Would a 22 be good for self defense? or does it just not have enough power? my 22 went through a phone book then into the tree behind it. wouldnt that penetrate deep enough to cause substantial damage to a person? how would it not do the same thing a any handgun would do? thanks guys.
22lr handgun for self defense?
- Thread starter Bonzeye
- Start date
Dragline45
New member
It's not the best choice for self defense but it can certainly get the job done. Any high speed object entering the body has the potential to be lethal regardless of size, its all about shot placement and hitting vital areas.
Say you are using a 40gr .22LR round which travels at 1200fps (40gr is how much the actual projectile weight), a 9mm round can easily travel the same 1200fps or faster with a 125gr or heavier bullet. Now that's just the bottom end of the barrel. You can get 44mag rounds at 300gr+ traveling around 1400fps. So in essence, a heavier bullet traveling at high speeds is more lethal than a lighter bullet, even if traveling at the same speed.
Now the main reason I think .22LR is not the best choice for self defense is rimfire ammuntion is not as reliable as centerfire. Rimfire has a priming solution spun into its rim, centerfire has an actual primer inserted into the casing. You will get the occasional dud round that wont go off with rimfire far more often than you will with centerfire.
Say you are using a 40gr .22LR round which travels at 1200fps (40gr is how much the actual projectile weight), a 9mm round can easily travel the same 1200fps or faster with a 125gr or heavier bullet. Now that's just the bottom end of the barrel. You can get 44mag rounds at 300gr+ traveling around 1400fps. So in essence, a heavier bullet traveling at high speeds is more lethal than a lighter bullet, even if traveling at the same speed.
Now the main reason I think .22LR is not the best choice for self defense is rimfire ammuntion is not as reliable as centerfire. Rimfire has a priming solution spun into its rim, centerfire has an actual primer inserted into the casing. You will get the occasional dud round that wont go off with rimfire far more often than you will with centerfire.
Aaron1100us
New member
The idea for SD is to stop the attack, not kill. A .22 just doesn't have the energy transfer to stop someone as does a larger bullet. With a .22, you'd need a head shot or hit the CNS. Not a very wise choice IMO but better than nothing.
Sent from my PB99400 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my PB99400 using Tapatalk 2
1911Alaska
New member
Code:
The idea for SD is to stop the attack, not kill. A .22 just doesn't have the energy transfer to stop someone as does a larger bullet. With a .22, you'd need a head shot or hit the CNS. Not a very wise choice IMO but better than nothingWhat this guy said
. You can put quite a few rounds into somebody with a 22 but if they are determined they can keep coming at you for quite some time. Put a 44. or a 45. then they are wayyyyy more likely to stop. I have my 1911 with hollow points at my bedside every night, I also carry it with me everywhere I go. But for self defense in my home I always have my Weatherby SA-459 loaded with buckshots and ready to go.Personally, I would not feel comfortable using a 22. to protect my family from an intruder.
Having witnessed a heart shot elephant run for another mile before he died I wonder if aiming for the torso is such a good strategy. I think hitting someone dead center chest may not be enough to keep them from emptying their handgun in your direction before they give it up.
On the other hand, if you get a .22 solid into their brain, lights out, game over, you go home safe.
On the other hand, if you get a .22 solid into their brain, lights out, game over, you go home safe.
hnl.flyboy
New member
Any gun can kill you...eventually. Picking a caliber is a personal choice, balancing what recoil the user can handle, what weight the user can handle (if carrying), what the user can afford, what the USER believes will stop an attacker quickly enough, and what makes the user comfortable.
My first choice is a 9mm. If that gun somehow happens to run dry, I'd pick up my .45acp next. I do have .22lr handguns in the safe, but those would get loaded only if sh*t really hit the fan and the 9 and .45 are both down.
My first choice is a 9mm. If that gun somehow happens to run dry, I'd pick up my .45acp next. I do have .22lr handguns in the safe, but those would get loaded only if sh*t really hit the fan and the 9 and .45 are both down.
