A .22 handgun for home self defense?

[Kleanbore]

Please, point me to an FBI paper that gives data on self defense outcomes.

That is naive.
No one records the specifics of individual shooting encounters in a manner sufficient to make any real conclusions. The order in which each shot hit what, the time required to effect a stop,, etc. are never known .

So--what we do is sisult medical science to determine what is generally required, and ammunion tessting reults to see what different loads usually do,.

What someone expects to defend against is 100% a driver.

What one may "expect" to defend against does not define what one will encounter.

The FBI “real data” studies you reference all have various assumptions, if you have dug very far into them, you will find the assumptions and success criteria.

The FBI data combine ammunition performance testing results with medical analyses to derive terminal ballistics effectiveness assessments. These are combined with shooting data to derive overall effectiveness data.

For the testing, objective measurements are used. The test specifications involve some barrier testing requiments, which one might characterize as having been based on assumptions, The results are real data.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

I have never much appreciated debating with those who don’t really take the time to read what you have said and take multiple occasions to object to some premise you have never stated. I don’t think there is anything further to be gained by our exchange. Have a good evening.

 

[Kleanbore]

I have never much appreciated debating with those who don’t really take the time to read what you have said and take multiple occasions to object to some premise you have never stated. I don’t think there is anything further to be gained by our exchange. Have a good evening.

I have read what you have posted and I have replied to it. I agree that there is little to be gained rom continuing the discussion.

I cannot see where any of your statements reply to the OP.

 

[TTv2]

I'm late to this thread and likely won't go back to read every comment, but I'm not opposed to the use of a .22 handgun for home defense, there's pros and cons to it and I think we all know the cons, but the pros are reduced penetration thru walls, low noise, low recoil, fast shots, and all of that contributes to better accuracy.

Being .22 this means multiple shots are likely to stop the threat and the biggest obstacle to ensure multiple shots is a semi auto malfunction or a rimfire dud. So, just like with carrying a .22, the revolver makes the most sense. I would prefer something that can have a light mounted to it and most revolvers don't allow for that, so semi autos have that advantage.

My preference for a semi auto rimfire is a DA/SA action, something that allows for a second strike and in my SR22 I've had times where the first strike doesn't fire, but the DA second strike does. IDK how many DA/SA .22 pistols there are out there, but the Ruger is one. They make a long slide version, I'd probably opt for that for home defense for the added velocity.

 

[mavracer]

True, but that applies to distincions among service clibers only.

This is naive at best and downright dishonest at worse.
Your basically saying to only look at the data that supports your conclusions.
You're trying to say larger holes only matter in a certain range, this just isn't true.

 

[Kleanbore]

This is naive at best and downright dishonest at worse.
Your basically saying to only look at the data that supports your conclusions.
You're trying to say larger holes only matter in a certain range, this just isn't true.

I intended to point out that the FBI tested service rounds, and to make no assertions regarding wounding effectiveness. "Applied" rather than "applies" would have been more clear.

I have no reason to not accept the FBI recommendations, but they are their conclusions, and not mine.

I have carried ammo that does not meet the FBI barrier test standards. I can see myself carrying a .30 Super Carry, and I have not seen anything that says that the law enforcement community would carry it.

 

[mavracer]

I intended to point out that the FBI tested service rounds, and to make no assertions regarding wounding effectiveness. "Applied" rather than "applies" would have been more clear.

Well it's not like the FBI protocol for it's battery of tests is a secret, there's plenty of testing results available for calibers not considered "service" calibers.
So really "applied" is no less naive or deceitful.

 

[Kleanbore]

Well it's not like the FBI protocol for it's battery of tests is a secret, there's plenty of testing results available for calibers not considered "service" calibers.
So really "applied" is no less naive or deceitful.

Have you seen any published recommendations for LEO usage for any of them? I haven't.

 

[mavracer]

Have you seen any published recommendations for LEO usage for any of them? I haven't.

Again HWFE has been out along with the testing protocols for literal decades, 12" Minimum penetration with up to 16 preferred. It really shouldn't be that hard to figure out.
There are several 32 acp and 380 load that have been approved for back up guns by many departments over the years.

