Right 5 to 10 times less, also a good number where shots are fired and no one is hit.
Are you having a problem with the math?
Do you understand what a majority is?
Or do you think that 5 out of 6 wouldn't be a vast majority?
A .22 handgun for home self defense?
- Thread starter gunny2
- Start date
Are you having a problem with the math?
Do you understand what a majority is?
Or do you think that 5 out of 6 wouldn't be a vast majority?
Source?
Attachments
Mav, Kleck's analyisis of the CDC estimates is well known to many of us. They measure the number of Defensive Gun Use incidents--the number of times that guns are used for defensove purposes, whehter or not they are fired. Good data, and important.
But ithey do not address the key issue here: whether a .22LR handgun is a reasonable choice for self defense, as compared to others. For that, we would have to analyze data regarding the comparative effectiveness of .22LR handguns vs other kinds. We cannot conlude much regarding psychological stops vs physical stops--there is no data base that enables us to distinguishe between assailants who stop timely because they are physically unable to continue vs those who choose to not continue after experiencing severe pain or great fear and anxiety.
I have, over many decades, used defensive firearms effectively to stop attackers without having ever fired a shot in anger. Yes, those were Defensive Gun Use incidents, but I have never considered them "psychological stops". Had I fired and missed, i probably would.
A .22 handgun may suffice, or not. The same can be said for a .45. But we do not see ..22s on any serious liste of recommended defensive weapons.
Those lists inlude guns that would likely be effective if they have to be fired.
But ithey do not address the key issue here: whether a .22LR handgun is a reasonable choice for self defense, as compared to others. For that, we would have to analyze data regarding the comparative effectiveness of .22LR handguns vs other kinds. We cannot conlude much regarding psychological stops vs physical stops--there is no data base that enables us to distinguishe between assailants who stop timely because they are physically unable to continue vs those who choose to not continue after experiencing severe pain or great fear and anxiety.
I have, over many decades, used defensive firearms effectively to stop attackers without having ever fired a shot in anger. Yes, those were Defensive Gun Use incidents, but I have never considered them "psychological stops". Had I fired and missed, i probably would.
A .22 handgun may suffice, or not. The same can be said for a .45. But we do not see ..22s on any serious liste of recommended defensive weapons.
Those lists inlude guns that would likely be effective if they have to be fired.
Well it ain't the first time you've tried to move a goal post.
There's only "psychological stop" and "physical stops" so exactly what do you consider a DGU with no shots fired.
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,210
I think it depends upon how many rounds you can hit them with. A 22 with 17 rounds of Federal Defense might work.
There may be more than one definition of psychological stop. To me that's any use of a gun that gets someone to stop without physical incapacitation. Not that there is real solid statistics from Gary Kleck or the NCVS, but it looks like in most defensive uses, guns aren't fired.
Every time I've heard of someone getting a 22 pulled on them, the victim didn't identify the caliber. Maybe criminals are better than cops at seeing that a gun is a 22 and taking their chance, where they wouldn't have taken the chance with a 9mm? I suppose there isn't any solid proof either way. That's why I said 22lr is "okay" for that. I didn't say superior to service calibers. I didn't say as good as service calibers.
If the mere display of a gun is going to stop an attacker who is afraid of getting shot, a K frame 22 or High Standard Sentinel might stop them just as well as a 45 or a realistic BB gun might.
Last edited:
Yeah. But you don't like most of those study's because most of them show that the 40 and 45 are actually more effective than the 9mm.
I agree for the most part it's really hard to conclude anything from most of the studies of real world shootings other that 2 absolute facts everything works sometimes and nothing is 100%
Funny that this chart from the Ellifritz study actually shows the 22 had a higher % of 1 shot stops with upper torso/ head shots.
Replying to my own post, now that I see this discussion drifted toward what's more effective once an attacker is actually getting hit with bullets.
There aren't any reliable statistics to back it up. But 5 shots of 9mm JHP in the heart/lungs is going to beat 5 shots of 22lr all day long. That's just my opinion, because the only thing I have to back it up is "They're bigger holes. Duh."
