Why not carry the .22 and .25acp as a primary defense gun?

[MLeake]

Reason for carrying a .22LR as primary

There is really only one reason I could think of that would justify a .22LR as primary: it's all the shooter can handle.

Now, before I get flamed by the "then you need to practice more" crowd, please realize that I do practice, and that my carries are either a 9mm P239, .357 SP101, or .45 C3; my other service grade pistols and revolvers are too bulky for concealment without a jacket, and I can't think of a reason other than hunting to carry my .44mag.

However, I am thinking more in terms of somebody like my mother, who is in her mid-late 60's and has fairly poor hand strength. Practice will help her skill, but in her case it isn't likely to help her with recoil control (due to physical pain), or with racking the slide on the autos (due to lack of strength in her grip). For her, a .22LR revolver is probably optimal (for CCW purposes, anyway, otherwise it would be a 20 gauge...)

A .22 that she can both carry and shoot is much better than a 9mm or .45 with a slide she can't work, or a .357 with recoil she can't handle, or a .38 that's too heavy or bulky for her.

Cheers,

M

 

[Bill DeShivs]

A 1911 is not particularly thin. It just seems thin because the gun is so big. My P32 is "considerably" thinner!
I have spent a lifetime looking for the "perfect" carry gun (for me.) Everything is a compromise. I know how to carry a .45, and have done so extensively. Then it was a 2" .38, then a Star Starfire .380. Along the way I probably carried most common guns for a while.
I work in a very bad area-lots of crime and racial tension. My pocket gun is always there to get me out of a fix. I'm very confident I can do the job with it.
Most weapons classes are taught by law officers. Their mindset is much different than necessary for civilian carry. Unfortunately, there are few qualified to teach the art of civilian carry-hence we have people strapping on huge guns because the former cop told them little bullets just bounce off people!
Think about this: if everyone carried a little .32 in their pocket, the world would be a much nicer place!

 

[dadofsix]

Chui, thanks for your response. I agree with most of your last post.

!. If the BG is armed with a firearm then immobilizing him pales into insignificance. In that scenario, COM and head shots are the only thing that makes sense.

2. When the SHTF, we will revert to what we have trained unconsciously. I guess that's why they call it training.

What I was getting at in my original post, and explained very poorly I might add, is a situation in which the BG is holding a knife or some other weapon that requires proximity to be of use. If the BG is closing, COM hits with a mousegun may not slow him quickly enough to prevent serious or life-threatening injuries to you. That is why I asked whether a change of tactics (necessitating, of course, a change in training) might be useful to consider. Several folks with a medical background have advised that, while an gunshot injury from a small caliber weapon to the hip would be painful, in their opinion, it would not be incapacitating or injure the BG sufficiently to consider the tactic as an alternative to COM shots. That's good enough for me until and unless someone with greater knowledge chimes in with a contrary opinion.

<><Peace

 

[Bill DeShivs]

98% (my estimate) will cease the attack if someone is shooting at them, 1% will cease the attack if hit with any bullet.
The other insane, zombie 1% probably wouldn't be stopped with any caliber without a CNS hit.

 

[PT111]

98% (my estimate) will cease the attack if someone is shooting at them, 1% will cease the attack if hit with any bullet.
The other insane, zombie 1% probably wouldn't be stopped with any caliber without a CNS hit.

I am not sure about those percentages but I would say that your ideas are right on. If someone sees your .22 revolver and gets hit with a .22 bullet but keeps coming, you need to consider retreat as a viable option.

 

[David Armstrong]

I'd wager that you are correct. Of course I'd also wager the maximum and minimum BUGs are identical for most attendees.

I don't know if I'd agree. While the 2" snub is the predominant weapon there is usually a fair cross-section of others.

And what does this prove .....

It proves exactly what the quoted material addressed, that there is a market for this type of training. Sorry if that zoomed right over your head while you were ranting about other stuff with no relevance.

 

[David Armstrong]

"Almost never" is the same thing that can be said for how often civilians will need a concealed weapon.

No, thta is not true, and we've gone over this before. For you to continue to say so is dishonest. The lifetime chance of using a firearm for defensive purposes is far from "almost never." It is rare, but that then should give you some idea of how truly rare the caliber difference matters, which is "almost never."

For many they prepare for the rare need only to fall short in choosing which caliber to carry.

Again, it is a matter of compromise. You have compromised in your chice of carry, others may consider different isues and come to different compromises.

Against a determined attacker a mouse simply lacks what it takes to stop the attack.

As do most handguns, which is OK because so few BGs fit into that category.

Not a single one of you pro mouse gun guys would choose that weapon if you knew in advance that you would face a determined attacker and only had handguns to choose from.

