I recommended a 22LR for self defense/conceal carry today

Richochet said:

The .22 LR has a lot of energy and the bullet will ricochet around in the body of the victim causing maximum damage.

Click to expand...

A CCI CPRN Mini mag from a 4" pistol will give 91.314 FPE, while a Speer Gold dot 38 spcl 135 non + p will give you 171.308 FPE. The 22 lr does not have a lot of energy, and will not Ricochet around the body. I have heard this quote many times, with nothing to back it up. Autopsy results? Testing? Anything other than a repeated quote. I have seen many Pt's with 22 lr wounds, chest, leg,arm, torso, head, and autopsies and have never seen a 22 lr ricochet around a body. I have spoke to a few ME's that have never seen this action, they were from Chicago, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Hackensack NJ. So please if you have any articles/papers/studies I would love to read them.

But, I do agree 100% that a 22 lr in the hand is better than a Katana in the safe. Should she get more training, we all should if we have the time, money and physical capability. My Mother carried a DAO J frame till she was 82 and could shoot it well. Illness prevented her from carrying that and she went to a Beretta 25 tip up. Better than fingernails . Be Safe,

roscoepc said:

Don't listen to them Mister X!!! Your NOT a Troll.. You are merely someone who bloviates about how wrong someone is without saying just what the correct way is! And the post's about Martial Art's, Well.... That REALLY put everyone in their place!! I mean that has a lot to do with teaching someone how to shoot!!

But don't worry... I won't tell anyone about your secret on just how you kicked a basketball hoop when you were younger... We just can't have everyone going to the sporting goods store or Walmart and kick them while they are still in the box on the shelf....

Click to expand...

I did outline my approach and have many times previously. The martial arts post was primarily an analogy, but unarmed skills is an integral part of fighting with a gun, but not range shooting. Some folks just can't understand the difference.

Not a secret and purely legitimate. I just prefer anonymity in certain instances.

Mister X said:

I did outline my approach and have many times previously. The martial arts post was primarily an analogy, but unarmed skills is an integral part of fighting with a gun, but not range shooting. Some folks just can't understand the difference.

Not a secret and purely legitimate. I just prefer anonymity in certain instances.

Click to expand...

Your rants and raves, opinions, and blind assessments have absolutely nothing to do with a brand new shooter who was previously against firearms and never owned one.

Please bring it over to another thread or start your own for god sake! That way you can appear superior to all of us "untrained target shooters" who "don't know as much as you" and your online self esteem can soar to new heights. Then pat yourself on the back for a job well done educating all of us.

You have to learn to walk before you run. But you can't figure that one out.

I eagerly await your new thread educating all of us. Please be sure when you start it, you post up your credentials and experience that can be verified so we know you are not just another internet blowhard regurgitating things you read online.

Now adios and move on because I feel you have derailed this thread with enough off topic and not related opinion that would be better served in it's own thread.

Mister X said:

I did outline my approach and have many times previously. The martial arts post was primarily an analogy, but unarmed skills is an integral part of fighting with a gun, but not range shooting. Some folks just can't understand the difference.

Not a secret and purely legitimate. I just prefer anonymity in certain instances.

Click to expand...

Hate to keep this going, but it's so far off the rails, why not.

I think what several pretty experienced LEO's and retired LEO's have tried to point out is not a flaw in your approach, but a flaw in your assumptions. Those LEO's, that appear to have pretty deep experience investigating civilian shootings, don't believe entangled shooting encounters occur anywhere near as frequently as you believe they do. Even the Claude Werner stats you linked to mentioned that most encounters were "just beyond arms reach" which would imply no entanglement. Maybe CHP holders are less willing to let someone get that close. Maybe it's just good karma.

If you start with the assumption that every encounter is an entangled encounter, then the answer will always be dojo skills and a snub. If you start with stats that show most aren't entangled, a .22 will likely be a fine solution.

Ziggy2525 said:

Hate to keep this going, but it's so far off the rails, why not.

