Posted on 01/08/2022 8:11:26 AM PST by DoodleBob
It’s a question those of us in the gun writing business often get asked. “What’s the best caliber for a self-defense handgun?” Those expecting a one-to-three digit answer from me will be disappointed. I respond to their simple question with a complex one. “What is the most powerful cartridge that you can shoot accurately and proficiently that comes in a handgun which is comfortable enough to carry that you’ll carry it all the time?” Depending on the person asking, the answer will vary. For some, it’s a full-sized .357 Mag. or 10 mm Auto. For others, it’s one of the current .380 ACPs offered in a 9 mm-sized handgun. And in certain cases, it’s the .22 LR.
...
Civilians who carry a firearm for self-defense are considering many of the same factors, including ammunition cost and availability, but their most important consideration should be using a firearm that is reliable and that they can consistently hit their target with at self-defense distances. Ballistic advantages goes out the window when your bullet doesn’t connect. Five .22 LRs in the bullseye beat one .44 Mag. that missed completely. To paraphrase famed lawman Bill Jordan, ballistics are fine, but accuracy is final.
Recoil is one factor that can hamper accuracy. Even cartridges on the lower end of the power spectrum, like the .380 ACP, can produce a lot of recoil when paired with one of today’s ultralight, micro-compact handguns. Lack of recoil is the .22 LR’s main advantage when it comes to shooting accurately. The topic of the .22 LR as a self-defense cartridge has been fought over and over in digital and print forums.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanrifleman.org ...
Hmmmmm...interesting
I guess shooting into ballistic gelatin showed the Firearms guys at Quantico that the .38 round would be just enough.
The instructor class I took, they shot into a torso filled with clay....9mm - .40 - .45 - .357....... That .357 round is no effin’ joke. Did obvious more damage than the other three.
One of the reasons the .357Sig never got off the ground....too hard to shoot for the average cop. Just like the .40 and now the reason so many departments are reverting back to the 9mm.
Good point on the revolver, that would be the way to go.
.22short! That would be cool. XD You’d probably have to finish up with a knife fight! But I’ll take a knife fight against an opponent with 6 holes in him over one with no holes in him any day! XD
One other consideration... it’s probably better if there is just one side of the story being told during the investigation!
“That .357 round is no effin’ joke.”
The #1 one-shot stop round in the history of FBI statistics.
” If you are drawing to the drop, you are probably DOA anyway.”
FBI data says the majority of gunfights are within 8 ft.
And 4 of 5 times the person who shoots first prevails.
If you have a semi-automatic, then you are probably history before you clear the chamber.
Conclusively? Debunks? Complete horse manure. 🐂💩 What an amazing glimpse into your reasoning process. Table 2 is ONLY about Boston and ONLY from 2010 to 2014.
Table 2. Firearm Calibers and Wounds for Criminal Shootings in Boston, 2010-2014
Like I’ve been saying: TAKE A Critical Thinking Class.
It works for me. I aint gonna hold your hand.
Oh, cool, since we’re cherry picking...
https://www.hipointfirearmsforums.com/threads/more-people-have-been-killed-with-the-22-than-any-other-caliber.336202/
‘More people have been killed with the .22 than any other caliber’
lklawson · Jun 28, 2015 · Edited by Moderator Jun 28, 2015
Font Rectangle Parallel Number Circle
This statement used to come up a lot, particularly referencing the lethality, and therefore suitability, of the .22 Long Rifle as a self-defense or caliber of last choice for self-defense.
On the surface, it doesn’t appear to make sense; however, it has been repeated frequently so maybe there’s a grain of truth to it, right?
There have been many articles on the internet debunking the supposed high-lethality of the .22LR when compared to other potential calibers. To their credit, I conclude that most of them are right. Ceteris Paribus, most larger calibers do tend to be more lethal than a .22LR. However, yes, there really is a germ of truth to the statement.
