.22 Ruger for self-defense?


PDA






deltastorm11
May 10, 2009, 08:43 PM
Ok so i was at the range today and we rented a Ruger 22/45 Mark III Hunter rimfire pistol just to try it out because I never shot a 22. Now personally I shot a 38 special revolver and then the ruger and it almost felt like the ruger had no recoil. Would a gun like this ever be considered for a self-defense gun?


http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=10120&return=Y

If you enjoyed reading about ".22 Ruger for self-defense?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GojuBrian
May 10, 2009, 08:45 PM
A .22 scores about 200/1000 for self defense. No stopping power, unless you're a squirrel.

deltastorm11
May 10, 2009, 08:47 PM
Now that was what I was thinking but then I thought, What if you lay 3 of these into a BG's chest?

22-rimfire
May 10, 2009, 08:51 PM
It works for self defense as long as you understand the caliber's limitations in whatever platform you are shooting it in.

I like 22's. I used one as a house gun for years. Didn't even bother with the 357 Python I had for a long time. The biggest point was I always hit what I was shooting at with the 22 and I couldn't say that about a 357 mag at that time.

Now I use a 38spl for self defense in a revolver. But I still keep a 22 Ruger Mark II loaded at home along with a few others.

GojuBrian
May 10, 2009, 08:51 PM
What if he was on pcp and shoved the ruger in your keister? :)

But really, a .22 is a bad idea for self defense my friend. Get a 9mm or larger.

mattlove444
May 10, 2009, 08:56 PM
I keep a .40 S&W Sig P239 loaded in my house. Talk about stopping power! Took down a feral hog w/ it at 30 yrds. :)

GojuBrian
May 10, 2009, 08:59 PM
1 shot 1kill? How big was the hog? What type round was it? I use a .40 xd myself. :)

grimjaw
May 10, 2009, 09:18 PM
.22LR out of a rifle is a better choice, if you're going to go that route. At least high velocity .22LR hollowpoints will generally maintain decent penetration and expansion when fired from (http://www.brassfetcher.com/var22lrrifle.html) a rifle barrel (http://www.brassfetcher.com/Federal%2036%20grain%20Copper%20Plated%20Hollow%20Point%20.html) as opposed to a pistol barrel (http://www.brassfetcher.com/WaltherP22test.html).

You also won't be quite as deaf if you fire .22LR from a rifle indoors. That's assuming whoever you're shooting at isn't shooting back with something else.

jm

bdickens
May 10, 2009, 09:20 PM
.22LR beats .25ACP, but not by much.

wtr100
May 10, 2009, 09:27 PM
I'd take one over a rock or a sharp stick

not Ideal but if it's what ya had

kb2zya
May 10, 2009, 09:27 PM
better than a sharp pointy stick. hehee pop the bad guy in the face.i use a 12g pump for hd.my wife's goto gun is a 702 mossberg she does not like the big guns:uhoh:

22-rimfire
May 10, 2009, 09:32 PM
A quick pointing little carbine like the Ruger 10/22 is not that bad a choice as far as I'm concerned.

tkopp
May 10, 2009, 09:41 PM
Just bear in mind -- a .22 is a deadly round, but it is not a very rapidly fatal round. You can miss anything important and have a guy walk away, or you can have him bleed out in 15-20 minutes. Or you can somehow lodge a round in his heart and kill him nearly instantly. The main problem is; what is this walking dead man, whose adrenaline makes him just feel a burning, non-incapacitating pain, going to do to you in his last 5-10 minutes of life?

It might make him run away. It might not. Without immediate medical care it will probably be fatal at some point. But you're better off with a round that puts your target into shock, something that convinces them to lie down.

jad0110
May 10, 2009, 10:10 PM
You can miss anything important and have a guy walk away, or you can have him bleed out in 15-20 minutes.

That is true of anything short of a 60 mm mortar shell.

I don't recall if the following was a story I heard on THR, or if it was from a friend. But apparently, a guy at a range was minding his own business when another fellow had an ND ... putting a 270 Winchester (IIRC) into his chest. Amazingly nothing vital was hit. Apparently, other shooters at the range had to hold the victim back for fear of him beating the snot out of the guy who had the ND. :D

Moral of the story: If something critical is hit, it doesn't really make a whole lot of difference whether it is a 22 or a 50 BMG. Conversely, if no vital structures are hit and the attacker doesn't simply "wimp out", it doesn't make much difference either.

Their are two big problems with a 22 though for SD: It is a rimfire cartridge, so FTFs are a relatively common fact of life in my experience. And second, penetration can by a very iffy thing, so even if you precisely place the shot, it may not go deep enough to have an effect on a determined opponent.

But for those who have extreme recoil sensitivity, or who cannot afford to buy anything else, it certainly beats the TV remote on the nightstand.