I think what several pretty experienced LEO's and retired LEO's have tried to point out is not a flaw in your approach, but a flaw in your assumptions. Those LEO's, that appear to have pretty deep experience investigating civilian shootings, don't believe entangled shooting encounters occur anywhere near as frequently as you believe they do. Even the Claude Werner stats you linked to mentioned that most encounters were "just beyond arms reach" which would imply no entanglement. Maybe CHP holders are less willing to let someone get that close. Maybe it's just good karma.

If you start with the assumption that every encounter is an entangled encounter, then the answer will always be dojo skills and a snub. If you start with stats that show most aren't entangled, a .22 will likely be a fine solution.

Click to expand...

-Most civilian self-defense scenarios(all types) involve physical contact at some point during the confrontation.
-Most civilians don't carry a gun.
-Most civilians(especially women), don't have the ability to access, effectively use and retain a weapon in an ECQ scenario. ---In most favorable outcomes, the gun will already be out or the assailant(s) immediately break contact or the defender is able to break contact to gain an opportunity to draw their weapon. In negatives outcomes for the defender, they lose control of the weapon, the shots don't have the required effect or they never even get the weapon out.
Even so, Zimmerman/Martin type scenarios(standing or grounded) do occur and would happen much more often if more people carried and had the skills to handle the initial assault and effectively access their weapon during in-fighting.

eb07 said:

Your rants and raves, opinions, and blind assessments have absolutely nothing to do with a brand new shooter who was previously against firearms and never owned one.

Please bring it over to another thread or start your own for god sake! That way you can appear superior to all of us "untrained target shooters" who "don't know as much as you" and your online self esteem can soar to new heights. Then pat yourself on the back for a job well done educating all of us.

You have to learn to walk before you run. But you can't figure that one out.

I eagerly await your new thread educating all of us. Please be sure when you start it, you post up your credentials and experience that can be verified so we know you are not just another internet blowhard regurgitating things you read online.

Now adios and move on because I feel you have derailed this thread with enough off topic and not related opinion that would be better served in it's own thread.

Click to expand...

I thought I was going on your ignore list. You've already stated you think I don't know what I'm talking about, so why would you be interested in my creditionals or even believe what I post.

Why exactly did you start this thread? Did you just want everyone to congratulate you on a job well done? What is the purpose of that? Why can't someone disagree and offer a different perspective on this topic? If I'm trying to stoke my online self-esteem, I've got a very strange approach, especially with being anonymous.

Mister X said:

I thought I was going on your ignore list. You've already stated you think I don't know what I'm talking about, so why would you be interested in my creditionals or even believe what I post.

Why exactly did you start this thread? Did you just want everyone to congratulate you on a job well done? What is the purpose of that? Why can't someone disagree and offer a different perspective on this topic? If I'm trying to stoke my online self-esteem, I've got a very strange approach, especially with being anonymous.

Click to expand...

Still going? I decided to hear you out so I did not ignore you. However your diatribe has gone way beyond the scope of a beginning shooter. I posted the thread to share my experience.

If I am wrong, post a new thread explaining your methods and justification. I will be open minded. I like to learn from people who actually know what they are talking about.

However, post your verifiable credentials like Massad Ayoob and other trainers do so we know you are legitimate and not just regurgitating stuff you read online. Maybe a lot of us will learn something. I am open to your opinion if you know what you are talking about and can prove it. Otherwise you are just another internet nobody who likes to argue.

Or just continue to argue online with vague references and vague opinions that cannot be verified and of justified.

What you do next will show me if you are for real or not. If you are I will offer my apologies and learn from you. I will be open minded. But you now need to prove yourself instead of just offering vague opinions that honestly I cannot figure without a clear understanding of your training methods. If you do not want to share your secrets without payment, then post up your business and maybe some of us will be inclined will take a course. I have taken quite a few force on force classes and am a member of a local group modeled after some of the classes we have taken. So I know a little bit about what you are talking about. I am a veteran been to foreign lands to fight foreign enemies and I have lived through a self defense experience which frankly I was young and unprepared for. but thankfully got through successfully. I have been in a few fights and feel that going to the ground is the last thing you want to do with an unknown and with unknowns around. Distance is your friend. So teach me.

