Where do people get these goofy ideas?


PDA






cratti
July 4, 2009, 09:18 PM
I was talking to an older gentleman today who was convinced that .22LR was the greatest HD/anti-personnel cartridge ever, insisting that the bullet would enter the body and ricochet indefinitely, claiming that "a shot to the stomach might ricochet so much that it comes out your shoulder."
I get at least one idiot a week who is convinced that the .22 is designed to ricochet inside a human body.

Logic would dictate that the .22, a rather weak, light bullet, would have fairly limited penetration upon striking a target, and the soft lead bullet would deform quickly upon striking something hard enough to cause a ricochet, thus increasing the speed at which it decelerates.

Then again, the same guy in question was referring to his 10/22 as the "best sniper rifle money can buy."

If you enjoyed reading about "Where do people get these goofy ideas?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Mags
July 4, 2009, 09:22 PM
I often hear the same about the 223 round don't know if it is true or not and don't care. I am more a fan of shot placement.

cratti
July 4, 2009, 09:23 PM
No, the .223 round is designed to "tumble" as well as ricochet. Apparently they think civilian .223 rifle bullets are identical to military 5.56x45 ammo.

jimmyraythomason
July 4, 2009, 09:23 PM
I don't know about that but I do know of a 40gr. solid .22 lr entering a canvas shoe directly on top of the big toe going around the bone and exiting directly underneath. This is a FACT, I SAW it myself.

Ron James
July 4, 2009, 09:29 PM
That's the first I've heard of the 22 bouncing around in the body:o, but never under rate the .22LR. I have seen a number of cases where the bullets have gone through the human body and was never recovered. The .22 will also deflect off bone and wind up in funny places quite a distance away from where it entered the body. Because of the small mass of the lead bullet it will have more of a tendency to do than a 9MM or 38. BTW. in Michigan the favorite gun for the Jack Lighters ( poachers ) is the .22 ( low noise ) and also in Florida the poachers use the .22 on gators.

BruceRDucer
July 4, 2009, 09:31 PM
/
As anyone with a bit of sense knows, the large mass of a .22, would empower it to travel through a car door, enter the stomach, ricochet off two Rolaids and a Chili and Cracker Lunch, embark upon a tumble which bounces it back and forth between ribs, upper arm bones, and a ball point pen, until it loses momentum finally, coming to rest in some old gentleman's brain, where it takes on an ethereal form, emerging as an Idea.

Whaddya mean Goofy Ideas? Are you narrow minded er whut?

/

Ohhhh! Wait a minute! You wrote about a .22LR round. That means LOW RECOIL.

Well sure, if you wanna be technical and all about it, the Low Recoil .22 won't have much power....but that's an extreme idea, goofy in its own right. [Pass the Chips and the Sour Cream, willya? Heh! Heh!]

/

/

Acera
July 4, 2009, 09:35 PM
Talk to Ronald Reagan about what a little .22 can do when it gets inside you.

Deltaboy
July 4, 2009, 09:42 PM
All I know is I don't want to be shot with one to find out. I agree with Acera President Reagan almost died from a lowly 22 LR.

FlyinBryan
July 4, 2009, 09:43 PM
Apparently they think civilian .223 rifle bullets are identical to military 5.56x45 ammo.

depends on whether you buy milspec bullets.

i have many times. in fact, ive bought demilled lc before. many times.

generally the real deal will tumble, and frag due to side loading.

cratti
July 4, 2009, 09:45 PM
Acera and Deltaboy - That was a chest shot that punctured his left lung and narrowly missed his heart. Completely different from the phenomenon people are discussing. It'd be a little bit more relevant if, say, he got shot in the shoulder, the bullet punctured his lung, and a few days later passed with a loud "clink!" into the toilet...

FlyinBryan - you said it. "The Real Deal."
Not Remington Cor-Lokt or UMC

FlyinBryan
July 4, 2009, 09:46 PM
a little soft .22 can really throw a wrench in the works of your bodily functions.

are others better?

silly question.

FlyinBryan
July 4, 2009, 09:47 PM
Not Remington Cor-Lokt or UMC

true.

cratti
July 4, 2009, 09:49 PM
Bryan - As another poster said, "Shot placement..."
A high powered pellet gun could "throw a wrench into the works of your bodily functions," under ideal circumstances.