When it comes to relying on an immediate physiological incapacitation, I suppose a 22lr in an eye socket IS just as good as a 45 in an eye socket. If you can do that in the midst of the brutality of home defense, you have way more confidence in your luck and abilities than I have in mine.
Getting back to this and first thanks all for the replies, much appreciated. Some general thoughts in response:
Really I'm not sold on 22 vs something else offhand, again just thinking out loud.
- "A 22 is better than nothing" (etc) only states the obvious, but that wasn't my question, which is probably my bad, I didn't state it well enough to begin with. The thing I'm really kicking around is if a 22 might be a better choice due to much lower recoil, since that can impact accuracy quite a lot and so should in turn (I think) equate to more hits in a crisis situation. Basically a hit with a 22 beats the hell out of a miss with a bigger caliber.
- I don't see that a 380 is a viable "in between" option as the recoil on that is much closer to a 9mm than a 22. If it was half-way between the two, it would be more of a consideration.
- I don't get the rifle suggestions-? It seems to me a rifle would be an impractical weapon in close quarters of a house. If I'm shooting kids to get off my lawn however
- Most break-ins are by people unarmed, and most aren't all doped up on crack/PCP/etc. So tbh I'm not too worried about the "crazed druggie." Someone however did make a good point about if they have heavier clothing on.
- "You have less of a chance of killing someone" is a plus, not a minus, in my book. I've no interest in killing someone, even a dirtball who's broken into my house. Only stopping them.
All of this makes me think there could be a viable market for a caliber that is truly half-way between a 22 and 380. A "30" perhaps. A true half-way between a 22 and 380.
Why are you hesitant to go for a pistol with a larger cartridge? Are you recoil shy? Is there some reason that .380 recoil is too much for you to handle? Most people I know are capable of handling a .380 well enough to use one to defend themself in a life threatening situation. Those that aren't capable of shooting a .380 accurately and reliably can usually be trained to do so with practice. My petite, recoil shy 13 yo old daughter became comfortable with my locked breach Browning 1911-380. I would not ask her to shoot my LCP 380 though. If you aren't willing to put the time into practicing and becoming proficient with a gun you (and your family) are probably better off with you not owning a gun. If you are just inexperienced and want to learn there is no harm in admitting this. Most people on this site will go out of their way to help you educate yourself.
I think the consensus is pretty clear. A 22lr handgun is not an optimal self defense gun in most situations. A larger caliber more powerful handgun will have a much better chance of neutralizing a threat quickly which will get you out of danger quicker.
There are cartridges between 22lr and .380. 22 WMR, 25acp and 32 acp are some of them. 5.7 x 28 and 22 TCM are two more that pack a good punch and also have VERY mild recoil.
Maybe if you could tell us a little about your background and any physical disabilities we could do a better job of steering you in the right direction?
There are a lot of choices in self protection pistols available but haven't given us much to go on to help you find something that might work well for you and still be effective for self defense.
Last edited:
Probably but we keep hearing how 9mm is better than everything bigger due to faster follow ups and more capacity.
Just playing devils advocate how about 2 or 3 9mm vs 4 or 5 22s?
Had one they're nice little guns, but to expand on my point above the Browning 1911-380 is nearly the same size and weight as my Sig P322.
8+1 of 380 vs 20+1 22?
I'm not really advocating that a 22 is a good choice, I just think from a realistic standpoint it's not much worse if any than the popular LCP/P38T or 5 shot snubs.
I've seen too many critters double lunged with 270/308/3006 to see a service caliber handgun as the hammer of Thor.
Last edited:
My personal belief is that it is the first shot that counts. So I prefer to carry the largest caliber that is practical for a particular situation even at the expense of round count. .45 acp is my preference but I often carry smaller. If I have gone through 9 rounds of .380 and the threat isn't incapacitated an extra 11 rounds of .22lr isn't really going to help me much because I will probably already be dead.