I have asked that you legitimize your training methods and share them in a new thread. I think that is a reasonable request. Ball is in your court.

vipermd said:

A CCI CPRN Mini mag from a 4" pistol will give 91.314 FPE, while a Speer Gold dot 38 spcl 135 non + p will give you 171.308 FPE. The 22 lr does not have a lot of energy, and will not Ricochet around the body. I have heard this quote many times, with nothing to back it up. Autopsy results? Testing? Anything other than a repeated quote. I have seen many Pt's with 22 lr wounds, chest, leg,arm, torso, head, and autopsies and have never seen a 22 lr ricochet around a body. I have spoke to a few ME's that have never seen this action, they were from Chicago, Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Hackensack NJ. So please if you have any articles/papers/studies I would love to read them.

But, I do agree 100% that a 22 lr in the hand is better than a Katana in the safe. Should she get more training, we all should if we have the time, money and physical capability. My Mother carried a DAO J frame till she was 82 and could shoot it well. Illness prevented her from carrying that and she went to a Beretta 25 tip up. Better than fingernails . Be Safe,

Click to expand...

I agree but the 22lr bouncing around inside the body can happen. Think Reagan being shot. My entire issue with the 22lr for SD is reliability. No one can claim they have NEVER had a 22lr fail to fire, rim fires have always been notorious for that. So I wouldn't want to bet my life on it.

wrkerr said:

Who said anything about head shots? They were all body shots. Tap, rack, fire again? It was a revolver. One officer lived long enough to return fire at the fleeing vehicle, HITTING THE KILLER IN THE BACK!

So logically we shouldn't carry .38 Specials either? Geez!

(Broke my own rule.)

Click to expand...

Anyone wants to use the 22lr, revo or semi is fine by me. I am just pointing out what should be obvious; it is an unreliable round & has little to offer in terminal ballistics unless cns is hit. I suppose though that a false comfort by those that choose a 22lr is better than abject fear.
BTW, thx for proving my point about terminal affect. The LEO that dies still managed to fight. That is kinda my point. Yes the 22lr will kill, but as a stopper, uh. no.

fredj338 said:

Anyone wants to use the 22lr, revo or semi is fine by me. I am just pointing out what should be obvious; it is an unreliable round & has little to offer in terminal ballistics unless cns is hit. I suppose though that a false comfort by those that choose a 22lr is better than abject fear.
BTW, thx for proving my point about terminal affect. The LEO that dies still managed to fight. That is kinda my point. Yes the 22lr will kill, but as a stopper, uh. no.

Click to expand...

I was very clear with her these exact shortcomings and issues with the round. Tried to steer her towards a 9mm semi or the j-frame. Wasn't having it. She made her choice anyway after I suggested that it was better than nothing at all. My guess is in a few months she will move up to something larger and more reliable/effective.

But the bottom line is all handgun rounds suck and without CNS hits anyone will continue fighting if they have the will and determination. Freeze, Fight, or Flight.....

fredj338 said:

I agree but the 22lr bouncing around inside the body can happen. Think Reagan being shot.

Click to expand...

That did not happen. All sources agree that the sixth and final bullet ricocheted off the armored side of the limousine and hit the president in the left underarm, grazing a rib and lodging in his lung, causing it to partially collapse, and stopping less than an inch (25 mm) from his heart . . .

fredj338 said:

I agree but the 22lr bouncing around inside the body can happen. Think Reagan being shot. My entire issue with the 22lr for SD is reliability. No one can claim they have NEVER had a 22lr fail to fire, rim fires have always been notorious for that. So I wouldn't want to bet my life on it.

