22 Rifle for Home/Defense?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My wife does not like to shoot center fire cartridges due to the perceived recoil, and blast. She has shot my 9MM's, and .380 at the range, but didn't like them. She did like how my Beretta 85FS felt in her hand, but as it is a blowback, the .380 was a bit snappy to her. So, I used that as an excuse to get a Beretta 87BB, .22LR when I found one at a gun shop. Not cheap, but it is very reliable, and accurate for its size. She loves it, and with CCI Minimags, she is at least armed with something.
 
I like .38/.357 revolvers for home defense. If you're concerned about over-penetration, one or two rounds of .38 Spl. wadcutters, then 4, .357 Mag Hollow Points. If the intruder is still coming after two .38Spl. wadcutters, you won't care about over-penetration. Just the noise of a .357 inside a room will have tremendous "shock value", (speaking from experience) and if you hit them lethally, WILL put the assailant down, especially if shot in the pelvic girdle. Remember, your primary duty is to yourself and your family. It's unlikely that a wild shot will hit any other person, rooms away, in the structure.

(Note: If you've never fired a shotgun at something 15 feet away, it's worth doing. No matter what choke or shot size, it acts pretty much like a solid at that distance.)
 
jmr40 wrote:
What you want is penetration...

Not necessarily.

Penetrate the soft tissue with a tiny hole that goes right on through and all the energy consumed in carrying the bullet to its ultimate destination after having penetrated the target is wasted. Penetrating the soft tissue of a human target is almost always less effective in taking the person out of the fight than a shallow wound that strikes and breaks a bone. A large, shallow wound, particularly one with numerous tiny wound channels can be far more effective in removing someone from a fight than a penetrating would because the effect of greater blood loss combined with the fact the wound appears very serious have a greater psychological effect on the attacker.
 
My two cents, based on what my girlfriend uses. She's not a hardcore shooter like I am, likes it, but is intimidated by most of my hardware. I got her (in the past), a Hi-Point carbine and then a KT Sub 2000, both in 9mm. The first was too heavy and long for her and the second too complicated for her to figure out, as well as she didn't like the noise and (minimal )kick

Before you jump, she's a very small framed lady, and because of where we live and her schedule and interest level, a handgun isn't an option here, nor is a shotgun, even in .410 gauge. However, I got her a Marlin 795 that she fell in love with and works well for her. Actually, I got it for myself, but after the earlier failed attempts at arming her, I let her keep it (as if that was an option ).
She's fast and accurate, likes shooting it, and works it like a pro. That's why it's her HD piece, as well as her one and only piece. I bring this up as an example of when a .22 makes sense as a defensive weapon. As Mark Twain said, 'Beware the man (or in this case, tiny woman ) who owns but one gun. Chances are good he(or she),knows how to use it.".
 
Last edited:
I'm thinking of replacing my Remington with a Marlin 60. Its got some feeding issues.
Tis why I never got a Remington 597. The Marlin M60 is a good inexpensive little 22 rifle (typically accurate and reliable). My Remington 22's are all bolt actions and they shoot good. I would consider a Ruger 10/22 if you dominant use for the 22 is plinking and apartment defense. Get a couple extra mags. Many of the large capacity after market mags are un-reliable. Steel lips are the best of those.
 
I have long thought that building a Kel Tec PMR-30 with TWO firing pins that hit the rim in two different places - or similar rig - would turn that thing into a real self-defense rig - need that reliable ignition. But it would make the trigger pull worse and would require a re-design, to make it cycle and have enough mainspring power to launch two pins with enough force to each fire independently.
 
I honestly can't afford to practice "enough" with pretty much anything center-fire; those who can I envy.

Pretty much any semi-auto 22 seems formidable as all heck at interior distances...
I have seen Remington Thunderbolts have a 25% failure rate. If it is quality 22 ammo I agree with you.
 
