22 magnum for self defense.

Skylerbone said:

My response did not indicate otherwise but was in reply to effectiveness/lethality.

Click to expand...

No, your "Israeli" response did not mention lethality at all, did it? The context of the discussion was self defense, not lethality, and you said the Israelis has proven the .22's effectiveness. The Israelis have not proven the .22 effectiveness in self defense.

And not to put too fine a point on it, "effectiveness in self defense" and "lethality" are not synonymous.

AgPilot said:

We just had a Burgler enter a Home at night close to where I live. There was a scuffle. The home owner shot and killed the burgler. No charges are being brought against the homeowner

Click to expand...

Okay? That happens all the time.

Mauser lover said:

However, this does bring up a question in my mind. How many people do come back and try to assault someone a second time after recovering (or get a buddy to do so). I’d really like to know the odds, and how much extra careful one should be after successfully refusing to be victimized. Maybe it’s off topic though...

Click to expand...

The background is a long and confusing story about the foibles and high drama of youth. However, there was a confrontation, harsh words exchanged, a baseball bat thrown at a departing vehicle. Young man shot another with a .22 rifle. Kid was paralyzed from the waist down. Shooter was offered a plea deal, turned it down, when to trial, found not guilty. Friends and family of the paralyzed youth made life so difficult for the shooter and his family that they eventually picked up and moved away.

Not a direct answer to your question. One anecdote proves nothing. But there may be consequences beyond criminal and civil action for a "good shoot."

Kleanbore said:

Irrelevant. However, be aware that The state has until the shooter dies or is pardoned to decide on that.

Click to expand...

Help me out here, Kleenbore. Apparently most states, with Louisiana being the exception, have no statute of limitation on murder. So until the shooter dies makes sense.

I thought a pardon could occur only after a conviction and wouldn't apply to whether or not a jurisdiction decided to bring charges?

I am straying far afield from the suitability of a .22 Magnum for defense.

Kleanbore said:

Remember Ford and Nixon?

Click to expand...

Oops. Of course. You are correct.

bdickens said:

Or to outright lie....

Click to expand...

Witnesses rarely lie outright, however; most "witnesses", whether to a crime, an automobile accident, or a DGU, actually didn't see a thing until something (scream, sound of the crash, gunshot) grabbed their attention. They will relate what they think they should have seen,

Double Naught Spy said:

No, your "Israeli" response did not mention lethality at all, did it? The context of the discussion was self defense, not lethality, and you said the Israelis has proven the .22's effectiveness. The Israelis have not proven the .22 effectiveness in self defense.

And not to put too fine a point on it, "effectiveness in self defense" and "lethality" are not synonymous.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, you are correct. I would argue however that there is evidence of effectiveness “in self-defense” as I am positive someone, somewhere out there has done it.

Also not self-defense but dead is dead, and this is .22lr in attacks. Not my favorite website but again, let’s not pretend it cannot kill.
https://www.gunpolicy.org/documents...t-rifles-kill-more-people-than-any-other/file

Skylerbone said:

Fair enough, you are correct. I would argue however that there is evidence of effectiveness “in self-defense” as I am positive someone, somewhere out there has done it.

Also not self-defense but dead is dead, and this is .22lr in attacks. Not my favorite website but again, let’s not pretend it cannot kill.
https://www.gunpolicy.org/documents...t-rifles-kill-more-people-than-any-other/file

Click to expand...

In fairness (to you), there is at least historical precedence of the Israelis using .22LR pistols not only as defensive weapons, but offensive weapons as well.

Back in the 1960s-1970s, their sky marshals were armed with Beretta 70 pistols chambered in .22LR (I believe part of the rationale was to give them weapons that wouldn't be too destructive to the fuselages of the planes they were on -- but I'm not sure about that). In the most famous (one would say legendary) use of those Beretta 70s, marshal Mordechai Rachamim took on several Arab terrorists armed with AK-47s at Zurich airport. The ballsy Rachamim ATTACKED the terrorists, killed one of them with a hail of gunfire from his Beretta, and kept the others pinned down until the Zurich police could show up to apprehend the perps.

