Posted on 02/26/2011 8:19:05 PM PST by Artemis Webb
I have a Taurus 94 .22LR 9 shot revolver. Does ammo make any difference as a self defense or concealed carry weapon?
MASS.......get it? Otherwise known as SECTIONAL DENSITY, in relation to the width, length and weight of the bullet. Impact energy cannot be transferred into the target medium without mass. “Stopping power” is the result of that energy being transferred through out the target, as well of the proximity of the bullet in a vital area. (AKA Penetration)
If your claim were true, then Alaska Big game guides and hunters would be using .22 LR’s for Moose and Brown Bear. In short, your argument is ridiculous.
Achmed the Dead Terrorist has that disease. I understand it is bad?? :^}
Actually he was shot in the a$$ by a marine but a bomb actually killed him.
I seem to have angered the pocket cannon crowd.
Don’t blame me, blame physics...btw, why do you think the larger energy loads in military rifles have so much more velocity? Of course a larger load has more energy, I merely told this guy to buy lighter ammo for his .22, because in that instance, the momentum equation works in favor of higher energy...and I get my head bit off. Of course, using your logic, he should be using a 158 grain bullet in his .22 right. I get it, people whose only experience with firearm used against a man is television love to talk about how theirs is bigger. I, however, have seen a man killed by a .22, and it sure as hell looked effective to me. Ammo is a delicate balance of many factors, mass is just one of them. I knew the mine is bigger crowd would disagree. BTW, if .22 ammo is so lousy, why do companies still make .22 pistols? Surely they need to consult with the Big Game Guide first! The .22 LR has proven to be the most prolific and effective self defense ammo for the last hundred years, period. All I’m saying is don’t make fun of people who know this.
“MASS.......get it? Otherwise known as SECTIONAL DENSITY”
BTW, mass does not equal sectional density.
Impact energy cannot be transferred without mass? Correct. Same goes for velocity, except its exponentially more important.
Penetration? That is actually where sectional density comes into play.
I’m ridiculous? Seriously. I’m having the stupidest argument in the world, with a bunch of people equating a .22 with a spitball.
I have never heard or read a self defense defense professional recommend the use of a .22 for personal protection. Ever. Then most I have ever heard is that it’s better than nothing. (I have heard/read .22 rifles being recommended as survival weapons, which is something different entirely.)
Every once in a while an amateur on a forum will suggest that the .22LR is an acceptable personal protection round, but you are the first person ever to promote it as superior.
Yes, they got lucky and made a soft tissue or head shot.
I don’t remember saying the .22 was superior. But lets look at what a CCW should do for you:
1. Be light enough to comfortably carry, all the time.
2. Be cost effective enough to practice, practice, practice with it.
3. Be lethal.
I don’t think anybody will argue with 1 or 2...but I knew there would be a crowd of Billy Bad-Arses who would tell this guy he was a pansy for using a .22. I don’t typically carry, and my pistol is an M9...so I’m not defending my own personal choice here...but really, this guy will be just fine with a .22. Trust me, its lethal - no matter what some guy’s dentist’s brother in law saw happen on an episode of CHIPs once. Some of the responses here are just absolutely silly...I’m all for somebody having a pocket cannon of his chosing, but why on earth should we make fun of a guy for carrying a smaller caliber. Its his choice. I’m sure he’s fired the thing; and, I’m sure he’s come to the (correct) conclusion that it would kill somebody.
“I don’t remember saying the .22 was superior.”
I do. Post 144:
“The .22 LR has proven to be the most prolific and effective self defense ammo for the last hundred years, period.”
That leaves very little wiggle room, so start wiggling.
1.) Nobody said it wasn't lethal. It will kill you, just not necessarily NOW. You keep ignoring the point everybody is making and keep going back to your straw man argument about (eventual) lethality.
2.) The .22's lack of effectiveness as a primary personal defense weapon is not based upon anecdotal evidence, but the experience of every single self defense expert in the world. Why do you think that police departments upgraded from the .32? Because of what some guy’s dentist’s brother in law saw happen on an episode of CHIPs once? No, because the ranks of police widows were too high.
3.) It's important to have the right tool for the job. The .22LR is a great round for targets, varmints, small game in a pinch, dispatching farm animals, and as a hideaway backup weapon. the proper tool for for personal defense is the largest caliber you can comfortably shoot with accuracy.
