Interesting comment from Sherrif's deputy


PDA






Jonnybronco
March 9, 2010, 10:50 AM
Some friends and I were out shooting last Saturday when a sheriff's deputy came out to our site. (We were in a legal area, but someone had called in to complain). He was nice about the whole thing and even came over to look at our guns.

One of my friends has a NAA 22 WMR that he always carries. As always my friend feels like he has to defend his choice of carry weapon, to which the officer responds something to the effect of, "I have seen more fatal shootings from 22s than any other caliber".

He said that the people are still alive when he gets there, but because the bullet "bounces around" inside they almost never recover.

Anyone else ever heard this?

Jonny

If you enjoyed reading about "Interesting comment from Sherrif's deputy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
nathan
March 9, 2010, 10:55 AM
I love the .22 LR , too. QUite accurate on small game hunting.

JR
March 9, 2010, 10:56 AM
I have actually heard this before from a few people that I go shooting with...

Ala Dan
March 9, 2010, 10:57 AM
The sheriff's deputy is correct. In my 20+ years in law enforcement, I too
have seen more people killed by a .22 caliber projectile than any other~!
Many times, you won't find an entrance wound; muchless a exit wound.
In my first three months on the street, my partner and I responded to a
shooting call that had two people shot. Upon arrival, one subject was
lying in the drive-way, shot in the stomach with a .32 caliber weapon.
He lived, but the other subject was shot under the right arm [near the
arm pit] with a .22 caliber handgun; he was dead on the scene~! ;) :eek:

gkdir
March 9, 2010, 11:02 AM
The .22lr, and the .22mag., are nasty little rounds. Not going to "stop" someone in there tracks, but I guarentee its going to screw up there day enough to give you some time to go to plan "B".

GunsAmerica Fan
March 9, 2010, 11:02 AM
I think it is more because people don't treat it as a serious danger than that the bullet does any bouncing around in there. People ask me why I don't take my 7 year old twins to the range with .22s and that is why. I want them to show me a few years of safe behavior with bb guns before I trust them to handle a .22. You can't have your eyes and hands on a kid every minute and I know what I .22 can do.

Kingofthehill
March 9, 2010, 11:11 AM
Ive heard this as well.

i would guess its because .22 guns are so cheap to obtain and most households have them and during a robbery they are likely stolen. The people i know with 1 gun that happens to be a .22 they got at K-mart, Walmart, or big box store for $100, isn't investing in a Safe.

JOe

Ed N.
March 9, 2010, 11:11 AM
> I too have seen more people killed by a .22 caliber projectile than any other


I've heard this many times, but I've always wondered whether it might be that more people are shot with a .22 than any other single caliber. That would lead to more deaths for that round. Could that be the case? The .22 is a very popular caliber.

John Wayne
March 9, 2010, 11:15 AM
.22 LR is the most popular (volume-wise) caliber, IIRC. More people shooting .22LR inherently equals more accidents, homicides, and justifiable shootings with this caliber.

Also, there are a lot of idiots who do not treat .22LR firearms with the same regard for safety as larger guns. I have heard of people who knew it was dangerous to fire centerfire rifles into the air that did not think it was dangerous to do so with rimfire cartridges :banghead:

APDDSN0864
March 9, 2010, 11:25 AM
Back in the mid 80's we had a fellow officer killed with a .22lr. Round went into lower abdomen under his vest area, bounced around so much that even after five hours of surgery the Docs couldn't stop the bleeding and he died on the table.
I've seen suicides where the person shot themselves in the temple and the round bounced back and forth inside without exiting.

Ed

Shawn, You're absolutely right. The term "bounced around" is not actually what happens. Bullet fragments, deflection from striking bones, and skin cause multiple "insults" to internal organs & structures.
Sounds cool for it to "bounce around, but we're not talking about a rubber ball here.
Thanks for calling it like it is.

Ed

Shawn Dodson
March 9, 2010, 11:30 AM
The bullet doesn't actually "bounce around" inside the thoracic or abdominal cavities anymore than it would suddenly change course and "bounce around" if you shot it into a swimming pool full of water.

A .22 caliber lead round nose bullet gets its reputation for "bouncing around" because the soft lead easily deforms when it hits bone, which expends energy it might otherwise use for penetrating bone. Coupled with the rounded nose and relatively low bullet mass, when it encounters bone at an angle, instead of penetrating the bone, it simply glances off and/or rides against the bone, like a car glancing off and/or riding a guard rail in a curve. In order to "bounce around" the bullet must collide with bone, or encounter skin at an angle where it would be expected to exit the body. (The holdback effect of the skin often traps the bullet under the skin where it rides against and underneath the skin until it it depletes its penetration potential.) The differences in density and penetration resistance of various soft body tissues is insufficient to make the bullet suddenly change course.

