If it can do this to steel what would it do to a BG?

[gatornavy]

Ok so i agree that a bigger more powerful load is ideal for SD, that being said at least you carry a firearm and that accounts for something, if that is all you are comfortable with, then get deadly accurate with it, a 22 may only make a .22 sized hole but if you put 15 of them in a 4 inch circle center mass then you have to hit SOMETHING vital, or at least your attacker will think twice after you put a mag into them. .22lr or .45 acp, either way its better than a rape whistle!

 

[mopar92]

About all rounds from pistols are deadly, some more than others...

 

[00 Buckshot]

As per the original post, we can all see the .22 caliber bullets penetrated the metal cylinder and would certainly do the same to a bad guy. No question about it!

If poking holes in an object/bad guy is your only objective it would be effectively achieved.

Stopping a determined aggressive attacker is another matter. Check other posts on this topic if that interests you.

As stated many times earlier by others on this thread, shoot what you are comfortable with. Move up to a more suitable defense round if/when you are ready.

Enjoy yourself when you are shooting. A wise man once told me there is no such thing as a bad day at the range!

 

[petey]

I heard that the most gunshot deaths in our country are from .22 rounds..

 

[WifeofBleys]

Enjoy yourself when you are shooting. A wise man once told me there is no such thing as a bad day at the range!

I sure do enjoy myself when we go out shooting! It's still so new to me that, when I hear the "ding" of the bullet hitting metal, I smile from ear to ear. I now know the FUN of shooting. Not to mention, putting a couple hundred rounds downrange is an awesome stress reliever!

 

[gc70]

WifeofBleys,

Nice shooting! Shoot what you are comfortable with shooting. The more you shoot, the more proficient you will become. All handguns are poor 'manstoppers' without good shot placement. Shoot your .22 until you are confident in your abilities. When - and if - you want to move to a larger caliber, you will be better prepared to master it, too.

 

[Geno]

WifeofBleys, et al:

I received an e-mail from Natchez regarding their sale on .22LR, and I took note of the Velocitor .22 LR GDHP. This really does look like an interesting round. Link provided:

http://www.natchezss.com/product.cfm?contentID=productDetail&prodID=cc0047&lsrc=NZ&src=BE636

Geno

 

[0to60]

I'm guessing the reason for .22LR being the top killer (if it is) in the US is prolly because its the most prolific round. i.e., if there are more .22's out there, statistically more accidents will happen involving a .22.

That said, there are a zillion variables involved in shooting someone. A .22 will produce an instant kill if it hits the right (wrong?) spot.

Many people bash this round or that round (often its the 9mm), saying it doesn't have enough stopping power. Aim a gun chambered in just about anything (well, maybe not a Daisy Red Rider) at me and I'll gladly hand over my wallet, car keys, watch, you name it. How many 9mm haters volunteer to stand downrange to prove their claims?? Exactly.

 

[Balrog]

ever here of someone surviving a .22" hole in their aorta

Yep it happens fairly often.

 

[mbruce]

Its not about what a .22 can and cannot do. It's about minimizing risks, maximizing odds. One cannot take into account "the perfect shot"....one must consider what caliber will be most effective overall. If you feel you can make a headshot with a .22 then great....unfortunately you will never know how your nerves will react until you're in that situation...then its too late and you have caused yourself even more anxiety because now you know you better make a few great shots....

I hate to say that using a .22 for SD is foolishness...but it is. A life is too valuable left up to a well placed .22

 

[gatornavy]

I hope im not overstepping my bounds here, but everyone seems to talk about shot placement and what not so i was just wonderng how many people have actually been shot at or shot at someone else cause on the two way range things are a whole different world than they are shooting at piece of paper just my 2 cents but in an actual firefight, cqb situation, or whatever you want to call it if you hit your target you.are doin pretty good

 

[NoobCannon]

One thing I'm a bit curious about, is how can somebody be "More dead"?

Yes, there are better cartridges out there, including my personal choice of .40S&W, but really. How can someone say "such and such round kills better than such and such round". I get the part about minimizing the chance the bad guy can do something to you, but honestly, IMO, he ain't gonna do much if you turn him into swiss cheese with what people consider something you train children to shoot on.

Just don't shoot him with Ratshot...that'll only make him angry.