I need some of Beck’s duct tape. Let me rephrase it - the .22 is used most often to kill someone in self defense. So? Am I implying it is more lethal than a .357? No! Am I implying that it is silly for people on this thread to imply that a .22 is harmless? Absolutely!
Get it - used alot (in fact most often)...so it obviously works. What is so hard to understand about that. Yes, I am aware that a civil war cannon would be more lethal...but soooo whaaattt? A .22 LR is lethal. I can’t believe that is seriously being challenged. Go ahead, try it...it will kill you...and I happen to believe it would be an excellent choice for a CCW weapon (btw, I don’t own one, I was just trying to warn the OP about what would happen - which is exactly what did happen).
I just thought of the perfect analogy: using a .22 as a primary self defense weapon is like framing a house with a finishing hammer.
“I just thought of the perfect analogy: using a .22 as a primary self defense weapon is like framing a house with a finishing hammer.”
But if you did that, you never would sink a 16d nail on the first blow, and it would take forever to finish the job.
Back to the straw man argument, I see.
1.) .22 rounds are lethal. Only a fool would question that.
2.) The purpose of a personal defense weapon is to STOP. Killing is purely incidental.
3.) .22 rounds, while lethal, lack stopping power. As do .32s. As do lower powered .38s
In review:
1.) .22 rounds are lethal. Only a fool would question that.
2.) The purpose of a personal defense weapon is to STOP. Killing is purely incidental.
3.) .22 rounds, while lethal, lack stopping power. As do .32s. As do lower powered .38s
One more time:
1.) .22 rounds are lethal. Only a fool would question that.
2.) The purpose of a personal defense weapon is to STOP. Killing is purely incidental.
3.) .22 rounds, while lethal, lack stopping power. As do .32s. As do lower powered .38s
From the 10 Commandments of Concealed Carry, Commandment #9
Written by Massad Ayoob.
Carry An Adequate Firearm
. . .Most experts recommend a five-shot revolver as the absolute minimum in firepower, and the .380/9mm/.38SPL range as the minimum potency level in terms of handgun caliber.
That's where the analogy falls down. The nails don't hammer back.
Dumbest thread ever.
I warned the OP that people would make fun of him for using a .22. I was right.
I’m still waiting for somebody on this thread to post a Youtube clip, demonstrating on himself how harmless a .22 LR is :). (P.S. Don’t really try this - the .22 used to be a tool of choice for killing hogs and cattle at slaughter - it really, really, really will kill you instantly)
I think I mentioned this earlier - I have seen the deadly aftermath of a .22 LR shot to the head. Call me a believer, it absolutely will kill you. Sure a cannon will kill you better; but, if this guy likes the weight and feel of a .22, he’ll do just fine...the people on this thread did just about everything but accuse him of having a millimeter peter, which I think is just silly. Unless you’ve served on a battleship, odds are I’ve fired weapons bigger than any of the detractors on this thread...but I don’t equate it with my masculinity.
My initial warning was correct...oh boy was it ever correct.
I stand by my original assertion: If you point a .22 at me, I will run like a little girl. If you fire the thing at me, I will outrun my shadow. If you hit me with it, I will be dead.
Same could be said about any weapon.
I tell people who think they are good enough to take small weapons away as long as they don’t mind a few holes in their lungs they might beable too.
Why do you want to use a 22 LR for defense?
“I warned the OP that people would make fun of him for using a .22. I was right.”
Really? How many have made fun of the poster? Not too many. Many have sensibly suggested that larger calibers are a better choice for self defense. Its interesting that no one is asking WHY the poster wants to carry one. If that’s all you have or can handle, it will have to do and is certainly better than nothing. In fact its likely that (like you) the vast majority of criminals will wet themselves and run away at sight of a gun. Its the ones who dont that are the problem. An ideal hit with a 22 will kill quickly/stop an attack quickly, but most center of mass hits will not. Its foolish and dangerous for you to suggest otherwise especially with the vast amount of information available to anyone not too lazy to find it.
Sensibly suggested huh? Your browser must have filtered out the comments about the bananas.
Dangerous? You caught me - one of the most popular (and often used) self defense weapons is useless. Seriously, you can’t argue your way around it. The guy asks about ammo, and its like a middle school locker-room around here. Its just dumb. One final (really, I mean it) note - a .22 LR is a DEADLY round, which will STOP a human being. This is why a .22 is sold at the gun counter and not the toy department.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.