I’d rather have a .22 than no gun, but given the choice, my carry gun would start with a 4.
I guess the low recoil and the ability to unload 3/4 rounds in quick succession makes it work.
I’d like to see the ratio of hits vs. misses to draw a final conclusion.
My thought has always been, if the caliber prevents the perp from getting off even one more shot than he would have with a lesser caliber, then I, my family members, my friends, my associates, or my fellow community members will have to dodge one less projectile to survive.
That’s my bottom line.
Mrs. Slim is recoil adverse, and dislikes heavy guns. I got her a S&W 351PD. Seven shot .22 Magnum that is 12 ounces loaded. 45 grain Hornady Critical Defense ammo exits the barrel at over 1000 FPS, and penetrates 9-11 inches in ballistic gelatin with good weight retention.
It's a gun she will carry and can handle.
FYI: Bill Jordan in "No Second Place Winner" opined that a J-frame 2 inch Airweight .22 Magnum would be a great backup gun in 1965.
The 9mm Sig P6, loaded with 147gr hollow points is of course the very best weapon anyone could possibly carry.
OK, I just wanted to get that in before my .45ACP friends arrived.
Most people don't like getting shot. The ones who are crazy or drugged enough to not care, will also need a lot of putting down.
One rule: although bigger is better, a .22 in the hand beats a .45 left home in the gun safe.
When you do manage to shoot them (without getting shot first) it's all physics. Variables like how close you are to a vital organ, how fast the bullet is travelling, how big/heavy the round is all come into play. Also how big the attacker is, how much clothing he's wearing etc.
Of course there are very specific scenarios where a .22 could be considered (close range quiet kills etc.), but anyone who advocates a .22 as a general purpose self defense round is nothing less than an abject moron.
The killing percentage is meaningless. Incapacitation is what you are looking for in a SD round.
I found this stat the most interesting in that it is a metric of the most important factor in self defence: the percentage of incidents where the opponent was not incapacitated. In that regard, .357 mag is king (but we all knew that, didn’t we?)
The results need to be weighted by the shooting distance. I doubt that the shooting distance data are available. A novice shooter with a .22 pistol at point blank range is going to be more effective at getting a kill than shooting the same gun at 15 feet. It would also be useful to know the point of entry of the bullet because this will also influence the kill statistic.
A 22LR will not even phase a drugged up intruder. My vote is for 357 Magnum or larger.
A scoped rifle chambered in .22 lr is an excellent choice for hunting small game like birds and rodents, and the ammo is dirt cheap. That said, .22 lr was never intended as a defensive round. That’s like asking if tennis rackets make good snowshoes.
Interesting topic. Thanks.
22LR is actually not too shabby out of a rifle. out of a palm sized handgun it is kinda lame.
I prefer to carry my 3 inch .45 ACP, but it is not alway practical, so then I carry a Ruger LCP .380 loaded with Corbon ammo that is about 200 fps faster than normal .380 ammo. It fits nicely in my pocket.
Of course shot placement is important, but I don’t believe that one will have the opportunity in every self defense situation to make a head shot. Like for instance the perp has you on the ground beating you head on the concrete and you are struggling for the gun. I want something that is going to do more damage than a .22.
Good to have a gun. And be quick on the draw.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DZVxD18Ztyw4&v=ZVxD18Ztyw4&gl=US
I have a serious problem with this article.
The typical death caused by a .22LR is via sepsis 3 days later. it makes a tiny hole that doesn’t bleed much. The person shot typically does not feel any pain. They go home and decide to ignore it rather than face questions when they get to the hospital. 3 days later their health goes downhill fast and they rush to the ER and die.
These deaths do not count, imo. THerefore I think the analysis in this article is of no value.
I will second the .22 for some good reasons. To start with, a 10 round magazine and a high number of RPM out of the barrel with good accuracy. Negligible barrel jump.
With higher calibers, the tendency is, for novices, one shot and look; for more skilled users, “two and done”. With a .22, you are under far less illusions about how effective your rounds *might* me, so you draw a capital letter “U” on their torso before you even consider pausing.
The second is a big secret of the .22 round. It has the damndest ability to just nick internal organs, which means that even if they get away and get to a hospital, they will seem to be doing okay, then out of the blue get a sky high fever and peritonitis, a severe and deadly abdominal infection that will likely take them out.
No other common round will typically do that. If they make it to the hospital, unless they lost an organ, they will often survive. But .22’s give you a “second chance” to take out the baddy.
This is not to say that a .22 is the end all, be all, because it certainly isn’t. But backed up with a short serrated or tanto knife, if they close the gap too quickly, and you are looking at pretty much a honey badger defense from 0 to 50 feet.