Pistol holds 31 rounds of 22 magnum. Good defense weapon? Yes or No.
- Thread starter ms6852
- Start date
- Status
ambidextrous1
Member
Many years ago, I thought the .22 Magnum was a good personal defense round, and became very proficient (accurate) with a pistol in that caliber, through extensive practice. I found that all .22 Mag rounds were not created equal, due to differences in powder burning rate. you need a round with a fast burn rate (Winchester et al) for the short pistol barrel.
After a few years of this endeavor, I gravitated to the large bore center fire pistols, anf feel more secure with that format.
Fire your .22 Magnum pistol a lot; it's good training and a lot of fun; it certainly gets the attention of other shooters. But combine your rimfire shooting with a bit of center fire pistol practice (at least 9 mm), and hopefully, you'll follow the same path to larger (center fire) formats, as I did.
I still shoot the .22 magnum for fun; my short-barreled Automag II always draws a crowd!
After a few years of this endeavor, I gravitated to the large bore center fire pistols, anf feel more secure with that format.
Fire your .22 Magnum pistol a lot; it's good training and a lot of fun; it certainly gets the attention of other shooters. But combine your rimfire shooting with a bit of center fire pistol practice (at least 9 mm), and hopefully, you'll follow the same path to larger (center fire) formats, as I did.
I still shoot the .22 magnum for fun; my short-barreled Automag II always draws a crowd!
SharpsDressedMan
member
Cromulent. Now THERE'S a word you don't see every day!
hill.country
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 11
I'm sure the quote is something like "it's not about the probabilities, it's about the stakes" - same as why many carry to begin with.
Back to the OP, I see nothing wrong with carrying 31 rounds of .22wmr, and would not feel either un-armed or under-armed with it... providing the firearm has proven itself reliable.
I'm sorry so many have decided to suggest that anyone carrying such would be less likely to aim well, or somehow be unable to cease firing without emptying your magazine - anymore than someone with an "Evil Black Rifle" would likely empty a 30 round magazine.
I also disagree with the suggestion that 31 (or 61) .22WMR well aimed rounds would typically be needed to stop, incapacitate, or discourage a single attacker as there's simply too much evidence of even the .22lr doing all of the above.
As for the courtroom probabilities if you search you'll see that some here are also worried about how a jury will see use of hollow points http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=408512 (among others), and we've also had this conversation about whether you're more likely to be convicted for using a "massive/excessive" 45 vs [potentially more shots if using] some smaller caliber.
Point is that a DA can make anything sound 'evil', and your lawyer can just as easily talk about how in the interest of preserving life (or for your health reasons [carpal, etc], or for xyz) you were 'only' using a .22 (which I think will resonate with many Texans), to stop the threat.
Texas law (as I understand it) allows firing in self-defense until the threat has ceased. It dosen't mention a number of rounds, and if you look at police incidents you'll find precedent there as well. As I see it if you're justified in using force, you're justified in using as much as required to stop the thread.
So while I don't carry it, I don't discount the .22WMR's stopping power, and agree with
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
The main problem is the reliability, and the lack of penetration/power not the diameter. Keep in mind that a small round, like the 5.56 or the 5.7, when going fast enough is plenty destructive. I would love to carry a pistol chambered in 5.7 if there was a Glock in that caliber and the rounds were cheap and plentiful enough. Skip the 1 or 2 big rounds and hoping for the best. Being able to put 6 or 7 rounds in tight accurate succession all driving towards that spinal cord is where it's at. Not to mention still having more than half a magazine left when you're done.
hill.country
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 11
While I would expect even better penetration from the PMR-30 than the NAA mini-revolver there's some .22WMR ballistic gel data right here at THR: Ballistic gelatin test results : .22 Magnum (NAA Mini-Revolver)
Better still check out the gel photos (and 5.7x28 comparison) at reply #29 of http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1262737740/29. Also some "different" 2" barrel .22WMR penetration data at reply #30 http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1262737740/30
Velocities from the PMR-30 if you want them at http://www.ktog.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1259682868
FWIW: Similar discussion at Glocktalk last January
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1173257
Last edited:
mljdeckard
Member
I decided years ago that I was more worried about carrying the gun I shoot best than how many rounds it holds. We don't live in MelGibsonland where you shoot 15 or more straight shots without reloading. Should you find yourself in such a situation, it is unlikely that a handgun will save your life anyway.