.38 Special RNL bullets also exhibit the same characteristic for glancing off bones as .22 RNL bullets.

Tommygunn
March 9, 2010, 11:43 AM
...i would guess its because .22 guns are so cheap to obtain and most households have them and during a robbery they are likely stolen. The people i know with 1 gun that happens to be a .22 they got at K-mart, Walmart, or big box store for $100, isn't investing in a Safe.
+1

I'd suppose if lots and lots of people were getting shot with .44-40 bullets the police would find most deaths came about due to that caliber, just as if many people were being shot with (FILL IN CALIBER) the same would be the case there.

And, yeah, as has been said a .22 into the head bounces around.

Warhawk83
March 9, 2010, 11:51 AM
When my wife was in high school,a friend of hers sneaked back into her house (she was staying at a friend's house). It was the middle of the

night and her dad heard someone in the house, the girl and her friend hid in the closet and then jumped out to scare her dad. The poor guy

had a .22 and shot at the noise, the round hit her collar bone and bounced around insider her torso hitting every vital organ. He had a few

minutes with her as she died.

SharpsDressedMan
March 9, 2010, 11:56 AM
My ex-chief of police that I worked for in Colorado was shot in the abdomen by a juvenile with a .22 rifle. He was chasing a stolen vehicle (all occupants juvenile brothers, 11,13, and 15 yrs). The 13yr old was firing from the car affter he got them stopped. One shot from an ARMED CITIZEN who saw the chase and decided to help caused the boy to drop the gun. Armed citizen had a .44 Super Blackhawk, and fired in the air. Took several months for the officer to recover, but he pretty much got back to normal. although he lost some intestine. He said it did incapacitate him pretty well at the time. I worked for him several years later.

Rickstir
March 9, 2010, 12:24 PM
I worked on an ambulance back in the mid 60's. We had a lady shot by .22. She was alive when we got there, but not when we got to the hospital. But then again, she was shot 8 times.

Deanimator
March 9, 2010, 02:00 PM
There's a difference between "fatal" and "incapacitating".

1. I attack you and you shoot me several times with a .22lr handgun. I proceed to murder you, dying of infection in the hospital several days later.

2. I attack you and you shoot me several times with a .45acp handgun. I am incapacitated and unable to continue my attack. I recover in the hospital and am subsequently incarcerated.

Which one would YOU prefer?

I want to be protected, not avenged.

I want you to stop doing what caused me to have to shoot you, RIGHT NOW. If that causes you to die, that's fine. If it doesn't cause you to die, that's fine too.

Injecting somebody with HIV will probably kill them eventually. At one time, it was pretty close to a 100% death sentence It's not what I'd consider effective self-defense, even in the 1980s.

cassandrasdaddy
March 9, 2010, 02:11 PM
we had a rather large gentleman here who was found dead. was thought to be natural causes till someone ran their mouth in jail. it turns out he had been shot with a 22 with almost no visible indication.

BCCL
March 9, 2010, 02:36 PM
.22's are great killers, but poor stoppers.

Double Naught Spy
March 9, 2010, 03:13 PM
One of my friends has a NAA 22 WMR that he always carries. As always my friend feels like he has to defend his choice of carry weapon, to which the officer responds something to the effect of, "I have seen more fatal shootings from 22s than any other caliber".

Chances are, he has seen more people survive being shot with a .22 than any other caliber as well. Doctors I have spoken with have seen more people shot with a .22 that walked themselves into the emergency room than with any other caliber.

elrod
March 9, 2010, 03:17 PM
National statistics show the .22 to be the greatest cause of death by gunshot in our country simply because there are so many more .22s than any other caliber present in our country. We use .40s and .357s to present as much force as possible, but the people who are not concerned with self-defense as much as the average home-defense person usually have a .22 lying around for pl inking. These people never think of the home invasion threat, and have the .22 as the only weapon should anything happen. Simply the weapon of availability.

mcdonl
March 9, 2010, 03:49 PM
There was a big story in 1997 here in Portland... well... big for Portland anyway :)

(The only link I could still find was the one below, and it is interesting as it is a lawsuit against the shooters insurance company to pay out for wrongful death..... the shooter Saboato Raia was found not guilty as he acted in self defense.....)

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/mainestatecases/00me155r.pdf

He killed 3 men, with a .22 pistol

CajunBass
March 9, 2010, 04:11 PM
A .22 caliber lead round nose bullet gets its reputation for "bouncing around" because the soft lead easily deforms when it hits bone, which expends energy it might otherwise use for penetrating bone. Coupled with the rounded nose and relatively low bullet mass, when it encounters bone at an angle, instead of penetrating the bone, it simply glances off and/or rides against the bone, like a car glancing off and/or riding a guard rail in a curve. In order to "bounce around" the bullet must collide with bone, or encounter skin at an angle where it would be expected to exit the body. (The holdback effect of the skin often traps the bullet under the skin where it rides against and underneath the skin until it it depletes its penetration potential.) The differences in density and penetration resistance of various soft body tissues is insufficient to make the bullet suddenly change course.