 

[Sky]

Munich massacre the Israelites sent their "M" hit team to Europe. They used 22lr for all the hits....All were head shots except for one which was a double tap and then a head shot. Shot placement and velocity is everything the smaller you go in caliber.

 

[Manco]

Here ... how about a visual example rather than anectotal stories and speculation?
Walther P22 versus ballistic gelatin block
http://www.brassfetcher.com/WaltherP22test.html
Here's a handgun internally similar to that ISSC pistol, 3.4" barrel and various ammo used. Note the skinny wound tracks in the flesh-like gelatin

Now here's a 9x18 Makarov pistol. I picked it because it is inexpensive for the gun and ammo and it shows a variety of ammo again:
http://www.brassfetcher.com/var9x18mm.html
That silver bear ammo is dirt cheap, by the way. Note the messy wound tracks and expansion ... this is a cheap surplus commie gun shooting a round somewhere in between .380 and 9mm Luger

Various 9x19:
http://www.brassfetcher.com/var919mm.html

Poke around, the difference is dramatic.

The difference is mainly in the temporary stretch cavities, which I'm not convinced makes much of a difference in flesh, which is far more elastic than ballistic gelatin (a decent predictor of penetration depth and indicator of temporary cavity width, but that's about it). Where and what a shot hits is vastly more significant, along with the penetration that enables it. If a particular load in a particular handgun can achieve adequate penetration (an entire topic unto itself), then that's most of what you need from your equipment, even if the caliber is .22 LR. Granted, many .22 LR loads are rather anemic in most handguns, but there are combinations that are effective for personal defense use, in my opinion.

Larger bullets undoubtedly cause more damage, but the difference is small in comparison to the size of the target, and in terms of shot placement only improve the odds of hitting vital structures slightly. While even a slight improvement may be worth the trade-offs when one's life is on the line, it's still only slight and must be balanced against other factors such as controllability, which varies widely among individuals. While I won't deny that increased bleeding is another advantage of larger bullets, it mostly factors into prolonged engagements and whether a person will die rather than stopping an assailant quickly (which comes back to shot placement).

 

[gatornavy]

I also wanted to point out that velocity aside a M16 shoots a 22 bullet, even a similiar weight as a 22lr so they definitely will.kill you there are just alot of.variables to consider

 

[Ben86]

Now for the argument that a .22 would not stop an attacker... If it can pierce steel at 100ft, imagine what it would do to a bad guy?

As others have said it would simply put a .22" hole in the bad guy. Now, that's not a good thing for the bad guy, and will most likely ruin his day, but can that quickly force him to stop attacking you? Odds aren't all that great with .22LR. At 100 yards he may not even realize he's been shot, unless he knows you are shooting at him. I had a friend that got shot by a stray .22 from some gangbanger down the road, he didn't realize he'd been shot until 20 minutes later when he noticed blood on his shirt. He thought it was just a little pain in his side like a pinched muscle or something at first. He also got shot buy a .45 and said it was like a freight train. I think freight train is an overstatement, but I believe he did notice a big difference. That friend is ok by the way, unless he's been shot again and I don't know.

That said, shot placement and volume of fire can trump ballistic ability. Make sure you are good with it. How is that ISSC M22? I think I want one.

 

[cz75bcrazy]

exactly what it did to the metal put a .22 sized hole in a BG, is that enough well that's not really up to the bullet as much as it is your aim. A .45 to the hand does less then a .22 to the face so really shot placement is the only thing that madders. For the people that don't think a .22 would work ask them and see if they will stand in front of it? I think not

I have seen many deer one shot killed with a .22 so I would be more then fine carrying a .22 as long as I could put on the target well.

 

[Ben86]

For the people that don't think a .22 would work ask them and see if they will stand in front of it? I think not

This arguement doesn't make much sense to me. Just because I don't want to be injured by a .22LR doesn't mean I think it is a good choice for SD.

Besides lack luster stopping power .22LR has a less reliable ignition system than centerfire and the guns tend to be a bit less reliable, especially the ones modeled after centerfire guns.

Sure it can work, but why tempt fate so?

 

[aryfrosty]

In short, it would poke a .22 caliber hole..

That ain't too bad. That would be the same diameter your 5.56 AR-15 would poke. I understand that the rounds are miles apart in so far as energy dump and hydrostatic damage are concerned. But a .22 hole in a the vital organs will do damage just the same.