 

[Kleanbore]

Again HWFE has been out along with the testing protocols for literal decades, 12" Minimum penetration with up to 16 preferred. It really shouldn't be that hard to figure out.

That wasn't the quest[on.

There are several 32 acp and 380 load that have been approved for back up guns by many departments over the years.

Can you point to some specifics?

BTW, I carry a .380--for backup.

 

[mavracer]

That wasn't the quest[on.

Is HWFE's conclusion not a recommendation?

Can you point to some specifics?

I could easily but I'm afraid it'll fall on deaf ears.
I have a few boxes of law enforcement marked Speer gold dots that were and overrun of production for a state police but can't remember which.
Here is a glocktalk thread where several officers replied about 380 being an approved gun/round that was about the 5th result of a Google search.

Which departments authorize 380 for off duty carry.

I am curious to know which departments still authorize 380 ACP for off duty/BUG carry and which ammo is authorized. I know LAPD did authorize the Smith and Wesson 380 bodyguard at one time. Chicago also has literature saying it authorized a 380 at one time .I do not know if this was available to...

www.glocktalk.com

 

[Kleanbore]

Is HWFE's conclusion not a recommendation?

No--the FBI Training Academy does not draw conclusions regarding specific ammunition, nor does it make recommendations. They develop testing protocols. Testing labs test the ammunition, and the Bureau makes recommendations. Many law enforcement departments, and all non-military federal agencies, use those recommendations. I believe that some departments make their own assessments.

 

[mavracer]

No--the FBI Training Academy does not draw conclusions regarding specific ammunition, nor does it make recommendations. They develop testing protocols. Testing labs test the ammunition, and the Bureau makes recommendations. Many law enforcement departments, and all non-military federal agencies, use those recommendations. I believe that some departments make their own assessments.

Why do you insist on playing this game of
"It doesn't say what it says in black and white"
From HWFE the paper from the FBI Training Academy.

There testing battery and protocol is well documented too. Does it need to be posted for the umpteenth time.
2+2=4
And 12" in calibrated gel is 12" in calibrated gel.

 

[Kleanbore]

Why do you insist on playing this game of
"It doesn't say what it says in black and white"
From HWFE the paper from the FBI Training Academy.
View attachment 1177004
There testing battery and protocol is well documented too. Does it need to be posted for the umpteenth time.
2+2=4
And 12" in calibrated gel is 12" in calibrated gel.

There are no conclusions regargdng the acceptability of specific loads, and that is what I said.

All papars of that kind have conclusions or summaries. Different thing.

 

[mavracer]

There are no conclusions regargdng the acceptability of specific loads, and that is what I said.

Like I said 12" in gel is 12" in gel.
If you can't look at penetration depth of a specific load and tell if it's more or less than 12", You should probably stop posting anything in regards to ammunition selection.

 

[jstert]

I'm late to this thread and likely won't go back to read every comment, but I'm not opposed to the use of a .22 handgun for home defense, there's pros and cons to it and I think we all know the cons, but the pros are reduced penetration thru walls, low noise, low recoil, fast shots, and all of that contributes to better accuracy.

Being .22 this means multiple shots are likely to stop the threat and the biggest obstacle to ensure multiple shots is a semi auto malfunction or a rimfire dud. So, just like with carrying a .22, the revolver makes the most sense. I would prefer something that can have a light mounted to it and most revolvers don't allow for that, so semi autos have that advantage.

My preference for a semi auto rimfire is a DA/SA action, something that allows for a second strike and in my SR22 I've had times where the first strike doesn't fire, but the DA second strike does. IDK how many DA/SA .22 pistols there are out there, but the Ruger is one. They make a long slide version, I'd probably opt for that for home defense for the added velocity.

i had the long slide 4.5” ruger sr22. i love my two 3.5” sr22. the 4.5” was a huge disappointment and happily gone after about 1200 rounds. at least i broke mostly $ even. ungainly. surprisingly much harder to reassemble after fieldstripping. less accurate in my hands than the perfectly balanced 3.5”. i never chronographed it but even if 4.5” offers a bit more energy, drawbacks were way too obvious. best to actually try both back to back, not infer from the shorter pistol as i did. if can’t try both then please learn from my mistake and simply get the 3.5” sr22.

as for ammo, before the china flu my sr22 ran just about any 22lr ammo just fine. now just cci and aguila. the pistol didn’t change, the ammo did.

