.22 for self-defense...?
- Thread starter halfdar
- Start date
I have had to consider a self-defense pistol twice in my life. I was advised to doso by the police, because of some bad actors on the loose who were mad at me. In both cases the bad guys were eventually arrested and charged. One went to jail and theotehr guy was found not guilty.
Anyway, I had to think of what to carry that would be small and light enough to conceal and still be useful if I needed it.
Thinking about it for real is different than thinking about it for a discussion group.
I owned most calibers from 22 short to 44 Mag. I chose a 9mm on each occasion.
In a lethal confrontation you want to stop the other guy. There is a big difference between killing and stopping. A 22 in the chest might eventually be lethal, but a lot could happen before he stops fighting.
The minimum I would carry would be a 9mm with quality HP ammo.
Anyway, I had to think of what to carry that would be small and light enough to conceal and still be useful if I needed it.
Thinking about it for real is different than thinking about it for a discussion group.
I owned most calibers from 22 short to 44 Mag. I chose a 9mm on each occasion.
In a lethal confrontation you want to stop the other guy. There is a big difference between killing and stopping. A 22 in the chest might eventually be lethal, but a lot could happen before he stops fighting.
The minimum I would carry would be a 9mm with quality HP ammo.
An acquaintance out here in the Fraser Valley had a similar experience several years ago and was similarly advised by the RCMP. These things do happen, and sometimes local law enforcement will actually recommend that someone be armed, if they are assessed to be in genuine danger and if the LEO considers him (her) sufficiently level-headed and responsible. Pretty rare, though, and no doubt dependent on having a good relationship with your local police force.
I can't believe nobody has dragged out the Israeli sky marshals (Beretta 71), the British SAS (Walther PP .22), the CIA (German Walther TPH .22) and all the other agencies who have at one time or another quite famously and effectively used .22...
Shot placement is key, with good ammunition, etc.
Recently, there is some absolutely terrible, crappy and unreliable .22 ammunition out there, but just before Christmas I discovered my (expensive) Fiocchi .357 magnum ammunition generates less energy than a decent .38 Special round. I have several boxes, I'll have to check the lot number, but it's absolutely gutless. Midrange match (Federal) .38 wadcutters are heading downrange faster ... so bad ammo happens regardless of caliber. Remington has turned out their share of duds that I know of (.38 Special, hollow points, dramatically underpowered) and is still making ammunition.
PPK in .22 is one of my favorites. CCI segmented hollow points ... ouch.
Lastly of course I am compelled to remind you doubters that a Boone & Crockett world record Grizzly bear was taken near Swan Hills in 1953 by Bella Twin, a 67 year old Native lady with a .22. It did take seven shots. She was picking berries, it was all she had, and she shot the bear in the head. Again, certainly not the recommended caliber for Grizzly, but she didn't suffer a scratch and she held that world record for many years. How's that for self-defense?
Shot placement is key, with good ammunition, etc.
Recently, there is some absolutely terrible, crappy and unreliable .22 ammunition out there, but just before Christmas I discovered my (expensive) Fiocchi .357 magnum ammunition generates less energy than a decent .38 Special round. I have several boxes, I'll have to check the lot number, but it's absolutely gutless. Midrange match (Federal) .38 wadcutters are heading downrange faster ... so bad ammo happens regardless of caliber. Remington has turned out their share of duds that I know of (.38 Special, hollow points, dramatically underpowered) and is still making ammunition.
PPK in .22 is one of my favorites. CCI segmented hollow points ... ouch.
Lastly of course I am compelled to remind you doubters that a Boone & Crockett world record Grizzly bear was taken near Swan Hills in 1953 by Bella Twin, a 67 year old Native lady with a .22. It did take seven shots. She was picking berries, it was all she had, and she shot the bear in the head. Again, certainly not the recommended caliber for Grizzly, but she didn't suffer a scratch and she held that world record for many years. How's that for self-defense?
EXCEEDINGLY lucky. "Compelled to remind" us all that a sample of one is not statistically valid
"Ouch" may not count for much when the adversary is wired, drunk or just very, very motivated to stay alive, as Ganderite mentions:
Ganderite said:
This^^^ Maybe slightly better IF you can manage a few head shots. Virtually none of us on CGN has any actual experience in such scenarios or knows how we would react. We can only guess. In any case, as Massad Ayoob noted, "Real-life encounters often diverge from popular expectations." He should know.
Can we unpack this a bit Gander? Did the Police issue you a carry permit, or tell you that they would support an application filled out by you if you chose to heed their advice? Did the permit expire by automation when the individuals were in custody (most folks have friends...just because the chiefs are locked up doesn't mean the threat is necessarily gone?)
BTW...230 grain .45acp gold dot HP's hold my confidence to stop a moose (even an angry one
) if required...so Glock, 1911 Commander, Derringer (snake slayer?).
Perhaps the 'PCP' addict is a big worry.
But I'd hazard a guess that 90% of the folks here would be either; A) looking for a chair or B) Down on the floor checking for Cockroaches, if they got shot in the body with a .22 lr.