I would like to reference:
The Medium is the Message: Firearm Caliber as a Determinant of Death from Assault, by Franklin E. Zimring, Journal of Legal Studies. Berkeley Law, 1-1-1972
This study is, in fact, a study of deaths by caliber in Chicago in 1970. The intention of the study was to attempt to quantify lethality by caliber with the thesis that larger calibers are more lethal and to quantify homicide by motive (intentional or unintentional).
Table 5, indicates that of the 113 (known caliber) fatal attacks, about 1/3 of all of them were with the .22 caliber, inclusive of [.22, .25, .32, .38, >.38] calibers.
Font Rectangle Parallel Number Circle
When including the .25 in that mix, the two (.22 & .25) account for around half of all fatalities, outnumbering by far any other individual caliber in the set. Table 7, “Estimated Death Rate from Gun Attacks by Wound Location, Number of Wounds, and Gun Caliber” further reinforces that trend.
Font Parallel Number Pattern Monochrome
The study then goes on the normalize against multiple hits and location of hit as well as a number of other factors, eventually concluding that (brace yourself), yes, caliber matters and that the relative “dangerousness” of the .38 (and, presumably, larger) is about 3 times greater, according to Figure 1 (pp106 journal, pp11 in PDF).
Rectangle Font Parallel Circle Number
The gist of it is, that more people were indeed killed with the .22 caliber than any other individual caliber within the study sample (Chicago, 1970) but that appears to be because there were a lot more people shot with a .22 than any other weapon, apparently because the .22 was a far more common weapon, not because it is more lethal.
It has been speculated that these numbers would probably be applicable to the general U.S. as a whole during the 1960’s and 1970’s due to the affordable price of inexpensive .22LR and .25ACP “Saturday Night Special” handguns, both domestic and imports.
Agreed. And, the majority of gun fights are domestic disputes inside a residence. Not my concern.
I’d say so, with a .22
If you could get the first off center mass with a 10mm... then perform immediate action... you would have a lot better odds I think.
“This statement used to come up a lot, particularly referencing the lethality, and therefore suitability, of the .22 Long Rifle as a self-defense or caliber of last choice for self-defense.
On the surface, it doesn’t appear to make sense; however, it has been repeated frequently so maybe there’s a grain of truth to it, right?”
You should go with that authors opinion.
And carry your little .22.
From the author:
I respond to their simple question with a complex one. “What is the most powerful cartridge that you can shoot accurately and proficiently that comes in a handgun which is comfortable enough to carry that you’ll carry it all the time?” Depending on the person asking, the answer will vary. For some, it’s a full-sized .357 Mag. or 10 mm Auto. For others, it’s one of the current .380 ACPs offered in a 9 mm-sized handgun. And in certain cases, it’s the .22 LR.
“I imagine you’d agree Paul Harrell is pretty much the gold standard for you tube gun talkies.”
He’s up there.
I think that statement may be more subjective than you would think.
Fentanyl might be a bad choice since it is scheduled, but would that be illegal with something like tetradotoxin, or Potassium Chloride? I mean the purpose of the bullet is to kill. Could you make the bullet more lethal, and somehow commit a crime?
A prosecutor could make the case that you were planning to kill in advance and not just stop the threat. That’s Murder 1.
L
I put pumpkin spice in my hollow points so they can die trendy.
“I put pumpkin spice in my hollow points so they can die trendy.”
That’s very considerate of you.
L
Interesting. My impression was you either had the right to bring deadly force, using any lethal means, or you didn’t. Not that the law means much these days.
Probably the most firearms knowledgeable guy I knew had made the case you always try to kill whoever you shoot so it is less likely you’ll get sued by a cripple. And that was twenty+ years ago, before it was as bad as it is now.
“I used the amount of force necessary to stop a deadly threat to my life. I wasn’t shooting to kill. I was shooting to stop the threat.”
It would be impossible to make that argument if you’d done something as stupid as filling your hollow points with a lethal dose of an illegal drug.
L
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.