When you anti-small gun folks all start carrying around N-Frame Smiths with 6" tubes in .44 Magnum caliber, its just so much hot air. You are just desperately trying to justify YOUR choice in spite of the history of failure to stop incidents present in the .40 caliber, and the .45, and the 9mm, and so on.

 

[David Armstrong]

I understand there are BUG classes, but not .22/.25 acp classes per se.

True, just as there are not .38 classes per se, or 9mm classes per se and so on.

My preferred BUG is a Kahr PM9, but it has considerable capabilities above my .22 revolver, so application and expectations of each is going to vary.

Exactly, and that is the key, IMO. BUGs usually dictate different tactics and applications thaan full size service guns. Revolvers usually dictate different tactics and applications than do autoloaders. .22 rounds can also dictate different tactics or applications than larger calibers. But to ignore all the evidence of the successful use of mouseguns for personal defense over the years, as some here are trying to do, is just ludicrous, IMO.

 

[David Armstrong]

You see, some of us have already "been there, done that" with the big guns, and actually made a conscious decision that a small gun would be our primary weapon.

Excellent point, Bill, and one I've noticed over the years. Given a choice, the more experienced shooters seem to gravitate to the smaller guns, while those with the least experience gravitate to the bigger guns. Certainly there are a number of exceptions, but that is a dynamic that seems to have held true for at least the 30 years I've been doing this stuff.

My pocket gun is always there to get me out of a fix. I'm very confident I can do the job with it.

I think that might be a key difference in the thinking, Bill. Some seem to have confidence in themselves, others seem to place their confidence in their equipment, and seem to feel they can't accomplish the task without that particualr equipment.

 

[Wildalaska]

Funny, when I got my CCW in NY way back in the 80s, it was always 1911s or P7s, and occasional Model 19 or 28...

Then it slowly wended its way to Browning High Powers, Model 60s...then a TPH....or a baby Browning

Now its all the way back up to a Seecamp, although I gaze lustfully at NAA .22 mags....

Must be I have more confidence in my ability and technique, don't need a big gun anymore or a substitute thereof....


WildcanishootyouinthefaceAlaska ™

PS....the last time I drew down with the Seecamp it was just as I alwys practice....center of face Screw that center of mass crap.....

 

[allenomics]

RFK's killer used a .22.

 

[Chui]

Chui, thanks for your response. I agree with most of your last post.

1. If the BG is armed with a firearm then immobilizing him pales into insignificance. In that scenario, COM and head shots are the only thing that makes sense.

2. When the SHTF, we will revert to what we have trained unconsciously. I guess that's why they call it training.

What I was getting at in my original post, and explained very poorly I might add, is a situation in which the BG is holding a knife or some other weapon that requires proximity to be of use. If the BG is closing, COM hits with a mousegun may not slow him quickly enough to prevent serious or life-threatening injuries to you. That is why I asked whether a change of tactics (necessitating, of course, a change in training) might be useful to consider. Several folks with a medical background have advised that, while an gunshot injury from a small caliber weapon to the hip would be painful, in their opinion, it would not be incapacitating or injure the BG sufficiently to consider the tactic as an alternative to COM shots. That's good enough for me until and unless someone with greater knowledge chimes in with a contrary opinion.

If a goblin is rapidly closing with a knife you have few options other than "surgical" speed shooting while simultaneously moving off his line of motion if possible.

There is a website (I cannot for the life of me recall it now but the google search of "NDIA, weapons symposium" should get you close) in which they discuss lethality of small arms and CNS shots are not common and neither are head shots in close proximity fighting. Multiple hits center of mass seems to be "the norm". The mechanism of death is rapid blood loss.

Within 20 feet or so it's unlikely that you'd be able to successfully draw, move and shoot without getting cut which places you in the "oh ****, I've GOT to stop the bleeding" category. I'm a bit spooked at the concept of a knife entering a confrontation (as many people are) and if I cannot "beat feet" getting rapid, solid hits in the upper torso MAY get the job done without me bleeding. Iff the threat is coming slowly enough or from far enough away the initial target would be upper torso, if he slowed but was still coming then I, too, would think, "PELVIC GIRDLE". It simply would not be my first choice and Nature has seemed to program us to strike towards head and torso (which is probably why when startled we bring our hands up to cover our face...) Interesting subject.

 

[Chui]

Some seem to have confidence in themselves, others seem to place their confidence in their equipment, and seem to feel they can't accomplish the task without that particualr equipment...

Would you strap that "rat stinger" on your hip if you knew that you'd have to use it TONIGHT??? H3ll no, you wouldn't.

You can "philosophize" with vague Freud (fraud?) references but you and I know damned well that you hit better with a larger framed gun than a Kel-Tec P3AT. If that isn't the case it would be all the rage in IPSC, IDPA and advocated by all armed professionals the world over. Here's a hint: They don't. And if you KNEW that the likelyhood was extremely high that you'd have to actually use whatever you carried you'd probably choose something a bit better than a BACKUP Gun - that is what they are called for a reason. Yes, it's better than nothing, but since when is "nothing" an option??