Last edited:
Tcruse
Member
Tcruse
Member
I agree that there is a good selection of capable 380ACP handguns for sale today, however with 380ACP ammo being more expensive and the difference in size/recoil compared to 9mm, it really doesn't make sense to choose .380ACP
The same can be said for the .22LR pistol today, with entries like the Sig P322 (20 or 25 round mags, optic sights, reliable operation) that is also becoming a more capable. I think we will continue to see more interest and options for .22LR sold for SD usage.
Tcruse
Member
There are certainly many people that make the claim that revolver is more reliable than an "autoloader". However, from listening to some of the "common" expert trainers, and personal experience that is no longer the case today.
Tcruse
Member
There is the popular Sig P322 that has 20 or 25 round mags and probably more reliable any .22 revolver and with the optic more likely to actually hit your target. I also hear good things about the Tarus TX-22 and Glock 44.
I agree the first shot is more important than any subsequent shot for obvious reasons, my belief is well founded from years of turning live stuff into dead stuff with everything from a 22 to 300 Win Mag and 45/70. The effective gain moving from the smaller calibers to service calibers is very small and IMHO is nearly a 1:1 ratio with that subsequent round that you may or may not get to.
As to "probably already be dead" that may well be the case regardless of caliber. Thing is from my experience without CNS damage from that first round, best case scenario you stop the heart from functioning, you'll have 15-20 seconds before Mr BG stops functioning.
That's plenty of time to get off 20 roumds
have folks who recommend a certain rimfire handgun ever owned, let alone shot, it?
let’s start with the premise that someone considering a 22lr handgun for protection has sound physical or financial reasons for choosing so, or simply isn’t a gun person. let’s agree that any firearm must be practiced alot. which gun owner gives you more confidence, someone with 500 practice rounds of 22lr or 50 rounds of 9mm?
22wmr handguns are really loud, practice is no fun indoors, and ammo costs a bit more than 9mm. 22wmr recoil may not match some centerfire calibers but distracting flashbang can be equally offputting to newbies.
besides uncomfortably stout trigger pulls, (at least) a ruger lcr 22lr trigger can be short-stroked and its cylinder locked in double action rapid fire. a s&w 317 aluminum cylinder can heat-bind after 50 rounds, which isn’t a defense issue but is disconcerting during practice. a taurus 94’s trigger pull was only barely possible.
if you cannot afford practice, or find practice to be unpleasant, how can you gain any profiency? firearms, (and golf clubs, chain saws, tennis rackets, etc.) all need confidence-building practice. a single parent or retiree on a limited income can afford alot more 22lr practice ammo. an infirm person’s frail body can more easily handle softer-shooting 22lr practice sessions.
i’ve seen more than a few non-gunner women looking for a handgun automatically steered to a 9mm blaster with the debate being made around them whether it should have, or not, a magazine disconnect. silly and sad.
let’s start with the premise that someone considering a 22lr handgun for protection has sound physical or financial reasons for choosing so, or simply isn’t a gun person. let’s agree that any firearm must be practiced alot. which gun owner gives you more confidence, someone with 500 practice rounds of 22lr or 50 rounds of 9mm?
22wmr handguns are really loud, practice is no fun indoors, and ammo costs a bit more than 9mm. 22wmr recoil may not match some centerfire calibers but distracting flashbang can be equally offputting to newbies.
besides uncomfortably stout trigger pulls, (at least) a ruger lcr 22lr trigger can be short-stroked and its cylinder locked in double action rapid fire. a s&w 317 aluminum cylinder can heat-bind after 50 rounds, which isn’t a defense issue but is disconcerting during practice. a taurus 94’s trigger pull was only barely possible.
if you cannot afford practice, or find practice to be unpleasant, how can you gain any profiency? firearms, (and golf clubs, chain saws, tennis rackets, etc.) all need confidence-building practice. a single parent or retiree on a limited income can afford alot more 22lr practice ammo. an infirm person’s frail body can more easily handle softer-shooting 22lr practice sessions.
i’ve seen more than a few non-gunner women looking for a handgun automatically steered to a 9mm blaster with the debate being made around them whether it should have, or not, a magazine disconnect. silly and sad.
Jim Watson
Member
Nope.