FlyinBryan
July 4, 2009, 09:55 PM
Shot placement is important with any caliber.

i could survive a 50 cal without proper placement.

ive already said bigger calibers are better stoppers. what do you want? me to say a 22lr tickles? ok it tickles.

Acera
July 4, 2009, 10:26 PM
cratti, but if you remember the bullet did bounce off something before it hit the president. Not trying to get too technical, while it is not a magic bullet, it can do a lot of damage.

dirt_j00
July 4, 2009, 10:29 PM
I've also heard the ".22LRs ricochet inside your body" line. In fact, it was used to support .22LR over 9mm for SD... :rolleyes:

I really can't see how any round could "ricochet" that much inside a body. I mean, sure, it may deflect around bones, but ricochet?

Oyeboten
July 4, 2009, 10:47 PM
The older Gentleman has the .22 LR confused with the 6.5 x 52 mm Italian Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifle with a six-round magazine and bearing
Serial number C2766, when using
Western Cartridge Co. ammunition with a 160 grain (10.37 g) round nose bullet, with poorly mounted, loose, and non-zeroed
Side-mounted Ordnance Optics of a 4 x 18 telescopic sight...and only when fired rapidly out a high window by a certain "A. Hidell".


Such a Bullet can in fact Zig-Zag, go 'in' and change direction, perforate Bone, viscera and Car Seats, reverse direction, write it's name in the air, pause in mid air, turn and go up, then turn and down, mysteriously shedding lead and copper-jacket debris while remaining perfectly intact, and doing all sorts of things, including ending up on a 'stretcher' for a little nap, looking as well rested and perfect as if it'd been fired into Water...


No .22 lr could ever hope to emulate these fetes...

jimmyraythomason
July 4, 2009, 10:52 PM
Yeah Oyeboten but that bullet was blessed by Castro(and Krushev).

geronimo509
July 4, 2009, 10:54 PM
I was under the impression that a .22 used to be a lot of hitmen's bullet of choice. It's quiet and with a silencer it's very quiet. Also, it has enough power to enter a mans head but not enough to exit and would bounce around, or ricochet, inside someones head. And that would leave little mess.

I could very well be wrong, but no one else ever heard that?

Dirtpile
July 4, 2009, 11:02 PM
A 5.56 can end up a fair distance away from the entry point in the body if it tumbles like it's supposed to.

However the record goes to the lowly .22LR where the bullet is small enough to be carried downstream after entering a major blood vessel.

SleazyRider
July 4, 2009, 11:19 PM
Saw a .22 shot to the head that entered above the eye, circumnavigated the skull just beneath the skin, and exited out the rear. Amazing, really.

Ranb
July 4, 2009, 11:26 PM
I was under the impression that a .22 used to be a lot of hitmen's bullet of choice. It's quiet and with a silencer it's very quiet.

Your impression is wrong. A 22lr pistol like the P-22 is about 160 decibels, this is loud. A good silencer will reduce this noise by a great deal, but it will still be at least 115 decibels, not quiet at all. Take a look here. http://silencertalk.com/results.htm

Ranb

Zoogster
July 4, 2009, 11:30 PM
The .22LR is actualy known to do exactly what is described in the OP.

It is not designed to do that, and it does not reliably do that. It does do that regularly enough to be very unpredictable.

The .22LR enters the body and easily penetrates soft tissue, but due to low mass and momentum along with a hard jacket is often deflected by bone. This results in totaly random results. People have had it enter thier torso, bounce around and exit thier neck.
I have seen instances of them enter a head at an angle, get deflected by the bone and go around the head underneath the skin before exiting without ever entering the brain arcing around thier head. At the same time when one does get in the brain they are known to richochet around in the skull unable to penetrate back out.
People have been hit in the leg and had them travel along the femor into the torso before bouncing around.
They do not penetrate bones well, especialy after losing a portion of thier energy, but ususaly penetrate soft tissue fine and that results in such erratic injuries.

Many similar wild and unpredictable examples exist. You can look up actual medical incidents of many similar events.
In fact I just saw one on the news the other day that traveled along someone's lower spine before exiting out of thier face and they were shot in the torso at a regular angle.