All handguns are a compromise of stopping power vs portability, and in this gun I see no gained advantage in concealability, or in stopping power. With all handguns you are shooting until the threat stops, and in this case, if you ever had to use it, I think you could be waiting a timespan that would feel like a decade in a defensive situation. I think I would be much more effective with three or four bigger bullets. With a .22 mag, if the first few don't save you, I think the rest of them are a waste of time and space.
All handguns are a compromise of stopping power vs portability, and in this gun I see no gained advantage in concealability, or in stopping power. With all handguns you are shooting until the threat stops, and in this case, if you ever had to use it, I think you could be waiting a timespan that would feel like a decade in a defensive situation. I think I would be much more effective with three or four bigger bullets. With a .22 mag, if the first few don't save you, I think the rest of them are a waste of time and space.
There is no such thing as stopping power unless you take out the central nervous system of the aggressor. Remember the .22 short, that's what killed Bobby Kennedy. I say caliber is totally irrelevant, it's where you put it that really matters. But then again that is only my opinion and what do I know! What I do know is that, the human body does not do well when hit with anything going at 1,000 feet a second.
My thought would be NO!. While the round is everything the .22lr always dreamed of being when it grows up and has good penetration, its still too small of a round to be a "good" self-defense stopping round. Also the pistol is a bit large for concealed carry. A "fair" self-defense round/gun, maybe, certainly its better than nothing and better than .22 lr.
The round is fairly effective on smaller-med. game. I've done a one-shot stop on a large dog when a pack was in my yard. That however was from a .22 magnum rifle. It would normally be considered too small for hunting deer size game, and even more lacking for stopping a charging deer-size animal.
The round is fairly effective on smaller-med. game. I've done a one-shot stop on a large dog when a pack was in my yard. That however was from a .22 magnum rifle. It would normally be considered too small for hunting deer size game, and even more lacking for stopping a charging deer-size animal.
LHRGunslinger
Member
I think the only way you could call it a really good defense weapon is if it had a three round burst function letting you put ALOT of rounds into the target quickly. I remember someone comparing the .22 WMR to a scratch awl. And if you're defending yourself with a scratch awl you want to be able to put ALOT of holes in whatever you need to.
I can not think of a single self defense scenario that would not be able to be taken care of in less than 10 rounds. I remember seeing some figures somewhere about the "average" gun fight. I seem to remember average self defense is under 10 feet, with around 2 rounds total fired. It is the movies that lead us to thinking that an assailant will be able to tolerate 10+ rounds before finally dying. If you hit center mass a couple times on a person not wearing body armor with a 9mm they are not going to want to fight anymore. Quantity can matter, but imho once you hit 10 rounds you are good
Saying you want 61 rounds for self defense is what has the revolver guys laughing at semi guys.
Saying you want 61 rounds for self defense is what has the revolver guys laughing at semi guys.
Ragnar Danneskjold
Member
And yet there are still bank robberies, jewelry store robberies, gang shootings, gang rapes and beat-downs, and team home invasions that all involve 3, 4, even 5 or more subjects. It happens. No one is saying you have to use every single round you have. But having the option of having more ammo when you realize your shooting doesn't exactly fit the standard formula is a smart thing.
A smart man prepares for what will probably happen
A very smart man also prepares for what could happen.
Which are you?
A smart man prepares for what will probably happen
A very smart man also prepares for what could happen.
Which are you?
Zerodefect
member
NO!
No.