So I have a hypothetical question:

I live in an apartment with a decent amount of space, but thin interior walls and neighbors and such. If (hypothetically) I were to set up a long gun for home defense, would a 22LR rifle (in my case, a Remington 597, or a lever-action carbine) be an effective choice for HD duty?
My thought is that a 22LR rifle, loaded with CCI Stingers (which cycle well) would be a reasonably effective tool. I understand that a single 22LR doesn't necessarily have the energy to immediately neutralize an attacker, but its lack of recoil and muzzle flash seems permissive to multiple follow-on shots and its light weight and short OAL makes it easy for either myself or my wife to use. Less risk of penetration into another room, less sound and lower cost for the weapon and ammo also seem to be positives. I also reckon that a .22 would make training far easier because I'd be able to afford a lot more rounds and range time than a more-expensive centerfire rifle. On the flipside, 22LR isn't necessarily as versatile a round as some of the centerfires out there and it's not necessarily powerful enough to neutralize a threat as reliably as a 5.56mm.



*Note: I've got shotguns and centerfire handguns too, and my go-to is currently a 1911 stoked with .45ACP hollowpoints. This is more of a conceptual exercise, but I'm also looking to streamline the collection somewhat too, and having common ammunition and manuals-of-arms is nice.

Could work, but also might not. Pretty marginal situation. Better tools out there. I am speaking from personal experience.
I witnessed and cared for a child shot with a 22lr in theback of the neck at 20 ft with high velocity ammo. The bullet fragmented and did not exit. The result was shock and paralysis, but not not unconsciousness or death. SO a frontal shot on a large man , would require a well placed shot. Probably more than one. For this high stakes choice I would choose something else.
 
Last edited:
The Israeli Army deployed Ruger 10/22s in combat.
They know a thing or two about that stuff!
http://www.ruger1022.com/docs/israeli_sniper.htm

Wow. I didn't know the Israelis were that brutal or savage. Shooting protesters with real firearms and lethal ammo...that's disappointing and disturbing and unethical. Use real LTL devices and weapons, or don't even perpetuate the fraud. Why do we support these people?

Somehow I doubt this would be even remotely acceptable if an American police department did it...
 
Not necessarily.

Penetrate the soft tissue with a tiny hole that goes right on through and all the energy consumed in carrying the bullet to its ultimate destination after having penetrated the target is wasted. Penetrating the soft tissue of a human target is almost always less effective in taking the person out of the fight than a shallow wound that strikes and breaks a bone. A large, shallow wound, particularly one with numerous tiny wound channels can be far more effective in removing someone from a fight than a penetrating would because the effect of greater blood loss combined with the fact the wound appears very serious have a greater psychological effect on the attacker.

From my experience the "psychological effect" has had little bearing until after the fight in most cases. Ive also found shallow wounds to be ineffective. Also, broken bones can be ignored unless its a traumatic compound fracture. Even then a determined, drunk, or drugged up person can be unfazed by these things.

In my experience good penetration is very effective if you hit the vital organs and large blood vessels found deep in the human body.

From 22 shootings Ive investigated bullet choice made a very big difference. I would choose a heavy solid bullet over a light weight, hollow point, or soft lead bullet. Ive seen the .22 give deep penetration and be very lethal and Ive seen the 22 fail to penetrate and fail to break bones right under the skin.
 
RM, you obviously have never encountered a howling mob of people who would quite happily kill you. Never forget that until 1997, genocide of all Jews in Israel was an item in the Charter of the PLO. While that was removed via pressure on Arafat from Clinton, the desire still exists.

Still....that's some stunning disregard for life there. Shooting people for protesting....
 
Last edited:
When I went through the Police Academy we were taught that No.9 shot may be issued for "herding" protesters if it looked like the the situation had degenerated into a dangerous mob, and this was in Democrat Party controlled California, btw.
 
Wow. I didn't know the Israelis were that brutal or savage. Shooting protesters with real firearms and lethal ammo...that's disappointing and disturbing and unethical. Use real LTL devices and weapons, or don't even perpetuate the fraud. Why do we support these people?

Somehow I doubt this would be even remotely acceptable if an American police department did it...