 

[jstert]

My FIL and I were having this discussion recently. He's in his '80's and has lost a lot of his strength. He can't shoot his Taurus 9mm any longer because he can't rack the slide. We bought him a Mossberg 500 in .410, the one with the muzzle brake, and while he can shoot it well enough, he's at the point where he can hardly lift it with both hands into a firing position. He started asking me about a .22 revolver... my thought was a 8- or 9-shot .22MAG DA revolver... but then looking at what's available, and for what prices, I don't know. I still wish I had my J-frame .38SPC to give him. I also thought about a 9mm revolver, but it would have to be small... because of the weight.

please skip the rimfire double-action and small centerfire revolvers. please try topshelf 22lr semiauto pistols such as ruger sr22, taurus tx22, keltec p17, s&w m&p compact 22. all are relatively lightweight, easy, handy, reliable. your fil might actually get a new & fun hobby of 22lr plinking in the process of protecting himself too.

if someone cannnot handle racking any semiauto slide, or any stout double-action trigger pull, or any recoil, then a rimfire single-action revolver is left to consider. both my now deceased mom and aunt had an inexpensive but reliable enough heritage roughrider 22lr single-action revolver tucked away at their homes until their ends. far from ideal, but still better than nothing.

 

[Rodfac]

I'll 2nd the recommendation above for Smith's M&P Compac .22. My example requires very little effort to rack the slide, has excellent adj. sights, and a safety that works and still allows you to rack the slide. I can't recall a single instance of any malfunction in the two years I"ve owned it. The only down side is the added complexity of an auto's controls etc., when compared to a DA revolver.

Mine is quite accurate (~1" groups at 10 yds with Mini-Mags from an unsupported Weaver Stance), but does have a relatively long trigger pull that has a plastic...y, Glock feel to it. Not my particular favorite, but I was surprised at how well it shot, in spite of its execrable trigger.

It's walnut dropping time here in KY and my wife and I have had some fun shooting the damned things that litter the ground in our side meadow. From 5 to 20 yds, with hollow points, there's no question when you hit one....this is just a suggestion if you're looking for cheap reactive targets.

Here's the M&P .22, below, with the OWB holster I made up for it. Best regards, Rod

​

 

[Charlie98]

please skip the rimfire double-action and small centerfire revolvers. please try topshelf 22lr semiauto pistols

If I thought he could rack the slide on an auto, I'd give him one of my Buckmarks... he doesn't have the strength to grip a slide and force it back, even my newer Buck with the grip ears. If there was a way to cock it, first, then yes, he can probably do it... but not with the hammer down. I have not tried any of the newer .22 auto pistols, like you and Rod suggest, however... I may have to have a look.

 

[MrChicken]

If I thought he could rack the slide on an auto, I'd give him one of my Buckmarks... he doesn't have the strength to grip a slide and force it back, even my newer Buck with the grip ears. If there was a way to cock it, first, then yes, he can probably do it... but not with the hammer down. I have not tried any of the newer .22 auto pistols, like you and Rod suggest, however... I may have to have a look.

How about one of the tip up barrel .25 autos from Beretta and I think Taurus made one. No need to rack the slide, centerfire instead of rimfire.

 

[.308 Norma]

How about one of the tip up barrel .25 autos from Beretta and I think Taurus made one. No need to rack the slide, centerfire instead of rimfire.

Dad was confined to a motorized wheelchair (with an oxygen bottle on the back) for the last year or so of his life, and he had one of those Beretta .32 autos with a tip-up barrel in one of the pockets in his robe.

 

[Charlie98]

Dad was confined to a motorized wheelchair (with an oxygen bottle on the back) for the last year or so of his life, and he had one of those Beretta .32 autos with a tip-up barrel in one of the pockets in his robe.

