There's something to be said about sending 10 rapid fire shots of accurate .22lr onto a target at close range. I think it's fine for home defense if it the shooter is comfortable and familiar with it. It's certainly better than nothing or a miss with a bigger caliber. Criminals aren't crazy either. Once the shooting starts, I would wager none of them wants to get shot no matter what the caliber.
Ruger 22 handgun protection question
- Thread starter ralphc21
- Start date
Oh man... Looks like we're going to draw some lines. 
I see some "Senior" members saying the .22 is Not a deadly round. I say, "DO WHAT"? A .22 will kill you Dead as a Hammer. One shot, BOOM. D E A D. And for less than .05 cents. I would say .02 but no longer. I don't have time this morning to dig for .22 reports. A man with 20k rounds of .22's and two or three rifles can hold the fort.
My personal pistol choice, I'd rather have a .22 than many of the peep squeak center fire rounds.
I see some "Senior" members saying the .22 is Not a deadly round. I say, "DO WHAT"? A .22 will kill you Dead as a Hammer. One shot, BOOM. D E A D. And for less than .05 cents. I would say .02 but no longer. I don't have time this morning to dig for .22 reports. A man with 20k rounds of .22's and two or three rifles can hold the fort.
My personal pistol choice, I'd rather have a .22 than many of the peep squeak center fire rounds.
skydiver3346
New member
.22 for self defense?
What pendennis said in a reply to your thread. However, a .22lr is better than no gun at all I would say.
What pendennis said in a reply to your thread. However, a .22lr is better than no gun at all I would say.
Cheapshooter
New member
Probably not "as" deadly would be more correct. Anything is better than nothing. The other problem with the original post is the assumption that just "showing" a firearm will end the threat. That might happen some times, but I would not want to trust my life on it. If it is indeed a life and death threat, better the bad guy lose his!
Most .22 hand guns are very accurate.
Along with a study of the human anatomy. (shot placement )
Knowing follow up shots if needed are going to be very accurate and very quick.
And at close defense ranges.
I would not want to be the BG.
9mm ,45 etc.with NO study of the human anatomy. I would take my chances of being the BG.
Along with a study of the human anatomy. (shot placement )
Knowing follow up shots if needed are going to be very accurate and very quick.
And at close defense ranges.
I would not want to be the BG.
9mm ,45 etc.with NO study of the human anatomy. I would take my chances of being the BG.
While most who worry about self-defense with a gun don't really want to shoot someone, hoping that displaying a gun will end the fight and make the attacker go away may be a "false trail". The same applies to firing a warning shot.
No, the unfortunate truth is that you need the largest gun you can comfortably shoot, so that the attack is stopped.
If you can't stop the attacker, and you have a gun (even your favorite .22), the next thing that happens is he takes it away from you. Now he does whatever he feels like...
For this reason, "straight talk" often includes something like, "If you can't summon the resolve to use a gun to save your own life, don't carry one."
So, while all the technical discussions of caliber, revolver vs. semiauto, handgun vs. shotgun, etc. are correct, I believe the first question you need to answer is, can you use a gun to save your life?
No, the unfortunate truth is that you need the largest gun you can comfortably shoot, so that the attack is stopped.
If you can't stop the attacker, and you have a gun (even your favorite .22), the next thing that happens is he takes it away from you. Now he does whatever he feels like...
For this reason, "straight talk" often includes something like, "If you can't summon the resolve to use a gun to save your own life, don't carry one."
So, while all the technical discussions of caliber, revolver vs. semiauto, handgun vs. shotgun, etc. are correct, I believe the first question you need to answer is, can you use a gun to save your life?
NoSecondBest
New member
I would have no problem using a 22 for home defense. If you are comfortable with it and can control it, it will make an excellent defense gun. Better to hit the perp several times with a 22 than miss him with a 40. A 22 will "stay on target" better than a gun with more recoil. Who says you can only shoot one shot?
When a .22 was what I had it was quite comforting.
However, I shot (and still shoot) that gun almost daily and was (and still am) quite proficient with it.
