22lr handgun for self defense?

My personal 22 rimfire SD option is the Ruger LCR 22 with the Aguila 60 grain. You are NOT gonna get the 1200 fps out of a snubbie so compensate with better bullet weight.

Not the BEST option, but it allows you to practice a lot.
 
Bonzeye
22lr handgun for self defense?
Click to expand...

Not from a handgun. Forget about the ballistics you read about for a 22LR. They're all from rifle length barrels - 16" to 18". Your speed from a 4" barrel is substantially less. That 1,200 fps for a 40gr is more like 900fps. Even with the hyper velocity stuff you're talking about something like 950fps from a 36gr. Energy from one of those is like 72 ft lbs. Pretty much the same as a round fired .25ACP and I don't think ANYONE would want a .25ACP as a primary SD gun unless they had no other choice.

Now, if you were talking about SD with a 10/22 that can throw rounds at you with the power of a standard pressure .38 Special...in a heartbeat.
 
Where are you guys getting these .22LR that are so reliable? What brand are you using? Seriously, I would like to know, I want to try some of them, maybe I have just be using the crappy rounds all these years. (Very possible)

I usually have several out of any given Winchester/Federal/Remigton bulk pack that is either crooked, a dud, or sounds like a CB cap going off.

This is not even counting the occasional misfeed, double feed, or accidental rim over rim loading (my fault) in a semi auto. Now I don't shoot any of the high quality .22 LR ammo out there, just the cheap stuff, so maybe there is better stuff out there.

But other than my AA conversion and my M&P 15-22 almost all of my .22 shooting is revolvers/lever action/bolt action.
 
Where are you guys getting these .22LR that are so reliable? What brand are you using? Seriously, I would like to know, I want to try some of them
Click to expand...

I'm wondering the same thing. I go through probably 3000 rounds a month, and almost always get at least one crap round.
 
I shoot CCI mini-mags almost exclusively in my semiauto .22 pistols now, because I got sick of the misfires, jams, and failure to cycle the action that I got with a lot of the other brands.

They do cost a bit more, but that reliability is worth the missing aggravation in my book. Almost never have a problem with them.
 
Referring here only to cartridges, it is worth checking carefully each and every round for any caliber before using it. And as a matter of fact, check boxes that you buy in the store, if they aren't sealed, to make sure the box is full.
 
CCI MiniMags rule for reliability,,,

CCI MiniMags rule for reliability,,,
Like I said in an earlier post,,,
I can't remember a failure.

They do cost more,,,
$6.50 for 100 at Wally World,,,
At 6.5 cents a shot it's still cheap ammo.

Federal Bulk Pack is 3.6 cents a round,,,
You'll spend an extra 2.9 cents a round for reliability.

Aarond

.
 
I haven't fired many CCI long rifles. But I use them exclusively in my .22 Magnums and I have never had a dud round.

I'll have to try and get some and see what happens.
 
IMO, a bullet is a bullet and a .22 is better than a sharp stick and yelling.

Will it kill your attacker? Maybe, depending on the area you hit, but I doubt it

Can't say I'd want to be first in line to be shot with one though...:rolleyes:
 
Try a .22LR revolver

For those who can't handle recoil and can't or don't want to operate an auto, the .22LR revolver is a viable option.

Consider the Ruger LCR, the SP-101, or several of the S&Ws, or the Charter Arms Pathfinder. Easy to operate. The LCR is a great purse or pocket gun...in any caliber.

The .22LR reliability issue is fairly well obviated in a DA revolver. In the case of a dud just pull the trigger again and the gun will likely go bang.

And the reliability issue is mitigated with the use of high quality ammo such as the CCI Stinger or Velocitor.

So don't count the .22LR out just yet. The right gun mated with the right ammo gets you a pretty potent package. Quite a bit better than a yell, I think.
 
Last edited:
For plinking I use the cheaper stuff,,,

For plinking I use the cheaper stuff,,,
But I always load with Mini Mags for carry.

When I am simply plinking at the range with my Bersa Thunder 22,,,
I use Federal Bulk Pack to save that 2.9 cents a round.

I've found it to be pretty dang good ammo as far as reliability,,,
And seeing as how the Bersa T-22 is a DA/SA pistol,,,
On that rare occasion when I do get a non-fire,,,
A second trigger pull usually does the trick.

Same with my Taurus 22-PLY,,,
I just pull the trigger again,,,
It usually fires then.

But if is doesn't,,,
Tap & Rack drills apply,,,
Just like any other semi-auto.

Aarond

.
 
Crow Hunter
Where are you guys getting these .22LR that are so reliable? What brand are you using? Seriously, I would like to know, I want to try some of them, maybe I have just be using the crappy rounds all these years. (Very possible)

I usually have several out of any given Winchester/Federal/Remigton bulk pack that is either crooked, a dud, or sounds like a CB cap going off.
Click to expand...

My experience with bulk Remington has been especially bad. At least 1 dud out of every 20 rounds or so. When I say dud, I mean it doesn't go off with multiple strikes after being rotated in the cylinder.

My best experience has been with CCI Mini-Mags and CCI Blazer. I normally use Blazer for plinking. It is the same stuff as Mini Mags without the coating.
 
aarondhgraham said:
Same with my Taurus 22-PLY,,,
I just pull the trigger again,,,
It usually fires then.


But if is doesn't,,,
Tap & Rack drills apply,,,
Just like any other semi-auto.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you can rack the slide on a Taurus PT22.
I'd need a pair of Vice Grips and a couple of minutes to accomplish that feat.
Plus with no extractor racking the slide will have little to no effect on clearing the chamber.
 
Anyone want to bet their life on 'cheap' .22s? That bargain brand could turn out to be an expensive choice.
The .22LR is one of the commonest, if not the most common, in the fatality statistics. But Dead Sometime On Or Around On Arrival is really good enough to fit this case.
 
