15-22 For Self Defense

[Garbo]

Been shot with a 22 round, and i can tell ya..i dont wanna go thru it again.
enterrance hole was in the front deltoid of my shoulder and it passed completly thru and out my back..after seeing this YES i would use a 22 for self defense. And yes i am stocking up on cci velocitors....nice little round.

 

[Shooterjgs]

Both my rifles are 22's... My 15-22 and my AR... as for gun its a Springfield XD40... that's about all I could carry in a SHTF situation.

 

[Majorlk]

I have eight .22s and any of them would be the last thing I would reach for in a home HD situation. The FIRST will be one of my 12-gauge shotguns. As for personal SD, again, the last would be one of my .22 pistols; my daily carry pistol is a .40 S&W with a 9mm as a second choice.

I have no intention of it taking a dozen shots for someone to slowly bleed to death while they are capable of shooting back.

Your life; your choice.

 

[thacheese]

keep in mind most of us probably don't personally own 8 weapons.
you've definitely got a few years collecting on me...

I might also add the large s&w box leaning against my trash can diffused a potentially violent situation at my last apartment... most people don't want to get into a firefight.

 

[mag318]

Totally agree with my brother in blue.

Don't asked the assasin's if a .22 is not a good caliber. During my training in Stockton Cal. back in 1996, A swat trainer, that started the SWAT unit in LA, told me, and I will always remember it, "It's not about caliber, it's placement, placement, placement, don't forget that". I haven't. Again depending on the duty at hand, a 22 cal. is deadly make no mistake. Now would you take one out on patrol as a primary, NO, backup maybe. The 22lr has it's place in shooting, plinking, covert and training. It is to me a very multi purpose caliber that I respect the hell out of. If I had my M&P with 10 rds in my bed room at night and someone came in, I would feel just fine using it knowing that I would put all 10 rounds in a 1" hole without worries.. So don't knock it off your list of calibers.. Good Shooting..

 

[w0ady]

everyone keeps talking like the bad guy is going to be standing square 5 yds in front of them with their hands at their side just like a range target. the only benefit i can see a .22 having is more rounds and thats only if you have the time to get off more than 1 round. i want more damage and penetration when and IF i hit them. do some reading about the percent of misses in a SD scenario. your adrenaline is pumping so i am less worried about recoil or noise or flash. by training with my 9mm i am going to depend on muscle memory to get the rounds on target as fast as possible. .22s kill more people because they're cheap and accessible. mob hits are done in the soft parts of the head because sometimes .22s dont penetrate. ive never seen them issued to any police or military departments either.

again i love my 15-22 but there are better options if you have them available. use whatever you're comfortable with, im not trying to show anyone up, just providing info to think about.

 

[Gopher Slayer]

everyone keeps talking like the bad guy is going to be standing square 5 yds in front of them with their hands at their side just like a range target.

And in a well lit area so they can take aim.

I bet some of the ".22 is fine for SD" guys have magnified optics that don't work for **** at close range.

I can hear it now, " but I have a red dot" or "I have night sights"

 

[rraisley]

I doubt anyone here thinks the 15-22, or ANY .22, is /preferable/ to a larger caliber gun. But if that's what you happen to have, either because it's ALL you have, or happens to be the closest, in most cases, I agree that it will do a pretty good job.

So, I don't think the question was so much "I have a .22, as well as a 9mm and .44 mag, and wonder if the .22 is best for home self defense?" but rather "All I have is a .22; can I use it for home defense?"

 

[Majorlk]

keep in mind most of us probably don't personally own 8 weapons.
you've definitely got a few years collecting on me...

Oh, I have far more than eight firearms (I don't own any weapons; weapons are for offensive use and everything I own will only be used for defense.) and they range over 14 different cartridges.

There is no such thing as one cartridge or one firearm for all purposes. My problem is the abundance of first-time gun owners here (with their first gun being a .22 LR) who have learned just enough to be a danger to themselves and others, when it comes to the concept of defending one's home or person. A little knowledge is a dangerous and a little incorrect knowledge can get one killed. Especially dangerous, IMO, is the advice from retired and ex LEOs that .22s are an OK defensive round because of all the people they have seen killed with them - or the BS that they are OK because professional hit men use them. For the LEOs - if the .22 is an adequate self-defense round, why doesn't your department issue them instead of 9mm, .357 SIG, .40S&W or .45 ACP, and why isn't one your personal primary carry piece?

I might also add the large s&w box leaning against my trash can diffused a potentially violent situation at my last apartment... most people don't want to get into a firefight.

True, but don't bet your life on that assumption.

 

[Majorlk]

I doubt anyone here thinks the 15-22, or ANY .22, is /preferable/ to a larger caliber gun. But if that's what you happen to have, either because it's ALL you have, or happens to be the closest, in most cases, I agree that it will do a pretty good job.

So, I don't think the question was so much "I have a .22, as well as a 9mm and .44 mag, and wonder if the .22 is best for home self defense?" but rather "All I have is a .22; can I use it for home defense?"

If that's ALL one has, one better spend a lot of time and ammo getting proficient at shooting full body targets and keeping all the rounds in the CNS and cranial zones.

I can just hear a prosecutor now asking, "Mr. Jones, why was it necessary to shoot Mr. Dead Guy with all 25 rounds from your assault weapon?"

 

[Kayback]

The original post has a stat where over 31% of people hit by the .22 didn't stop.

That's almost a third of the people shot with it were still able to press their attack. This is not a good thing.

It is not about "killing", it is about stopping the illegal attack on your or another's person.

BUT

You don't get to say when the fight is over, that is up to the guy you are shooting. There are only a couple of ways to stop an attack and most of those involve doing enough damage to actually stop them. Physical damage which means they are incapable of attacking. It isn't like paintball where a well placed shot means they call themselves out, you may need to remove their ability to perform tasks. This involves damage to their Central Nervous system or causing lack of oxygen to the brain, either by exsanguination or by interrupting the blood flow by destroying their heart.