 

[cobblestone]

These get so out of control. Its a .22, it is what it is. Argue about it all day but I sure a poop dont want to rely on a .22 or rimfire of any kind. Ill stick to my overcompensating macho rounds. =)

 

[kk0g]

Anyone condoning the .22LR as a defensive round because of it's killing power is starting out with a false premise. The killing effectiveness of the .22LR, or how many people a coroner, doctor EMT, etc. say have been killed by a .22LR, or the fact that a 9mm, .40S&W, .45ACP etc. won't kill any deader than a .22LR doesn't mean squat because in a self defense situation the goal is NOT to kill the attacker. The goal is to stop the attacker from continuing his attack as efficiently as possible so that you may continue to live a happy, carefree life and die of old age.

Once you realize your goal is to stop the attack as efficiently as possible, if you know anything at all about terminal ballistics (even if you know nothing about it you can easily see with your own eyes how enormous even a 9mm is in comparison to a .22LR) you come to the logical conclusion that a standard defensive caliber is way more efficient than a .22LR in accomplishing that goal.

Is a .22LR better than nothing? Obviously it is, it would be foolish to argue otherwise. But to say that it's even remotely as efficient at stopping an attack is absurd.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

.22 should not be taken lightly

.22 long rifle at rifle velocities in standard ballistic gel.

.22 long rifle 40gr solid bullet 1122 fps velocity:
14 inches (36.5 cm) pentration (about half way, the bullet tumbles and ends up stopping base first).

.22 long rifle 37gr hollowpoint bullet 1272 fps velocity:
10 inches (26.5 cm) penetration (mushrooms to over twice original diameter within 2 inches).

Handgun velocities would be somewhat less. Corrected: the handgun would give almost the same penetration depth but less bullet deformation and a narrower wound channel than the rifle.

On small game, I consider 25 pounds body weight to be the upper limit for a humane (one shot) kill with a .22 and I would expect a game warden to arrest me for hunting 150 pound deer with anything less than a .357 magnum revolver, .30-30 rifle or 12ga shotgun with slugs.

A thug might be deterred more by a harsh word of warning backed by a .22 handgun, than by just a harsh word of warning, but the defender would have to project the intent to follow through and be prepared to shoot multiple times to stop if necessary. And a .22 will kill even if it might not be a one shot stop weapon.



illustrations from ballistics expert Martin Fackler

http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound Profiles/22LR 40gr RNL.jpg

http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound Profiles/22LR 37gr HP Wound Profile.jpg

 

[Manco]

This arguement doesn't make much sense to me. Just because I don't want to be injured by a .22LR doesn't mean I think it is a good choice for SD.

Although I hold .22 LR in higher regard than you do, I agree with your reasoning. I wouldn't want to be spat on or get a splinter in my finger, for that matter, but neither of those minor tragedies would stop me from attacking somebody if I were a bad guy.

Besides lack luster stopping power

But no service-caliber pistol has any real "stopping power" to speak of, either--at least not without shot placement, and .22 LR can affect a stop with the latter, too. Larger calibers will give you better odds, to be sure, but not by a whole lot because once you can get adequate penetration, the law of diminishing returns kicks in pretty hard, and .22 LR can get adequate penetration in humans (try the CCI Velocitor in a 3" or longer barrel).

.22LR has a less reliable ignition system than centerfire

Generally speaking that is true, as common bulk .22 LR ammo is made to be as inexpensive as possible, but some .22 LR ammo is extremely reliable, including the aforementioned Velocitor.

and the guns tend to be a bit less reliable, especially the ones modeled after centerfire guns.

That's precisely why I always recommend revolvers for .22 LR when used for defensive purposes. There are 10-shot models available that match the typical capacity of .22 LR autos, and there are also small-frame models with 8- or even 9-shot capacities.

Sure it can work, but why tempt fate so?

If one shoots .22 LR significantly better than they do larger calibers, then it can be an advantage. More shots on target gives one better odds, too--even more so than larger pistol bullets, in my estimation.

 

[Manco]

Anyone condoning the .22LR as a defensive round because of it's killing power is starting out with a false premise.