Deltaboy
May 10, 2009, 10:15 PM
Indians in the great white North kill Moose with them.

earlthegoat2
May 10, 2009, 10:39 PM
if you have enough capacity and you can shoot it fast enough.....

akodo
May 10, 2009, 10:40 PM
People slaughter cattle and pigs with 22LR all the time.

I know some Native Americans in Canada kill Moose with them, as metioned above

BUT...the technique for slaughter is to shoot them between the eyes at close range. I have talked with some Native Americans (and yes, that term works for Canadian Indigenous people as well...they native the the contient of North America) who hunt moose by canoe, and ambush the moose while it is swimming, so again, close range shots. (Prior to firearms, they would actaully drown the moose by holding it's head underwater)

For defense? No one likes to get shot. However, again as mentioned above, the 22LR has the habit of inflicting a wound that causes the person to die 5 minutes, 15 minutes, 2 hours later, but allows them to stay up and fighting for a few minutes after being shot.

So no, not a good defensive option.

You truely want zero recoil in a defensive gun? The best I think you are going to come up with is a 9mm carbine (like the beretta storm carbine) A carbine will way 4 or 5 times as much as a handgun, so that will really absorb any 'kick'

It just doesn't store in the nightstand drawer as well.

Unfortunately, for firearms, EVERYTHING is a comprimise...power, kick, ease of use, concealability, accuracy, ease of storage, capacity, balance, etc etc.

flrfh213
May 10, 2009, 11:03 PM
i Carry a p-22 Walther as well as a snub 357 depending on mood, i can put 8 out of 10 shots with .22 in center mass in a hurry after drawing, 2 or 3 if i am lucky with the 357 but 1 is all the 357 needs if i am against a single attacker

xstuntman
May 10, 2009, 11:29 PM
22's are great. The wife and I both carry one. Besides unless you stocked up on ammo prior to the MADNESS you can't get anything but high end 22 anyhow, at least we can't. I think practice and quality ammo like CCI is WAY more important than caliber. X

SaMx
May 10, 2009, 11:35 PM
I wouldn't depend on a .22 for defense.

outerlimit
May 11, 2009, 12:27 AM
.22 Ruger for self-defense?

Sure, but there are better options.

FlyinBryan
May 11, 2009, 12:50 AM
i carry a 1911 commander sized pistol in 45acp with 230 federal hydrashoks.

every single time i step out of my house, its on my side.

i also have a little browning 22 auto pistol thats extremely reliable, and more accurate than my 45.

if i were to be without my 45, i would find great comfort with my browning on my side.

i you have a good reliable 22, and some fellows plans for the evening include assaulting you, then going to dinner, and you are capable of breaking leather intime to argue your case, his dates gonna really be mad.

its simple physics really.

if you poke holes in his important parts, hes gonna have a rough time (probably just a few seconds is all hes gonna have)

of course, one in the noggin and its lights out. even a grazing blow to the noodle is gonna be like getting hit in the head with a ball peen hammer, and of course, a square hit upstairs and nighty night.

mordechaianiliewicz
May 11, 2009, 01:13 AM
Well, I was just talking to a friend about this. I took her shooting, and of course started her on a .22 pistol. She wondered about it for self defense. I'll tell you the same thing I told her.

I don't recommend it. It's better than nothing, but it's a far cry from a real self defense pistol. I suggest 9mm or larger.

If you decide to go with it, couple of suggestions.

1.) Load it with hollowpoints.

2.) Train to make multiple shots to the brain.

Outside of a head shot that penetrates the brain pan, rarely will a .22 stop a person quickly enough in the gravest extreme. If a perp doesn't get medical treatment in time, he is likely a dead man (and .22 bullets are really hard to find in the body compared to some other rounds, cause they often deflect away from their entry points, and are pretty small).

His dying hours, or a full day later won't be much comfort to you though if he already killed you.

ScareyH22A
May 11, 2009, 01:15 AM
First of all, .22LR's are not really reliable.
Second, why use a .22 if you can use a common 9 or better?

FlyinBryan
May 11, 2009, 01:25 AM
First of all, .22LR's are not really reliable.

not true.

many are as reliable as any other caliber firearm.

try a browning.


no question there are better calibers for defense, also no question there are worse circumstances than being targeted while carrying a .22, like being targeted while carrying nothing

FlyinBryan
May 11, 2009, 01:39 AM
His dying hours, or a full day later won't be much comfort to you though if he already killed you.


it is true that there is a chance you wont stop him in his tracks.

it wouldnt surprise me if 90 something percent of the people that recieve a non mortal just dont feel they need your wallet anymore, and decide that since they are leaking, they would rather just bug out.

no doubt there are better calibers. but i just feel like if you take one to the head, your going down, right then, and right there.

even if you take one in the chest, good chance its over.

even being shot 2 1/4" above your naval with a 22 makes you think you are going to die, and from what ive learned, feels like a couple pounds of ready to cook kingsford has just been surgically placed in your gut.

like i said, there are better options, but if you ever take a 22, good luck standing up for even 5 more seconds.

