22s for Self Defense

S

SIGSHR

New member
I have seen stories lately of homeowners defending themselves with 22s. One in involved an elderly lady in Iowa (?), the other a man in Tennesee. Someone with superior computer skills can post a link to these stories. Without reopening the debate on the value of a 22 for SD I will simply note these two incidents validate the words of wisdom of two of the Gunwriting Greats of our day
1. Jeff Cooper-"First Rule of Gunfighting-have a gun."
2. Elmer Keith responding to a reading asking about a "mouse gun'-He said it
wasn't his cup of tea "but it sure beats your fists."
 
Although I would not recommend .22LR for SD, it is certainly better than empty hands. Certain brands loaded in a 6" 22LR revolver will have a little over 100 ft lb. Not ideal, but definitely enough to stop someone.



SIGSHR
22s for Self Defense
I have seen stories lately of homeowners defending themselves with 22s. One in involved an elderly lady in Iowa (?), the other a man in Tennesee. Someone with superior computer skills can post a link to these stories. Without reopening the debate on the value of a 22 for SD I will simply note these two incidents validate the words of wisdom of two of the Gunwriting Greats of our day
1. Jeff Cooper-"First Rule of Gunfighting-have a gun."
2. Elmer Keith responding to a reading asking about a "mouse gun'-He said it
wasn't his cup of tea "but it sure beats your fists."
Click to expand...
 
Cooper and Keith were correct. A .22 would certainly not be my first choice as a home defense weapon, but they will sure perforate a person. Poke enough holes in a guy and he is bound to quit or go away at some point.

In most instances the mere presence of a firearm is enough to settle an aggressor down. In those cases caliber is irrelevent. If all I had was a .22, I would not feel totally unprotected at all, I would feel undergunned though.
 
Back around 35 yrs ago young married couples that I knew used Ruger MKI's loaded with CCI Stingers for home defence guns lacking funds for something bigger/better.One of the guys in our circle of friends bought his Mom a .22 semi rifle for her HD gun.Today I'd rather have something larger but if I only had a .22 LR handgun/rifle I would feel well protected.YMMV.tom.:cool:
 
Last edited:
I knew an old Korean War veteran who used an old Ruger Bearcat as his primary home defense gun and nobody could make him feel undergunned, it was easier for him to carry around than his Browning Auto 5
 
I think the best hope for a .22LR is a head shot. There have been cases of .22 slugs glancing off BG's skulls.... so shoot 'em again!
 
wouldnt be likely at all. Maybe a subsonic roudn or a cb cap *might* bounce off. Even the cb caps probably wouldnt inside 20 to 30 feet. Those things will more than likely kill somoene with a shot to the head, and they aren't nearly as potent as normal 22lr's let alone 22 magnums.
 
The video of Hinkley's assassination attempt against Reagan was interesting. Brady went down with a head shot. The Secret Service agent went down with a solar plexus shot. Reagan caught one in the chest - he was shoved into the limo and was in bad shape by the time he reached the hospital.

If I'm carrying a .22 I will still shoot for the head, and I won't stop with one shot.
 
I sure wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of 10+ .22LRs!
I would certainly recommend something different, but if the .22 is the order of the day--learn to get good hits and fast follow-ups.
 
I ran a whole lot of 22's over the chrono to see just what the score was. Everything from 1 1/8" FA mini Revo's, 4" Bearcat, 5.5" MKII, 10" MKII, 18" 10/22, and Marlin mod 60 18-20?"

The point is that in most (all? I don't have my notes in front of me) cases we got absolute highest velocities with a 10" barrel. Faster than the same ammo in a 10/22 & Marlin #60. FWIW

The 10" MKII is wicked accurate too, even with Stingers :cool:
 
Not my first choice by a long shot but beats throwing rocks. If 22 was all I had, I surely wouldn't feel ashamed of defending myself with it.
 
As has been stated - First Rule of a Gunfight: Bring a gun.

Second Rule: Be able to hit what you aim at.

While a .22 is not my choice for SD, it's a whole lot better than empty hands. .22 rounds have been shooting people for years, and often, fairly successfully in stopping.

Basically, carry what you shoot best. We go back to shot placement. IMO, a hit in the face/head/throat area with a .22 has a much better chance of stopping than a hit in the arm with a .45 ACP. I am NOT saying a .45 won't do more damage - certainly it will - IF you get a good hit.

A .22 handgun often has a great advantage in number or rounds. The new Keltec PMR-30 carries 30 rounds. Not many bad guys will be able to ignore THAT!

The operative word in self defense is SELF. It's a very personal thing and everyone has their own ideas of what works for them, and that's the key - what works for them.
 
22 SD?

When I first went into B-52's, we were told that the U.S. Air Force used to supply a 22 cal fold-down rifle in their survival gear with the intent to hunt for food. They took it out of the survival kit (69 pounds afterwards for the Martin-Baker MB-5 ejection seat) because, we were told, it was against the Geneva convention - that it is considered not a "killing" weapon, but one for "maiming." Any thoughts on that? I have often wondered about its legalities; though, if one can hit the target well, like the guy said, "it beats my fists."

WU2:)
 
Um, not to mention that it's 30 + 1 rounds of .22 mag! :eek:

CWPinSC
<SNIP>A .22 handgun often has a great advantage in number or rounds. The new Keltec PMR-30 carries 30 rounds. Not many bad guys will be able to ignore THAT!<SNIP>
Click to expand...
 
Hi,
As others have said, the first rule is "have a gun". a few years ago a firearms instructor defended himself in his driveway agains firve armed agressors. the only thing he had at the time was a 22 pocket revolver (as well as skill and an agressive resolve to survive) ; to of his oponents died, one was wounded, two fled - he was unharmed.

A couple of weeks ago a prominent criminal was mudered, the murderer (executioner actually) used a .22. the blood trail in the house showed that despite being hit in the back several times, he only succumbed when he was shot in the head.

Many years ago, I was shot with a 22 from point black range. it went through my bicep without hitting bone, and luckily my flack vest stopped it from continuing into my chest. the arm wound did not incapacitate me and I was able to shoot back. if the bullet had not stopped in my vest it probably would have ended differently.

In other words, far better than bare hands, and although far from being an optimal caliber, well placed shots are deadly.

Brgds,

Danny
 
Last edited:
While far from ideal, .22s beat the hell out of sticks, rocks and bare hands.

RFK was killed with a .22. Lots of folks have been. Head shots can kill. A .22can also bounce off a head shot (its the angle, and curved surface of the skull, not the power) if things are just right.

.22s kill. No question. Not good reliable stoppers, but way better than nothing. One fellow I knew used a Ruger Mk I, and was confidant about it. After seeing him shoot, I understood why. He could empty the gun, cutting the eyes out of a silhouette target in about 2 seconds. And that was starting with his back to it!

Old timer's advice for using a .22 for defense was the same as using birdshot, "shoot 'em in the face!" There's something to that. You might not kill, you might not stop, but if your attacker can't see, your odds go waay up!
 
Wow, what great advertising slogans for a 22 for defense:

Hey, at least it's a gun!

It's better than nothing!

Then there is the preposterous rationalization that while a 22 may bounce off a skull, it could also happen with a 45. Possibly, but it's a bunch more likely to happen with a 22.

Bottom line, while a 22 IS better than nothing, it's still a poor choice for defense. Why anyone would pick it on purpose escapes me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top