That sounds enough like bouncing around to me, for casual conversation. Maybe not literally, but it'll do.

AzBuckfever
March 9, 2010, 04:25 PM
There's a reason you don't see many criminals carrying high calibers (44, .357, etc.) As said, that statement is true. .22s bounce around and create a lot of damage, almost like a shotgun. Not only that but most .22 bullets are bought in those wonderful boxes of 550 or so, and they're all hollowpoints. Like it or not, even a piece of lead the size of a needle travelling at 600 fps can do some damage. So now imagine this little bullet explodes once it hits your rib and shrapnel goes everywhere. Most cases, that damage is more devastating than a singal .357 to the abdomen.
Even moreso is that a .22 is extremely compact and can hold several rounds. Plus, you get into the age issue. Legal to buy .22 ammunition at 18 vs. 9mm or basically anything else until 21. Leaves 3 years for your young thugs trying to make it up in the ranks and make it easy to obtain ammuntion. It's pretty easy (most of the time) to tell if someone is under 21 or could be, but how many 12 years olds have you seen who look like they could be older?

Wolfebyte
March 9, 2010, 04:33 PM
When I was working the jail back in 1982-85, we had an intoxicated young man brought in that had been threatening his wife/girlfriend. She had enough and shot him in the chest from a distance of about 15 feet. .22 round struck left of the sternum, twisted under the first layer of muscle and followed the path of least resistance, going under his left arm and exiting 3 inches left of his spine. It stopped him from attacking, he found out she was serious. Didn't kill him, dr dressed the two wounds, gave him antibiotics and a tetanus shot and deputy brought him to jail.

it was 3 weeks before he could put his left arm down to his side without pain though..

Vern Humphrey
March 9, 2010, 05:03 PM
"I have seen more fatal shootings from 22s than any other caliber".
There is a big difference between killing and stopping.

To understand that, consider the Florida FBI murders. The bad guy who did all the killing was killed by a shot fired by the first FBI agent to die. That agent killed him, but didn't stop him. The bad guy killed the agent, then proceeded to kill and wound all the other agents.

Another point is how the shootings happen. It's one thing to pop an unprepared and innocent man. It's another thing for that innocent man to haul out his own gun and defend himself against a drug and adrenaline-charged opponent.

And as pointed out earlier, the statistics are skewed by the criminals' choice -- the cheapest gun they can get, which is usually a .22. So police see a lot more shootings with .22s than with any other caliber.

AzBuckfever
March 9, 2010, 05:23 PM
Better be careful with all the comments and stats of 22s killing people, pretty soon the attention will be taken off the real killers like "Assault Weapons" and 22s will be banned **lol**

Kernel
March 9, 2010, 06:20 PM
I’m calling BS. “Bouncing around” inside a body is an Urban Myth. A tall tale told and retold by Hollywood, gun store clerks, guys-who-heard-it-from-a-guy, law enforcement officers, and medical personnel who should know better.

As a farm kid growing up in a time before the internet I had ample opportunity to shoot all manner of animals, vegetables, and inanimate objects with the .22 Long Rifle cartridge. Based on thousands of observations, not once did I see evidence that a .22 bullet had “bounced around” inside a body.

In fact, in every case, the bullet ALWAYS traveled in a path very closely approximating a straight line until it came to rest. When encountering a solid object the bullet would either stop on impact, penetrate the object, or careen at a slight angle and continue to travel in a straight line.

Not saying bullets don’t ricochet, follow a bone, or potentially bounce back, under certain rare and frequently predictable circumstances. Furthermore, declaring the performance of a .22 LR superior to a .357 Magnum is laughable.

rugerman07
March 9, 2010, 06:52 PM
A .22 pistol or rifle may not be the best choice for a personal defense situation. But, I am a firm believer that anything that shoots is better than having nothing at all to defend yourself with.

Warhawk83
March 9, 2010, 06:53 PM
Call BS all you want, it does happen. Just like someone can get shot in the head and not die, sometimes the bullet "walks" around the curve of the skull.

mljdeckard
March 9, 2010, 06:55 PM
Ask that deputy if he is willing to drop his issue sidearm for a .22 pistol.

nerd-with-a-gun
March 9, 2010, 08:11 PM
I used to work in an Emergency Department in a fairly big hospital. We got in a guy who had shot himself in the head with a .22 and indeed the bullet had bounced around in his head doing extensive damage to his brain. He actually lived for about an hour after he arrived at the ER, but it was only autonomous brain function. He continued to breathe and his heart beat for that full hour, but the cognitive functions of his brain were long gone.