Not me--I'm saying that .22 LR has nearly the same "stopping power" as the service calibers, which in physical terms is practically nothing unless you hit something vital, and in psychological terms it's even closer, as any sort of gun at all is pretty intimidating to those who do not wish to die.

The killing effectiveness of the .22LR, or how many people a coroner, doctor EMT, etc. say have been killed by a .22LR, or the fact that a 9mm, .40S&W, .45ACP etc. won't kill any deader than a .22LR doesn't mean squat because in a self defense situation the goal is NOT to kill the attacker. The goal is to stop the attacker from continuing his attack as efficiently as possible so that you may continue to live a happy, carefree life and die of old age.

So how do the larger calibers stop more effectively, aside from the obvious, such as being slightly more likely to hit something vital, and causing faster bleeding? With regard to the latter, the difference is still not enough in the vast majority of cases to prevent the attacker from inflicting a lethal wound on you, as it will likely take minutes to affect a stop.

Once you realize your goal is to stop the attack as efficiently as possible, if you know anything at all about terminal ballistics (even if you know nothing about it you can easily see with your own eyes how enormous even a 9mm is in comparison to a .22LR)

The difference in size between .22 LR and 9mm only tells me that it is slightly more likely to hit something vital. Several times larger than small is still small in comparison to the size of the target, after all.

you come to the logical conclusion that a standard defensive caliber is way more efficient than a .22LR in accomplishing that goal.

The conclusion you're jumping to may be logical, but simply being logical does not mean that something is true, as there can be false assumptions as well as failing to include enough factors that reflect physical reality. For example, one might conclude that because 9mm JHPs are more effective on humans than 9mm FMJs, then the same must be true for even larger creatures. Is that not logical? It is indeed, however it may well be false nonetheless because 9mm JHPs may severely underpenetrate larger creatures, failing to even reach vital tissues, while 9mm FMJs may penetrate enough to be far more effective. What might not seem logical at first on the surface could very well be true regardless, once all of the necessary factors are taken into account.

While we're on the subject, the same principle applies to the vaunted .22 LR CCI Stinger because of its impressively explosive effect on small animals, but I consider it a poor choice for defensive purposes against humans because it will likely be short on penetration, whereas the CCI Velocitor, which is not nearly as impressive on gophers, should be far more effective on humans. This is also a reminder that load selection can sometimes be more important than caliber (some folks might say that this defies logic, too, but it's still true).

Is a .22LR better than nothing? Obviously it is, it would be foolish to argue otherwise. But to say that it's even remotely as efficient at stopping an attack is absurd.

With the right loads (e.g. CCI Velocitor) and sufficient barrel length (3" as a bare minimum, which is reasonable), a .22 LR handgun can launch bullets that penetrate flesh just as deeply as those of larger calibers (JHPs in 9mm and larger), which in my view makes them better than remotely as efficient, and I don't think that this is absurd in the least. Like all logic, mine is based on certain assumptions, which in this case is primarily the significance of shot placement and penetration being above that of other factors--not to the exclusion of the latter, as I shoot .40 S&W myself for a number of reasons, but they are the most important factors. The best way to disprove my conclusions would be to discredit my assumptions.

A thug might be deterred more by a harsh word of warning backed by a .22 handgun, than by just a harsh word of warning, but the defender would have to project the intent to follow through and be prepared to shoot multiple times to stop if necessary. And a .22 will kill even if it might not be a one shot stop weapon.

I hate to paraphrase a guy like Stalin, but he was correct when he said that quantity has a quality of its own. I don't really believe in one-shot stops with the service calibers, either, and if .22 LR makes it possible for beginners and those who are sensitive to recoil to place more accurate shots on target quickly, then I would say this makes them more effective shooters than if they used a larger caliber. I use a larger caliber because I can, not because it's SO much more effective than .22 LR, because it is not. When my life is on the line, I'll take any edge that I can get, and if .22 LR gave me an edge because it's all I can truly handle, then I'd use it instead.

 

[PedalBiker]

I haven't had a chance to use the chrono, but CCI stingers make a huge muzzle flash in a .22 handgun while they don't make much in a rifle. I think Velocitors use a similar powder charge. I have some I can test next time I'm at the range, but I think both of those suffer a lot in a handgun and the flash is as obnoxious as a full charge of 2400 in a .357.