Seriously considering the SR22 for CCW

M

militant

New member
I have carriedany different pistols as CCW, but I always end up shooting my .22 at the range more often. While the .22 may not have the power of other handgun rounds, rapid fire into a paper plate size target is simple. I haven't had any issues with CCI misfiring either. What are your thoughts?
 
Better than a box of rocks probably but not something I would ever do myself.

I would much rather count on a single well placed shot with 9MM Gold Dot 124 GR +P and have follow up shots of same available if needed.
 
As long as you are happy with the reliability of rimfire ammunition. I'm not, I have had issues with even CCI rimfire ammo. Agreed not often, but there have been duds.. I don't want that one in a thousand misfire to happen during that one in a million chance I need the gun. Also realise that in a stressful SD situation no matter how good a shooter is on paper, they will miss a lot on a target that is attacking them. So all those rapid fire little bullets aren't going to end up where you want them.
 
At least you are thinking of a decent pistol,,,

At least you are thinking of a decent pistol,,,
My SR22 has been perfectly reliable since I've had it.

And Fobus makes a nice lightweight paddle holster for it.

Even though I do it on occasion,,,
I can't advocate using a .22 as a carry pistol,,,
But if you are going to do it the SR22 is a good choice.

Aarond

.
 
I agree with Sigarms except I prefer a .45. If you're going to carry a .22 use it within it's abilities and limitations and you should be fine.
 
As long as you are happy with the reliability of rimfire ammunition. I'm not, I have had issues with even CCI rimfire ammo. Agreed not often, but there have been duds.. I don't want that one in a thousand misfire to happen during that one in a million chance I need the gun. Also realise that in a stressful SD situation no matter how good a shooter is on paper, they will miss a lot on a target that is attacking them. So all those rapid fire little bullets aren't going to end up where you want them.
Click to expand...

This, pretty much. Rimfires in general are unreliable - if that's what I was limited to, I'd rather have a .22 revolver than an auto. I have an SR22, and love it, but I'd never trust my life to it.
 
There can be good reasons to carry a .22. We've had students who were elderly and arthritic, or who had other physical limitations, who could handle anything more powerful. However, more powerful cartridges are more likely to be more effective for self defense.
 
I normally open carry mine when fishing.

I'm kinda lucky to still have mine, I rolled the yak in a set of rapids this past summer. I gathered myself up and got back in, I was 300 yards down the river to meet up with the rest of my group when I noticed the cheap nylon strap had come unstrapped. Fished the rest of the day, and that evening around 8 hours later I dropped the hammer on the 11 rounds in the magazine without issue.

Need a better holster for white water rafting...LOL
 
There is a lot to like about the SR22P for concealed carry. But I ultimately decided on the S&W Shield and Sig P238. More zippity do-dah.

The SR22P is a terrific and reliable small gun though.
 
I carry my SR22 once in a while. I use a clip on IWB kydex holster, and it carries very comfortably.
I have shot this pistol and several other 22's a lot over the last couple years. I use the better CCI and Aguila offerings and have not had a single failure.
 
Last edited:
my personal experience is the qc on 22 is too poor to carry, even with CCI small pack stuff as they have relaxed a bit in order to catch back up, meaning stuff normally turned away from public sales and sold at cost at the company store to employees is now sent out the door.

with that said, if that's what you feel the most comfortable packing, then I suggest CCI stingers or mini-mags to get the most velocity from that itty bitty little pistol and deliver the most energy to bad guy. I don't know how well the SR22 will hold up to a solid diet of the stuff so you may continue to shoot standard velocity stuff for practice and just run a few boxes of the high velocity stuff every once in a while to keep in practice and to make sure the gun can handle it.
 
The .22LR is a great self defense round, and I'll bet a lot of shooters would be better off with a .22 in terms of their chances of surviving a self defense scenario.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing why this is, the real world data speaks for itself, and this real world data people who carry .22's for self defense are just as likely to stop attackers as people carrying other calibers, even more so in some cases.

