Is a .22lr better than nothing?
- Thread starter Fer
- Start date
When I mentioned an action plan and like you said it applies to al calibers specially small calibers. For example a mind set in my case is:
I carry a Concealed revolver, but if I am caught off guard and some BG is pointing a gun at me at close range I am prepared (in my mind) not to draw my gun, I could get shot very easy and in a stupid way. I would rather wait for the right moment to draw or if the ocacion occurs to shoot when the Bg´s think they have gotten away with the assault, if they have not discovered the revo.
On the other hand if I see trouble coming I would try to avoid it, if that is not posible I can defend my self, but I have a view of what is happening.
This action plan should go in hand with shooting practice, being armed is not just stufing your pocket or holster with a gun, your mind should also be prepared.
Fer
I carry a Concealed revolver, but if I am caught off guard and some BG is pointing a gun at me at close range I am prepared (in my mind) not to draw my gun, I could get shot very easy and in a stupid way. I would rather wait for the right moment to draw or if the ocacion occurs to shoot when the Bg´s think they have gotten away with the assault, if they have not discovered the revo.
On the other hand if I see trouble coming I would try to avoid it, if that is not posible I can defend my self, but I have a view of what is happening.
This action plan should go in hand with shooting practice, being armed is not just stufing your pocket or holster with a gun, your mind should also be prepared.
Fer
Its called Lethal Force for a reason and if you had time to try and wound somebody you are better off not to shoot at all in civil liability terms...If you have to shoot the law expects somebody to be dead at that level of force. If they don't die its an happy by product of the event.
The gun, even a .22, does have a "deterrence" or "Oh, Shxxt!" effect, no doubt. I suspect one can put it to offensive use such as pulling it out and displaying it and hoping the "attacker" will pee his pants and run off.
In the state where I live if one uses a firearm like that, he could very well be charged with aggravated assault with a firearm. If convicted, he's going to serve at least one year in prison. If you have the time and distance to pull a weapon and "deter" someone, the law expects you to use that time and distance for other purposes such as pulling the cell phone, hitting "911" or fleeing.
Lethal force with a firearm is a last-resort option, no matter what caliber. It most often involves situations where the attacker is at arms length or at most seven or so yards from the defender. The defender can't retreat or ward off a life-threatening attack. Sometimes the victims are unaware they are in danger until after the attack is launched.
If you're fighting for your life and all you have is a .22, fight and best wishes for good health and long life to you. I've seen people wounded who don't realize it until after the fight. Your attacker may so be inclined. A .22 makes a small hole and doesn't break bones in many cases.
You might be better off with a stick. A good stick fighter can break bones. And a stick doesn't have as big as an "Oh, Shxxt!" factor on prosecutors.
In the state where I live if one uses a firearm like that, he could very well be charged with aggravated assault with a firearm. If convicted, he's going to serve at least one year in prison. If you have the time and distance to pull a weapon and "deter" someone, the law expects you to use that time and distance for other purposes such as pulling the cell phone, hitting "911" or fleeing.
Lethal force with a firearm is a last-resort option, no matter what caliber. It most often involves situations where the attacker is at arms length or at most seven or so yards from the defender. The defender can't retreat or ward off a life-threatening attack. Sometimes the victims are unaware they are in danger until after the attack is launched.
If you're fighting for your life and all you have is a .22, fight and best wishes for good health and long life to you. I've seen people wounded who don't realize it until after the fight. Your attacker may so be inclined. A .22 makes a small hole and doesn't break bones in many cases.
You might be better off with a stick. A good stick fighter can break bones. And a stick doesn't have as big as an "Oh, Shxxt!" factor on prosecutors.
The .22 zippered from the crouch to the throat will certainly ruin a Gremlins' day!
There was an EMT at a church I use to attend. He knew I was into firearms so he would relate to me the shootings that he went to.
Had a neighbor roused in the middle of the night by a "gremlin" kicking in his door. He fired one shot, hit the Gremlin in the throat. The gremlin was med-evaced to a trauma center when he died.
Another shooting, a rapist was shot once, the gal who shot him, threw down the gun and ran out of the house screaming...when he didn't drop on the spot she got totaly scared...after all the movies always show the gremlin dropping...she went to the neighbors, called 911 and about 25 minutes later the police come.