SHOULD be practiced a lot, but few get it.
Unless you are in a shooting sport, or are in a high level military or police agency, or have a high perceived threat level, you probably aren't practicing much. Even if you have formal training, you may not be practicing what you were taught enough to keep in form.
Interesting, there is another thread running here simultaneously, "How effective is .45 ACP hardball?"
OP, I used to compare the recoil of my Beretta 84F in .380 to that of a .22 in a smaller handgun. It really was, to me, a mild, soft-shooting gun. I would guess one of their 82 models in .32 ACP would only be even milder.Getting back to this and first thanks all for the replies, much appreciated. Some general thoughts in response:
Really I'm not sold on 22 vs something else offhand, again just thinking out loud.
- "A 22 is better than nothing" (etc) only states the obvious, but that wasn't my question, which is probably my bad, I didn't state it well enough to begin with. The thing I'm really kicking around is if a 22 might be a better choice due to much lower recoil, since that can impact accuracy quite a lot and so should in turn (I think) equate to more hits in a crisis situation. Basically a hit with a 22 beats the hell out of a miss with a bigger caliber.
- I don't see that a 380 is a viable "in between" option as the recoil on that is much closer to a 9mm than a 22. If it was half-way between the two, it would be more of a consideration.
- I don't get the rifle suggestions-? It seems to me a rifle would be an impractical weapon in close quarters of a house. If I'm shooting kids to get off my lawn however
- Most break-ins are by people unarmed, and most aren't all doped up on crack/PCP/etc. So tbh I'm not too worried about the "crazed druggie." Someone however did make a good point about if they have heavier clothing on.
- "You have less of a chance of killing someone" is a plus, not a minus, in my book. I've no interest in killing someone, even a dirtball who's broken into my house. Only stopping them.
All of this makes me think there could be a viable market for a caliber that is truly half-way between a 22 and 380. A "30" perhaps. A true half-way between a 22 and 380.
A tip-up barrel would solve any issues of difficulty racking the slide.
Absolutely. I've shot a hog with the Lord's caliber, and it's not a magic bullet. One of my friends shot a hog with the ultimate man stopper, the 357, and it chased him and his buddy into the back of pickup truck with a perfect heart/lung shot that you could fit two fingers through. Didn't stop until they shot it in the head.
If an animal or person was attacking me, I'd shoot it as many times as I could as fast as I could and it would probably stop.
I love the hammer of Thor comment, and I think hammers make a good analogy as another tool to do a job. I use a 16 ounce claw hammer for almost everything. I can hammer a nail with relatively fast. I could hammer a nail with a 28 ounce framing hammer, but I couldn't control it as well, so I would hammer the nail any faster or straighter. A professional carpenter could do better, but I'm an average guy.
If the 16 ounce hammer is smaller, more controllable, why not use a 4 ounce hammer? I think at some point you get diminishing returns- you're not going to hit the nail fast enough to make up for the lack of force.
Jim Watson
Member
Does a .22 work sometimes? Does a .45 fail sometimes?
Sure.
"There is no such thing as luck. There is only adequate or inadequate preparation for life in a statistical universe."
Sure.
"There is no such thing as luck. There is only adequate or inadequate preparation for life in a statistical universe."
Probably like you said initially most stops are psychological. As for physical stops the shootings that guys point to to justify carrying a bit larger caliber mostly give me pause that just hitting center mass with a little bigger caliber or a couple more rounds just might not be enough.
Maybe a guy should practice a failure to stop drill.
To expand on this were trying to poke holes using a 16 oz hammer to poke .22" holes will be a lot easier than trying to poke .35" or .45" holes especially for my 93 year old dad and I'm quite sure handing him a 4# sledge isn't a good answer.
whatnickname
Member
NO!
JERRY
Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Messages
- 3,836
Very regular guy views with a little comedy.
youtu.be
Is the .22 LR good enough for concealed carry self defense? A Personal Perspective.
*DISCLAIMER:* All content and commentary in this channel is for entertainment purposes only, nothing is intended or implied to be any kind of substitute for ...
youtu.be