That 31 round Keltec looks to be as big as a 13 round .40 S&W Glock 23. 13 rounds plus a 15 round G22 magazine for a reload is plenty.
No thanks, I'll take the G23.
In a gunfight, I figure if I haven't eliminated the threat in 10 rounds, regardless of how many mags I have on my belt, the chances of me dieing go up exponentially very quick. It's been a bad, bad day when I have to reload under stress.
But that deosn't mean that I don't carry a reload, I do.
How many shots can the bad guy land on you in the time it took for you to send 10+ rounds in his direction?
What I find more interesting is at this point in a 5.7x28mm thread there's a dozen posts saying how weak and completely ineffective 5.7 is. Yet far weaker .22 mag is OK? What's up with that?
No.
That 31 round Keltec looks to be as big as a 13 round .40 S&W Glock 23. 13 rounds plus a 15 round G22 magazine for a reload is plenty.
No thanks, I'll take the G23.
In a gunfight, I figure if I haven't eliminated the threat in 10 rounds, regardless of how many mags I have on my belt, the chances of me dieing go up exponentially very quick. It's been a bad, bad day when I have to reload under stress.
But that deosn't mean that I don't carry a reload, I do.
How many shots can the bad guy land on you in the time it took for you to send 10+ rounds in his direction?
What I find more interesting is at this point in a 5.7x28mm thread there's a dozen posts saying how weak and completely ineffective 5.7 is. Yet far weaker .22 mag is OK? What's up with that?
The following indvidual makes several compelling agruments about the 22 rimfire for self defense. Though his reference is about the 22 lr not the 22 magnum.
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/04/22-long-rifle-for-self-defense.html
My wife has a 38 S&W model 642 that she carries with crimson tracer grips but refuses to shoot it for practice because of recoil but I know that she would shoot it in an emergency.
Personally I would feel much better her carrying 30 rounds of 22 magnum in a single magazine knowing that she will use it with less fear. This way she gets to practice and I can teach her better tactics, multi target acquisition, weak hand, etc.
There are those that argue about spraying bullets around because of innocent bystanders and there is truth to that. But, many times there will be no witness around when some one is attacked. Either by one or more perps. This way the perps get to duck for a long time if they are not hit instead of her getting to shoot 5 times only with a 38. Just my opinion.
http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2006/04/22-long-rifle-for-self-defense.html
My wife has a 38 S&W model 642 that she carries with crimson tracer grips but refuses to shoot it for practice because of recoil but I know that she would shoot it in an emergency.
Personally I would feel much better her carrying 30 rounds of 22 magnum in a single magazine knowing that she will use it with less fear. This way she gets to practice and I can teach her better tactics, multi target acquisition, weak hand, etc.
There are those that argue about spraying bullets around because of innocent bystanders and there is truth to that. But, many times there will be no witness around when some one is attacked. Either by one or more perps. This way the perps get to duck for a long time if they are not hit instead of her getting to shoot 5 times only with a 38. Just my opinion.
Shadow 7D
Member
like the idea, but much like the 5.7 (it is a .22 after all)
it may have it's place, my doubt would be with a rimmed round as .22 has trouble in double stacked mags, known limitation.
As a SD, I am a firm believer that much like realestate, Location, location, LOCATION is what counts, so 30 rounds in vital organs, are JUST as effective at 7 .45s.... ( you will end up dead, and yeah there is the time thing, and PLEASE, no knockdown factor, that has been PROVEN to be psychological (unless it's a .50bmg
)
But then it comes to platform and shooter if it's accurate and reliable, then by all means, however I'll take my P32 and OWB gun...
it may have it's place, my doubt would be with a rimmed round as .22 has trouble in double stacked mags, known limitation.