Frank Ettin
May 11, 2009, 01:42 AM
First of all, .22LR's are not really reliable...I agree (notwithstanding FlyinBryan's claim). First, it's partly the nature of a rimfire cartridge. On occasion the primer compound doesn't get evenly distributed.

Second, it's just the nature of trying to feed a rimed cartridge from a magazine. Rimless cartridges tend to be better suited to the functioning of an auto-loader.

ScareyH22A
May 11, 2009, 01:44 AM
not true.

many are as reliable as any other caliber firearm.

try a browning.


Buckmark? Are you serious? I've seen plenty of Buckmarks as well as Ruger Marks FTE and FTF their rounds. Sometimes the cartridge will have had a hit but failed to fire. Again... .22LR's are not exactly reliable.

If I was to have a FTE or FTF or even just a light strike and hard primer on my USP, I'd remember that day forever.

mordechaianiliewicz
May 11, 2009, 02:49 AM
.22 revolver probably would work every time. I've used rimless autos that won't eject well. Yes, .22s can have problems. So can any gun. That's why you test it for reliability.

As for .22 killing but not stopping. That's why I said practice your headshots. The smaller the projectile, the more accurate you have to be. You need to practice to hit targets much smaller than a human silhouette regardless of caliber, but with a .22 it becomes especially important.

I would hope the bad guy looks down and sees his wound and goes away, or sits down and starts praying he'll live. But, he also might be hopped up on a drug, or drunk, or just tough and mean.

Any which way, I'd go with atleast a 9mm. But, .22 is better than hand-to-hand combat.

C-grunt
May 11, 2009, 03:19 AM
Like others have said a .22 will work but its far from ideal. But then again if its for HOME defense I would look at something else besides a handgun to begin with.

From my experiences as an officer handguns suck as a defensive weapon. You carry it because of ease not because its tremendously effective. One of our recent bad guys took 2 .45 ACP rounds through COM and still had to be chased down and arrested. He was then walked to the ambulance and taken to the hospital. His wounds were very serious and was very close to death.

Theres a reason why they say over 80 percent of people shot with a handgun live and over 80 percent of people shot with a long gun die.

^^^ Probably not terribly accurate but its generally true.

harmon rabb
May 11, 2009, 08:50 AM
:evil:From my experiences as an officer handguns suck as a defensive weapon. You carry it because of ease not because its tremendously effective. One of our recent bad guys took 2 .45 ACP rounds through COM and still had to be chased down and arrested. He was then walked to the ambulance and taken to the hospital. His wounds were very serious and was very close to death.

was he found to be on drugs? (meth, pcp, etc?) i hear these stories and they're wild. on the other hand, i also read an article about a little girl who killed a kodiak bear with a .22 :evil: (talk about a lucky shot! she must've shot it in the eye or something)

however, i'd bet that for every one of these stories you recount, there are 10 where the bad guy is shot once COM with a 9mm, .40, or .45 and stopped instantly. :o

Carl Levitian
May 11, 2009, 10:07 AM
Look up the Perry Stevens/George Temple incident.

The almighty .45 failed to make an impression on the perp untill he was shot in the head while he was still fixated on beating the officer to death.

A bullet, even a .45 bullet is not going to stop an attack unless it hits something vital. A .22 in the hands of a shooter who is really good with it, is as good as many other choices. The man behind the gun is what makes the difference, not the piece of hardware. Who would you rather face; a punk gangbanger with a tech 9 or Bob Mundan with a .22 Ruger?

For a first hand gritty account of what it was like to be shot in the face by a .22 pistol, read the first chapter or two of Frank Serpico's book. He very barely lived through the experiance, and was taken down imediately.

To the original poster; A .22 Ruger will do just fine, if you do your part. Practice like a mad obsessed person, with at least weekly if not twice weekly visits to the range. Get to know, really know the gun, and pratice with a wider range of shooting conditions. One very clear advantage of a .22 is, you will be able to expend thousands of rounds of ammo with very little hardship to your wallet. You will have almost zero recoil, and in the space of the next year, you will turn into a far better shot than if you go center fire over the next year.

Is the .22 a good choice for a self defense gun? While not the best choice, It's not a bad choice either considering the adavntages. As for people making comments that a .22 is little better than a sharp stick, or somebody will take it away from you and stick it up where the sun won't shine, their idiots. I've seen 5 people shot by a .22 in my life. three of them were attacking somebody and they got shot for thier pains. All three were out of action, with one of them curled up in a fetal position making whimpering noises, a second was sitting on his rear end agaist a building moaning that he needed an abmulance, and a third had his arm hanging down by his side and was making sure it didn't move because it hurt like hell.