Mr.Davis
March 9, 2010, 08:16 PM
He said that the people are still alive when he gets there, but because the bullet "bounces around" inside they almost never recover.
This is common BS.

The .22LR is certainly lethal. That's been proven time and again. But it does NOT "bounce around" in the body. It just doesn't have enough energy to do that.

KBintheSLC
March 9, 2010, 08:28 PM
This highlights the difference between killing power and stopping power. The .22 has plenty of killing power, but lacks a bit in making rapid stops. Nonetheless, a .22 in your pocket beats the .44 in your safe.

The .22LR is certainly lethal. That's been proven time and again. But it does NOT "bounce around" in the body.

Ditto... if it had that much energy, it would merely exit.

ozarkgunner
March 9, 2010, 09:35 PM
I've heard something like this before. Also, that it would be better to take a larger caliber to the head than a 22, because a larger caliber will enter and exit, where as the 22 enters and "bounces around" whole or in fragments.

trickyasafox
March 9, 2010, 09:47 PM
I wonder if its more a function of the ultra soft swaged bullets often found in 22s. Often gun forums talk about expansion of hollowpoints and such, but soft swaged lead never fails to deform, no matter the medium.

I'd also bet its easier to get multiple hits with a 22. I'd be interested to see what percentage of 22 lr deaths had either a head shot or multiple torso hits.

SteelyNirvana
March 9, 2010, 09:48 PM
My dad told me once as a kid "If a person is shot in the head with a .22 it will either kill them instantly or bounce around and make them a vegetable the rest of their life" Years later, I had a friends uncle who took his own life from a single shot with a 4" .22 revolver.

mcdonl
March 9, 2010, 09:55 PM
Bouncing around is a stretch, but a projectile can hit bone and ricochet... and it does not take much energy to cause damage to a solid organ with a rich blood supply.

Avenger29
March 9, 2010, 10:13 PM
Let's try not to use the term "bouncing around". Saying stuff like that grows into the infamous ".22 or .223 is so DEADLY because it'll enter your shoulder and end up in your leg" bull****.

I had to give a 5 minute explanation on that, the truths about the early AR-15s/M-16s in Vietnam, etc in one of our history classes the other day.

I'll also tell you the current or former military personnel in the classes are the worst about spreading/keeping alive the myths such "You can't shoot someone with a .50 cal, you aim for their belt buckle", etc.

Kernel
March 9, 2010, 10:35 PM
I used to work in an Emergency Department in a fairly big hospital. We got in a guy who had shot himself in the head with a .22 and indeed the bullet had bounced around in his head doing extensive damage

Nerd, unless you did the autopsy yourself, detailing the track of the bullet, back-and-forth inside the subject’s head, you are just a guy-who-heard-it-from-a-guy.

It sounds like something we’ve all heard it before. It’s got that veneer of credibility. But it’s BS, and you’re perpetuating the myth.

billybobjoe
March 9, 2010, 10:58 PM
A little coon was sitting in a garbage can which was half full of water on a hot day. I shot him in the head and the 22 went through the can at a right angle. Maybe the bullet hit the jaw bone?

toivo
March 9, 2010, 11:13 PM
I think the "bouncing around" mythology comes from the fact that the .22 round often doesn't have enough energy to exit, and comes to rest somewhere inside the body of the victim. It may have been deflected by bone and ended up somewhere unexpected, but that idea that it ricochets around in there like a lead pinball just doesn't make sense. Contributing to the myth might be the fact that in many of these shootings, more than one round was fired. Sometimes a lot more than one round.

There must be hundreds if not thousands of these "stopping vs. killing" arguments in reference to the .22LR bouncing around the Internet by now. I'm going to guess that the reason that so many fatalities are caused by .22LR is, as smarter people than me have observed, that there are so many .22s out there. It is the ultimate weapon of opportunity. I don't know about you, but I know lots of people who I wouldn't exactly call "gun people" who have a .22 rifle hanging around the house somewhere, gathering dust and waiting to be stolen.

I totally agree that .22 is not a very good self-defense caliber. But people exaggerate in the other direction too. How many times have you heard the old line "If you shoot someone with a .22, you'll just make them mad and they'll take your gun and stick it up your ..." etc. Aileen Wuornos murdered seven men with a single-action .22 revolver. Not one of them managed to stick it up her ... etc. But again, that's murder, not self-defense; she had the drop on her victims, and AFAIK none of them was armed.

WestEnd65
March 9, 2010, 11:44 PM
I've heard something like this before. Also, that it would be better to take a larger caliber to the head than a 22, because a larger caliber will enter and exit, where as the 22 enters and "bounces around" whole or in fragments.

