markj said:
...I posted I use a larger caliber but if a 22 was all I had...
Let's be clear. That is not exactly what you posted.
You initially wrote:
markj said:
...It was a common carry round before the media brain washed everyone into thinking only a cannon will do the job...
And then you wrote:
markj said:
...Would I consider a 22 for self defense? heck yeah, pin point accuracy and little noise, light recoil and fast back on target, sure would...
And then:
markj said:
...Them riverboat gamblers carried multi shot 22s for the cartridges guns...
And then:
markj said:
...Like I said themedia has brain washed most folks, Americans need bigger than anyone else...
All of that is about defending
choosing a .22, not simply using a .22 if that's all that is available.
All of us are agreed that in an emergency, one should use what he has. And if a .22 is all that he had to work with, he's going to need to use it and hopefully find a way to make effective use of it. But if one can make a choice and pick something bigger than a .22, a .22 is not necessarily the best idea.
markj said:
...them guys just dont understand what Ian writing...
Perhaps we aren't understanding what you are trying to say. But if so, perhaps it's because, as I've noted above, you're not making yourself very clear.
Are you trying to say that in an emergency, if a .22 is all that's at hand, one would have to use that and could, with skill, make decent use of it? If so, we can all agree on that.
But are you also trying to say that a .22 could be a good choice for a gun intended to be used for personal defense? If so, then several of us don't agree (at least absent special circumstances like serious recoil sensitivity or various disabilities), and we've explained why.