But the thing that stayed with me for my life, was the memory of seeing a heavy set man with a large hunting knife coming at a man, put down by three shots from a Colt Woodsman.

I was 10 years old at the time. My father had taken us to the montains on a summer get away, and we had stopped at a picnic ground just outside of Front Royal Virgina. We were at a table having luch when three men came out of the woods, and came in our direction. They were dirty down at the heels bums, and they asked my dad for some beer money. My father was polite but firm, and told them to leave. One of them got closer and started yelling at my dad that how come he has a nice shiney new Pontiac but can't spare a few bucks. Started calling him some pretty bad names. Dad told him again to leave. This was the 1950's, and there was no cell phones to call the cops.

The man took out a large knife from a sheath at his belt and took a step toward dad. Dad took out the .22 Woodsman he carried when we were on a trip or hiking in the woods. The man kept advacing on my dad, cursing him and saying he din't have guts to shoot. Dad stopped warning him and shot him. The shot made the man stop for a second and hunch up a bit, then he again came toward dad with the knife. Dad shot two more times and the man doubled over then fell on his side, pulling his knees up to his stomach and screaming that his guts were on fire. Over the course of a minute, he grew quiet, and went unconcious. Some others from the picnic ground went down the road to a gas station where they called the police and an ambulance. By the time they got there, the man was dead. He hadn't moved or made a sound since he went down.

Because there was lots of witnesses, it was ruled self defense, and dad had no problem with the police. He even went back down to Front Royal a month later to get his woodsman back. Like I said, it was the 1950's, and things were a little differnt.

But to my dying day, I will never ever forget the sight of a man going down screaming that his guts were on fire, and then dying. It made a lifelong impression. If somebody tells you a .22 won't do the job, thier're an idiot. When the liver, heart, kidneys, or other organs are punctured, blood pressure drops drasticly and fast. This results in loss of conciousness. If an organ does not get hit, then it won't matter if it was a .22 or a .45, there has been no major damage. they say the .22 does not have any shock effect. Maybe thats a good thing in a way. The people I've seen shot by a .22 seem to be in sever pain.

You'll be fine with the Ruger, deltastorm11. Just practice alot, and stay calm. The devil will be buying a snow shovel before you encounter a person who will take half a magazine of good CCi ammo in center of mass and still be a danger. It they are, then shoot the head. It'l work just fine.

Go ahead and use the Ruger .22 if you really like it, your the one shooting it. If you like it, thats all that really matters. It's a great gun, fun and cheap to practice with, and you'll get good with it.

These posts come up with great regularity. It's ridiculous that so called experianced gun people have such scorn for the .22. This leads to misconceptions that it is not a very dangerous and potentially deadly gun. Misconceptions that lead to a gun not being taken very seriously leads to tragic accidents. Like the idiot who wanted a hole through the wall for the TV cable and didn't have a drill, so he used the .22. He shot through the wall, hit his wife and killed her. I guess he thought that a .22 was only for squirells too.

Any gun, even a .22 short is dangerous. How deadly it is, is totally in the hands of the user.

Dave T
May 11, 2009, 11:43 AM
As already stated a 22 is less than ideal as a SD round...much less. That being accepted and common knowledge, I ran into instances when I trained people for CCW certification where a 22 was all that would work. Think of an 84 year old women with arthritis.

What I taught and still believe, if circumstances dictate all you have for self defense is a 22, train/practice close range head shots. A cylinder or magazine full of 22s fired rapidly into the face of an assailant will most likely give them other things to think about other than hurting you.

Again, not ideal but you play the hand you are delt.

Dave

MCgunner
May 11, 2009, 11:54 AM
The problem with .22 reliability does not lie with the firearm in question. It's the ammunition that's the problem. It's not particularly perfectly primed and even in high quality ammo, will go bad a lot quicker than centerfire especially if carried in humid climes. I often carry a little NAA mini as a second or third gun in a pocket and I change the ammo out every week if I carry that gun. It will misfire over time from the sweaty environment of a south Texas summer pocket in pretty short order.

The Ruger is a might large for carry. If it's all you got, in the home, it would suffice with good marksmanship. I can fill an eyeball with mine at 50 yards off a bench. I cheat, though, has a 2x LER scope on it. Even with bulk pack ammo, though, it'll shoot 1" groups at 50 yards. It's just a standard Mk2, also, not a target gun.

I normally rely on a 9x19, a .38, a .45, or a .357 magnum for self defense. My Mk2 is huge fun to shoot and a killer little small game hunting pistol, but it's not a self defense auto. Could it be pressed into service for that? Sure. It's easy to make head shots with at room distances. I wouldn't wanna be shot with it. But, I have better calibers for the purpose.

aliasneo07
May 11, 2009, 06:51 PM
A .22 will kill you the same as any other bullet, but I would never use one in self defense. Minimum selfe defense cal in my opinion is a .380. People tell you stories of people getting killed with .22s all the time, and they are all true. But guess what? A .22 will not lay someone out. And if someone is reaching for a weapon, or charging you with a knife, you need to STOP them cold, not shoot them 5 times with a .22 and have them continue to fight you till they bleed out.

