Posted on 06/04/2012 3:38:53 PM PDT by marktwain
Wade writes:
Foghorn, my Dad is planning on getting his CCW license, and is already thinking about the handgun to use. But he says that he is going to get a .22lr or something similar, saying that ‘accuracy is more important than force’. He has hunted his entire life, and is an extremely good shot with both rifle and pistol, but I think he is too cocky when he says “all you need to do is shoot someone in the head and the party’s over”. How can I convince him that he may not be able to hit what he’s aiming at in a high-stress situation, and that he needs to look into a more versatile caliber?
I’ve got some bad news — your Dad isn’t completely wrong. And, because I have nothing better to do today, we’re going to open up that whole can of worms . . .
Your dad is completely correct in that a properly placed .22lr round will take a man down for good. Despite the relative thickness of the human skull a typical .22lr round does have enough power to successfully penetrate and cause sufficient damage to kill a human from close range. And on the more fleshy bits of a human it is perfectly capable of inflicting some damage.
The issue we run into with the .22lr round, and one that you seem to have correctly identified, is that when you don’t hit a particularly useful organ it doesn’t do much immediate damage. The best example I can think of in this case is the wild hogs of Texas and the gulf coast, which have a nasty tendency to survive and escape if they’re not hit with a large enough caliber or in the right spot. Humans posess a similar ability to survive extreme punishment and damage without actually dying.
We could sit here all day long until we’re blue in the fingers discussing the relative merits of the different calibers, but the best solution is always the same: cold, hard data.
About a year ago Greg Ellifritz over at Buckeye Firearms concluded a pretty darn impressive analysis of gunfight data recorded over a 10 year period, the total count of incidents included in his analysis topping 1,800. It doesn’t give us a statistically significant look at murders in the United States, but the data is sufficiently large and normal to give us the ability to use his results to compare the effectiveness of different calibers.
Admittedly 9mm does take up a disproportionate percentage of the observations and .32 data is a little skimpy, but its good enough for our purposes. So, using his data, let’s take a look at how well the lowly .22 round does compared to other handgun calibers (and shotguns, just for comparison sake).
First things first, let’s see what percentage of observed gunfights ended in a fatality for the person on the receiving end.
The graph is pretty clear on this: .22 caliber firearms are just as deadly in a gunfight as any other handgun caliber. In fact, it beat the average (far right). Surprisingly, every caliber that begins with a 4 (.40 S&W, .45, .44 Mag…) performed worse than the .22 caliber firearms in terms of putting the opponent in the dirt for good.
The next thing I thought was interesting was the metric about how many rounds it took to incapacitate the opponent.
In case you were wondering, the smaller the bar in this example the better the round performed. And, in terms of performance in putting the opponent down, only a shotgun beats the .22 round. I get the feeling that in reality you can chop a round off the 9mm’s numbers, as the double tap has been trained into almost every shooter these days and probably means the numbers are artificially high.
Greg also includes something about a “one shot stop” percentage, but I don’t agree with his methodology on it and is not presented here. Go read up on it at the original site if you’re interested.
There’s a small fly in the ointment: the percentage of incidents where the opponent was not incapacitated.
Another chart where large bars are bad, and here the mouseguns aren’t doing so hot compared to the big boys. However, I get the feeling that this chart is somewhat deceptive with its results. Newer shooters have a tendency to get the smaller guns with smaller calibers, and also have a tendency to not be as well trained as those carrying the larger rounds. So, instead of this chart being an argument against the lowly .22 round I see it as an argument against poor training. As we saw with the last chart, IF you can hit the guy there’s a great chance he’s going down. But the issue is hitting him, and incorporating some of the accuracy results from the original study seems to back up my suspicions.
So, in short, what’s the answer? Is a .22 a good self defense round? According to the numbers, it looks to be among the best in terms of stopping the threat. Add in the fact that it’s lightweight, low recoil and uses firearms that are ridiculously easy to conceal and you can see where a .22 caliber firearm for concealed carry might be a winner.