Umm, I do believe that if you are shot in the head with ANY firearm, espically one larger than a .22, 99.999% of the time you are screwed. ;)

AzBuckfever
March 10, 2010, 12:01 AM
I agree with the term "bouncing" around in being a myth or exageration. I think fragmented and/or deflected would be a better term :D

bds
March 10, 2010, 12:06 AM
I wonder how many "targets" been "neutralized" by silenced 22LR pistols? :rolleyes:

labhound
March 10, 2010, 12:31 AM
Interesting that this topic came up today. I had filled up a "Milkbone" box with sand (6 inches thick) to shoot into to see if I could tell how much sand it took to stop a .22lr, .380 and a 9mm bullet. Didn't get enough info to tell much about the amount of sand needed, but when I filtered the sand and retrieved the bullets, the .380 and 9mm were intact and non deformed but the .22lr copper jacked round nose bullets had deformed into perfect little mushrooms slightly bigger in diameter than the .380 or 9mm. I can see where this could do more damage than one would expect.

grumpycoconut
March 10, 2010, 12:38 AM
As a young EMT in the late 80s I transported a guy from a small hospital to the local trauma center. He'd been sitting in his car minding his own business when someone shot him in the head from near contact distance. You could see the powder stipling around the entry wound. I got to see the x-rays and you could follow the wound track from the entry wound just in front of his left ear to a spot about 4 inches inboard. The guy's chief complaint was a stiff neck. Very pleasent guy to chat with.

C-grunt
March 10, 2010, 05:23 AM
As a LEO for a big city I have seen a few .22 wounds.

Had a drug deal gone bad where one of the guys was shot with a .22. Entered ter bridge of his nose between his eyes and exited just in front of his left ear, destroying the back of his left eye. It then carved a nice clean half pipe out of the top of his left shoulder. he lived but almost bled to death.

Had a lady commit suicide by placing a H&R revolver against her chest and firing. Pretty much dead when she hit the ground. I showed up maybe 3 minutes after it happened and she had no pulse when I started CPR.

Had a guy accidentaly shoot his girlfriend in the head with a Lorcin. Bullet entered her upper jaw under her nose. Then travelled through her head and lodged in her upper spine. Luckily it didnt hit the spinal cord. She also almost died.

As far as .22s being used more by criminals and non gun people, I believe it. I remember when I was in FTO (field training) my trainer and I responded to a found gun call. A guy found a RG .22 in his front yard while mowing. When we emptied the gun, each chamber had a different kind of .22 in it! The criminals couldnt even scrounge together 6 of the same kind of .22.

Those are the only .22 stories I can think of.

SMMAssociates
March 10, 2010, 06:16 AM
Just IMHO, but I don't find 'em all that reliable.... Misfires, etc.... My preference starts with a "4" :), although I will admit to owning some 9mm and .380 guns....

Regards,

Officers'Wife
March 10, 2010, 08:40 AM
Any firearm is capable of causing severe damage. I'm told that during the Great Depression far more deer were harvested with the .22LR than heavier calibers. If the cartridge will bring down a whitetail, it will kill a human and should be given the same respect as any other firearm.

mljdeckard
March 10, 2010, 12:55 PM
But remember also, that people poaching to survive in the great depression weren't under pressure to make it count. They weren't like modern hunters who might only have one chance, to kill one animal, with one shot, once a year. (If that.) They didn't usually have big freezers to store a kill, and they didn't usually travel as far to hunt as modern hunters. They are looking for targets of opportunity, they aren't restricted by bag limits or seasons, and they aren't under pressure to take the biggest animal they can find. If they nick an animal with a .22, they will just wait for another one. Stealth and convenience were more important than clean kills.

Here's the thing about .22s. It's not so much that they will or won't do anything as much as they are UNPREDICTABLE. (All bullets are unpredictable, but .22s are much more so.) They MAY do a traditional wound cavity, or they MAY change direction because they have so little mass and energy they can get knocked around. When I was in high school, a friend of mine got hit right below the ribs with a .22 when we were out in the desert zapping jackrabbits. (We don't know who hit him. I know it wasn't me, I was reloading a 10/22 magazine when it happened, we think it might have been a ricochet.) It entered in the front, and exited out his back right below the ribs. We said a naughty word, carried him back to the truck, and drove as fast as we could to the nearest hospital, about 30 min away. He walked out 20 minutes later with two stitches and a band-aid, because the bullet had entered at an angle, skimmed the outside of his ribcage, and exited after having done a near 180. Like I say, we don't know if he was hit directly or by a ricochet, that bullet may have had reduced energy.

I think it is POSSIBLE but highly unlikely that a .22 can ricochet around someone's head. The sabot round from an M-1A1 120mm smoothbore can have this effect at the edge of its effective range. It doesn't have enough energy to scream straight through a target tank, so it will enter and spall, (push in a chunk of the tank's armor,) and the pieces will bounce around shredding the crew and touching off the ammo, but the circumstances where a .22 might do this would have to be perfect. I think most of the stories where they 'bounced around' in someone's head come from laypersons who just don't realize that any given gunshot wound may appear very devastating.