Theres a reason police and military don't use .22s for people-stopping.

When you have someone charging you the object is to cause as much hydrodynamic shock in the shortest amount of time possible. You can't do this with a .22 effectively. If you're set on a pistol, get at LEAST a .380. For me, I would use nothing less than a 9mm.

But this is a moot point since a pistol is not what I would reach for. If someone comes breaking into my house at night I might tuck a pistol into my robe or something, yes, but I'm grabbing my 12GA.

Whatever you choose, make sure you practice practice practice. And good luck :-)

Fishman777
May 11, 2009, 09:00 PM
Thanks for your sharing your experiences.

Are there more powerful, more effective rounds than the .22 lr?

Sure there are, but the fact is that a .22 in the right hands is a deadly weapon. Even in the wrong hands, these can still kill. .22s can kill you just as easy as anything else with proper shot placement. I'd rather have my wife get in multiple hits with a .22 than missing with my .357 magnum.

Would I want to depend on a .22 to save my life? I'd prefer something bigger, but I'd rather have a .22 than no gun at all.

http://stoppingpower.info/index.php?title=CarDoor_Videos

If a .22 can easily shoot through a car door, what do you think it would do to your head or your chest? It would make a tiny hole, but the size of the hole doesn't really matter if you hit a vital organ.

grimjaw
May 11, 2009, 09:23 PM
Deliberately deciding to use a .22 for HD is suicidal IMO.

While I agree that it's not the best choice, especially if you live in a house, I don't consider it "suicidal."

Since I've been on my own, I've spent as much time living in apartments as I have houses. Those apartments did not always have thick, bullet-proof walls, and even #1 shot would penetrate enough drywall to pose a danger to the other occupants of the building (i.e. my neighbors).

Yes, a rimfire round might also penetrate the dividing wall between apartments, but fewer of them than most other centerfire handgun rounds and with less projectiles than buckshot.

It's not my first recommendation if you can afford otherwise, or if your living circumstances allow you to shoot in any direction in your home without risk of collateral damage. A 12G shotgun and 9mm handgun are my choices today. But at one point in my life a semi-auto .22 rifle was all I could afford to shoot on a regular basis, and one of the few I could shoot with less risk of putting lead into my neighbor's kids.

jm

Grey Morel
May 11, 2009, 11:42 PM
I hate to be the guy who keeps saying this, but people need to BACK UP what they say, especially in a public venue such as this.

So far in this thread I have heard people say:

* Rimfire ammunition is not reliable - Someone PROVE this with empirical data. If its true, then rim fire ammunition should have a substantially higher percentage of failures than center fire ammunition of comparable quality, AND this should be true across multiple brands, and in multiple firearms. Lines that include "in my experience" or "my buddy said" or "the way I remember it" are not legitimate evidence. Post numbers from a verifiable source.

* I keep hearing left and right that people are killed but not incapacitated by 22s. Where is this information coming from? Someone please post 5 verifiable incidents where someone who was shot with a .22 wasn't stopped, but would have been if hit in the same spot with a single 9mm or larger. Any incidents offered should make note of ammunition type.

As seen in penetration tests, modern high velocity .22lr ammo can indeed reach vital organs. The brass fetcher tests show that CCI Velocitors will exit a 16" gelatin block, even from the short 3.5" barrel of a P-22. The 4-6" barrels on Ruger pistols would reach vitals for certain with every shot. Rugers are very accurate pistols, and CAN be made to run reliably; I just went through this process myself.

If the gun is accurate enough o do the job, reliable enough and penetrates enough to do the job, then the burden for doing the job rests on your personal skill.

Aka Zero
May 12, 2009, 04:41 AM
I have a mark III, and have told several people, several times. I would rather have it with me if I needed it than almost anything else. Good in most situations, without a lot of downsides. But on to the ammo debate.

At 7 yards I could put all ten rounds into a paper plate in a little over a second.
Think buckshot. Little holes, and a lot of them. NO one says buckshot won't stop someone,

I think people over estimate big rounds, and under estimate little rounds.
22 stinger hits harder than a 32 auto, with a smaller hole.
stinger: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=199998
32 auto: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=153200

22 mag hits harder than 380, and even 38 special +p. but again, smaller hole.
22 mag:http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=775384
380: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=550134
38 spc: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=152083

And if people say it's about caliber size.... why do people have 223 rifles? Bullet speed is important in causing trauma, trauma causes shock.

I think any gun is a good defense in the right hands. Train well, find what works. go with it.