So, in the immortal words of HAL, “I’m sorry Wade, I can’t do that.” According to the best numbers I could find, I can’t come up with a valid reason to convince your Dad to move to a higher caliber. Not only is it an effective round, but its size and weight means that your Dad is more likely to actually carry the gun instead of leaving it at home because it was too inconvenient to bring along. And, as we all know, its often the mere presence of a firearm that can save one’s life.
Does that mean I’ll be swapping out my Wilson Combat 45ACP 1911 for a Derringer? Hell no. But it doesn’t stop me from looking at some of those mouseguns for the hot Texas summer…
I've read good things about that round but never fired one.
My wife is 5'2" and 110lbs. She carries a Taurus PT140 Millenium Pro (40 S&W). She has no problem with it and loves to shoot the darned thing. About 500 rounds every month.
My daughter is 5'5" and 100lbs. She carries a Beretta Px4 Storm Compact (40 S&W) and absolutly LOVES it. She shoots with my wife and I and does the same 500 rounds or so every month.
Out to 15 yards they both print in the black on a 8" target.
I really think it is attitude more than kick. If you have the proper grip you can shoot nearly anything without much problem. I will say they usually refrain from shooting my S&W model 29 (44 Mag 6" barrel) more than 20 or 30 rounds in one session. That one can make your hand feel the recoil now and then.
They're easy to aim, shot place, and plenty loud.
For wifey, we have a 20 gauge Mossberg scattergun - being as she's well under 90 pounds, a 12 gauge was gonna be too oppressive for her to handle.
A variation on a theme. I never hesitate to unload my handgun and allow a person to handle it. When they hand it back I say, "Thanks, I wanted to get some more fingerprints on it."
Oh My!
“You just know”
Practice, practice and then practice some more. When you think you have it down pat, practice some more.
“You will perform in any conflict, the way you practice.”
Sun Tzu, the Art of War.
but I remember when the whole 9mm thingee started back in the ‘90s, the FBI did a really big study. And they concluded that if it didn’t start with a .4xx, it wasn’t a good deal.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That study was semi autos only. They were not going back to a six shot revolver. However, that study was done before they had really good 9mm defensive loads. Now days, 9mm is a little better than it used to be.
Obviously, a 44mag would perform better than a 357 but there are no FBI data on a 44mag because none have ever been issued to a law enforcement officer and used to shoot a bad guy..
“The large Rambo contingent here on FR watches too many Bronson movies.”
Oh Geez, you are SOO correct.
Anyway, its fun to see what some of these ‘Rambos’ think is ‘cool.’
Take care and shoot straight.
It almost could qualify as a .22 cal pistol, being chambered in 5.7mm. There is an optional 30-round magazine! Muzzle velocity is about 1,900 fps. Very accurate. The Secret Service carries them. Drawbacks: it and the ammo it uses are expensive.
I own a Charter Arms Bulldog Pug in .44spl and it seems to me it should come off pretty well compared to a .45acp. Some of the smaller 1911 variants have short barrels and similar capacity to the pug.
Oh Geez, you just broke a very big law here on FR!
Everyone KNOWS that Dirty Harry cleaned up San Fran with a .44. The most Powerful Handgun In The World!!
LOL
I know what you are saying, they have “spiffed” up the puny .9 to bring it a little more up to snuff. But if I had to make a choice, I’d still settle for a .357 revolver over a 15 round 9mm.
I’m just glad that you remember the study. You are correct, they only compared autos, they figured revolvers were mostly obsolete.
Personally, I still like that puny old .22LR.
Now, how old does that make me?
LOL
Yours is an extremely valuable post and observation, and I assume it is true.
I have been following this .22 theme and was very interested in Molotov Mitchell’s WND video on the subject, which was later on Gordon Liddy’s talk radio show with all kinds of heated arguments.
You are the first to make this one.