Here's some more reading:
http://forums.handloads.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=24777&PN=1
However, I shot (and still shoot) that gun almost daily and was (and still am) quite proficient with it.
Here's some more reading:
http://forums.handloads.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=24777&PN=1
Last edited:
LightningJoe
New member
Ha ha.
Not that this carries any weight, but I would feel perfectly safe with a 22.
There is a lot to say for a handgun that you can shoot thousands of rounds through for very little money; enough so that you can accurately and quickly put the bullets where you want.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am a better shot with my 22 than with anything else. That counts for quite a bit in my book.
There is a lot to say for a handgun that you can shoot thousands of rounds through for very little money; enough so that you can accurately and quickly put the bullets where you want.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am a better shot with my 22 than with anything else. That counts for quite a bit in my book.
The Tourist
Moderator
Of all of the dozens of handguns I've owned over the decades, I probably shoot my Ruger 22/45 the best. In fact, one friend won't shoot against me for friendly competition if I want to use that particular pistol.
It's the metal not the man. I have plenty of stuff I'd most likely miss with, I'd like to secure plenty of hits.
It's the metal not the man. I have plenty of stuff I'd most likely miss with, I'd like to secure plenty of hits.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Can anyone cite differential statistics of criminals who after taking a 22 round continued the crime successfully as compared to other calibers?
Please do the appropriate stats for statistical significance and effect size.
Also, why do most DGUs resolve with no shots fired? Supposedly up to 95% of usages. So give up a deterrent gun?
If a person is competent with a 22 - use it.
Also, check out www.corneredcat.com by our Pax for women and gun realism. Then we could have the 9 vs 45 argument.
Please do the appropriate stats for statistical significance and effect size.
Also, why do most DGUs resolve with no shots fired? Supposedly up to 95% of usages. So give up a deterrent gun?
If a person is competent with a 22 - use it.
Also, check out www.corneredcat.com by our Pax for women and gun realism. Then we could have the 9 vs 45 argument.
Southern Rebel
New member
The word "useless" is totally useless when invoked in a discussion of the relative effectiveness of a self-defense gun. Even a gun that refuses to fire is not useless - it might have possibilities of use as a threat, a club, a stumbling block, a distraction, etc. Thus, to describe a functioning gun as "useless" merely because of the caliber only manages to cast doubt on the other parts of the offered opinion (which may be very accurate and potentially very valuable!) There are just too many documented cases of human beings killed by just one .22 caliber bullet wound.
Embellishing our arguments with gross overstatement tends to place us down on the level of the gun control crowd from whom comes the many arguments that are generally filled with overstatement, lies, and damned lies. We would be better served to confine our presentations to real-world facts that acknowledge the many variables that arise when using a gun against a human being. Those variables seldom allow statements of absolutes when it comes to the projected results.
(Nevertheless, I prefer the odds of success I envision when I load my .45 versus when I load my .22! I just don't believe in fair fights when I am one of the participants.
)
Embellishing our arguments with gross overstatement tends to place us down on the level of the gun control crowd from whom comes the many arguments that are generally filled with overstatement, lies, and damned lies. We would be better served to confine our presentations to real-world facts that acknowledge the many variables that arise when using a gun against a human being. Those variables seldom allow statements of absolutes when it comes to the projected results.
(Nevertheless, I prefer the odds of success I envision when I load my .45 versus when I load my .22! I just don't believe in fair fights when I am one of the participants.
)I cant add to much more than whats already been said here or in many more similar threads like this.
But i can say that shooting bigger calibers has its fun points,i loved my G20 10mm.But i also shoot my .22 at least 50% of my range time even when i take 4+ guns.They both provide different fun.
Why am i talking about fun? Maybe it may interest you to try the larger caliber and feel comfortable with it.As my 1911 is my most carried main gun 75% of the time,its also my second most fun gun at the range next to my .22
Im very comfortable with it in my hands and very confident also.
Mabey tell him to get creative a bit and make shooting larger calibers at the range more fun for you.Once you enjoy a gun you wont mind carrying it as you will have an attachment of sorts,i know i do.