That does not make it a good self defense round. It is small, entirely unpredictable, and even when it does something like richochet and damage internal organs in a lethal way it does not reliably stop the threat. It kills them minutes or hours later.
Someone can place a very good shot, and have that good shot deflected away by bone into a much less critical area of the target. So just as it can be unpredictably dangerous it can be unpredictably ineffective even with well placed shots.
Would you want to rely on random luck or skill in stopping a threat? It is a horrible self defense round, but the richocheting multiple times internaly mentioned by the individual is quite real.

moewadle
July 4, 2009, 11:31 PM
that also. That is what happened to Robert Kennedy. He was shot in the head with a .22 LR and the bullet shattered inside his brain and ruined it of course with fragments of bullet.

Zoogster
July 4, 2009, 11:44 PM
Your impression is wrong. A 22lr pistol like the P-22 is about 160 decibels, this is loud. A good silencer will reduce this noise by a great deal, but it will still be at least 115 decibels, not quiet at all. Take a look here.

There is numerous types of "silencers". Many are designed to give acceptable results from an acceptable dimensioned item. They can also give much better results from a larger device.
The .22lr can become virtualy silent because it is one of the easiest rounds to silence. The very small bore opening combined with the very low pressure and total air mass results in the ability to contain virtualy all escaping gas in a practical size silencer. The only remaining noise is the sonic crack if the round breaks the sound barrier. Sub-sonic rounds do not.
So they can be as quiet as the action of the firearm.

Most rounds cannot be silenced so effectively from a practical size silencer, but the .22lr with sub-sonic rounds is one that can be.
This is due to the low total volume of air being moved and the small bore opening. If the majority of the air is retained inside the device until its pressure drops significantly and is then released or released gradualy the muzzle blast is gone. This would be unpractical with most other calibers requiring a massive silencer.

(Silencer is also as good a name as suppressor because the guy that invented the device when he also invented the car muffler called them silencers. So the inventor named them "silencer".)

jad0110
July 4, 2009, 11:44 PM
I was under the impression that a .22 used to be a lot of hitmen's bullet of choice. It's quiet and with a silencer it's very quiet. Also, it has enough power to enter a mans head but not enough to exit and would bounce around, or ricochet, inside someones head. And that would leave little mess.

I could very well be wrong, but no one else ever heard that?

As stated by Vincent 'Vinnie' Antonelli in My Blue Heaven:

Richie loved to use 22s because the bullets are small and they don't come out the other end like a 45, see, a 45 will blow a barn door out the back of your head and there's a lot of dry cleaning involved, but a 22 will just rattle around like Pac-Man until you're dead.

:D

Ranb
July 5, 2009, 12:34 AM
The .22lr can become virtualy silent because it is one of the easiest rounds to silence. So they can be as quiet as the action of the firearm.

I have heard 22lr firearms with good silencers, they are not virtually silent. I was very impressed with how much the noise was reduced, but they certainly should not appear to be virtually silent to anyone without advanced hearing loss.

According to Al Paulson, the author of Silencer History and Performance, even the little 10/22 action can be as loud as 100 decibels. Since the muzzle noise is about two feet from the shooter's ear, and the bolt is clacking only a few inches away, the muzzle noise will sound less loud than the bolt.

Ranb

musick
July 5, 2009, 12:40 AM
Where do people get these goofy ideas?

My money is on the internet. :neener:

bearmgc
July 5, 2009, 12:47 AM
Like folks who are afraid to go near a handgun, like its gonna just shoot off a round by itself. That's one I have to laugh at.

Zoogster
July 5, 2009, 01:17 AM
I have heard 22lr firearms with good silencers, they are not virtually silent. I was very impressed with how much the noise was reduced, but they certainly should not appear to be virtually silent to anyone without advanced hearing loss.

As I said there is many types of silencers, but the .22lr can be virtualy silent because of the properties I mentioned earlier. Most production silencers are designed to be practical, working well for a relatively high volume of rounds while being of a practical size. And retaining longevity in the US (because they are NFA items and consumers want thier expensive taxed and registered product to last, in some nations they have disposable ones.) They do not maximize the potential to supress.
Some designs can be virtualy silent however. Not all supressed firearms are cycling semi-autos either. A bolt action firearm can be very quiet because the action is not cycling. Some suppressed semi-auto pistols and carbines have also been designed to allow the bolt/slide to be locked closed so it will not cycle or even move between shots, requiring manual cycling. This allows it to be even quieter. Some do it with a switch others strange things like a multi-stage trigger.
With an extensive multistage suppressor you can actualy achieve Hollywood like suppression (without the goofy sound) which is unrealistic with most calibers.