 

[Stevie-Ray]

There is really only one reason I could think of that would justify a .22LR as primary: it's all the shooter can handle.

Extremely good point. My Pt-22 was bought with the wife in mind. Being a tip-up made it easy to load without having to rack the slide. Alas, even the simplicity of this gun was too much for the wife's destroyed hands. My thought was "better than no gun" as has been stated. Should someone try to shame me to my face in that I was wrong in thinking I could trust my wife's life to a "mere mousegun," I'd slap him silly.

 

[Bill DeShivs]

Chui-
Do you live somewhere that has zombies?
As I said before- anyone who keeps coming after being shot at (or shot) is obviously insane, and nothing besides a CNS shot would put them down immediately.
Apparently, you are spooked by more than knives-if you think a crazed assassin bent on your destruction (at the cost of his own life) is after you.
Yes, we ALL realize that a bigger gun is better. We simply no longer feel the need to carry a big gun. We would rather be comfortable and go about our lives armed. You carry your big "rig" all you want. One day you just might say, "You know, those old guys were on to something."

 

[.300H&H]

Quite a few bad guys have been known to carry mouseguns. A lot of ugly street crimes/assaults have been carried out with little .22/.25acps. One of the most important aspects of the mousegun, is its concealability. In a self-defense situation, its extreme concealability is likewise the main attribute of its effectiveness.


The range is going to be very close ie. less than 5ft - and maybe less than 1ft. away. Think about 7 shots from a .22 delivered into the torso at a range of about 2ft. Maybe they'll survive? Bullet failure can occur with larger calibres too ie. a .357 mag at close range might miss a vital spot, not open up...and could also be problematic to control via blast/recoil.


There are factual stories of soldiers on the battlefield having
.50cal. rounds go through them...but still living to effectively fight on quite a bit. There's no 'magic bullet.' I'm not saying that the .22/.25acp is the best round - but I would say it can be quite effective. Personally, I prefer a .38, but there are times when a smaller mousegun...is nice to have too. It's not just better than nothing - but a lot better than nothing.

 

[PT111]

In our local paper this morning is an article about a woman getting life in prison fro killing her husband with a .22 pistol. I just posted the link for verification.

Also remember that the little 4 year old girl that used her grandmothers .32 to put a bullet clean through herself. Last I hear she is doing fine.

Mouseguns can and do kill. I don't think anyone who says that they prefer a box of rocks to a mousegun is willing to back that up with being shot by one.

http://www.scnow.com/scp/news/local...life_in_prison_for_christmas_day_murder/9855/

 

[JollyRoger]

And if you KNEW that the likelyhood was extremely high that you'd have to actually use whatever you carried you'd probably choose something a bit better than a BACKUP Gun - that is what they are called for a reason. Yes, it's better than nothing, but since when is "nothing" an option??

Unless you're active military in a combat zone or law enforcement, the vast likelihood is that you are not going to be confronted with a life-or-death armed response situation. If in fact you KNEW you were going to be in such a situation, you would be a fool not to be equipped with a vest and long gun at a minimum. Oh, but that's not practical to carry such equipment in your daily trips to the store, back and forth to work, etc. Even the most forthright advocates of service-size weapons here are making a COMPROMISE. Those of us who have been carrying off duty, or as CCW for 20+ years know that unless we're someplace we really shouldn't be, the likelihood of encountering a crazed killer hopped up on PCP is close to zero. For many, carrying concealed is just a little insurance in case you actually do hit the lottery and encounter a really bad situation.

I've interrogated or otherwise interviewed violent offenders for a long time, and the almost universal response to having guns pointed at them and/or fired at them is to leave if possible or take cover if they can't reasonably get away , due to volume of fire. They may return fire while running, or attempt to return fire from cover, but none has ever advanced into oncoming fire, and none has ever made mention of caliber or scoffed at little guns: they just know they are being shot at, and want to get away from it.

 

[DAWGTRAXX]

deleted

 

[Wildalaska]

Yes, we ALL realize that a bigger gun is better. We simply no longer feel the need to carry a big gun. We would rather be comfortable and go about our lives armed. You carry your big "rig" all you want. One day you just might say, "You know, those old guys were on to something."

Comfort...Im all about that If bigger is better I'll grab my M1A

Plus 1 billion

WildsmallisgoodAlaska TM

PS I put the 44 away and now carry a 38 S&W Webley in the glove box, simply so when confronted by a "goblin" (tee hee, how cute) I can go into my Michael Caine mode and scream FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRR.

I can't afford a 455