The gremlin was in her front yard walking in a circle...he was incoherent and was taken to the hospital where he recovered...in this case the gun did was it was suppose to, it stopped the attack.
Another shooting I saw involved a .25 caliber. The guy comes running up screaming he's been shot..seems he and his wife got into it and she let one off. I saw no blood, just a small bruise about the size of my small fingernail.
Drove him to the hospital where he died from blood loss...seems the bullet went through the liver and they couldn't stop the bleeding!
Another shooting I was told about invovled a .22. The little gal fired one round trying to hit her "significant other" in the shoulder. The bullet went through the artery, he turned, walked to the front door (20 feet) collasped and died!
Finally, another shooting involving a 22 single six ruger, loaded with 22 mag. Her ex-husband was trying to kick the door to the trailer open. She fired all six round through the door. When the police arrived, seems that the screen door handle had caught under his belt, so they found him standing. My buddy told me when they took his shirt off, there were 6 small holes in the front, but the back side had holes the size of golf balls!
Don't underestimate the lowly .22...
There was an EMT at a church I use to attend. He knew I was into firearms so he would relate to me the shootings that he went to.
Had a neighbor roused in the middle of the night by a "gremlin" kicking in his door. He fired one shot, hit the Gremlin in the throat. The gremlin was med-evaced to a trauma center when he died.
Another shooting, a rapist was shot once, the gal who shot him, threw down the gun and ran out of the house screaming...when he didn't drop on the spot she got totaly scared...after all the movies always show the gremlin dropping...she went to the neighbors, called 911 and about 25 minutes later the police come.
The gremlin was in her front yard walking in a circle...he was incoherent and was taken to the hospital where he recovered...in this case the gun did was it was suppose to, it stopped the attack.
Another shooting I saw involved a .25 caliber. The guy comes running up screaming he's been shot..seems he and his wife got into it and she let one off. I saw no blood, just a small bruise about the size of my small fingernail.
Drove him to the hospital where he died from blood loss...seems the bullet went through the liver and they couldn't stop the bleeding!
Another shooting I was told about invovled a .22. The little gal fired one round trying to hit her "significant other" in the shoulder. The bullet went through the artery, he turned, walked to the front door (20 feet) collasped and died!
Finally, another shooting involving a 22 single six ruger, loaded with 22 mag. Her ex-husband was trying to kick the door to the trailer open. She fired all six round through the door. When the police arrived, seems that the screen door handle had caught under his belt, so they found him standing. My buddy told me when they took his shirt off, there were 6 small holes in the front, but the back side had holes the size of golf balls!
Don't underestimate the lowly .22...
That is called brandishing, and is itself usually considered to be deadly force. You really shouldn't draw unless you are in fear of your life. Justification for drawing and justification for shooting are usually one and the same. If you are in fear of your life, you have nothing to fear from the brandishing, as you would be justified to not only pull your gun but to shoot it as well. Nothing REQUIRES you to shoot it, however. If brandishing alone stops the attacker, the gun has served it's purpose.
One thing to keep in mind is that if you do have to resort to deadly force (either brandishing or actually firing), the very next thing you should do after the attack is to call the local police (911 will do) and file an initial report. It is very important to get the report in early -- BEFORE your attacker or his (her?) cohorts have the chance to do likewise. The first one in with the report carries a lot of weight. It is a very good reason to have a cell phone on you all the time. It is also a very good idea to have a good idea what you are going to say and do when the police arrive. Be prepared to give a brief statement with nothing but the vitals pertaining to the attack and your identity, and then respectfully defer any details pending consultations with a lawyer.
Double Naught Spy
New member
The "better than nothing" logic has to be one of the worst forms of reasoning conceived to justify carrying a gun with so little firepower as a .22 lr. By such logic, anything is better than nothing. By using the 'better than nothing' standard you have picked the absolute lowest level of positive performance. Me, I want something substantially superior to the standard of being better than nothing.
Mikeyboy said
Reagan was not assassinated. Reagan lived, thus it was an attempted assassination.
Mikeyboy said
Reagan was not assassinated. Reagan lived, thus it was an attempted assassination.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
[quopte]1.If your going to carry a .22 for defence , you better have the skill and the will to hit your opponent in the head. Then you'd better have the will to go though an ugly criminal /civil trial that has you explaining why you purposely tried to kill vs wound him.