AFAIK, Israeli sky marshals have since switched over to 9mm pistols. But that incident at Zurich stands as a testimony to what a highly motivated and courageous individual can do with the weapon at hand.

https://www.eliyokimcohen.com/2021/09/02/israeli-mossad-22-lrs-the-reliable-pistols-of-the-mossad

https://www.ammoland.com/2020/10/be...f-22-rimfire-used-for-survival/#axzz79hEko8TA

There we go, self-defense with rimfire. The above are also self-defense. Remember all self-defense is not 6 meth heads running at you “hyped up”. Lots of scenarios beyond the human one.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...ites-defense-article-1.1151926?outputType=amp

Kleanbore said:

When we speak of self defense, we do not include bear attacks. Different laws and dynamics.

A.22 rimfire is a terrible choice for bear defense.

Click to expand...

I guess my definition is broader. Absolutely agree I’d prefer a rifle for bear but the point was challenged that no evidence existed for rimfire being used for SD and so I presented evidence.

Im sure someone here has seen memes or read responses indicating that those who carry 9mm need a whole bunch of little bullets to do what 8 rounds of .45 ACP can do. I’m really sensing that same vibe here, and I’m not concluding .22 WMR is enough for any situation, only that there are more situations than dark inner city alley. I’ll withdrawal from the thread now, I’ve stated my position.

Heck, even in the case of a bear attack if it was my .22wmr or my Swiss Army Knife guess which one I pull out.
I’d prolly be lunch either way but the .22 is at least noisier.

Atavar said:

Heck, even in the case of a bear attack if it was my .22wmr or my Swiss Army Knife guess which one I pull out.
I’d prolly be lunch either way but the .22 is at least noisier.

Click to expand...

I don't know, I think I'd be pretty darned noisy if I was being attacked by a bear, and all I had for defense was my trusty Swiss Army Knife - at least for a little while.

I actually like pictures more than debate. My newly acquired Smith 351c with Barami hip grips. I like it and I’ll carry it. I think it’ll work if I need it and I know it’ll be there if I need it. Some guys say the same thing about a Colt 1911 and I support their decision.

Skylerbone said:

I guess my definition is broader. Absolutely agree I’d prefer a rifle for bear but the point was challenged that no evidence existed for rimfire being used for SD and so I presented evidence.

Click to expand...

Well, whoop de do!

There's evidence that people have jumped from an airplane at altitude without a parachute and survived. You gonna suggest that is a good idea?

I sometimes carry a High Standard derringer in 22 magnum, but it is strictly a backup gun. Not saying 22 Mag can't get the job done, but it is not ideal IMHO

bdickens said:

Well, whoop de do!

There's evidence that people have jumped from an airplane at altitude without a parachute and survived. You gonna suggest that is a good idea?

Click to expand...

You gonna suggest 9mm over rat shot in a .22 for a snake? Where I’m from the latter is a more likely scenario as I spend a good deal of time outdoors. If your definition of SD includes only violent drugged up gangs charging at you then we can both agree that centerfire is the obvious “good idea”. What I meant by “broader” is that which so many do when they post “against 2-legged and 4-legged critters”. It’s not a single scenario choice.

I will mention that .22wmr has pretty much the same muzzle energy as a standard 9mm, about 350 lbs.
does that mean that y’all who are disparaging the .22wmr are going to toss your 9mm’s too?

Muzzle energy is irrelevant.

Projectile weight * velocity = energy

as both rounds would most likely stop in the target both rounds deliver all their energy to the target.
If that energy is the same then…

What does deliver energy mean? It is not like a bolt of lightning. The projectile from a handgun is effective when it destroys some vital structure as cutting blood supply, damaging important nervous system components or breaking bones as to reduce movement (doesn't mean the person will stop fighting on this one).

Energy per se has been debunked as criteria quite awhile ago. No handgun energy is destructive in and of itself. This is seen by your hand still existing when you fire a large caliber handgun. The same energy is delivered to your hand.

Right. So the .22wmr creates a long skinny wound channel and tumbles about a bit while the 9mm creates a shorter wider wound channel.