A decent example of suppression even with a high volume of rounds is the MP5SD with its integral supressor. Not virtualy silent with the 9mm round, but with a .22LR that type of design can be extremely quiet for the volume of rounds. Being essentialy a pistol barrel ballisticly but a full length carbine with most of the length devoted to internal suppression.

Most calibers cannot achieve Hollywood levels of suppression from a realisticly sized silencer, but the .22LR is an exception to that. The cycling of the action can become the loudest part of the process. On designs that allow the action to be kept from cycling they are even quieter, with the noise of the round striking the target the loudest sound of all. The only actual sound from the firearm being the firing pin striking the round.

The most effective silencers also tend to be the most maintenance intensive, and effective for the lowest number of shots and with close tolerances quickly lost from wear. So not practical or ideal for casual shooting. Multiple stages, wipes that wear out, often "wet" requiring refilling with oil or water between a very limited numbers of shots, sometimes with low durability and little longevity while ususaly larger in size than ideal. The most effective possible designs also are integral as that allows the firearm to be designed completely airtight with things like rubber gaskets.
Think of designs similar to the Welrod, but of higher quality and chambered in .22lr, sealed internaly at both ends.
Chambers and containers that capture compressed gases vented to them through one way air valves, never releasing them like a standard supressor can even be incorporated in a design, vhastly exceeding any traditional silencer. No pressurized gas even escapes.
Certainly not what someone spending hundreds on an NFA toy for plinking would enjoy. The gain in suppression would not be worth the loss in simplicity, durability and other areas to the consumer, and as a result such designs are not seen on the market. Who would spend hundreds of dollars for a few dozen suppressed shots between complete rebuilds or required venting of the device? Or enjoy an integraly suppressed firearm with gaskets and wipes that change dimensions and wear out after a limited number of rounds? And with integraly suppressed firearms having the greatest potential, consider there is very few on the market with most consumers purchasing a seperate "can".
All these factors lead to most people with NFA registered suppressors possessing devices that are not maximized for absolute suppression at the expense of other qualities.
They are not all that exists however.

Double Naught Spy
July 5, 2009, 04:14 AM
No, the .223 round is designed to "tumble" as well as ricochet.

You have got to show me the design plans that stipulate such things, especially the ricochet part. I would love to see what design features makes said bullets uniquely better at ricocheting.

I really can't see how any round could "ricochet" that much inside a body. I mean, sure, it may deflect around bones, but ricochet?
What do you think ricochet means? A projectile hitting a surface and deflecting is a ricochet. It is rebounding off that surface.

Webbj0219
July 5, 2009, 07:53 AM
Also heard a story about a gas station clerk that was robbed at gunpoint. The clerk simaltaniously kneeled down and put his hands on his head. While the perp accidently fired a shot aimed at the his head. The shot ricocheted of the clerks wedding ring and he was completely fine.

Rodentman
July 5, 2009, 08:07 AM
Well I'll add my 302...

I former neighbor of mine found out his estranged wife was moving to ********** with his 2 kids. He went to her apt with his 22, shot her in the leg, and shot a guy who was helping her move. That guy died from the bullet puncturing his aorta. That was in 1991 and the shooter is now out of prison on supervised work release. He was charged with 2nd degree murder whist in the process of commiting spousal abuse, or something like that.

Maybe he thought he would "teach someone a lesson" with just a 22, I don't know. Every once in a while I'd get a letter from him talking about prison life. Of course all incoming and outgoing mail was censored.

He should have listened to Johnny Cash: "Don't take your guns to town."

divemedic
July 5, 2009, 08:27 AM
o much for the anecdotes- anyone have any actual, you know- data? This thread sounds like a bunch of kids at a campfire in summer camp.

41022collector
July 5, 2009, 08:37 AM
SS109 5.56mm Ammo out of the current M4 (M16) is designed to tumble on impact with body flesh. It can and does create an erratic wound channel that can often get to a diameter of 1.375" due to the tumble and with over 5.0" overall wound channel with 7" of travel in flesh. This is not a myth, nor battlefield legend. It is how it was designed. This can be found in various sources, but the best I have seen is the FM ( and DM manuals from Pic Arsenal, amazing studies into small design changes that cause different affects and effects.