Officers'Wife
March 10, 2010, 01:02 PM
If they nick an animal with a .22, they will just wait for another one.

People in the 30's, at least in rural areas, had a different mindset than that. The main was they were given dominion over the animals of the field and responsible for fair and gentle treatment of them. You are mistaking the commercial hunters of the time with the table hunters. Completely different mindsets.

Avenger29
March 10, 2010, 01:37 PM
.22lr copper jacked round nose bullets

Those aren't copper jacketed, just copper washed. So, it's pretty much a simple lead nose bullet that fouls the barrel a little less due to the coating vs. a plain lead nose .22 round.

mljdeckard
March 10, 2010, 01:39 PM
Officer's wife,

It doesn't get any more rural than where I grew up. These are the guys I grew up with. It was all about practicality and survival.

GRIZ22
March 10, 2010, 06:03 PM
One of the reasons a 22 is so deadly is the bullet glances off bone and heavy muscle. It fragments and the erratic path taken by the round and fragments create wound channels that a surgeon would have to do more damage than the bullet did in order to remove it.

Hatterasguy
March 10, 2010, 06:49 PM
Yep he is correct. I was doing research for a paper in school a few months back on school shootings. Most of those are done with the .22LR.


Think about it and it will make sense. .22's are the most commen round and dirt cheap. So by defualt they are going to be used.

Officers'Wife
March 10, 2010, 10:56 PM
Hi mljdeckard,

Perhaps the people in my neighborhood are just cut from different cloth. The depression era hunters I've met would no more wound an animal and let it suffer than they would hurt themselves. Every day a few more of that generation is lost to use. So much the pity.

mljdeckard
March 10, 2010, 11:22 PM
All the more likely, they didn't use .22s. (30-30s much more likely.)

toivo
March 10, 2010, 11:29 PM
All the more likely, they didn't use .22s. (30-30s much more likely.)

It depends. My father grew up on a farm in the UP of Michigan during the Depression. The only gun they had was a single-shot .22, and he told me that he and his brothers used to poach deer with it.

Voimakas
March 11, 2010, 06:18 AM
It depends. My father grew up on a farm in the UP of Michigan during the Depression. The only gun they had was a single-shot .22, and he told me that he and his brothers used to poach deer with it.

Hyvä päivä Toivo! Suomalainen poika?

My grandpa always told stories of his oldest brother poaching during the 20s and 30s. The game wardens looked the other way the few times he (my great uncle) was caught.

What part of the UP was that farm situated in? It wouldn't be down by Wakefield by any chance, would it?

Vern Humphrey
March 11, 2010, 06:26 AM
One of the stories my mom and dad told was of a friend of theirs who used a .22 for deer hunting during the Depression. They said he lost about as many deer as he harvsted.

Dain Bramage
March 11, 2010, 11:38 AM
From My Blue Heaven

Vincent 'Vinnie' Antonelli (Steve Martin): 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.

nathan
March 11, 2010, 11:44 AM
Bec its too small to locate , the surgeon will have a hard time finding it. All the while internal bleeding sets in which could lead to losing the battle to survive .

Like in combat a lot of shrapnel wounds account for more deaths than actual KIAs.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc127/Dongha_97/DSC_0720.jpg

Guns and more
March 11, 2010, 01:31 PM
I have heard for years that the .22 is the weapon of choice for professional assassins. They walk up behind someone and shoot them in the head. The .22 is known to tumble and follow bone in any shooting so the puny round can do a lot of damage.

toivo
March 11, 2010, 01:59 PM
Hyvä päivä Toivo! Suomalainen poika?

Hei hei! Kyllä. (In spite of my username, that's about the limit of my Finnish--I'm the "next generation.")

My grandpa always told stories of his oldest brother poaching during the 20s and 30s. The game wardens looked the other way the few times he (my great uncle) was caught.

That was my father's experience too. They would say "Don't let me catch you," and then wouldn't try very hard to catch them. People had to eat.

What part of the UP was that farm situated in? It wouldn't be down by Wakefield by any chance, would it?

No, it was way up in the Keweenaw area, near Ahmeek, Allouez, and Seven Mile Point. I actually visited there with my folks a few years ago. The farm itself is all overgrown now, gone back to woods, but the house is still there. Some people from downstate bought it as a summer cabin. Kind of funny when you think that a family of eight was raised there!

One of the stories my mom and dad told was of a friend of theirs who used a .22 for deer hunting during the Depression. They said he lost about as many deer as he harvsted.