I'm not going to argue with internet commandos, they can whine about what a gun looks like on paper all day, it doesn't change the facts.

Google "an alternate look at handgun stopping power" for more information.

I say go for it. I'm currently looking for a good holster for my sr22, once I find one I will be carrying it instead of my Glock 19.
 
The .22LR is a great self defense round, and I'll bet a lot of shooters would be better off with a .22 in terms of their chances of surviving a self defense scenario.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing why this is, the real world data speaks for itself, and this real world data people who carry .22's for self defense are just as likely to stop attackers as people carrying other calibers, even more so in some cases.

I'm not going to argue with internet commandos, they can whine about what a gun looks like on paper all day, it doesn't change the facts.

Google "an alternate look at handgun stopping power" for more information.

I say go for it. I'm currently looking for a good holster for my sr22, once I find one I will be carrying it instead of my Glock 19.
Click to expand...

You need to look much more closely at the difference between lethality vs 'stopping power' or defensive use.

Don't come here making a bunch of absurd claims and then say, "but I'm not going to debate it with anyone." If you want to make your claim that people are better off using a 22lr for self defense than a 9mm... state your reasoning.
 
I agree, telling someone to google a search term is like me telling you hop on I90 and get me a meat lover's pizza with olives and mustard... we need specific data, sources, and credible reports, not google hearsay.

I don't doubt that a 22 to the skull is going to stop about any bad guy in his tracks and if you is some mongoloid caveman with homer simpson brain then at the very least he's probably going to rethink his position real quick. but a 22 does not equal a 9mm which does not equal a 500 S&W. there are differences in energy, stopping power, and lethality with every cartridge. also if you would have read my post prior to yours you would see that in many cases 22 ammo quality is complete garbage. ammo that was once premium and just as trustworthy as centerfire is now held to the same qc standards as bulk pack which I would never trust my life to and would never sit quietly while someone else suggested using it.

if a person is sitting on a healthy stockpile of 2 year old premo 22 ammo then by all means but that is before ATK was 6 billion rounds behind demand and 2 years later they have only cut that defect in half and are starting to cut corners to meet that demand. CCI, american eagle, federal, independence, all of the major rimfire lines are all made in the same factory 1.5 miles from my house.

you can argue a 22 sized hole killing Joe herpderp all day long but if that hammer falls and all you hear is CLICK* then you are in for a world of pain and that is something that you can not deny or even attempt to debate even if you wanted to.
 
I say go for it if you feel comfortable doing so. I don't think I would carry one but thats just me. If you want something small I would at least step into a centerfire cartridge like 25 or 32ACP. I do not doubt for one minute that 3-5 40gr. solid 22 bullets center mass will send an attacker to the uppa room! But still the way a rimfire cartridge is made worries me. You could also look into getting some high quality high velocity 40 grain solid MATCH ammo for carry use. Something like ELEY, etc. Guys at the club love the ELEY match for the small bore silhouette matches.
 
Got my fire extinguisher handy...

I have an SR22. I like it as it's a fun little gun to plink with and teach my boys to shoot with. I shoot cheap ammo through it and it jams some when it gets dirty, but what .22LR doesn't? I do not, however, carry it for defense. My XDs .45 fills that role.

That being said, if I had no better option, I would rather use my SR22 in a bad situation then say...a pocket knife. Or a stick. Or a rock.

My humble, non expert, opinion: I personally don't think .22LR is the best option for self defense. I'm not saying you're wrong if you choose to use it. If it's all you have, go for it. I just think that if one has the option of a .380, or 9mm, or 40...you get the point. To each their own. Use whatever you want, or whatever you have. Hell, a sharp pencil could save you life if that's all you have!
 
I'm not going to argue with internet commandos, they can whine about what a gun looks like on paper all day, it doesn't change the facts.
Click to expand...

However providing credible facts would go a long way toward elevating you above the level of "internet commando".

