.22 LR Handgun for Self Defense? This Guy Seems To Think So

My wife's night stand gun is a 617. Trying to work her up to the 627 w/.38special, but no luck yet.

If one has physical limitations that mandate a .22, it's a great choice. I would work very hard to find a top of the line .22 ammo that has great QC due to the primer issues, but there are limits to what you can control.

Works against snakes just fine...



Zero misfires in a whole brick of CCI Blazers. And I'm pretty sure that if I'm shooting a BG with my 43C, the BG is either dying or running away. I'm okay with either of those options.

No, it's not my EDC. But it is probably adequate in reality.

Not my first choice, but I'd trust my SR22 with my life if it was my only option.

Here is a 2x4 shot at self-defense distances with cheapy Remington ammo:





I understand that wood is different than flesh and bone, but based on the damage it'll do to a 2x4, I'd trust a .22 to do enough damage to save my hide if it had to.
Especially considering that where I live, I'm more likely to be attacked by a small 4-legged critter than a large 2-legged one.

Reliability?

As others have said, the single greatest red flag to the .22 RF as an SD round is the relatively large number of failure-to-fires, they suffer. The priming I believe, is spun into the case rim and many .22 RF duds will indeed fire if you rotate them a bit to bring up a fresh piece of rim under the firing pin. That's because there was a piece of rim without priming.

Every time I go to my outdoor club/police range, I pick up a dozen or more dud 22s, most of which fire on the second strike.
With a revolver, you merely need to pull the trigger a second time if you train yourself to do so. A semi auto requires a stoppage drill, even with second strike capability as you can hammer that cartridge all day and nothing will happen.

This is the first I've heard of reliability issues with .22LR rounds. Without exaggeration I'll bet I've shot over 100,000 rounds of .22LR. I'm sure I've had a failure in all that shooting, but not enough where it stood out. I honestly can't remember the last time I had a .22LR fail to fire.

In the last 2 years though, I've shot less than 500 rounds of .22 so, it could just be my faulty memory.

O.K... here goes. Is the .22 LR reliable for SD. I think so. From about August 1979 up through April 1982 I carried a Ruger Mk. II standard type .22 LR pistol in the pocket of my work pants. I walked night security in a shipyard as well as a few other locals in New Orleans, LA. I have got no earthly idea how many rounds I put through that little pistol. Even on my limited budget (newly married student in seminary) I could afford enough .22 LR ammunition to shoot a lot. I got to where I could hit stuff fast w/ that little pistol. I can not remember that it ever failed to do anything but go bang when I pulled the trigger. It may be that I just bought super high quality ammunition. Maybe the humidity and high heat made the ammunition particularly responsive when struck by the firing pin. I don't know. I do know that that little pistol stayed in my right hand pants pocket every night, week after week. When I pulled the trigger, it always went bang. I don't know that I ever cleaned it more than a few times other than wiping the exterior off w/ a oily rag.

Over the last few years I've been known to slip my little 18-3 into my pocket, loaded w/ Mini-Mags. That little revolver has fired a wheel barrow load of ammo since the summer of 2000 when I bought it. It has not ever had a misfire of any sort. I shot a lot of CCI Blazer, Mini-Mags, etc. in it. I do clean it regularly. It is as tough as a tank. It has never missed a lick.

I do not doubt that there are problems encountered w/ rimfire ammunition. Doubtless there are some firearms and some brands of ammunition that are problematic, others are more reliable. Fired in the guns I own and use... Ruger Mk. II target competition model, S&W 18-3, S&W 15-22, Ruger 77/22, Ruger 10-22, Winchester 190... I have not found any problems w/ current .22 LR ammunition.

Currently I have a couple of nice revolvers in .38/.357, .44 Special, .45 ACP, any one of which would work very well for SD/HD. At night a 21-4TR is on the nightstand, loaded w/ some old (ca. 1971) Winchester 246 gr. LRN ammunition. Based on experience w/ ammunition from that batch, I am confident that if needed the ammo would light up and run just fine. I have .22 LR ammunition from a little later (ca. 1977-1980) that has proven equally perfectly reliable when fired in the 18-3 and Mk. II. It would be a sad thing if any of these pistols had to be used in a SD incident. But, if necessary I think any one of the three would be more than equal to the situation. JMHO. Sincerely. brucev.

.22LR for defense

I think it is all in the application and, of course, training.

Years ago we were at Shootin' Iron Academy in Oklahoma, Paul Abel presiding. He was just finishing up with a lady as we arrived.

She was in her fifties and in a wheelchair. As Paul later explained, she had been assaulted as she went out the door of her urban apartment, in her wheelchair.

