A Ruger MK II .22 lr for home defense

[Min]

Or for that matter, a Browning Buckmark .22 lr semti-auto pistol.

Why, you may ask?

Not that I'm doing this, but a point I want to present to the members here.



Firstly, .22 lr is very easy to shoot in quick succession, more so than any other handgun caliber. You can dump a 10-rd mag full of stingers or mini-mags to the target in a continuous stream of lead - no flinching, no deafening report to distract.

Second, said 10 rds (or more) of .22 lr stingers or mini-mags WILL stop someone given proper shot placement. Proper shot placement would be easier with a .22. I'm talking 10 shots to the upper chest or to the head/face. No gut shots and no appendage shots.

Lastly, in court if it ever comes to that, the prosecuting atty would have to hold up a humble .22 pistol instead of an evil AR15 to the jury.


Let's not underestimate the deadliness of the humble .22 long rifle round. Shot placement is the key, and if you practice practice practice, you should have no problem defending your home with said .22 pistol.

 

[Harbinger]

I absolutely agree with you.
Of course, I'm still gonna use my shotgun....

 

[JohnKSa]

Flinching in self-defense scenarios probably is more of a problem from being shot at than from recoil. Most people don't notice recoil at all in a self-defense situation and some have even reported thinking their gun was malfunctioning because they neither felt recoil nor...

heard the shots--which brings me to the second point. Most people experience auditory exclusion during a shooting. They don't hear a thing because the fight or flight reflex concentrates all of the body's resources on watching the threat and dealing with it. Vision typically narrows and becomes tunnel-like and hearing can be cut off altogether. A friend of mine shot a person in self-defense and recalls that several minutes after the shooting someone brought her attention to the fact that the smoke alarm directly over her head had been set off by the smoke from the shot. She never noticed the sound. It certainly wasn't any kind of a distraction...

A Ruger Mk II looks plenty deadly to the typical jury idiot. I doulbt you'd get any points for it vs a 9mm.

And, while 10 rounds of .22 might stop someone, Murphy says you'll be up against two or more...

However, the biggest reason most experts warn against the use of rimfire in self-defense scenarios is that rimfire cartridges are more likely to misfire. Also, feeding rimmed cartridges in an autoloader can be a bit more problematic than rimless cartridges.

I wouldn't throw a .22 down and run if that's all I had--but I'd never use one if I had access to a 9mm.

 

[keederdag]

If that's what a person is comforatable with, Great. Comfort usually means get's used (shot) a bunch. This means practice. Practice means proficiancy. Proficaincy and comfort with a .22 is better than a .45 that never get's shot, and the person is scared to practice with. .22 for self defense, nothing wrong with that in my book. Main thing to me is proficiancy, second comes caliber.

 

[Min]

Yeah, and if you're really good, two in the eye sockets, one in the nose cavity.

 

[444]

I think it would be a good choice if you used good technique. Firing a lot of rounds of any caliber isn't going to do you any good unless they are good hits to the vitals. Providing that, a magazine full of .22s is going to put a hurtin on the guy on the recieving end.
More so if they were fired out of a rifle.
I have no intention of doing this, but I agree with you that I can fire an almost continuous stream of lead out of my Ruger Mk.II at fairly close range and have a pretty nice group to show for it.

 

[Min]

This kind of defensive shooting is, I think, a different approach to higher grain centerfire handgun shooting, and would thus require a different set of skills. What I mean is: required mutliple shots (mag-full actually), and non-stop precision shooting.

A .45 would be more like two to centermass and check to see if target is still moving.

 

[45R]

I'd say use the biggest caliber that you can comfortably control. .22LR is good and all but I'd have a hard time trusting my life to it unless it was the only thing I had.

 

[Drjones]

.22 as a defensive caliber?

I'll say the same thing I said to someone else on another forum:


Respectfully, if you choose a .22 caliber firearm to defend your life, you're going to be largely alone in that choice.

I believe you are referring to the rumour that may or may not be true that the .22 has killed more than any other caliber. I have never seen a whisper of evidence that this may be true, so as such it would be wise to regard it as just that; a rumour.

True, the mob used it as their select hit weapon but because it was quiet and was just enough to kill someone. Mind you, they weren't shooting at BGs intent on killing them from a distance, they were popping .22s into the backs of people's skulls at point-blank range. Of course a .22 is good for that job, but just barely.

A caliber as tiny as .22 is only effective with proper shot placement, which we know goes to hell when under stress. Unless you are a former SEAL or are otherwise very highly trained, you are most likely simply not going to be hitting the 10-ring at 0-dark thirty when someone is possibly trying to kill, rape, whatever you and your family, and you are under extremely high levels of stress.

With that said, we now understand why the 12-ga shotgun is THE weapon of choice for home defense; even an "off" hit is severely destructive. Further, the 12-ga has probably the highest and most advantageous psychological factor working in its favor as well.

If your home-defense scenario involves making perfect head shots at people standing relatively still, pick the .22. Otherwise, me and pretty much everyone else are going to use a real gun.



After further thought however, I decided that I actually would use a .22 cal as a defensive weapon, but only one particular type:

A 6,000 RPM .22 minigun with a *very* large belt.