A know of someone that was out target practicing with some friends and one of the .22 semi auto guns accidentally slam fires. He was hit in the abdomen and he said it felt like someone run him through with a hot poker and dropped him immediately, totally incapacitating him. The round went though him and lodged near his spinal column where it rests to this day. This guy was no small person either, he is a strapping 6'4" and weighs around 230 lbs so sometimes the .22lr can do the job.
Even with this knowledge what we have in the house and as carry guns for self defense are 9mm and 38spl and figure that is probably the minimum my wife and I should depend on.
 
Not the best choice, and certainly not my 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice, but sure beats fists, feet and foul language.
 
"The idea for SD is to stop the attack, not kill."


No state I know of in the U.S. allows for the use of deadly force just to maim someone.
Click to expand...
Justifiable deadly force is made legal so that people can prevent an attacker from committing a serious crime against them or another innocent. It is not made legal so that people can kill criminals. The fact that justifiable deadly force can and often does result in the death of the attacker is neither here nor there. It is an understood CONSEQUENCE of the legal use of deadly force, it is not the PURPOSE.

The purpose of self defense is DEFENSE. It doesn't make any difference if the attacker dies, if his death comes about only after he completes his attack and seriously injures or kills his victim. Nor does it make any difference if the attacker lives to be 100 years old, as long as the use of deadly force by the defender causes him (either voluntarily or involuntarily) to cease his hostilities prior to killing or injuring his victim.

So yes, it is true that SD is not about killing--the purpose is stopping an attack/preventing serious injury or death of the defender. That purpose may be, and often is accomplished without the death of the attacker and likewise the death of the attacker can occur without the goal of self-defense having been accomplished if the attack is not stopped soon enough and the attacker only dies after the attack has been completed and the victim is injured or killed.

As for the second statement, shooting an attacker, or even shooting at an attacker will be considered use of deadly force, regardless of where the attacker is shot or even if the attacker is missed. Shooting to "maim" is legally problematic unless the defender (or the defender's legal counsel) can show why that tactic offered the best chance of stopping the attack. An example might be a case where a defender aimed for the pelvis of an attacker with a contact weapon (e.g. a knife or club) with the idea that he might have a much better chance of damaging the attackers pelvis and reducing the attacker's mobility (and therefore eliminating the threat) than he would have of incapacitating the attacker with a torso shot from a handgun.

Generally speaking, the recommended course of action is to shoot at the center of mass the largest part of the attacker that is visible. Most instructors agree that offers the best chance of stopping an attack when all the variables are considered. Shooting at extremities or the head is generally not recommended because it usually results in a reduced chance of scoring a hit and/or a reduced chance of incapacitation if a hit is made.
 
jeeplover1 said:
many people have died by a 22. its all about bullet placement...
Click to expand...
Remember that the goal is to quickly stop an assailant before he can hurt you (or someone else). So the real question is how quickly and reliably being shot with a particular cartridge will force an attacker to stop whatever he is doing to try to hurt you (or someone else).

A .22 can certainly kill someone; but whether, if he's attacking you, a .22 will stop him quickly enough to keep him from hurting you badly is another question entirely.

There are four ways in which shooting someone stops him:

  1. psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."
  2. massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function
  3. breaking major skeletal support structures
  4. damaging the central nervous system.

Depending on someone just giving up because he's been shot is iffy. Probably most fights are stopped that way, but some aren't; and there are no guarantees.

Breaking major skeletal structures can quickly impair mobility. But if the assailant has a gun, he can still shoot. And it will take a reasonably powerful round to reliably penetrate and break a large bone, like the pelvis.

Hits to the central nervous system are sure and quick, but the CNS presents a small and uncertain target. And sometimes significant penetration will be needed to reach it.

The most common and sure physiological way in which shooting someone stops him is blood loss -- depriving the brain and muscles of oxygen and nutrients, thus impairing the ability of the brain and muscles to function. Blood loss is facilitated by (1) large holes causing tissue damage; (2) getting the holes in the right places to damage major blood vessels or blood bearing organs; and (3) adequate penetration to get those holes into the blood vessels and organs which are fairly deep in the body. The problem is that blood loss takes time. People have continued to fight effectively when gravely, even mortally, wounded. So things that can speed up blood loss, more holes, bigger holes, better placed holes, etc., help.

So as a rule of thumb --

  • More holes are better than fewer holes.
  • Larger holes are better than smaller holes.
  • Holes in the right places are better than holes in the wrong places.
  • Holes that are deep enough are better than holes that aren't.
  • There are no magic bullets.

The bottom line is that a lower power cartridge with a smaller caliber bullet will make smaller holes and may not be able to as reliably penetrate to where those holes need to be to be most effective.

Or to put it another way, why would anyone think that a .22 will be enough when sometimes a .357 Magnum isn't necessarily enough. LAPD Officer Stacy Lim was shot in the chest with a .357 Magnum and still ran down her attacker, returned fire, killed him, survived, and ultimately was able to return to duty.
 
IMO if you haven't had a failure to fire with factory .22lr ammo, you haven't shot enough rounds. Now the Remington bulk stuff is truly the pits and unfortunately I have several bricks of that stuff to use up yet, but I have experienced failures with every brand of .22. I don't use the match ammo so I can't say anything about that.
Several years ago I was shooting at an indoor club range and the guy next to me was shooting a little Beretta .22. He was extolling the virtues of it for self defense and then asked me what I though. Without getting into the caliber wars thing, I told him that I didn't think that factory .22 was reliable enough. He said he had never had a problem with his mini mags and then proceeded to have 2 failures to fire in his next magazine. I didn't rub it in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top