Omaha-BeenGlockin
May 12, 2009, 10:33 AM
Back in the '80's I had a Ruger Target model that I could shoot so fast you would think it was a machine pistol---while making a 2-3in group at 20yds.

So it can throw a lot of lead in a little spot---just make sure you pick the right spot and avoid bulk pack ammo.

Not the best choice--but still workable--no doubt.

MCgunner
May 12, 2009, 12:27 PM
* Rimfire ammunition is not reliable - Someone PROVE this with empirical data. If its true, then rim fire ammunition should have a substantially higher percentage of failures than center fire ammunition of comparable quality, AND this should be true across multiple brands, and in multiple firearms. Lines that include "in my experience" or "my buddy said" or "the way I remember it" are not legitimate evidence. Post numbers from a verifiable source.

I'm sure there are articles out there on the net that will tell you this, but I know it through experience, so you'll just have to trust me on this. I own a dozen rimfires, long guns and handguns of one sort or another. This experience might not be legit to you, but by holy God it is to me! I ain't trusting my life to rimfire ammunition except if I keep it fresh and in a gun I know dents a larger part of the rim for reliable ignition and only as last ditch back up to a primary or primary and back up and preferably with high quality, not bulk pack ammo. The only reason I ever carry my NAA is that it takes up about as much room as a pocket knife and it could come in handy, you never know. I've used it to shoot vermin and even a few rabbits, but thankfully have never had to use anything in a firefight, let alone the NAA.

I can recall reading articles in the past touting .25ACP over .22 in the mouse gun wars for the very reason of ignition AND feed reliability of the .25. I used to have a .25 and it always went bang even with stale ammo, so I know this to be a truism in that comparison, too. I can gaurantee you, as I've seen it too many times, you carry a rimfire in the summer in a pocket and after a couple of months, you'll get a full cylinder of misfires. That's why I always replace ammo weekly (it's cheap) in the NAA when carry it. It never fails to die from the humidity if you don't, never, nada, what is it about no you don't understand? Think of rimfire as fancy cap and ball loads. Ol' Wild Bill unloaded, cleaned, and reloaded his brace of Colt Navys daily for the same reasons. At least it's easier to unload a rimfire and reload it.

Trust the rimfire at your own risk. I have the knowledge, been there, done that. Even if you're going to use it for home defense in a Ruger, load up with CCI. Federal bulk pack has a misfire in my Mk2 about 1 out of every 200 or so rounds, never fails. It's just not well primed and CCI is. This is no big deal when shooting metal plates or even squirrels, but in a fight, it could cost you your life. Do your on research, I ain't wasting my time. It's YOUR life after all, not mine. I could give a nit. Might help to get out and shoot now and then, too. Experience has been my best teacher.

grimjaw
May 12, 2009, 12:52 PM
Trust the rimfire at your own risk.

I could say the same thing about 1911s, for as many of them as I've seen malf at a range. ;)

jm

RedLion
May 12, 2009, 02:52 PM
Well, When I started shooting, I was able to hit 5 metal plates at my gun range in about 4 to 5 seconds with a .22. Using my friend's dad's HK USP 9mm I couldn't hit one. So, my guess is that I would have fared much better with the .22 than the 9mm, in a self defense shooting.

If it's what you got, just know what it can and and can't do. Don't expect to pull the trigger once, and certainly be ready to use your hand or something else, but certainly don't expect a .45 or 9mm or even a 12 ga to shoot a "silver bullet".

benderx4
May 12, 2009, 07:26 PM
If that's the only thing you'd considering carrying, then I think it's a great gun/caliber!

I'm thinking many overseas assassins use the venerable .22, don't they? (My son got this from the Military Channel.)

I got a SW Model 317 for my daughter and, fully loaded, you can barely tell it's there. Better than a sharp stick in the eye and most BGs won't be able to tell it's not a 38 special.

Confederate
May 12, 2009, 11:31 PM
I would feel perfectly...perfectly...at home using a Ruger auto for self defense in the home. In many ways, I'd consider it an ideal home weapon. Imagine yourself standing in front of that little firecracker while it was cranking out eleven shots in just over four seconds. Also, check it out at the range. Shoot for the head and see how fast you can put three or four shots in the critical areas.

I think the .22LR is one of the most underrated rounds available today. I knew someone who was shot with one from almost a mile away and he nearly died. They found the place where the bullet came from, so they know how far away he was. He felt a stinging sensation in his back, then got dizzy and keeled over. He'd been working in his yard, so he wasn't at rest. It's a deadly little round and a nightmare for doctors.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/RugerMarkII_9a.jpg

B yond
May 13, 2009, 12:53 AM
http://www.rimfireuniverse.com/tip_backround.jpg
I wouldn't want to get hit with any of these. Of course if you shot me with one I might be inclined to shoot you back with something bigger...