The guy who popularized true modern body armor did so in response to an incident in which, while delivering a pizza in Detroit, he killed three criminals with a .22LR revolver. That is a true story by the way, seriously.
That being said, if I were that guy I'd have wanted a 1911 or a Glock 17 instead. Your choice.
That being said, if I were that guy I'd have wanted a 1911 or a Glock 17 instead. Your choice.
Sparks1957
New member
The unreliability of the rimfire cartridge is another consideration that make .22s a poor choice for self-defense
I carried a little .22 Jennings (yes, this one worked and was reliable) in the early '90's. It was small enough for me to conceal in most situations. However, I always felt like "This thing is just barely better than nothing!".
Now, there are some incredible micro-9mm's out there that are just as small as my little J-22. They are far more reliable, more durable (not more accurate), and actually have a larger capacity than my J-22. I can carry one of these Micro-9's with a round in the chamber (no way you want to do this with a J-22). For those who don't like the recoil of the Micro-9mm's, there are plenty of .380's or even some decent .32's out there that will out-perform .22LR.
In my opinion, there is absolutely no justification for carrying a .22LR pistol for self defense. They are as obsolete as Belgian pin-fire revolvers.
Now, there are some incredible micro-9mm's out there that are just as small as my little J-22. They are far more reliable, more durable (not more accurate), and actually have a larger capacity than my J-22. I can carry one of these Micro-9's with a round in the chamber (no way you want to do this with a J-22). For those who don't like the recoil of the Micro-9mm's, there are plenty of .380's or even some decent .32's out there that will out-perform .22LR.
In my opinion, there is absolutely no justification for carrying a .22LR pistol for self defense. They are as obsolete as Belgian pin-fire revolvers.
Just to rephrase and perhaps increase in emphasis an earlier post:
The goal in self defense is to stop the aggression against yourself or your loved ones as soon as possible. While .22 bullets may kill the aggressor, he is likely to remain functional for long enough to do serious harm before he dies unless you hit the brain (smaller than you might think) or the spinal cord (even smaller and not a good target). The value of larger projectiles is to deliver a harder hit that causes more disruption that incapacitates the aggressor more quickly and ends the danger to yourself or loved ones sooner, regardless of the eventual lethal effect.
I hope this helps you understand why .22 does not get good reviews as a defensive cartridge. That said, there are times you do the best you can with what you have. The most common opinion among people who study such things intently seems to be that arming yourself with at least a .38 in revolver cartridges or at least a 9 mm in semiauto cartridges gives you your best chance of prevailing in a dangerous situation.
The goal in self defense is to stop the aggression against yourself or your loved ones as soon as possible. While .22 bullets may kill the aggressor, he is likely to remain functional for long enough to do serious harm before he dies unless you hit the brain (smaller than you might think) or the spinal cord (even smaller and not a good target). The value of larger projectiles is to deliver a harder hit that causes more disruption that incapacitates the aggressor more quickly and ends the danger to yourself or loved ones sooner, regardless of the eventual lethal effect.
I hope this helps you understand why .22 does not get good reviews as a defensive cartridge. That said, there are times you do the best you can with what you have. The most common opinion among people who study such things intently seems to be that arming yourself with at least a .38 in revolver cartridges or at least a 9 mm in semiauto cartridges gives you your best chance of prevailing in a dangerous situation.
Crow Hunter
New member
If you are ever attacked by a dry phone book, you should be okay.
If a .22 is the only thing you can handle, then yes, it is better than yelling.
In my opinion the problems with the use of a .22 for defense is two-fold:
1. Reliability of the rounds in question. They are rimmed and don't always feed reliably in semi-autos. They are not normally used for defensive purposes so the manufacturers aren't using the same quality control measures that they do for premium defensive rounds. (Misfires are common) My advice is use them in a revolver at a minimum.
2. Lack of penetration. People aren't the same as a homogenous paper phone book, or even a wet phone book. The human body is full of soft parts, hard parts, squishy parts, springy parts, etc. The .22 may penetrate or it may not, particularly if you hit something on the way in like an arm that could keep you from getting the minimum penetration needed to reach something vital.