2. The gun, even a .22, does have a "deterrence" or "Oh, Shxxt!" effect, no doubt. I suspect one can put it to offensive use such as pulling it out and displaying it and hoping the "attacker" will pee his pants and run off.
In the state where I live if one uses a firearm like that, he could very well be charged with aggravated assault with a firearm. If convicted, he's going to serve at least one year in prison. If you have the time and distance to pull a weapon and "deter" someone, the law expects you to use that time and distance for other purposes such as pulling the cell phone, hitting "911" or fleeing.[/quote]
Old DNS makes a reasonable point about the better than nothing situation and that he wants to carry a better gun. I certainly and strongly agree with him. One has to limit the argument to the special circumstance of carrying a 22 LR when for whatever reasons that's all you have. The choice is whether you should carry if that is all you have!
If that is case, for whatever reason, then the two posts quote above really don't contribute much.
Let's look at #1 - It ignores the deterrence argument which I know is not appealing to those who want the 'shoot em' option perhaps actually to happen. Most of us would be happy if deterrence occurs. So you would rather throw away deterrence that works most of the time so instead you guarantee that the BG does have his way with you or you have to get into a hand to hand fight or get stabbed? That makes NO sense unless you are just mired into the fantasy of shooting someone. The other point is that you would have to explain that you were just trying to wound someone? Where in God's name did that legal doctrine come from? 22 LRs are clearly seen as instruments of lethal force and if you shoot someone with it, NO one would think that you deliberately choose a wounding weapon. The case will revolve around the legitimacy of your need to fire the gun. Bah.
Now, #2 - again, you don't understand the deterrence argument. If you are in a situation where you can legitimately use lethal force, you deploy the firearm. There is NO necessity to shoot someone. If you can deterr a situation where the use of lethal force was legitimate - that may be for the good. If there was no legitimacy to use lethal force, you don't deploy the gun. This comment is based on a false logic. If you shoot, that depends on how the incident proceeds. The Tacoma mall guy seems to have made the wrong decision by challenging the shooter. However, that is not the doctrine. Every time a civilian or office deploys a gun, you don't have to shoot, you just have to justified to use lethal force. Thus, you won't be charged unless you did not have a good reason.
To return to the point, I would not carry only a 22 based on its performance. I agree with DNS. If however, because of some turn of fate or physical handicap, all I could have or deal with was a 22 - I would carry it.
2. The gun, even a .22, does have a "deterrence" or "Oh, Shxxt!" effect, no doubt. I suspect one can put it to offensive use such as pulling it out and displaying it and hoping the "attacker" will pee his pants and run off.
In the state where I live if one uses a firearm like that, he could very well be charged with aggravated assault with a firearm. If convicted, he's going to serve at least one year in prison. If you have the time and distance to pull a weapon and "deter" someone, the law expects you to use that time and distance for other purposes such as pulling the cell phone, hitting "911" or fleeing.[/quote]
Old DNS makes a reasonable point about the better than nothing situation and that he wants to carry a better gun. I certainly and strongly agree with him. One has to limit the argument to the special circumstance of carrying a 22 LR when for whatever reasons that's all you have. The choice is whether you should carry if that is all you have!
If that is case, for whatever reason, then the two posts quote above really don't contribute much.
Let's look at #1 - It ignores the deterrence argument which I know is not appealing to those who want the 'shoot em' option perhaps actually to happen. Most of us would be happy if deterrence occurs. So you would rather throw away deterrence that works most of the time so instead you guarantee that the BG does have his way with you or you have to get into a hand to hand fight or get stabbed? That makes NO sense unless you are just mired into the fantasy of shooting someone. The other point is that you would have to explain that you were just trying to wound someone? Where in God's name did that legal doctrine come from? 22 LRs are clearly seen as instruments of lethal force and if you shoot someone with it, NO one would think that you deliberately choose a wounding weapon. The case will revolve around the legitimacy of your need to fire the gun. Bah.