C-grunt
May 13, 2009, 02:52 AM
Harmon Rabb wrote...
was he found to be on drugs? (meth, pcp, etc?) i hear these stories and they're wild. on the other hand, i also read an article about a little girl who killed a kodiak bear with a .22 (talk about a lucky shot! she must've shot it in the eye or something)

however, i'd bet that for every one of these stories you recount, there are 10 where the bad guy is shot once COM with a 9mm, .40, or .45 and stopped instantly.

No drugs, just adrenaline. Actually the instant stops with a handgun tend to be more rare than the shot and run away. Now most of the badguys did stop what they were doing, but probably did have the ability to continue fighting if so inclined.

Shooter57
May 13, 2009, 11:32 AM
I aways like reading someone saying not too carry a 22 and their not any good. then add they carry a 22 once in a while.:banghead: If thats what you want to carry and your accurate fine,practice two in the body and one to the head. When I practice with my 22 I shoot 2 in the body(center mass) try for shirt pocket 1 in the forehead and one in the throat and back to the body. of course I'm trying for all hits to center of body and a couple always go high because of recoil ;). Most of the time I do carry a 45 but conditions change so I must also.

searcher451
May 13, 2009, 11:44 AM
While it's true that a .22 is better than no gun at all ... and while it's true that the .22 has long been the choice of so-called professionals ... and while it's true that any number of gun-related deaths have been attributed to the lowly .22 caliber round through the years (including many high-profile cases) ... it's also true that you can do far better with any number of more potent calibers whose attending guns will offer you many, if not all, of the same advantages that you are seeking in a .22.

That having been said, only you can determine whether you want to trust your life and the lives of your loved ones to a .22.

Confederate
May 13, 2009, 01:25 PM
From my experiences as an officer handguns suck as a defensive weapon. You carry it because of ease not because its tremendously effective.
I beg to differ. Handguns are the ideal home defense weapon. Law enforcement is a far cry from home defense, and the newspapers are full of stories of people who used them (even .22LRs) successfully in self defense. I used to gather such stories when I worked for the NRA years ago. They still print those stories in their monthly publications. Even the diminutive .25ACP has been used to put bad guys down and, in a surprisingly large number of cases, kill them. Police officers also are under more stringent rules of engagement than most civilians. Even their presence, their uniforms, evoke emotional responses in some criminals.

A bad guy is more frightened of civilians who might not have the rigid training or discipline that an officer would. Their first thought is, I wonder if this guy's going to accidentally shoot me?

Police usually run into far more people who take multiple hits than civilians. And a .22LR pistol can put a lot of lead into the air and very accurately, too.

A .22 will kill you the same as any other bullet, but I would never use one in self defense. Minimum selfe defense cal in my opinion is a .380.
A .380 tends to have substantially more recoil and flash than a .22LR, plus inadequate stopping power. A .22LR hits someone in the chest and it can end up anywhere because it doesn't have the energy to exit. It can be delivered quickly to the chest and head, whereas the .380 is more difficult to control, like most centerfire pistols. But even then, the .380 has also stopped a lot of bad guys. But I'd prefer a .22LR.

Anyone who chooses to use a .22 LR when they could have chosen a bigger round is suicidal IMO.
Again, there are lots of dead bad guys who have fallen victim to the .22LR. I've never seen any articles about homeowners who failed to stop a bad guy with a .22LR or who were killed after they shot a bad guy, though I'm sure it's bound to have happened; but if so, it's very rare.

Larger rounds can do things like break the bones of bad guys. A bad guy with a seriously broken arm or leg is a seriously hampered bad guy. They might not die quickly but their ability to damage you will be seriously diminished.
Granted. For home defense, a .38 Spc. would have more of whallop. That said, a .22LR can be aimed very accurately. But I've seen people with .38s who miss head shots at relatively minor distances. Placement is usually far superior with .22LR. If you want a one-shot stop, your best bet is to use a .357 mag with 125 gr JHP. If it connects, almost anywhere, it's very good at taking people out. But the blast and the recoil are such that followup shots might be difficult.

Rifles and shotguns may have superior stopping power, but to use them in enclosed spaces is problematic unless you've got a barrel under 18 inches long. Bringing them on target takes more time than with a handgun and someone with a fireplace poker (a common handy weapon for intruders) or just bare hands can deflect or grab a long barrel if you're moving around or going to another room to retrieve your children.

5whiskey
May 13, 2009, 03:12 PM
I hate to introduce myself here as the fact police, but....

I have a mark III, and have told several people, several times. I would rather have it with me if I needed it than almost anything else. Good in most situations, without a lot of downsides. But on to the ammo debate.