This can be a problem with any type of round, however, heavier/larger centerfire rounds greatly improve on these 2 factors.
The only way to be 100% sure of stopping an attack is destroying the parts of the nervous system that controls movement (brain, upper spinal cord).
Anything else is relying on other factors. Physchological (oh crap, I've been shot!) or Hemmorraging/pneumohorax which robs the brain of oxygen and thusly shutting down the ability to move and stopping an attack.
If a .22 is the only thing you can handle, then yes, it is better than yelling.
In my opinion the problems with the use of a .22 for defense is two-fold:
1. Reliability of the rounds in question. They are rimmed and don't always feed reliably in semi-autos. They are not normally used for defensive purposes so the manufacturers aren't using the same quality control measures that they do for premium defensive rounds. (Misfires are common) My advice is use them in a revolver at a minimum.
2. Lack of penetration. People aren't the same as a homogenous paper phone book, or even a wet phone book. The human body is full of soft parts, hard parts, squishy parts, springy parts, etc. The .22 may penetrate or it may not, particularly if you hit something on the way in like an arm that could keep you from getting the minimum penetration needed to reach something vital.
This can be a problem with any type of round, however, heavier/larger centerfire rounds greatly improve on these 2 factors.
The only way to be 100% sure of stopping an attack is destroying the parts of the nervous system that controls movement (brain, upper spinal cord).
Anything else is relying on other factors. Physchological (oh crap, I've been shot!) or Hemmorraging/pneumohorax which robs the brain of oxygen and thusly shutting down the ability to move and stopping an attack.
Microgunner
New member
If you're too feeble or gun shy to handle a center fire cartridge then .22 rimfire is for you.
Otherwise, stick with the largest centerfire caliber you can shoot well. Just makes sense to me.
Otherwise, stick with the largest centerfire caliber you can shoot well. Just makes sense to me.
A 22 has only 1 thing to recommend it over any other hand gun and that one thing is cheap ammo. However we must not underestimate the true value of that one virtue.
A man that has a reliable accurate 22 pistol and has fired it in practice 20,000 rounds is probably no one you’d want to have shoot at you.
There is only 1 round that I would put below a 22 in its “combat effectiveness” and that is the 25 auto. But according to the FBI the round that is used in homicides more than any other is the 22 LR and it’s so far out in front that in some years it was used more in the USA than ALL OTHER ROUND COMBINED!
Keep in mind a 22 is a GUN! A REAL GUN! There are no rounds out there that are not deadly. NONE! If anyone were to invent one no factory would make them very long because that would be analogous to a car company making a car that would not roll on it’s wheels. It would not have a purpose.
In the line up of "deadly rounds made", the 22 is close to the bottom of the list, but it is ON THE LIST.
So don’t underestimate a 22.
In the classes I teach, I find about 15% of my students are best armed with a 22.
People that have trouble with recoil and don’t respond well to drills to cure that problem.
People on a very tight budget, who can handle a more powerful gun well IF they could practice with it, but can’t afford the ammo.
Some on Social Security do not have that kind of money, and they are NEVER going to have it either.
A 10/22 Ruger rifle and a good 22 auto pistol and 1000 rounds of practice a year make them very dangerous adversaries.
You absolutely would not want to have one of my students (named Sarah) as your enemy.
She’s small, lightly boned, a bit weak and wanted to learn to protect herself on a very limited budget.
I trained her to use a 10/22 rifle and A Ruger MK2 pistol. She took classes from me for 6 months.
She now can put all 9 of her rounds from her pistol through a target as big as an orange at 15 yards, and she can do it in about 4 seconds.
She can also hit a thrown paint can going across her front 3 times in 5 seconds while it’s moving.
And with her 10/22 RIFLE she’s a lot better.
She’s going to be the winner in most conflicts, I am sure.
She can afford to keep that level of skill too.
As a rule I do not recommend a 22, but there are exceptions. I train people to fight. I am not interested in the tools of winning as much as I am in the winning itself. It’s always 98% the fighter and 2% what the fighter is using.