We are not wild animals or unlearned warriors from another era; we know that after we get shot, we are in a bad way.
I can't hit much with a 9mm, body shots at any distance...maybe. Headshot; likely not.
A good .22; left nipple or right? That'd make a lot of difference; that sort of accuracy, I've shot gophers at goodly distances with .22 pistol ( another place, another time ). That equates to a headshot on a man, at...20 - 30 paces?
Just my thoughts of course, flame away.
But I'd hazard a guess that 90% of the folks here would be either; A) looking for a chair or B) Down on the floor checking for Cockroaches, if they got shot in the body with a .22 lr.
We are not wild animals or unlearned warriors from another era; we know that after we get shot, we are in a bad way.
I can't hit much with a 9mm, body shots at any distance...maybe. Headshot; likely not.
A good .22; left nipple or right? That'd make a lot of difference; that sort of accuracy, I've shot gophers at goodly distances with .22 pistol ( another place, another time ). That equates to a headshot on a man, at...20 - 30 paces?
Just my thoughts of course, flame away.
If you can do so under the pressure and adenaline of a live encounter, with a target that may be moving around/aggressive/armed and not backing down, you'd very likely come out alive. That, unfortunately, is the Great Unknown. I would hope that I could put three or four rounds into COM with a 9mm or .45 at a distance that would justify pulling the trigger (ie 5 yds. or so). "How hard can it be at that distance?" I hope I never have to find out. I do know that I would not choose a .22 if I had an alternative.
I'd like to believe that the .25 ACP/6.35mm were bumped into Prohib. class because The Powers That Be were afraid someone would try to defend themselves with one and get killed, but we all know that wasn't the reason!
True about the stress putting additional load on the aiming and staying levelheaded.
I just have issues making a CF semi-auto do what the 22 can.
But you are correct in that; we'll likely not ever find out...thank god for that.
I just have issues making a CF semi-auto do what the 22 can.
But you are correct in that; we'll likely not ever find out...thank god for that.
You are missing the point. "if you can manage a few head shots"? you don't understand incapacitation, and the difference in killing. a justified incapacitation is far better than killing someone. And you will be accountable for every round fired and your reason for doing so.
Last edited:
justinb1981
Regular
- Location
- Hamilton, Ontario
Definitely not. I'd rather pistol whip my attacker with a .22 pistol. It has as much chance as stopping them as shooting them with it would.
Actually... You're NOT gonna shoot someone in your house in Canada... Bad guys have too much rights here and YOU gonna go to jail. Handguns here are only for shooting range fun. I would use a baseball bat, metal bar/telescopic stick or even a shotgun with rubber slug long before using my handguns... You don't want to kill someone, your job is to "control" the bad guy until the cops arrive. I think (and it's my personnal opinion) that martial arts are the best self-defense method available here... Im not talking about air roundhouse kick in the face... But a good armlock technique is really effective (to control a single opponnent at least). Okay you could be attacked by more than one person but you think shooting everybody is the solution? We can't use taser here but i think it would be an effective weapon for home defense. So forget about any handgun caliber for home defense/self defense... Just enjoy your handgun at the range and if one day someone break into your home and you're gonna use your handgun for self-defense... You gonna grab something you trust in your safe, and im pretty sure youre not gonna take that (insert 22lr pistol brand here)...
The point of "a few head shots" was simply that if you genuinely perceive your life to be in danger, you may not stop the attack with one (hopefully) well-placed shot, even to the head, esp. with a low-powered round like a .22. But I agree that I may have put it rather badly.
This is why I shake my head when I read of a police shooting with several rounds fired and someone comments, "Why didn't they just shoot him in the leg"?, the answer being that in SHTF situation, such precision is rarely possible, even though most of us would agree that it would be a far better outcome- minimal force used to achieve the required goal. And indeed, I think I stated in an earlier post that the intent is not to kill, but to stop the threat.
I am often appalled by the comments on the 1911 or S&W Forum where someone posts a case of someone defending themselves and people chime in with stuff like, "The little m***f***s got what they deserved", "I love a happy ending", etc. Mind you, we don't live in communities with the levels of seething personal violence that some of those folks do, like "The Jungle" in Seattle where three kids, age 13, 15 & 17, recently murdered someone. Maybe we'd think differently if we did.
Agreed, we would be accountable for every round. And some clever defence lawyer might well try to argue that "if you only felt it necessary to slightly wound my client with a single round, I suggest that he wasn't in fact posing a deadly threat." Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Look at the Ian Thompson case- a suitably restrained reaction to a potentially very serious act (warning round with a .38 fired at 2 guys torching his garage). Not charged with illegal discharge/irresponsible use of a restricted weapon, as one might expect- they eventually pinned "unsafe storage" on him! All eventually dismissed, after a couple of years' wrangling in court and tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees which he'll never recover.
Fortunately few, if any, of us are ever likely to find out the hard way if our pet theories are correct or not. I'm happy with that.
