the right hands.
To dudeman....take a good look at the Gifford's event. The perp used a 22 cal. gun and shot the hell out of alot of people. I suspect that if you hit someone in the head at 10 ft, you will at least knock the hell out of them and incapacitate them long enough to do more damage.

 

I'm an expert shot, and all I keep in the bedroom is a 22 revolver, but if you shoot them between the eyes, they won't go anywhere.

 

Wow.

There are a few issues, so Israel issues .22 pistols? One country out of how many? He mentioned that they are easily suppressed, there is no question in that. But that is why they carry it. For suppressors. Special Appeal, fallacy.

.22lrs and .380 topped the list? Appeal to Popularity, fallacy.

A .22 is better than nothing, however it is far from ideal. The premise of self-defense is not about shooting your target as many times as you can, it is about stopping the threat. Shooting someone and "emptying the clip" is just asking for legal problems, those of you who have suggested such, how many bonified self-defense classes have you taken?

Headshots? Are you kidding? You go for center of mass, the largest slowest moving target available.

The .45 does not have recoil, and neither does a 9mm. Hold on to your gun.

 

No, he used a Glock 19.

 

.22's typically do not fragment, they do not have enough energy to do such.

The .22 also lacks the energy to tumble around a great deal. You simply do not get the same tissue damage with a .22LR as you do a .45ACP.

There is a reason why military, police, self-defense guru's gravitate towards more powerful cartridges than the .22.

 

People are easy to kill, but hard to stop.

.22's, as far as I know, are only used by our military in suppressed pistols to eliminate patrol dogs; "Hush Puppies." As a military/police round, they are usually a foolish choice.

The goal of a defensive gun should be: 1) as a show of force to convince the attacker to stop or flee (the typical use), or 2) as a means to stop the attacker.

If someone is too old, weak or squeamish around guns to handle the recoil of a better small defensive pistol round, such as a 9mm, 9X18, or .380, then they had better pray they don't have to shoot the 300 lb. raging lunatic coming at them fast, with the expectation they will drop dead from the .22 round bouncing in their skulls. Yes, yes, there have been polar bears killed with .22's, but any sane person would not trust their life with one as long as they had ANY better option.

The very best, all around weapon to keep one's home safe is going to be a military type, clip-fed rifle: AR, AK, etc...

 

well there was the American 180 full auto rifle,177 round drum of .22was good enough for police departments and prisons.....I fired one years ago a class III dealer had at the local gun range,One could chew the center out of a target with ease

 

There is also a machine gun that shoots BB's to shoot out windows for tactical entries.

For the average person here in the US, that does not have an large budget, or access to class III weapons, the logical choice for a "front line" defence gun is going to be a semi-auto handgun (9mm and above), and/or a military type rifle in .308, .223, etc. Shotguns are thrid place. And .22's at or near the bottom.

 

^
Exactly.

If .22LR's are so effective, why are they not deployed as standard issue for police and military?

 

It's attitudes like this that keep the NRA well funded to fight ignorance.

 

I know,just citing an example where .22LRwas used

And large budget is right,saw one for sale at gun broker for 15 grand