Silencers are not silent, they only serve to suppress the noticable to most human noise from a sub-sonic bullet. The sub-sonic only comes into play in flight so that the (breaking the sound barrier "Clap" will not be heard.)

A .22 is the preferred weapon..... most of the time either a Hi-Standard, Ruger or Beretta semi auto. Most have a action lock for single shot. It will be a smithed in hook or block to the bolt or slide. I personally have a beretta Mod 21a in .22lr that has a vintage .22cal SIONICS Suppressor on it. It will reduce the db to about 63 which is bel;ow the average ambient sound around you of 72. I usually lock the slide and cycle the action by hand (I had to invent and install an extractor and slide lock on this beretta).

It is quieter than my C02 Walther (crossman) PPK pistol. It is highly accurate with 60grain Aguillia sub sonic rounds due to the heavy bullet weight.

The Sionics works by cooling the gasses of the shot round before it leaves the muzzle, therefore it normallizes to the outside of the barrel temperature and thus NO crack from hot gases hitting ambient air.

The larger suppressors work well on .223 and .308 and .220/.222. They are usually called "Cans," in that size and can bring the noticable sound down to about 103db and with a sub-errant round, the T-clap is kind of thrown else where and not from where the shot came from.

MOST revolvers cannot be supressed due to the gap between the cylinder and barrel. I know of three specially designed revolvers made to use a built in suppressor, 2 are UK and one is Russian and all are WWII era. They are just impratical.

NOW... where do people get bad info, usually made up or from reading 1/5 of an article on some subject and usually from no real life first person experience.

FBI Crime Stats, Report to Congressional Task Force on Crime, 1998 - .22 (Lr, mag & short) account for more accidental and purposful deaths than any other caliber in the USA. They state the reason are ease of accquiring .22 firearms and ammo (even home made 22's are easy to make), ease of carry and the inherient usual poor workmanship of cheap imported .22's that will cause accidental discharge.

The 2nd most prolific accidental and purposful round is various forms of 9mm (9mm para, 9x18, 9mm Luger, 9mm Largo etc). .various forms of .38 (spl, 357 mag, 38 super, 38 auto etc) is in third place. Shotguns of all ga are in 4th.

Have a great day

Mike

cratti
July 5, 2009, 08:54 AM
Meh. I wouldn't bet on a .22 bullet doing any of the crazy crap people says it does.
I'll stick with my .88 Magnum. Who needs quiet when you can shoot through schools?

22-rimfire
July 5, 2009, 09:27 AM
Cratti you seem to underrate the 22LR and the older gentleman seems prone to exaggeration in his statements that you recount about the effects of the 22LR. That's okay. We all have our opinions.

I don't want to get shot by that little bitty 40 gr bullet and I don't think President Reagen wanted to either. I would feel the same fear regardless of whether I was armed with a Ruger 10/22 or 500 S&W when a home invader comes a-knocking. I would be willing to bet the outcome would be exactly the same. I say, do whatever you are more confident with and don't worry about what the "experts" preach.

cratti
July 5, 2009, 09:34 AM
I'm not "underrating" it. I'm just questioning its ability to ricochet extensively inside a body. Not its effectiveness when it ricochets before hitting a target. And definitely not comparing it to a .223.

22-rimfire
July 5, 2009, 09:42 AM
Not picking on ya Cratti. Many feel exactly the same. I think the term "extensively" is the kicker. I'm told the 22 bullet can do some unexpected things inside the human body and I think it may well glance off some hard parts depending on the impact angle. But "extensively", probably not and certainly any comparisons to a .223 is sort of like apples and oranges from my point of view.

cratti
July 5, 2009, 11:00 AM
By that rationale, don't unexpected things happen with EVERY cartridge? That makes the .22 just as remarkable as the rest. And if they're all pretty much equal, that makes it unremarkable...

Tim the student
July 5, 2009, 11:44 AM
41022collector said:
It can and does create an erratic wound channel

Not in my experience. In my experience, they generally pinhole straight through. Do you have a specific source you can share? I can't begin to guess what FM you're referencing.

speedreed
July 5, 2009, 12:04 PM
According to the book "Vengeance" (George Jonas), the handgun of choice of the Israeli counter-terrorist team that took out many of those responsible for the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre was the Baretta .22. They used bombs also.