But I guess we all must just go by your google hearsay, and demand that law enforcement, and military all change to the 22 rimfire in order to be more efficient and save tax player's money! :eek:
 
boltomatic said:
The .22LR is a great self defense round, and I'll bet a lot of shooters would be better off with a .22 in terms of their chances of surviving a self defense scenario.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing why this is, the real world data speaks for itself, and this real world data people who carry .22's for self defense are just as likely to stop attackers as people carrying other calibers, even more so in some cases.....
Click to expand...
So let's have a look at some real data and see why that is drivel.

There is data, and there are studies, and we have a good deal of knowledge about wound physiology, and none of it supports the claim that:
boltomatic said:
...The .22LR is a great self defense round,....
Click to expand...

What the data shows with regard to self defense could be summarized as follows:

  1. Pretty much every cartridge ever made has at times succeeded at quickly stopping an assailant.

  2. Pretty much every cartridge ever made has at times failed at quickly stopping an assailant.

  3. Considering ballistic gelatin performance, data available on real world incidents, an understanding of wound physiology and psychology, certain cartridges with certain bullets are more likely to be more effective more of the time.

  4. For defensive use in a handgun the 9mm Luger, .38 Special +P, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, .357 Magnum, and other, similar cartridges when of high quality manufacture, and loaded with expanding bullets appropriately designed for their respective velocities to both expand and penetrate adequately, are reasonably good choices.

  5. And that's probably as good as we can do.

I've posted the following before and might as well post it again here:

Let's consider how shooting someone will actually cause him to stop what he's doing.

  • The goal is to stop the assailant.

  • There are four ways in which shooting someone stops him:

    • psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."

    • massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function

    • breaking major skeletal support structures

    • 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.

    • There are no guarantees.

  • With regard to the issue of psychological stops see

    • this study, entitled "An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power" (yes, the very study referenced by boltomatic) by Greg Ellifritz. And take special notice of his data on failure to incapacitate rates:


      ​


      As Ellifritz notes in his discussion of his "failure to incapacitate" data (emphasis added):
      Greg Ellifritz said:
      ...Take a look at two numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...

      In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops" occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this....
      Click to expand...

      1. There are two sets of data in the Ellifritz study: incapacitation and failure to incapacitate. They present some contradictions.

        • Considering the physiology of wounding, the data showing high incapacitation rates for light cartridges seems anomalous.

        • Furthermore, those same light cartridges which show high rates of incapacitation also show high rates of failures to incapacitate. In addition, heavier cartridges which show incapacitation rates comparable to the lighter cartridges nonetheless show lower failure to incapacitate rates.

        • And note that the failure to incapacitate rates of the 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, and .44 Magnum were comparable to each other.

        • If the point of the exercise is to help choose cartridges best suited to self defense application, it would be helpful to resolve those contradictions.

        • A way to try to resolve those contradictions is to better understand the mechanism(s) by which someone who has been shot is caused to stop what he is doing.

      2. The two data sets and the apparent contradiction between them (and as Ellifritz wrote) thus strongly suggest that there are two mechanisms by which someone who has been shot will be caused to stop what he is doing.

        • One mechanism is psychological. This was alluded to by both Ellifritz and FBI agent and firearms instructor Urey Patrick. Sometimes the mere fact of being shot will cause someone to stop. When this is the stopping mechanism, the cartridge used really doesn't matter. One stops because his mind tells him to because he's been shot, not because of the amount of damage the wound has done to his body.

        • The other mechanism is physiological. If the body suffers sufficient damage, the person will be forced to stop what he is doing because he will be physiologically incapable of continuing. Heavier cartridges with large bullets making bigger holes are more likely to cause more damage to the body than lighter cartridges. Therefore, if the stopping mechanism is physiological, lighter cartridges are more likely to fail to incapacitate.

      3. And in looking at any population of persons who were shot and therefore stopped what they were doing, we could expect that some stopped for psychological reasons. We could also expect others would not be stopped psychologically and would not stop until they were forced to because their bodies became physiologically incapable of continuing.