Muss Muggins said:

That did not happen. All sources agree that the sixth and final bullet ricocheted off the armored side of the limousine and hit the president in the left underarm, grazing a rib and lodging in his lung, causing it to partially collapse, and stopping less than an inch (25 mm) from his heart . . .

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I always figured the "bounce around in the body" thing must've come from an autopsy showing one entering the skull and ricocheting inside or hitting a rib or other heavy bone and then ricocheting at a sharp angle.

Ok I'll bite...

I'm licensed to carry in my state..

I have absolutely no problems carrying a 22lr for self defense as long as it's an appropriate sized pistol. For example, on occasion I'll carry my Beretta mod 71. It is ridiculously reliable. My EDC alternates between a 32acp and a 380 and I get picked on by my pals at the range who carry larger mainstream calibers from 38 special to 40s&w.


My mindset is that I carry to defend myself. Not blow the offender's head off.. And if being shot or shot at stops the offender then the pistol regardless of caliber has done its intended purpose. It is no secret that we can for the most part all shoot a smaller caliber handgun faster and more accurately than larger caliber. I can fire off all 8 shots with my Beretta mod 71 in 22lr at 7 yards a heck of a lot faster and put all 8 rounds in the butter zone than my 38 special 642 snubby. Under stress and without warning which gun will put more rounds on the bad guy? The one you can shoot faster & more accurately with. If it's a 22lr or 25, or 32acp then so be it. Those rounds are lethal and can kill.

Get on YouTube guys, watch all the surveillance videos of civilian self defense in action and 99.9% of the time when a civilian pulls out a gun regardless of caliber, the bad guy/s take off. Caliber was not a factor.

My mindset, is to stop the person/s from attacking me. However mainstream magazines and online reviews & so called "experts" will lead us to believe that a successful defense is when you "incapacitate" the bad guy. Bigger is better yadda yadda yadda... Way too much talk about caliber and gel tests expansion bla bla bla... lets talk about actually being about to shoot and hit the target first... With that. I can guarantee with a 22lr, I will hit the target..

fredj338 said:

Anyone wants to use the 22lr, revo or semi is fine by me. I am just pointing out what should be obvious; it is an unreliable round & has little to offer in terminal ballistics unless cns is hit. I suppose though that a false comfort by those that choose a 22lr is better than abject fear.
BTW, thx for proving my point about terminal affect. The LEO that dies still managed to fight. That is kinda my point. Yes the 22lr will kill, but as a stopper, uh. no.

Click to expand...

Certainly stopped the other officer. And there were NO cns hits. Talk to me when you've been there and done that. I have! My partner has been in a wheelchair since 1979 from a freaking .22!!! And watch the video of the Reagan shooting. Secret Service Agent goes down FAST from a single .22.

Dang. Broke my rule again. I'm done. There is no reasoning with gun-shop commandos. It's their way or the highway. I'll take the highway.

Oh, and you missed MY point: the .38 Special didn't stop the killer either. So in this case, .22 .38 ... didn't matter. Carry what you want. Just don't think your opinion is Gospel.

Before this gets locked...

I know a thing or two about shooting. And teaching others how to shoot. And being involved in actual shooting situations. But let's talk about horses. Specifically, training a cutting horse. You pick yourself a good horse that's quick and nimble on his feet. Now, he's not going to understand about cutting, he's not going to understand about wearing a saddle, he's not going to understand about wearing a bridle, or a lead rope, or reins, or just about anything about being a good cutting horse. You have to train him. I guarantee that if you go out first day and put a bridle and saddle on him and start trying to cut, one of two things is going to happen. You're going to get hurt, or you're going to get hurt. You have to start slow, get him used to the bridle and lead rope, introduce the saddle calmly, let him get used to your weight on his back, let him feel the bit and the reins and how to turn, get him used to the signals you give with your knees on which way to go. If you start him slow, let him work and learn at HIS pace, you'll have a darn fine cutting horse one day. Try and rush him, try and make him learn things he ain't ready to learn, and you'll ruin a horse. Same with the lady shooter. She is the one who decided that, for now, the .22 is the one she wants to shoot. She's learning the bridle and lead rope, as it were. The saddle and cutting will come soon enough. Try and rush it, and she'll decide nope, not gonna do it. The CQB scenarios and run and gun tactics can come later, when she's ready. At least for now, she's better off than she was.