As we watched, Paul stepped aside. There was a silhouette target about 10 feet away. When Paul said "GO" she slid a hand through a fold in her skirt, snapping a [small .22 revolver see below] into a line between her eyes and the head of the silhouette. In the blink of an eye she put all rounds into the head.
Edit: A comrade who also observed this chastised me for my faulty memory. The lady drew a Beretta 22, something like a Bobcat with a tip-up barrel.
Seems to me that would be effective.

one eye joe said:

I AGREE WITH Rastoff. I READ A STORY ABOUT AN LEO, WHO WAS KILLED BY A SINGLE .22LR TO THE ARMPIT, WHICH TRAVELLED TO HIS HEART. THIS WAS AFTER HE SHOT HIS KILLER 5 TIMES IN THE CHEST WITH HIS .357 MAGNUM. HIS KILLER SURVIVED. SURPRESED RUGER SEMI-AUTOS IN .22LR WERE USED FOR WET WORK BY SOG UNITS IN VIETNAM. MOB HITS HAVE BEEN MADE USING .22 LR WEAPONS. STATS INDICATE THAT THE .22LR KILLS MORE PEOPLE THAN ANY OTHER CALIBER EACH YEAR. THIS IS MORE AN INDICATOR OF THE POPULARITY OF WEAPONS CHAMBERED IN THE .22LR CALIBER, RATHER THAN THE KILLING EFFICIENCY OF THE CARTRIDGE, IMHO……….………..

Click to expand...

I believe you are referring to the SC state trooper. He was shot with a NA mini .22 short. I watched the video of the shooting and an interview with the shooter. He bled to death before his back up arrived, the back up officer was a friend of mine.

There were true stories of African game keepers putting down bull elephants with an old 6.5 mm rifle, by shooting them correctly in the eye or another soft spot int he massive skull to deliver a fatal hit. Than again, if you took that into the bush chasing after a wounded bull elephant, guides and experienced hunters would call you a damned fool for putting your life into the hands of a less than adequate firearm, arrogant for putting your life into the hands of your marksmanship. When dire situations arise, there is little time to aim, and firepower being a very real advantage for stressful, less than perfect situations, your choice of firearm or load can be the difference between life and death.

There is a very large difference between shooting an unsuspecting police officer, ambush style, under the arm with a pistol, and pulling a gun to defend yourself from another person who is the aggressor and calling the situation and much of the circumstances. Large difference between murdering a human being not seeing it coming, and being on the defensive, with perhaps someone on top of you, and very little time to aim, and with angles that are less than perfect. The choice of firearm, round, and load can be the difference between life and death.

At best, .22 LR is a very poor, if not desperate or arrogant choice of defensive caliber. Its deficiencies are many, its performance poor, and its only advantage is being cheap, and easy for disabled people to shoot. If you can afford better, and aren't a 90 pound grandmother, or with a very serious disability, there is no real excuse for carrying something more adequate when the stakes, life, are so high.

Enough talk of shot placement. 22LR does not make anyone inherently accurate, and .454 isn't inherently impossible to aim. Shot placement is not magically guaranteed with a smaller caliber, and not magically impossible with a larger one. There are those that can shoot better with a .44 magnum than some can with an air pistol. Expecting perfect shot placement in close range self defense is either wishful thinking, or arrogance on part of the shootist. Picking squirrels out of a tree at 50 yards is one thing, shooting a 350 pound heroin addict who is 2 feet away from you and attacking you, and stopping him when determined, are worlds apart. You can shoot a paper target "between the eyes", but if you can't pull it off on a real man who is really trying to kill you, perhaps the choice of caliber will matter for where your bullet really does hit.

Once again, we see a cult of people who will never forget a single incident where their caliber worked, but will discard and forget every time it failed. You should pick the caliber for the job, and not justify or rationalize your choice of caliber for everything simply because you like it.

USAF385 said:

My wife had a walther p22. One day while we were out back shooting, she had a few failures to feed and multiple failures to fire. The failures to fire happened with three different types of ammo.

After that, she said "ok, I see what you mean." and not long after we traded it in. I had told her a few times I didn't trust .22 lr's reliability for defense, she saw it first hand.

Honestly, if I trusted it would fire every time, it would be a different story for me. It sure wouldn't be my top choice, or second, or third....

Click to expand...

This ^^^^

I have experienced far more FTFs, duds, etc. with .22 lr than any other calibers combined. I have no problem with the .22 lr for SD purposes IF it could be trusted as much as my .38s, .357s, .44s, or .45s.

Okay...there's no doubt a .22 rimfire will kill somebody. So will a 20-penny nail if driven into a guy's eyeball and into his brain. But, in either case, do you really want to risk the aftermath if you aren't completely successful?