Fascinating read, by the way. I recommend it.

speedreed
July 5, 2009, 12:07 PM
According to the book "Vengeance" (George Jonas), the weapon of choice of the Israeli counter-terrorist team that took out many of those responsible for the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre was the Baretta .22.

Fascinating read, by the way.

dirt_j00
July 5, 2009, 12:48 PM
What do you think ricochet means? A projectile hitting a surface and deflecting is a ricochet. It is rebounding off that surface.

I know what a ricochet is. I said:
I really can't see how any round could "ricochet" that much inside a body

I have added emphasis to help clarify my statement.

I thought the OP was speaking in regards to a .22LR:
-Ricocheting multiple times inside a human body, or
-Ricocheting to such an extent that it comes to rest or exits the body well away from the entry point.

speedreed
July 5, 2009, 01:03 PM
According to the book "Vengeance" (George Jonas), the handgun of choice for the Israeli counter-terrorist team that took out many of those responsible for the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre was a Beretta .22. They were highly trained and fired point-blank however.
They eventually gravitated towards using explosives, as they were after the shock (terror) value themselves.

Fascinating book, I recommend it.

Other than this bit of trivia, I'm staying out of this argument!

speedreed
July 5, 2009, 01:05 PM
for the double post. The website seemed to hang or something when I made the first post.:uhoh:

Uncle Mike
July 5, 2009, 01:10 PM
No, the .223 round is designed to "tumble" as well as ricochet.

WHAT....!?!?!?!?!

Oh brother.... here we go again!

:D

Carl N. Brown
July 5, 2009, 01:23 PM
A book on forensic pathology contained an anecdote about a person shot in the chest with a .22; the bullet was found in the leg. What had actually happened was, as described in the book, was that the .22 had penetrated into a major artery and traveled with the blood flow til it reached an artery smaller than .22 inch in the leg. That did not stop op-eds promoting gun bans from claiming the bullet ricocheted from the chest to the leg. The bullet penetrated a few inches of flesh, then entered the circulatory system, which could have pumped the tiny bullet anywhere.

Autopsies of head shots with .22 shows (a) straight through penetration in and out; (b) penetration of one side, through the brain, stopped on opposite side of skull; (c) penetration of one side, path through skull, bounce off opposite side and one path of richochet; (d) penetration of skull at an angle so the bullet goes inside the skull following curvature until it stops; (e) bullet stopped on entry by combination of low power and thick skull.

Stories of .22 bullets ricocheting endlessly about the body or inside the skull are grossly exaggerated. Even ardent anti-gunner Robert Sherrill noted in The Saturday Night Special (1975) if the killer-diller .22 short RG10 (cheap snubnose imported revolver of the 1960s) was as fearsome a weapon as built up in the op-eds of the 1960s, why didn't any military outfit use the Saturday Night Special?

Devon
July 5, 2009, 01:23 PM
OK, real world here. About 10 years ago the fire dept. I was a member of was called for for an attempted suicide. When we got there we found a fellow who had shot himself under the chin with a .22 rifle. He had an entry wound under his chin and an exit wound on the very back of his head near the base of his skull, there was very little bleeding and he was alert & conscious. It appeared to be a through and through shot, somehow missing the brainpan. After a more thorough exam (and the opportunity to see the bruising start to shape up) we found that the bullet had entered below his chin, followed his jawline around to the back of his head and exited the skin.
This is the only .22 shot I have seen while working in EMS. I have seen what little is left of the head after a fellow removed the rest with a 12 guage in his mouth. I've seen a foot partially blown off by fellow resting a shotgun muzzle on his boot. Said his dog pulled the trigger lol.

GRIZ22
July 5, 2009, 01:28 PM
a shot to the stomach might ricochet so much that it comes out your shoulder."


Maybe not to that extent but a 22 will bounce off bone and heavy muscle. You haven't seen many autopsy reports. I've heard surgeons experienced in treating gunshot wounds say they have to do more damage to remove the bullet than the bullet did in the first place. Frank serpico still has 22 bullet fragments in his head.

divemedic
July 5, 2009, 01:57 PM
Devon- anecdotes prove nothing. I have been to many GSWs. Most recently, I saw a man shoot himself in the head with a 9mm. He lived. Does that make the 9mm ineffective?

jimmyraythomason
July 5, 2009, 02:02 PM
Perhaps this should be sent to Myth Busters as an idea for a show.