CelticSire said:

Before this gets locked...

I know a thing or two about shooting. And teaching others how to shoot. And being involved in actual shooting situations. But let's talk about horses. Specifically, training a cutting horse. You pick yourself a good horse that's quick and nimble on his feet. Now, he's not going to understand about cutting, he's not going to understand about wearing a saddle, he's not going to understand about wearing a bridle, or a lead rope, or reins, or just about anything about being a good cutting horse. You have to train him. I guarantee that if you go out first day and put a bridle and saddle on him and start trying to cut, one of two things is going to happen. You're going to get hurt, or you're going to get hurt. You have to start slow, get him used to the bridle and lead rope, introduce the saddle calmly, let him get used to your weight on his back, let him feel the bit and the reins and how to turn, get him used to the signals you give with your knees on which way to go. If you start him slow, let him work and learn at HIS pace, you'll have a darn fine cutting horse one day. Try and rush him, try and make him learn things he ain't ready to learn, and you'll ruin a horse. Same with the lady shooter. She is the one who decided that, for now, the .22 is the one she wants to shoot. She's learning the bridle and lead rope, as it were. The saddle and cutting will come soon enough. Try and rush it, and she'll decide nope, not gonna do it. The CQB scenarios and run and gun tactics can come later, when she's ready. At least for now, she's better off than she was.

Click to expand...

Excellent analogy.

In fact someone already tried to introduce her to the saddle too early and nearly ruined her.

eb07 salvaged the situation.

She may become a good cuttin' horse yet

Well, in another world, comparing a grown wonan to a cutting horse would result in histrionics. I think it's a bit mysoginistic myself. Too bad we can't all continue to live in the 50's. Time for this thread to close.

BC38 said:

Excellent analogy.

In fact someone already tried to introduce her to the saddle too early and nearly ruined her.

eb07 salvaged the situation.

She may become a good cuttin' horse yet

Click to expand...

Muss Muggins said:

Well, in another world, comparing a grown wonan to a cutting horse would result in histrionics. I think it's a bit mysoginistic myself. Too bad we can't all continue to live in the 50's. Time for this thread to close.

Click to expand...

LOL, some of us never lived in the 50's - I for one wasn't born until 1962.

I also don't hang out in those "worlds" where the histronics that you refer to would occur, and if I thought this was one of them I wouldn't be here. The fact is that gender had nothing to do with my analogy. I'd apply the same analogy to a new male shooter who had been put off shooting by a bad previous experience and who had been successfully reintroduced to firearms.

But then I guess I'm just not PC enough to see the imaginary implied gender bias in the original analogy. Almost seems like a form of what they call projection.

And I kinda think it is up to the mods to decide when a thread needs to be closed, isn't it?

fredj338 said:

I agree but the 22lr bouncing around inside the body can happen. Think Reagan being shot. My entire issue with the 22lr for SD is reliability. No one can claim they have NEVER had a 22lr fail to fire, rim fires have always been notorious for that. So I wouldn't want to bet my life on it.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree that I would not want to use 22lr fo SD, secondary to frequent misfires compared to factory centerfire ammunition. I think EB07 did a great job in helping this new shooter find a place, and this may open avenues of discourse, and possible change in her feelings, beliefs, comfort level and may lead to a change in what she carries. Could she have BUD's training, Karate, knife fighting, and extreme CQC training- yes, but they probably are not and option. 30 years ago I could kick a bottle off your head, assuming your not over 6'7", now, I am lucky if I could kick my own leg!! I can not run, secondary to vertiginous issues, and always try to deescalate any situation, since I do not want a confrontation, since no one will will benefit either person. Still believe that 22 lr is better than fingernails. Be Safe,