Back to topic, yes, that's probably accurate. My father didn't mention how many they lost. I think ethical hunting took a back seat to putting food on the table back then.

myrockfight
March 11, 2010, 03:47 PM
But remember also, that people poaching to survive in the great depression weren't under pressure to make it count. -MLJDeckard

MLJ, can you quantify that statement? Because from what my Grandfather has told me about my family's lifestyle/hunting practices, it couldn't be further from how he and his brothers operated.

They wouldn't take a shot unless it was a a virtually guaranteed kill/incapacitation because they could barely afford the cost of ammunition. They also couldn't spend a lot of time hunting because they ALL had jobs outside of school which were started at the age when they were physically able to ride a bike for paper routes, etc. Furthermore, if they were unsuccessful in their hunts, they didn't eat meat at all. Only potatos. Quite often they had neither.

I honestly can't think of a situation, that I have heard of, when anyone was under MORE pressure to make it count other than people surviving out in the wilderness. Honestly, your statement sounds absolutely ridiculous when looked at it from that perspective. And there were an awful lot of families that were in the same situation.

On another note, I think the prevalence of .22 injuries/deaths can be attributed to not only to the large numbers held by the population, but how many people have them that aren't trained properly, the amount of those handed to kids at a young age (how many people's first firearm was a .22?), and people's lack of respect for a firearm in that caliber.

The latter of the three is easily demonsrated easily. Not only on this board, but this thread! And I'd like to think that we here have more respect for firearms than the general public.

Avenger29
March 11, 2010, 08:45 PM
I have heard for years that the .22 is the weapon of choice for professional assassins. They walk up behind someone and shoot them in the head. The .22 is known to tumble and follow bone in any shooting so the puny round can do a lot of damage.

Assassins don't use .22 because it's special in the damage department. It's quiet and easy to suppress.

U.S.SFC_RET
March 11, 2010, 09:44 PM
For the most part ehis is a decent thread concerning the 22LR. Yes they are dangerous. Much more than most think.

west aussi shooter
March 12, 2010, 11:22 AM
sorry but not bs .two my mates ambos picked up a guy who shot himself he lived for 4 hours

theotherwaldo
March 12, 2010, 11:55 AM
I helped to butcher a deer that my dad took when we were broke down and snowed in in the Siskiyou Mountains. Spent almost a month up there before we could hike out.

Dad used an AR-7. Tried for a neck shot on a doe. Bullet glanced off of the bottom of the jaw, then off of the base of the skull, travelled diagonally down the neck, hit a shoulder bone, punched through both lungs and the heart, and wound up in the intestines. The doe took two steps and dropped.

Admittedly, that shot could have failed badly. That bullet might have ricocheted in any direction. A heavier caliber, though, would have merely shattered the jaw and passed on. The deer would have died a miserable death and we might have, as well.

My take: the .22 is relatively unlikely to kill quickly, its penetration is unpredictable, but it beats going unarmed.

gym
March 12, 2010, 12:29 PM
More civilians own 22's than any other gun, so it stands to reason that more get killed with them. I have heard the same thing for 50+ years now. Is it true or just legend at this point. I remember when my uncles went for Moose to Canada about 30 years ago, and took all their fancy rifles and scopes with them. They had an Indian guide who carried a 22 rifle. My uncle asked him how he killed those big animals with that little rifle, and the guide said "I sneak up on them and shoot them in the ear", so who knows.

SMMAssociates
March 12, 2010, 03:29 PM
Art's Grammaw's going to be all over me, gym, but....

Guy was telling his son how to catch fish in the winter.

"Cut a hole in the ice, and then scatter some peas around it.

Grab the fish by the ice hole when he comes up to take a pea...."

:D

(Got that from a Greek guy who used to work with me. He had about 400 jokes - mostly as bad as that one, and he'd tell 'em in sequence. Then he'd start again....)

See you guys again when my ban wears off :evil: .

Regards,

mljdeckard
March 15, 2010, 12:27 AM
Poachers, regardless of the justification, aren't bound by seasons, bag limits, or boundaries. They never have to take a difficult shot because it's sunset on the last day of the hunt. They don't have to freeze the kill because they won't have another chance until next year.

Palehorseman
March 15, 2010, 03:21 AM
A .22 rf 40 grain solid will travel through 16 inches of thigh muscle. (don't ask me how I know this is a fact)

Elmer
March 15, 2010, 07:18 AM
I have very vivid memories of conversing with one guy shot in the abdomen with a .22. Almost no blood, and he wasn't in that much distress.....until just before he died....

Officers'Wife
March 15, 2010, 09:18 AM
Hi US SPC,
For the most part ehis is a decent thread concerning the 22LR. Yes they are dangerous. Much more than most think.

Anytime you have an object with mass traveling at a velocity there is a danger.It's not the .22LR that is dangerous anymore than a semi-truck, John Deere tractor or Abrams tank is dangerous. As I've heard repeated over and over since I was 11- it's not the machine, it's the operator.