A lot of talk on this thread about incapacitation etc. But the sad truth is that God forbid you have to use it to defend your life or the lives of your loved ones it is not a good idea to leave an injured, desperate and talkative individual in neighborhoods where John Edwardses and hand-picked juries may be found.
Thanks, but I don’t think I’d want to shoot any larger caliber than .38SP in a sub nose. Any more power in a concealable weapon and I’d switch to a pistol, which absorbs the energy better.
I carried a semi auto .22 lr for years as my personal defense weapon. As my eyes have gotten weaker, I tried moving up to a Glock 23. Shooting the .40 was not as ‘comfortable’ as I expected, so I ordered a Glock 19 barrel and now carry the 23 as a 19 with veridian laser. I agree on the 147 gr bullet though ...
Golux,
I have to bow my head and think through what you have posted.
The lawyer contingent adds a component to protecting your family, that is a complete wild card.
G. Gordon would not hesitate to use a .22. OTOH, you have to do what is best for you and yours.
In your case, putting an end to your antagonist, in short order, is better than defending yourself against his lawyer if the SOB lives.
Its a personal thing, you have to make your own decisions.
Everything I have read says otherwise. The .44 magnum is a hunting round. The .357 magnum round is by far THE BEST self defense round. Once that fact is understood, then the other factors can be considered (not in order of importance).
But if you could get your hands on one of Barret's new handguns, you could end many fights just by flashing it at the perp.
I’m with you, Slim. Lot’s of folks, especially wimmin, can’t handle much recoil. For them, a good .22 mag revolver is only 1 million times better than going bare-knuckles, as opposed to a more manly caliber, which would be about 2 million times better. But I’d take 1 million times better than a UFC fight to the death any day.
Gee, one might think I had just set a hook with my tongue in cheek post, seeing if anyone would actually work themselves into a lather over it. It seems that there is always someone on these caliber threads who goes straight to belligerent. Frankly I thought it so obvious that everyone would get it.
But apparently there was one taker. Calling me an idiot was perfect. Where shall I ship your prize?
Forget that 9mm post I made, that is only what I use while sleeping. The customized .375 H&H revolver is the must have for knock down.
And here is a secret, as the 9mm over penetrates (going right through) some people who are obviously less schooled than you prefer heavier bullets, so the don’t waste energy behind the target. They probably don’t understand just how stupid that is. Heck, they’d probably be better off with a .22 or .45 ACP (and sorry for my arcane language, it goes with all of the 100 year old guns I own).
Love this thread even more than most FR firearms threads.
No details in a public forum but was once stopped by the police (illegal U-turn) driving a very, very fancy car in a very, very liberal city on Christmas Eve at 1150pm.
I had not been drinking, (rather amazingly for me at that time) but I HAD been hunting on private land and there were two of what the MSM would call “high powered rifles” as well as a .25 dispatcher in the trunk, and a LOT of ammo.
Big, seasoned kick-ass black cop, Sergeant:
“Any weapons or drugs in the car?”
“No, Sir. No drugs or street weapons. But I am a hunter. I have been hunting in (another state.) If you open the trunk you will find rifles, ammunition, and hunting gear, also some blood as I transported a carcass this morning.”
Here I was in a jacket and tie.
Guns drawn. Hands where they could see ‘em. So many cop cars they closed the street. (A fairly major street...) Terrible blue lights everywhere.
But they did not cuff me.
Told after 45mins to sit back in the car.
“Do you know that in (this place) there is a MINIMUM FIVE YEAR SENTENCE for (what you’ve done?)”
“No Sir.”
...To make a long story short, they did not arrest me and assigned a detail to watch my car while I fulfilled my work-related duties. Yes, what I did was totally illegal (I did not know it) but though I am not a badge-licker, I have nothing but praise for those policemen who call ‘em like they see ‘em.
INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY is what we’re about. Including State Officers.
Possible?
Postscript - I never forgot his badge number. My brother had been a cop two decades before in the same (precinct or district) and I and did him a very good, anonymous turn, one Christmas later.
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.