22 for self defense?

I think you underestimate the ability of an experienced shooter with a "bit" of practice to shoot accurately well beyond "pepperspray-range" with an LCP. With the far superior 380 and quality ammo, I would take your bet.

The idea that someone will be deadly accurate with a .22, and ineffective with a subcompact 380 is only valid if there are physical limitations or unfamiliarity with the pistol in my experience. Using a .22 handgun for self-defense is with rare exception, a bad idea in my opinion.
Click to expand...

As it turns out, I have quite a lot of experience with both the Buckmark and the "original" LCP design, the Kel-Tec P-32 (Ruger copied the design and added better QC).

Since it was such a low-cost pistol, I regarded it as a project to push the P-32 as far as it would go. I upgraded the sights to something more useful, and added a trigger stop to eliminate over-travel to increase multi-shot speed. Then I practiced, and got pretty good with the thing.

I once achieved a near-miraculous shot with the P-32 at ~20-25 yards on a running rabbit out in the desert. But that was the only small game I ever took with the thing, and it involved a huge amount of luck.

The rabbits I've taken with the Buckmark, however, did not require luck. The Buckmark is just light-years ahead of what the LCP can do, in the context of "surprise" moving targets, where multi-shot speed and accuracy is a big advantage.

On the other hand, it seems to be that getting hits with the "far superior" .380 on actual people buys you some advantage over .22, but surprisingly little: https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power The bottom line is that you still have to poke one or more holes in something the other guy needs, for a reliable stop -- and for that task, a Buckmark is going to have serious advantages over a pocket pistol.
 
The bottom line is that you still have to poke one or more holes in something the other guy needs, for a reliable stop -- and for that task, a Buckmark is going to have serious advantages over a pocket pistol.
Click to expand...

I won't argue that a pocket pistol is ideal in any self-defense situation. An LCP is not my go-to pistol for home defense. For that I have other, better options. None of those choices are in .22 either.:D

For me an LCP is for carrying when there isn't another better choice. If I can get away with carrying a Buckmark, I can carry a compact in a service caliber. Given that choice, why would I choose the Buckmark?
 
a Buckmark is going to have serious advantages over a pocket pistol.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understanding why the comparison is being made between a Buckmark and a pocket pistol?

The Buckmark is a full size auto with a 4"-- 7.25" barrel: the opposite of a pocket pistol.

Sure the Buckmark will have obvious advantages in terms of shootability and accuracy when compared to pocket pistols. But level the playing field, compare apples to apples, and those 'advantages' are not nearly so pronounced. For example, a full size .380 or 9mm is still very easily managed with little felt recoil.
 
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understanding why the comparison is being made between a Buckmark and a pocket pistol?
Click to expand...

The OP specified that "all he had was a Buckmark." A few posts up, an LCP was recommended to replace it for self-defense. That's the reason for the comparison.

I agree that a high-quality 9mm with good grip, sights, and trigger would be a better tool for most self-defense purposes. But I wanted to point out that a Buckmark is not automatically at the bottom of the barrel -- there are a lot of pistols that are worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top