Well... that's my FIL... minus the oxy tank. His lungs work a little too good, sometimes, if you know what I mean...

I did think about one of those tip-up barrel autos.

I've also considered just getting him a Kahr CW9... and just load it for him. It would be no different than a revolver setting there... he is not going to have the dexterity to do a reload in any event, and particularly in the middle of the night. 8rds of 9mm is way better than anything .22LR, .25, or, likely, .32. I'mma have to drag him out to the desert to see if he can shoot it.

 

[jstert]

If I thought he could rack the slide on an auto, I'd give him one of my Buckmarks... he doesn't have the strength to grip a slide and force it back, even my newer Buck with the grip ears. If there was a way to cock it, first, then yes, he can probably do it... but not with the hammer down. I have not tried any of the newer .22 auto pistols, like you and Rod suggest, however... I may have to have a look.

really sorry to learn about your dad’s condition. we all face it. you are a truly good son.

i don’t know about the browning buckmark slide but it can’t be that much different than that of the other pistols i mentioned, can it? if a round is always chambered then no need to rack the slide. if worried about safety awareness with a chambered round then another point for a 22lr single-action revolver. so, maybe bring a ruger wrangler (better transfer bar safety arrangement) or heritage roughrider out to try too? can he handle some of these suggested handguns in a gun store before buying? if you don’t have a 22lr single-action revolver yet, probably should get one anyway as they are excellent plinking, teaching, learning tools.

indeed only six shots and no tactical reload possible but i assume that your dad’s home security is layered, with six 22lr stingers being the “last ditch” defense. an added benefit is when shooting mine i feel like a kid again. both my late mom and late aunt separately said with a smile that they “feel like annie oakley” with a heritage roughrider.

 

[joneb]

A 22 magnum from a 4" barrel could be a adequate option.
I'd go with a revolver.

 

[chicharrones]

If I thought he could rack the slide on an auto, I'd give him one of my Buckmarks... he doesn't have the strength to grip a slide and force it back, even my newer Buck with the grip ears. If there was a way to cock it, first, then yes, he can probably do it... but not with the hammer down. I have not tried any of the newer .22 auto pistols, like you and Rod suggest, however... I may have to have a look.

If he doesn't have the strength to cycle the slide of an uncocked Buckmark (I have one), then I don't think he'll have the strength to cycle the slide of an uncocked compact .22 autoloader (I have a Bersa .22 to compare). However, a hammer fired compact autoloader typically has its hammer exposed as opposed to concealed as in the Buckmark. Which means he could thumbcock the hammer before cycling the slide. But those hammer spurs are naturally small, which could be similar to a person trying to twist the top off an airline sized whiskey bottle as opposed to an oversized prescription medicine cap.

I can tell you that my dad had an old S&W model 10 (.38 special) up to his passing at age 82. A centerfire S&W K-frame is as easy to thumbcock as any single action revolver I've experienced. Plus, the S&W has a shorter hammer throw which actually seems to make one handed cocking easier for me compared to one of my Ruger Single Sixes. (For reference, the Ruger LCRx that my wife has is not as easy to thumbcock compared to a larger revolver.)

Model 10s can be very soft shooters with 148 grain wadcutters, if recoil is a concern. If you can find an older taper barrel model 10, they weigh the same as my 4.6" barrel Single Six. Or a Wrangler, or a Heritage.

Folks bring up the possibility of never needing a reload. While it may be true that a reload might not be needed in a shooting event, I believe in the need for a reload being available once the event is over. It sure sucks to have an empty gun (or partially empty), even if you think you might not need it again.

For people with dexterity problems, I know ejecting 6 and reloading 6 is a much easier affair in a swing out cylinder (or break open) revolver than any single action revolver. My Single Sixes and Bearcat are fussy to reload compared to my .22 LR DA/SA revolvers.

And yes, it appears I keep railing against .22 LRs in this thread. Probably half of my firearms are .22 LRs and I love shootin' 'em. But . . .