Now, #2 - again, you don't understand the deterrence argument. If you are in a situation where you can legitimately use lethal force, you deploy the firearm. There is NO necessity to shoot someone. If you can deterr a situation where the use of lethal force was legitimate - that may be for the good. If there was no legitimacy to use lethal force, you don't deploy the gun. This comment is based on a false logic. If you shoot, that depends on how the incident proceeds. The Tacoma mall guy seems to have made the wrong decision by challenging the shooter. However, that is not the doctrine. Every time a civilian or office deploys a gun, you don't have to shoot, you just have to justified to use lethal force. Thus, you won't be charged unless you did not have a good reason.
To return to the point, I would not carry only a 22 based on its performance. I agree with DNS. If however, because of some turn of fate or physical handicap, all I could have or deal with was a 22 - I would carry it.
22lr
Being a new comer to the forums, my hat goes off to Glenn e Meyer for the statements and logic he has expressed. I carry a 22-mag for pp. I have a few other choices. The ccw factor here in Florida and dealing with the warmer climate makes this a good choice for me. Lite,small, and easy to hide on a 98 degree day wearing as little cloths as possible to try and stay cool. As most of you know the change in FL. law that has come about still does not garrentee the use of deadly force is a free walk from taking someones life. I could not agree more with the logic of the deterrent factor. I would much rather defuse the situation by showing rather than shooting. I do belive in protecting my loved ones, my self, and the things that I work for and would try to do all that is possible before attempting to take someones life and the latter only being the LAST resort.
Being a new comer to the forums, my hat goes off to Glenn e Meyer for the statements and logic he has expressed. I carry a 22-mag for pp. I have a few other choices. The ccw factor here in Florida and dealing with the warmer climate makes this a good choice for me. Lite,small, and easy to hide on a 98 degree day wearing as little cloths as possible to try and stay cool. As most of you know the change in FL. law that has come about still does not garrentee the use of deadly force is a free walk from taking someones life. I could not agree more with the logic of the deterrent factor. I would much rather defuse the situation by showing rather than shooting. I do belive in protecting my loved ones, my self, and the things that I work for and would try to do all that is possible before attempting to take someones life and the latter only being the LAST resort.
Varmint Eviscerator
New member
mind you, a 22 mag has a little less power out of a pistol then doesn the 22lr out of a rifle,second, for those who advocate the 25 acp, news flash,alot less energy then the 22lr out a similar lengthed barrel
Chase
Chase
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Living in TX - I know well the heat factor and I have spent significant time in Florida.
So while I have laid out the arguments, and thanks for the nice words, I would say that unless you are really sure that you can only carry a NAA sized gun, you might up scale.
Personally, by buying light weight cargo type shorts with deep pockets, I can manage a J frame or a PM9. Wearing a floppy light weight shirt over a tee shirt, I can carry a Glock 19 IWB.
As I said in another thread, I would only carry a 22 Mag or 22 LR if because of some dress concerns I couldn't carry the bigger pocket guns.
I do carry a 22 Mag Mini as a BUG sometimes as it easily drops into a jacket pocket. I don't trust the Keltecs.
So while I have laid out the arguments, and thanks for the nice words, I would say that unless you are really sure that you can only carry a NAA sized gun, you might up scale.
Personally, by buying light weight cargo type shorts with deep pockets, I can manage a J frame or a PM9. Wearing a floppy light weight shirt over a tee shirt, I can carry a Glock 19 IWB.
As I said in another thread, I would only carry a 22 Mag or 22 LR if because of some dress concerns I couldn't carry the bigger pocket guns.
I do carry a 22 Mag Mini as a BUG sometimes as it easily drops into a jacket pocket. I don't trust the Keltecs.
Para Bellum
New member
.22lr
is an effective gun. If you can shoot, it will do the job:
here are some pics of a .22 Stinger shot into clay form a 3,5" Beretta:
compare the bullet's size to the cavity in pic 2. That is pretty tough. I'd alo trust a .22lr more to penetrate bones and skull etc than a .45
more: http://www.raoulwagner.com/tests2005.htm
is an effective gun. If you can shoot, it will do the job:
here are some pics of a .22 Stinger shot into clay form a 3,5" Beretta:
compare the bullet's size to the cavity in pic 2. That is pretty tough. I'd alo trust a .22lr more to penetrate bones and skull etc than a .45
more: http://www.raoulwagner.com/tests2005.htm