TimM
July 5, 2009, 03:28 PM
No, the .223 round is designed to "tumble" as well as ricochet.

What? No bullet is designed to tumble or ricochet.

Ranb
July 5, 2009, 06:22 PM
I personally have a beretta Mod 21a in .22lr that has a vintage .22cal SIONICS Suppressor on it. It will reduce the db to about 63 which is bel;ow the average ambient sound around you of 72.

The larger suppressors work well on .223 and .308 and .220/.222. They are usually called "Cans," in that size and can bring the noticable sound down to about 103db....

NOW... where do people get bad info, usually made up or from reading 1/5 of an article on some subject and usually from no real life first person experience.


What meter and microphone did you use to measure the impulse noise levels? Do you have suppressed and unsuppressed data? From what I have read, it takes a meter/microphone combination with no more than a 20 micro second rise time to accurately measure the impulse noise of a gun shot. Thanks.

Ranb

BeltfedMG
July 5, 2009, 08:58 PM
A .22 will go threw a deer stomach.
A .22 will go threw the skull of a deer, threw the brains and out the other side of the skull.
A 22 will kill hogs shot in the head.

Shot by a $0.02rnd or a $5 rnd, dead is dead. Have you ever looked up the $'s of people killed worldwide with a .22? Astonsishing seeing how some think it wont.

cratti
July 5, 2009, 09:15 PM
TimM and Uncle Mike - I was being sarcastic.

Pack
July 5, 2009, 10:06 PM
I don't put my faith in the 22lr, but strange things have happened.

I recall a case my dad told me about from the ER. A 22 entered the upper arm, and traveled along the bone, entering into the chest cavity with just enough energy left to tear into the aorta. The patient was dead on arrival from the internal bleeding.

Mags
July 5, 2009, 10:21 PM
Looks like alot of us drink out of the same pitcher of Kool Aid. I might as well be from Iowa cuz you gotta show me. Where is the proof?

Devon
July 5, 2009, 11:14 PM
Devon- anecdotes prove nothing.
Divemedic, anecdotes? I simply stated what I had seen, the truth without embellishment.

I have been to many GSWs.
Good for you, I've seen a few myself. That means you're responding to calls.

Most recently, I saw a man shoot himself in the head with a 9mm.
Did you at least try to stop him? I mean, you really saw him shoot himself in the head? Couldn't you just shoot the gun out of his hand?

He lived.
He a very fortunate idiot.

Does that make the 9mm ineffective?
No, that means the guy missed the vitals. Shot placement, seems I heard that somewhere.

I can taste the sarcasm, can't you?

WTBguns10kOK
July 6, 2009, 12:34 AM
Guys let's keep this high road, we don't need all this mean spirited sarcasm and I don't want to have to lock this. Thanks!

Tim the student
July 6, 2009, 12:38 AM
Iowa cuz you gotta show me.

Mean Misery? Here in Iowa, we are all just Idiots Out Wandering Around. You don't have to show us anything, we already know it.

Ky Larry
July 6, 2009, 01:19 AM
I heard an explaination of why the 5.56mm round tumbles upon entering flesh. When the point makes contact, it immediately starts to decelerate but the back of the bullet is still trying to maintain its speed. This causes a tumbling effect on the bullet. I'm not sure I buy this explaination. Wouldn't this apply to all pointed projectiles? I've dug slugs out of game from .22 in squirells to .30 cals in deer and never seem this happen unless bone was struck Wouldn't this tumbling be obvios in ballistic gel?

divemedic
July 6, 2009, 08:06 AM
Devon- I wasn't attacking you personally, I am just saying that so many threads on here make claims, and then the thread degenerates into a war story contest, and we wind up with a thread full of stories. All show and no go.

Devon
July 6, 2009, 08:34 AM
Guys let's keep this high road, we don't need all this mean spirited sarcasm and I don't want to have to lock this.
I dont see moderator under your username.

Devon- I wasn't attacking you personally
Really, it seems you called me out with:
Devon- anecdotes prove nothing.