A man that has a reliable accurate 22 pistol and has fired it in practice 20,000 rounds is probably no one you’d want to have shoot at you.
There is only 1 round that I would put below a 22 in its “combat effectiveness” and that is the 25 auto. But according to the FBI the round that is used in homicides more than any other is the 22 LR and it’s so far out in front that in some years it was used more in the USA than ALL OTHER ROUND COMBINED!
Keep in mind a 22 is a GUN! A REAL GUN! There are no rounds out there that are not deadly. NONE! If anyone were to invent one no factory would make them very long because that would be analogous to a car company making a car that would not roll on it’s wheels. It would not have a purpose.
In the line up of "deadly rounds made", the 22 is close to the bottom of the list, but it is ON THE LIST.
So don’t underestimate a 22.
In the classes I teach, I find about 15% of my students are best armed with a 22.
People that have trouble with recoil and don’t respond well to drills to cure that problem.
People on a very tight budget, who can handle a more powerful gun well IF they could practice with it, but can’t afford the ammo.
Some on Social Security do not have that kind of money, and they are NEVER going to have it either.
A 10/22 Ruger rifle and a good 22 auto pistol and 1000 rounds of practice a year make them very dangerous adversaries.
You absolutely would not want to have one of my students (named Sarah) as your enemy.
She’s small, lightly boned, a bit weak and wanted to learn to protect herself on a very limited budget.
I trained her to use a 10/22 rifle and A Ruger MK2 pistol. She took classes from me for 6 months.
She now can put all 9 of her rounds from her pistol through a target as big as an orange at 15 yards, and she can do it in about 4 seconds.
She can also hit a thrown paint can going across her front 3 times in 5 seconds while it’s moving.
And with her 10/22 RIFLE she’s a lot better.
She’s going to be the winner in most conflicts, I am sure.
She can afford to keep that level of skill too.
As a rule I do not recommend a 22, but there are exceptions. I train people to fight. I am not interested in the tools of winning as much as I am in the winning itself. It’s always 98% the fighter and 2% what the fighter is using.
aarondhgraham
New member
I'm somewhat of a hypocrite,,,
I never recommend a .22 as a self-defense handgun,,,
But I often carry one myself.
I am not as good as the young lady Wyosmith described,,,
But I do practice a lot with a Taurus 22-PLY and a Bersa Thunder 22.
I shoot at least once a week,,,
I'll put at least 50 rounds through each pistol,,,
At self defense distances I can triple-tap a three inch circle.
I use CCI Mini Mags and can not remember when my last dud round was,,,
Even when I am practicing with Federal Bulk Pack, duds are rare,,,
And the DAO and DA/SA actions allow for a 2nd or 3rd strike,,,
I really do not feel under-gunned with my .22 pistols.
I often recommend a .22 as a first handgun because of the cheap trigger time,,,
But I also strongly urge the people I advise to move up to centerfire as soon as feasible.
Aarond
.
I never recommend a .22 as a self-defense handgun,,,
But I often carry one myself.
I am not as good as the young lady Wyosmith described,,,
But I do practice a lot with a Taurus 22-PLY and a Bersa Thunder 22.
I shoot at least once a week,,,
I'll put at least 50 rounds through each pistol,,,
At self defense distances I can triple-tap a three inch circle.
I use CCI Mini Mags and can not remember when my last dud round was,,,
Even when I am practicing with Federal Bulk Pack, duds are rare,,,
And the DAO and DA/SA actions allow for a 2nd or 3rd strike,,,
I really do not feel under-gunned with my .22 pistols.
I often recommend a .22 as a first handgun because of the cheap trigger time,,,
But I also strongly urge the people I advise to move up to centerfire as soon as feasible.
Aarond
.
It would not be my first choice.....
But it's certainly on my list. IF I were in "gravest extreme", and had a .22 in reach, I would certainly not pass it up thinking "oh crap, its only a .22 and won't work".
The .22LR is our premier small game and practice round. And it certainly will kill people. You can look in the "Armed Citizen" column of the American Riflman, and see numerous clippings every month where a .22 drove off an atttacker, and sometimes mulitple ones.