But i can say that shooting bigger calibers has its fun points,i loved my G20 10mm.But i also shoot my .22 at least 50% of my range time even when i take 4+ guns.They both provide different fun.
Why am i talking about fun? Maybe it may interest you to try the larger caliber and feel comfortable with it.As my 1911 is my most carried main gun 75% of the time,its also my second most fun gun at the range next to my .22
Im very comfortable with it in my hands and very confident also.
Mabey tell him to get creative a bit and make shooting larger calibers at the range more fun for you.Once you enjoy a gun you wont mind carrying it as you will have an attachment of sorts,i know i do.
I think the bottom line is you use what you got...
we are talking about the use of deadly force... your life is in danger. If I had a choice it would be at least a 12gage shot gun with either OO buck or a slug... the problem is you often don't have a choice... it is what you got on hand... be it the 12 gage or a 22 or the kitchen chair and a frying pan... you use what you got and you use it to the full extent of it's potential.
With a 22, if I had the time to think and aim... I would be doing my best to put the bad guy's eye out.
we are talking about the use of deadly force... your life is in danger. If I had a choice it would be at least a 12gage shot gun with either OO buck or a slug... the problem is you often don't have a choice... it is what you got on hand... be it the 12 gage or a 22 or the kitchen chair and a frying pan... you use what you got and you use it to the full extent of it's potential.
With a 22, if I had the time to think and aim... I would be doing my best to put the bad guy's eye out.
The Tourist
Moderator
blume357 said:
That's an excellent point, and we should include it especially to newer members.
A "layered" security system, whether that's a home, car, or business, is the best idea for safety. If the attacker/thief is already 'inside the wire' your choices diminish.
If a motion sensor has tripped a light or an alarm you might have to do nothing. If the attacker/thief is not to be denied, you are then ensconced at a position and armed with a weapon of your choosing with the police on the way.
22lr just fine
If I was in my home when an intruder entered I would rather shoot him in a knee cap or other disabling spot my Ruger 22 rather then kill him with my 45acp. You can justify injuring a burglar to hold him for police better then you can explain killing him. I know I will get bashed for this but plenty pf people have spent time in jail for a justified killing. Small cal all the way. I have a 22 and a 45 cocked and locked in easy reach. Besides an alarm system and a 100lb black lab.
If I was in my home when an intruder entered I would rather shoot him in a knee cap or other disabling spot my Ruger 22 rather then kill him with my 45acp. You can justify injuring a burglar to hold him for police better then you can explain killing him. I know I will get bashed for this but plenty pf people have spent time in jail for a justified killing. Small cal all the way. I have a 22 and a 45 cocked and locked in easy reach. Besides an alarm system and a 100lb black lab.
The Tourist
Moderator
outdoor14 said:
I hope you don't, a forum should be an exchange of ideas.
I know where you're coming from. I think a reasonable man should espouse restraint in any pursuit, be that driving, use of alcohol and the use of a deadly weapon.
I do think your position also hangs on if there are people in your care. If it's just you home alone it may be easier to take a chance. If your wife and kids are at home it might be tempting (or wise) to put the intruder on his back.
And since I have never faced that dilemma...
As for administering a wound, I know for a fact the guy might try to bleed you in civil court, especially if he can demonstrate he is "crippled." There is a sleazy underbelly of folks who make a living this way. It's something to consider.
As for being in the 'right,' let me tell you what my attorney told me:
He said, "We could post your innocence on the front page of the daily paper and half of the people would still believe you have it coming..."
Lots of things in life are a balance of morality and expediency. I do applaud your courage to take a stand despite the potential for criticism.
Using a firearm is always deadly force. It doesn't matter if you hit them in the pinky or even miss them entirely, it's still deadly force. If you wouldn't be justified in putting one through their brain box you wouldn't be justified in shooting them in the knee.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating going out of the way to kill anybody and really don't care where you want to target intruders. I'm just pointing out that "kneecapping" somebody requires the same level of legal justification as any other application of deadly force.