Ky Larry: I vaguely recall seeing something just like that on TV not long ago. It was on one of the shows on either Wednesday Night at the Range or Thursday Night Shooting. They shot ballistic gel with a 5.56 and you could see the wound channel where the bullet had tumbled.

To sum up my experience with the .22lr, it's a good small game round, but from what I've seen I don't think I'll be using it for self defense as long as I've got anything that's 9mm or larger.

22-rimfire
July 6, 2009, 09:07 AM
Just about everyone knows that a larger caliber is better than a 22LR for self defense. Folks that subscribe to the "I'll use a 22" side of the fence generally shoot a lot of 22's and feel confident that in a crisis they could do what needs to be done defensively better than with many centerfires (that are often hardly shot) due to shooting precision and repeated shots. I don't know how I'd react in a crisis sitution. I'll take whatever loaded firearm is closest and hopefully deal with the crisis. But I would prefer to reach for a centerfire handgun over a 22 handgun if I had a choice.

The older gent reference in the OP was just talking as we all do from time to time and he'd probably take the larger caliber gun too if he had a choice. It also sounds like something a 50 or 60-something person would say to a 18-20 somthing person.

Mandolin
July 6, 2009, 09:48 PM
For those who like .22LR,
http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg62-e.htm

20 rounds of .22 per second, sustainable for up to 14 seconds.

riverrat373
July 6, 2009, 10:11 PM
People keep spreading the myth about the 5.56mm round being designed to "tumble" so as to cause greater damage. Early on, when the M-16 rifle was first used in combat in Vietnam there was a problem with the bullet tumbling but it was because the rifling twist in the M-16 was too slow to properly stabilize it. After the rate of twist was increased, the tumbling problem was mostly corrected. There was still a problem with the light 55 grain bullet at use then because if it hit any brush or limbs in the jungle, it would be easily upset and would start to tumble. The military then moved to a heavier bullet to help correct that problem. There never was a deliberate effort to "make the bullet tumble" because a tumbling bullet is horribly inaccurate!

Mr_Rogers
July 6, 2009, 10:26 PM
The "tumbling" bullet is designed to be marginally stable in flight but to tumble when it hits significant resistance. It is very old idea, and it worked.

One version of the 303 British bullet was made with a standard lead filled base but with a light-weight filler in the nose. To provide a simple explanation, this caused the base to overtake the point when it hit an object, ie it tumbled.

riverrat373
July 6, 2009, 10:32 PM
Go to www.billricca.com/myths.htm to read more about the 5.56 tumbling bullet myth.

Uncle Mike
July 6, 2009, 10:35 PM
TimM and Uncle Mike - I was being sarcastic.

hehehe... no problem, I was also! hehehe:D

:D

huntsman
July 6, 2009, 11:12 PM
It also sounds like something a 50 or 60-something person would say to a 18-20 somthing person

Are you suggesting us old gun guys tell stories? Whoppers? ;)

I'm not sure I'd bet my life on the .22LR but its better than a stick.

As my eyes get worse the older I get I've come to appreciate the value of a shotgun and multiple pellets.

bigione
July 7, 2009, 12:12 AM
I read somewhere recently that a doc in ER hated to see 22 wound come in, as it was very difficult to know where the bullet would end up. With most bullet wounds, a rod inserted into the wound channel would lead to the bullet. Not with a 22. Sometimes it would take many xrays and might have many pieces of bullet fragmensts scattered about inside.

fireman 9731
July 7, 2009, 12:20 AM
I think that its safe to say that 22 will simply follow the path of least resistance. It might be straight or it might bounce around everywhere. With its light weight, modest velocity, and poor bullet construction, its all it can do.

Is it designed to bounce around and kill people? No.

Is it good for killing people? No.

Will it kill people? Yes.

Will I carry a 22 caliber gun for self defense? No.

BruceRDucer
July 7, 2009, 07:59 PM
I'm not "underrating" it. I'm just questioning its ability to ricochet extensively inside a body. Not its effectiveness when it ricochets before hitting a target.-----Cratti

Well Cratti, respectfully, that don't make no sense. Just because a fellow is "questioning" the facts, don't mean the facts ain't there.

(Sheesh)......
/

KarenTOC
July 7, 2009, 08:08 PM
This has been an interesting thread. I learned one thing for sure: a .22lr will kill you, unless it doesn't.

If you enjoyed reading about "Where do people get these goofy ideas?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!