At 7 yards I could put all ten rounds into a paper plate in a little over a second.
Think buckshot. Little holes, and a lot of them. NO one says buckshot won't stop someone,

I think people over estimate big rounds, and under estimate little rounds.
22 stinger hits harder than a 32 auto, with a smaller hole.
stinger: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct...tnumber=199998
32 auto: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=153200

22 mag hits harder than 380, and even 38 special +p. but again, smaller hole.
22 mag:http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=775384
380: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=550134
38 spc: http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=152083

And if people say it's about caliber size.... why do people have 223 rifles? Bullet speed is important in causing trauma, trauma causes shock.

I think any gun is a good defense in the right hands. Train well, find what works. go with it.


That post is all good and well if you are using a .22lr RIFLE for SD. If you're using a pistol, you can take those pretty numbers and throw them away. CCI stingers fired out of a 3" pistol bbl will pop out going about 970 FPS. (32gr x 970 x 970)/ 450400 = 67 ft lbs of energy. S&B .32 acp loads are advertised as 190 ft/lbs of energy out of a 4" bbl, plus a bigger hole, plus a slug twice the size of the .22lr.


If all you have for SD is .22lr, then rock it. You DO need to understand the capabilities and drawbacks of the round. Advertising that CCI stingers or .22 mags are just as good as .32 acp and .380 is some pretty misleading information. Of course, if it's coming out of an 18" bbl and the pistol cartridges are coming out of a 4" bbl, then it is indeed true. Make sure your comparison is apples to apples.

I would rather have 9mm, but I would use it :eek:

Carl Levitian
May 13, 2009, 04:13 PM
I've yet to see proof of the 250 pound crack addict that took a mag of .22's and then beat the shooter to death.:rolleyes:

C-grunt
May 13, 2009, 05:46 PM
^^^ We had a family man here in Scottsdale, last year I believe, who decided to kill his family. He killed his wife and daughter but his 18 year old son, after taking several .45 slugs to the body, was able to grab a knife and stab him to death.

All handguns suck............ well maybe except a .460 or .500 mag.

Confederate
May 13, 2009, 10:11 PM
All handguns suck............ well maybe except a
.460 or .500 mag.
Oh, come on. This was an isolated incident and who knows, maybe the deranged father was using FMJ ammo. You have to know all the facts before you can make a snap judgment like that. I know a guy who shot a Moro in the chest with a .45 ACP. Guy didn't even slow down. Had my friend (who, BTW, would never own a .45 after that) been using a modern Remington 185gr JHP, the guy most likely would have gone down like a sack of potatoes. Had he been using a .357 revolver with 125gr JHPs, the guy probably wouldn't have known what hit him.

Knives are horrible things as weapons. Very deadly and they can do a lot of damage. Still, few people would take one over a good pistol. You take a .22LR of almost any variety and it's an easy thing to put your bullets where you aim them. One of the reasons is because the guns don't recoil enough to blot out the target when you fire. Even a .380 will jump just enough to obfuscate the target for a fraction of a second, but a .22LR makes it easy to keep the target in view even while you're firing the gun.

Eugene Sockut tells the story of a woman who stopped a terrorist attack in Israel using a Ruger Single-Six, killing the terrorist with one shot. Perhaps this woman would think all handguns are GREAT! And there are soooo many people who are alive today because they had a handgun that to berate it is...well, silly. Years ago, I recall the cover story of a magazine was of a very attractive woman who held an attacker for the police. He went from a leering sociopath to a pathetic jerk in just seconds. I still recall the gun she used: a stainless steel Ruger 6-inch Security-Six.

My kind of gal! She even made him call the police, to add insult to injury.

When I read these stories, I always try to take note of the caliber and whether the person shot was killed or injured. I was surprised by the number of stories where someone shot someone with a .25 ACP and killed them. Many criminals have a healthy respect for a .22LR because they're such bears to get out of people in the emergency room.

They should not be underestimated.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/Beretta21A_950_4.jpg

C-grunt
May 13, 2009, 11:16 PM
Confederate... I think your misunderstanding what I was trying to say. I dont discount handguns as defensive weapons. I carry a Glock 22 or a Ruger SP101 myself.

What I was trying to tell the OP was, if he is using it for home defense, a shotgun or rifle would be a much more effective option. We carry handguns because carrying my 12 gauge or AR15 isnt really practical.

I try to inform new shooters who might not know better that a handgun most likely wont work like it does in the movies. Handguns just dont have much power. Thats why Im suprised when I see someone who dropped DRT when shot with a handgun. Its not the norm, even with good COM shots.

A .22 will work if you use it correctly and have good shot placement. A .45 wont work that well with bad shot placement as well.

bad_aim_billy
May 13, 2009, 11:45 PM
I find it fascinating how all the criminals are high on PCP, they weigh 300 lbs, are not threatened by a gun (maybe they know it's a .22? Criminals are usually pretty gun-savvy, right?) and they always will stop with one shot from a large-caliber handgun, regardless of bullet type.

If you enjoyed reading about ".22 Ruger for self-defense?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!