      4. From that perspective, the failure to incapacitate data is probably more important. That essentially tells us that when Plan A (a psychological stop) fails, we must rely on Plan B (a physiological stop) to save our bacon; and a heavier cartridge would have a lower [Plan B] failure rate.

  • Also see the FBI paper entitled "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness", by Urey W. Patrick. Agent Patrick, for example, notes on page 8:
    ...Psychological factors are probably the most important relative to achieving rapid incapacitation from a gunshot wound to the torso. Awareness of the injury..., fear of injury, fear of death, blood or pain; intimidation by the weapon or the act of being shot; or the simple desire to quit can all lead to rapid incapacitation even from minor wounds. However, psychological factors are also the primary cause of incapacitation failures.

    The individual may be unaware of the wound and thus have no stimuli to force a reaction. Strong will, survival instinct, or sheer emotion such as rage or hate can keep a grievously wounded individual fighting....
    Click to expand...
  • And for some more insight into wound physiology and "stopping power":

    • Dr. V. J. M. DiMaio (DiMaio, V. J. M., M. D., Gunshot Wounds, Elsevier Science Publishing Company, 1987, pg. 42, as quoted in In Defense of Self and Others..., Patrick, Urey W. and Hall, John C., Carolina Academic Press, 2010, pg. 83):
      In the case of low velocity missles, e. g., pistol bullets, the bullet produces a direct path of destruction with very little lateral extension within the surrounding tissue. Only a small temporary cavity is produced. To cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly. The amount of kinetic energy lost in the tissue by a pistol bullet is insufficient to cause the remote injuries produced by a high-velocity rifle bullet.
      Click to expand...

    • And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 83-84, emphasis in original):
      The tissue disruption caused by a handgun bullet is limited to two mechanisms. The first or crush mechanism is the hole that the bullet makes passing through the tissue. The second or stretch mechanism is the temporary wound cavity formed by the tissue being driven outward in a radial direction away from the path of the bullet. Of the two, the crush mechanism is the only handgun wounding mechanism that damages tissue. To cause significant injuries to a structure within the body using a handgun, the bullet must penetrate the structure.
      Click to expand...

    • And further in In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 95-96, emphasis in original):
      Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much-discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable....The critical element in wounding effectiveness is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large blood-bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding....Given durable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of the hole made by the bullet....
      Click to expand...

  • And sometimes a .357 Magnum doesn't work all that well. LAPD Officer Stacy Lim who 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. She was off duty and heading home after a softball game and a brief stop at the station to check her work assignment. According to the article I linked to:
    ... The bullet ravaged her upper body when it nicked the lower portion of her heart, damaged her liver, destroyed her spleen, and exited through the center of her back, still with enough energy to penetrate her vehicle door, where it was later found....
    Click to expand...

  • But take special note of the quote in the third bullet point in item V., above:

    • In In Defense of Self and Others... (pp. 95-96, with my emphasis):
      ... the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of the hole made by the bullet....
      Click to expand...

    • So a sub-caliber, .22 lr, .25 ACP, or similar, can kill and can, under some circumstances, stop an attacker. But the odds are that something larger will be more likely to be effective. A sub-caliber might fill a special need, such as a need for deep concealment or if one can't handle something larger; but if someone has a choice, a sub-caliber will not be the best choice.

boltomatic said:
...Google "an alternate look at handgun stopping power" for more information....
Click to expand...
I linked to that study above. Obviously boltomatic didn't read it carefully or didn't understand it, because it doesn't show what he seems to think it shows.

Cheapshooter said:
boltomatic said:
I'm not going to argue with internet commandos, they can whine about what a gun looks like on paper all day, it doesn't change the facts.
Click to expand...

However providing credible facts would go a long way toward elevating you above the level of "internet commando"...
Click to expand...
He can't, because there is no credible data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top