 

[LynnMassGuy]

I'm just not staking my life on a rimfire cartridge.

 

[P95Carry]

JohnKSa ..... summed up most ... but then so did the others too!

Well ... ''better some gun than no gun'' .... but getting that outa the way .... will it STOP????? The answer is probably, NO it won't, even 10 shots connecting. Sure the perp will prolly bleed out and die but not before he has (perhaps) emptied his mag into you and yours.

Forget the legal ''appearance'' deal ...... go for what willsave your life ........ that's the bottom line so ... IMO 9mm minimum .. well OK -- .380 at a pinch ..... but - certainly something with stopping potential. In fact ... for HD ...... where concealment is a non issue . go for LARGE ..... good .357 ... even a .44 .... make it count!

 

[Drjones]

go for LARGE ..... good .357 ... even a .44

Like my Desert Eagle .44!!!

 

[another okie]

Ask that doctor in Arkansas who shot at Mr. Eizember 9 times and hit him four times. Mr. Eizember then tried to shoot and kill the doctor and failed only because his pistol jammed. Eizember ended up pistol-whipping the doctor and driving off in his car.

 

[Dave Markowitz]

If you choose to use a .22 for defense this can be spun against you by a prosecutor with half a brain. E.g.:

"Clearly the defendant used excessive force. He shot the victim TEN times!"

Nevermind the facts that you may have needed all 10 shots to stop the perp high on PCP, and that the "victim" had an arrest record as long as your arm.

 

[Shake]

I fail to see any convincing reason to ever use a .22 caliber weapon for home defense (except in an emergency when all better options are exhausted). In my opinion too many rely on handguns as their primary home defense weapon.

I think it unwise for anyone to PLAN on using a .22 unless there is no alternative. If you're talking .22 handguns, you can get a good 12 gauge shotgun for the same price. Why not use something that you know WILL stop a threat?

As far as the legal issue goes, what better than a "duck" gun for the jury?

Shake

 

[Neal Bloom]

I can put 10 rounds of .22 into a small group very quickly at a variety of distances when the ammo works. Like someone else said I just can't depend on the ammo. .22 ammo seems to be gettting worse.

 

[IRONFIST]

I think the only weapon in .22LR that I would be comfortable using over a shotgun is... The American 180! For those that don't know the American 180 is a .22LR machinegun that would probably saw a guy in half. Unfortunately, I think that using such a weapon would hang you with any jury.


Michael

 

[larryw]

Time how fast you can cover 7 yards on a dead run. Then see how many rounds you can get off in that time.

Note how the head moves when the attacker is sprinting straight at you, waving a knife and screaming bloody murder; think you can hit a 5" diameter (face) moving target under extreme stress? In the dark? With no sight picture?

Even in the unlikely event that you get two or three shots off in that time, they certainly won't stop the attacker before he eviscerates you. Reliably stopping such an attack takes more than just shot placement from a plinker.

But it beats throwing rocks. Barely.

 

[Graystar]

My personal opinion is...with .22 you are *depending* on proper shot placement to save you. Shots in the leg or arm will probably go unnoticed. With a .357 Mag or .40, you don’t absolutely need good placement to disable the perp. A shot in the arm could break it. A shot in the knee will blow it apart.

I agree with those that say bigger is better.

 

[Mastrogiacomo]

It's been my experience, most people are idiots. I wouldn't take my chance on a jury knowing the difference between one caliber or the next, so I'll keep my Berettas handy.

 

[Min]

BTW, I'm not Gunkid.

 

[clubsoda22]

Lastly, in court if it ever comes to that, the prosecuting atty would have to hold up a humble .22 pistol instead of an evil AR15 to the jury.

and say, "This man shot my client TEN TIMES with this assault pistol using high velocity hollowpoint death bullets. Note the long sniper barrel for increased deadliness and the hair trigger to make it either to fire shot after shot into my poor client as he attempted to flee for his life."

This is why i like my winchester defender loaded with 00 buckshot. a single shot is like 9 rounds from a pistol, but a single shot is a lot easier to explain than 9.

 

[10mmshooter]

Other people can do as they please....but I personally would only use a .22 in defense if that were the only weapon I had access to, and I had absolutely no chance to flee.
Otherwise...my advice is to use the biggest, baddest, nastiest, most obnoxiously violent weapon that you can handle safely, and accurately. In my house...that job goes to a 1911 in 10mm, as I would prefer not to have a prosecutor showing my AK to a jury. Otherwise, the 7.62x39mm would get the job. If I decide to buy another 12 guage shotgun....it would get the nod.
As for using a .22 in self defense.....hahahahahaha!!!!! I hope that your BG isn't armed, and determined. Also hope they aren't too big. I don't think I'm bulletproof in any respect, but at 6'2" and 255lbs....you better hope that your marksmanship doesn't fail you...because I think if I were armed and determined...it would take more than a couple poorly placed shots from a .22 to save your life.

 

[Min]

That's it. I'm using a slingshot. Hey, it worked for another guy as I recall.

 

[P95Carry]

I'm not Gunkid

OK Min!!!