The purpose of a defensive firearm is to defend yourself. How that is done (and with what) is not as important as the fact that it gets done.
The ideal defensive handgun is one that is powerful enough to be relied on to stop a fanatically determined attacker. And the .22 is not. It has done it, and will do it again, many times. But it cannot be relied on, with confidence.
The majority of the time, the mere presence of a gun deters criminals. Many times criminals who get shot (with anything) will flee if they are physically able. To me, those are successful defenses.
But we plan for the worst possible case. And that is the fanatic (for what ever reason) that will not stop until physically incapacitated. Make no mistake, a .22 is deadly force, but may not stop someone, until it kills them. And sometimes, that's what it takes, even with the biggest, most powerful rounds.
Another of the problems with the .22 as a defensive round is that it is cheap. And because it is cheap, people tend to buy the cheapest .22s. And the cheapest .22 ammo is not nearly as reliable as a centerfiire. Misfires are not uncommon. With hi quality .22s, they still happen, but are much less common. Feeding in semi auto pistols is not 100% reliable, each gun being a law unto itself about what (if anything) it will feed reliably.
The .22 makes the list of homicide calibers, because a lot of people have been killed by a .22. But murder is quite different from stopping an attacker.
If a .22 is all you have, or all you can manage, you are still far from defenseless. I knew a state trooper many years ago who's home defense gun was a Ruger Mk I target model. He could dump the full mag so fast it sounded almost like a single shot, and cut the eyes out of a standard Sillhouette target at 15 feet faster than you can read this sentence.
I'm not that good, so I rely on larger calibers...
But it's certainly on my list. IF I were in "gravest extreme", and had a .22 in reach, I would certainly not pass it up thinking "oh crap, its only a .22 and won't work".
The .22LR is our premier small game and practice round. And it certainly will kill people. You can look in the "Armed Citizen" column of the American Riflman, and see numerous clippings every month where a .22 drove off an atttacker, and sometimes mulitple ones.
The purpose of a defensive firearm is to defend yourself. How that is done (and with what) is not as important as the fact that it gets done.
The ideal defensive handgun is one that is powerful enough to be relied on to stop a fanatically determined attacker. And the .22 is not. It has done it, and will do it again, many times. But it cannot be relied on, with confidence.
The majority of the time, the mere presence of a gun deters criminals. Many times criminals who get shot (with anything) will flee if they are physically able. To me, those are successful defenses.
But we plan for the worst possible case. And that is the fanatic (for what ever reason) that will not stop until physically incapacitated. Make no mistake, a .22 is deadly force, but may not stop someone, until it kills them. And sometimes, that's what it takes, even with the biggest, most powerful rounds.
Another of the problems with the .22 as a defensive round is that it is cheap. And because it is cheap, people tend to buy the cheapest .22s. And the cheapest .22 ammo is not nearly as reliable as a centerfiire. Misfires are not uncommon. With hi quality .22s, they still happen, but are much less common. Feeding in semi auto pistols is not 100% reliable, each gun being a law unto itself about what (if anything) it will feed reliably.
The .22 makes the list of homicide calibers, because a lot of people have been killed by a .22. But murder is quite different from stopping an attacker.
If a .22 is all you have, or all you can manage, you are still far from defenseless. I knew a state trooper many years ago who's home defense gun was a Ruger Mk I target model. He could dump the full mag so fast it sounded almost like a single shot, and cut the eyes out of a standard Sillhouette target at 15 feet faster than you can read this sentence.
I'm not that good, so I rely on larger calibers...
I have to agree! I haven't had a misfire, failure to chamber/extract with a .22 for about 15 years, and that includes some junky Winchester stuff with bad crimps. I keep thinking they must have figured out a better way to get the primer compound up into the rim.
I also agree that while .22 is no great stopper, I can only think that 10 round dump to the center mass would slow just about anyone down!
I also agree that while .22 is no great stopper, I can only think that 10 round dump to the center mass would slow just about anyone down!