That being said, you probably won't find me trading in my .45 in order to pack a .22 for self-defense.

It boils down to practicality and sensibility. I can probably kill a guy by strangling him with a bootlace...but it sure ain't practical or sensible. I can also probably kill a guy with a .22, but that, too, isn't real practical, if you think about it, when you can stop an aggressive attack with a 240-grain bullet traveling over 900 fps.

Just my view from the saddle.

There's frequently a variety of wise apples at the local gun stores who say something like "shooting a bad guy with a 22 will only make him mad".

I always offer to shoot them with mine so they can prove their point.

Not one taker yet. Not a single one.

22 LR is better than nothing. But, I still would rather have a centerfire cartridge. I don't like "clicks" when I should hear "bang." Premium rimfire ammunition does help though.

Duckford said:

There were true stories of African game keepers putting down bull elephants with an old 6.5 mm rifle, by shooting them correctly in the eye or another soft spot int he massive skull to deliver a fatal hit. Than again, if you took that into the bush chasing after a wounded bull elephant, guides and experienced hunters would call you a damned fool for putting your life into the hands of a less than adequate firearm, arrogant for putting your life into the hands of your marksmanship. When dire situations arise, there is little time to aim, and firepower being a very real advantage for stressful, less than perfect situations, your choice of firearm or load can be the difference between life and death.

There is a very large difference between shooting an unsuspecting police officer, ambush style, under the arm with a pistol, and pulling a gun to defend yourself from another person who is the aggressor and calling the situation and much of the circumstances. Large difference between murdering a human being not seeing it coming, and being on the defensive, with perhaps someone on top of you, and very little time to aim, and with angles that are less than perfect. The choice of firearm, round, and load can be the difference between life and death.

At best, .22 LR is a very poor, if not desperate or arrogant choice of defensive caliber. Its deficiencies are many, its performance poor, and its only advantage is being cheap, and easy for disabled people to shoot. If you can afford better, and aren't a 90 pound grandmother, or with a very serious disability, there is no real excuse for carrying something more adequate when the stakes, life, are so high.

Enough talk of shot placement. 22LR does not make anyone inherently accurate, and .454 isn't inherently impossible to aim. Shot placement is not magically guaranteed with a smaller caliber, and not magically impossible with a larger one. There are those that can shoot better with a .44 magnum than some can with an air pistol. Expecting perfect shot placement in close range self defense is either wishful thinking, or arrogance on part of the shootist. Picking squirrels out of a tree at 50 yards is one thing, shooting a 350 pound heroin addict who is 2 feet away from you and attacking you, and stopping him when determined, are worlds apart. You can shoot a paper target "between the eyes", but if you can't pull it off on a real man who is really trying to kill you, perhaps the choice of caliber will matter for where your bullet really does hit.

Once again, we see a cult of people who will never forget a single incident where their caliber worked, but will discard and forget every time it failed. You should pick the caliber for the job, and not justify or rationalize your choice of caliber for everything simply because you like it.

Click to expand...

this is absolutely correct....22 is a POOR self defense round as compared to 38,357,etc.

I have heard about every argument about every caliber over the decades. Shot placement is always a talking point. I was a poor student in school but I am certain that the eye is a no vital shot. If the eye is lined up , it is an easy path to the brain but only IF it lines up. I have visited with many professional African guides and not a single one told clients to shoot for the eye. And no self defense instructor I ever encountered ever said aim at the eye. In my decades of guiding and hunting I had a number of animals shot in the eye with high power rifles that were not fatal. Let the caliber debate continue, but the eye is not an ideal target.

2 years ago when i got my first handgun (old colt .22); if i would have needed it for home defense i would have used it as that was all I had. I added my 9c earlier this year and that is what i work on for any potential defense now.
I'm more accurate with the .22 at distances beyond normal defensive range, but as others have stated the occasional ftf it can have is enough to stay in the back of my mind. And that is enough of a concern not to rely on one.

I do agree that if someone was looking at a barrel (or perhaps heard a slide in motion) that in itself may be enough of a deterrent.

From the video, I did not get the impression the gentleman / video was suggesting to use a .22 for self defense. I have seen several of this gentleman videos on different types of ammo. I find them to be very informative with very consistent testing methods.

I did find the video very interesting. IF for some unknown reason I was carrying a .22 for self defense, I would have probably had CCI Stingers in it. After the video I would probably consider CCI mini-mags , or CCI Velocitor.

A .22 isn't my first choice for self defense,, but it's better than a police whistle ,, or having 911 on speed dial..

The .22 LR has always been very much under estimated!
A high velocity .22 cal round can do serious internal damage to a human body. Unless the heart or brain is hit, it may not be an instant stopper but it will still kill you in a very short time!