As a SD, I am a firm believer that much like realestate, Location, location, LOCATION is what counts, so 30 rounds in vital organs, are JUST as effective at 7 .45s.... ( you will end up dead, and yeah there is the time thing, and PLEASE, no knockdown factor, that has been PROVEN to be psychological (unless it's a .50bmg
)But then it comes to platform and shooter if it's accurate and reliable, then by all means, however I'll take my P32 and OWB gun...
mljdeckard
Member
DonRon, I said stopping power, not knockdown power. There is absolutely a stopping power factor in handguns. The idea is to cause as much tissue damage as possible in the shortest amount of time. The more cm3 of tissue damage you cause, the more likely you are to hit something that makes the attacker stop. I have more faith in 6-9 well placed .45s. Or .38s, for that matter.
easyg
Member
It's not a matter of capacity, it's a matter of caliber effectiveness.
The .22 magnum is simply not a good caliber for self defense.
Yes, the .22 magnum can kill a person, as can the .22LR and the .22 short.
But the .22 (even the .22 magnum) has a dismal reputation for QUICKLY STOPPING a human aggressor.
The likely outcome of using a .22 for self defense:
The bad guy advances with a baseball bat.
The good guy draws and shoots with his .22 caliber pistol and hits the bad guy several times before the bad guy is upon him.
The bad guy, having closed the distance, crushes the good guy's skull with the bat.
The bad guy continues to pulverize the good guy for several minutes insuring that the good guy is dead.
The bad guy takes the good guy's wallet and walks away.
20 minutes later, and while bleeding profusely, the bad guy calls 911 and claims to be a victim of a "drive by" shooting.
Approximately 15 minutes later EMS arrives and starts life-saving treatment to the wounded bad guy.
15 minutes later the bad guy arrives at the emergency room.
10 minutes later the bad guy is taken to surgery.
Despite the heroic efforts of the EMS, the emergency room personnel, and the OR staff, the bad guy dies during surgery.
The good guy is survived by his wife and two children.
I have one of these now and here is my thoughts on the gun, the ammo and the best use for it. First, the 22 mag is a very reliable round. I sent 5 rounds through the washing machine and dryer. My wife found them and freaked because she thought they would blow up. I took them out and fired all rounds through my NAA mini revolver. Not a single misfire. I have never had a 22 mag not go boom when the gun was working correctly. Second, the 22 mag is not the best round for purely defensive purposes. However, I have carried the NAA in 22mag for over 20 years. It has gone places that I would not have been able to carry any other kind of gun. In a true mouse gun, this is one of the better rounds. Of course I would much rather have a 9mm if I had a choice. Finally, the PMR30. This gun scared me for the first 2 mags. It jammed a lot and I figured I better clean and oil it. I did that and it hasn't jammed since. 300 rounds later and still runs like a clock. This gun is ultra light and about the size of a Glock 17 but thinner. It has a nice trigger pull and it accurate enough to use for trail use. This is the gun I grab when I walk my dog on a wooded trail in rural central VA. My seat of the pants evaluation of the power of this round is much stronger than the 22lr in my 10-22. Exactly what you need if confronted by a pack wild dogs, rabid forest animals, or people meaning you harm while hiking or camping. The major down side is that it looks like a pellet gun and it might force you to prove it is dangerous while your Glock is easily identifiable. However, one pull of the trigger and the BG will see a major flash and hear a very loud bang.
migkillertwo
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2010
- Messages
- 279
I definitely would not. I'd trust a Kel-tec PF-9 before relying on any rimfire cartridge to stop a BG. The 22 might pierce an artery, but will it sever it like a 9mm or a .45 JHP?
Quote General Geoff
"As an aside, if the PMR-30 takes off in popularity, ammunition manufacturers will likely begin to market loads designed specifically for the PMR-30"
+1 on that I'd love to see a quicker pistol powder loaded into a .22WMR, would attract more buyers than just those with a PMR-30
"As an aside, if the PMR-30 takes off in popularity, ammunition manufacturers will likely begin to market loads designed specifically for the PMR-30"
+1 on that I'd love to see a quicker pistol powder loaded into a .22WMR, would attract more buyers than just those with a PMR-30
varoadking
Member
You've studied this?
- Status