Here he goes again; I really have a hard time believing you were in the US Army. Study history, young man. Starting with British treatment of 'rioters' in Boston, 5 Mar 1770. Ohio NG, 4 May, 1970. Current US military doctrine on surpressing internal rioting does initially use LTL methods, particularly LRAD, but is backed up by good ol (OH MY!) M16's. Ferguson shows not all levels of riot control will utilize LRAD, seems some types of riot are to be less supressed.
Instead of shooting 'key protest leaders' in the legs as the cited work states, I'd utilize the 10/22's for shooting identified agitprops in the head amidst the confusion of riot, then plant junk .22's on scene and blame the rioters themselves, but that's just my pragmatic side showing.

Why do we support these people?
So in addtion to a socialist elitist, you are anti-Semetic, too?
 
Still....that's some stunning disregard for life there. Shooting people for protesting....
No its shooting them for rioting. Big difference.
Despite that authors rather loose terminology, he starts off with "mass VIOLENT clashes."
The Israelis have shown restraint when possible, but the Palestinians don't seem to be content with taking the long, peaceful approach to attaining their goals, such as Ghandi or MLK- both of whom accomplished far more for their people than Arafat or Farrakhan ever did.
With today's technology, there are great LTL choices for police and military leaders. But when faced with deadly aggression by an unlawfully assembled mob- I'm OK with the forces of order using force in kind. Peaceful protesters should be careful about who they associate with and leave immediately if things turn violent.
Back to the OPs question- I wouldn't feel under gunned in a home or self defense scenarios with a reliable, semi auto, moderate capacity (10+) round .22 rifle. But, the bigger issue is the general unreliability of rimfire vs center fire ignition. Still, if its all your comfortable and effective with, go for it.
 
Makes sense. If I ever need it, I'm not wanting to risk overpenetration and I want something cheap, effective and easy to shoot indoors. Thanks for the advice.

Not anti-Semitic, btw. The Palestinians are the original inhabitants of the area and got a really raw deal, and they're just as Semetic as the Israelis. I just think defending reprehensible conduct based on ethnicity, religion or anything else is a poor man's attempt to justify evil, but that's just a liberal Fudd for y'all, not a Real American Man like y'all. But that's not a High Road debate.
 
Makes sense. If I ever need it, I'm not wanting to risk overpenetration and I want something cheap, effective and easy to shoot indoors. Thanks for the advice.

Not anti-Semitic, btw. The Palestinians are the original inhabitants of the area and got a really raw deal, and they're just as Semetic as the Israelis. I just think defending reprehensible conduct based on ethnicity, religion or anything else is a poor man's attempt to justify evil, but that's just a liberal Fudd for y'all, not a Real American Man like y'all. But that's not a High Road debate.

As usual, you completely avoid addressing the correction to your previous statements ('protests' vs. 'riots') and play the victim.

Also, when did "Y'all" become the new rallying call of the Leftist? Is there a pamphlet or something passed around at the SPLC meetings or something? It's as reliable as a 'Coexist' bumper sticker these days...


Larry
 
Because this is my country and I'm as American and patriotic as any of y'all. I just think that some of the more dangerous tools we sell ought to be more strictly regulated than they currently are. Y'all are so busy hating anyone with a different opinion that you forget that and break the rules of your own forum. High Road, people.

I just wanted some advice on how to make a sensible, effective home defense/utility weapon in a noncontroversial caliber without controversial features.
 
Last edited:
Because this is my country and I'm as American and patriotic as any of y'all. I just think that some of the more dangerous tools we sell ought to be more strictly regulated than they currently are. Y'all are so busy hating anyone with a different opinion that you forget that and break the rules of your own forum. High Road, people.

I just wanted some advice on how to make a sensible, effective home defense/utility weapon in a noncontroversial caliber without controversial features.

A Quisling, indeed.


Larry
 
Dude, I'm not so wedded to my guns that I'd turn down job opportunities in more liberal states for lack of portability, and I don't really want to shoot Magnum Bearkiller .302 Blackout Assault Tactical Limited Special for target practice or home defense. 22LR is pretty accepted everywhere, including by my liberal peers in most of the world, and is cheap, fun and effective enough. There's a lot more gun owners like me than there are smug keyboard commandos.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top