(sorry for the rant but you pushed my rant button.)

GRIZ22
March 15, 2010, 09:35 AM
I have heard for years that the .22 is the weapon of choice for professional assassins.

I've heard the same. The OSS and CIA used suppressed Colt Woodsman pistols. I've read the Mosaad uses the Beretta Model 70. Not so much that they are the most effective weapon but even without a surpressor the noise may be dismissed as a car backfiring.

easyg
March 15, 2010, 01:31 PM
had a .22 and shot at the noise, the round hit her collar bone and bounced around insider her torso hitting every vital organ.
Let's see...
It hit her collar bone and then hit her heart, spinal cord, liver, both kidneys, and both lungs? :scrutiny:


Seriously, the .22 does not bounce around inside humans.
And it is not a good self-defense round nor a good "killing round".

NOLAEMT
March 15, 2010, 03:21 PM
I was leaning against the wall at the local hospital doing paperwork last night, when they brought in a GSW from the waiting room. I watched the trauma team assess him (this is a level 1 trauma facility with a team dedicated to serious trauma standing by 24-7).
He had been shot 6 times with what was agreed upon to be a .22. He was still alive, but probably wouldn't be doing anything for a while. One leg was paralyzed, and he had 1 round through his scrotum :what: in addition to 4 other various wounds to his arms and abdomen.

Even after all that, he was able to sit himself up in a wheel chair and talk to the hospital staff on the way back to the trauma bay. (his friends brought him in, and put him in a wheel chair, so they brought him right back like that. the hospital didn't put him in a wheelchair with a gun shot wound, don't worry)

Officers'Wife
March 15, 2010, 03:34 PM
It hit her collar bone and then hit her heart, spinal cord, liver, both kidneys, and both lungs?

You can't predict some projectiles. I remember one case a patient came with a GSW. The ball had been a hollow point (I don't remember the caliber) and had broken into three pieces. One piece perforated the left lungs missing the heart by less than a millimeter. The second they found in the patient's neck and the third was resting on the pelvis. In the process the lung was damaged, seven holes in the stomach, several feet of small intestine perforated and a small hole in the liver.

Manco
March 15, 2010, 04:20 PM
I have to say that I'm utterly perplexed by the notion of a .22 LR somehow doing more damage, in general, because of its relatively high probability of ricocheting off bone in comparison to larger calibers. A bullet only has so much momentum and will only penetrate a certain maximum distance through flesh whether it is deflected or not, and one would think that deflections would rob some of its momentum, thereby reducing penetration overall. Whether it penetrates in a straight line or a zigzagging path, the real harm it does depends on what happens to get hit. Also, while a tumbling .22 LR bullet will cause more damage to the depth at which it penetrates, that depth will necessarily be reduced because it will lose momentum more quickly. This is all based on physics--there is no magical way for the .22 LR to do more damage than its limited energy will allow. All you can do with bullets in general, aside from aiming them accurately, is make sure that their energy is used optimally rather than wasted, hence the development of hollow-point bullets in calibers that would otherwise likely overpenetrate and thereby waste much of their wounding potential. The .22 LR is not such a caliber against human-sized targets, and while it's lethal, it's neither inherently more lethal than larger calibers, nor will it liquify one's insides by bouncing around 20 times and penetrating several meters of flesh in the process, please.

In the specific case of shooting a .22 LR bullet into somebody's head, whereupon it will, according to some, bounce around several times and thereby scramble the person's brain more than a larger-caliber bullet would, I can't say that I know all the facts but I'm skeptical because I know of a number of cases where people survived penetrating head shots from .22 LR handguns, at least for a few hours or days. There was a guy who shot himself in the head in my neighbor's front yard a number of years back, being so distraught (more like in a murderous rage) at getting dumped by my neighbor's daughter, while I watched discreetly from my front door, ready to call the police (had I known that he was armed, I would have called already, but his gun was in his car). He died two days later in the hospital, if I remember correctly. I'm not exactly sure what damage was done, but there was definitely no exploding exit wound with buckets of blood and bone fragments spraying all over my lawn. With no hearing protection and from fairly close proximity the shot sounded like a small firecracker. Now imagine somebody's head getting hit with a .40 or .45 with the muzzle pressed against it--all that energy released into the relatively inelastic tissues of the brain, and probably expelling some nice chunks of it out the other side, too. Are people still convinced that .22 LR is the most lethal caliber for head shots? As others have said, its main advantage--especially for assassins--is that it is relatively quiet, and with the latest technology can be suppressed to near silence.

mljdeckard
March 15, 2010, 04:28 PM
Like I say. All bullets are unpredictable. .22s are less predictable than others. They MAY do a lot of things. But there is less likelihood that they WILL do any particular thing than OTHER bullets.

If you enjoyed reading about "Interesting comment from Sherrif's deputy" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!