It isn't nice, but then fighting for you life isn't about nice, it is about survival. You better be prepared to KILL the attacker in order to stop his illegal attack, otherwise why are you using Lethal Force? If the situation does not warrant the badguy dead, you'd better not be shooting him with ANY gun.

A best case scenario is everyone goes home alive, but if things have gotten to the point of pulling the trigger, you'd better be meaning to kill your attacker. Forget about the whitewash - I was defending myself, not trying to kill him saga. You are using Lethal Force in many cases when you just BRANDISH the gun, actually dropping the hammer on someone means you are trying to kill them because it is the only way in which you can stop the attack.

If the gunfire does result in the attack stopping, without anyone dying, bonus. But you'd better be correct in employing lethal force in the first place and you will be accountable for it.

Saying something can bite you both ways. You don't want someone to use a previous statement for evidence of pre-meditation, but you also don't want someone using a statement about not wanting to kill someone as evidence of the situation not warranting lethal force.

As for the .22, whenever I take new shooters to the range the first thing I do is shoot something with the .22 to show "all guns can damage". I cheat by using Stingers and a sealed, full 500ml plastic bottle, but one second there is a plastic bottle, the next there is a light rain. It has always been very useful for demonstrating the damage even a .22 can do.

 

[hkyplr]

A little off topic here but, just remember that in the unlikely event anyone is involved in a self defense shooting and the perp doesn't die....
A good civil lawyer would look at anything posted here, or any other board as something to use against said person.

 

[Kayback]

I was on another board when someone asked does anyone have any documented proof that that actually happens or is it an internet rumour?

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

The original post has a stat where over 31% of people hit by the .22 didn't stop.

That's almost a third of the people shot with it were still able to press their attack. This is not a good thing.

It is not about "killing", it is about stopping the illegal attack on your or another's person.

Take a look at the number of hits measured against the number of people shot. For the .22 (including 22 shorts) it's a mere 213 hits measured on 154 people. For most all the other calibers, 9mm on up, the number of hits per person shot is much greater. It makes sense that people who are hit with more bullets are likely to be incapacitated at a greater rate.

For example: The .22 shows a 31% failure to incapacitate with with an avg of 1.38 hits per person shot. The 9mm is showing a 13% failure to incapacitate with an avg of 2.45 hits per person. It's difficult to compare caliber "stopping power" while measuring two 9mm hits versus one .22.

Interestingly, when measured one to one, such as percentage incapacitated by one shot to the head or torso, the .22 performs quite well compared to other calibers.

What all this means... I don't pretend to know. But I tend to think that caliber between the ears means a lot more than caliber in hand.

 

[Kayback]

True true. There are simply too many variables to say which one works "best".

That article also spoke about intermediate barriers, even something simple like clothing. A heavy winter jacket, while not bullet proof, can be strong enough to stop the rounds acheiving critical organs. This is less likely with larger calibers.

I'd like to do my own study, but there are simply too many variables, and I don't have access to the right information.

I'd still, from personal experience, only use the .22 if my other option was a rock. Many people claim the low recoil aids the ability to punch one hole groups. That is a crutch to back up lack of training or practice.

You can do the same thing with a 5.56mm. Or a 9x19mm. Or a .45ACP. I've got a pic on Photobucket (down at the moment) which is a one group hole from my 1911, through two mags.

KBK

 

[mag318]

Prior to starting my LE career I scoffed at the idea of a 22 being adequate for anything other than target shooting and plinking. On my very first trip to the Cook County Morgue I had lunch with the coroner. Being a firearms enthusiast I queried him as to what calibre was most prevalent in cases his office handled. Without hesitation or having to think about it he stated 22s, I was astounded thinking the answer would have been at least something larger. This was a statement of fact, supported by thousands of death investigations.
Would a 22 be my first choice for defense, no ofcourse not. Off duty and now once again a civilian I usually carry a 38 or 9mm, and believe it or not there are people who think anything under 40 calibre is inadequate. Like everyone else on this forum we all have opinions, mine is based on a 31 year long police career. My postings in several threads on the subject are just my opinion. I recently bought a Model 43c for my wife because she is very recoil sensitive. Everytime we go to the range she shoots it and shoots it well. She also likes my Model 632 with 32 long wadcutters but prefers the 22. When it comes to rifles she absolutely loves our M&P15-22 so we keep that loaded in a case in our bedroom in case she ever has to repel boarders. I still maintain that M&P is an excellent home defense tool. To those who disagree I respect your opinion, use an maintain what you feel comfortable with.
An old retired Chicago cop.

 

[Gopher Slayer]

If that's ALL one has, one better spend a lot of time and ammo getting proficient at shooting full body targets and keeping all the rounds in the CNS and cranial zones.

I can just hear a prosecutor now asking, "Mr. Jones, why was it necessary to shoot Mr. Dead Guy with all 25 rounds from your assault weapon?"

I couldn't agree more.

That's exactly why my home defense shotgun looks pretty plain (compared to many others).

Shooting someone several times with a "tricked out" .22lr that you post pictures of on the internet isn't going to help your case.

Another real world example off the .22lr not being able to do the job the way a SD/HD firearm should...

My mother and I work on my grandfather's cattle ranch in Montana (seasonal for me). Two years ago (I was at home in Washington) my mom had to put a four month old sick/crippled calf down. She grabbed the old model 62A off the fireplace and headed out to the corral. The thing couldn't move and she was within ten yards of him. She put three rounds right between the eyes. It didn't work. The forth shot finally did him in. This was an ideal situation, which wouldn't be the case in a home invasion where the other end is able to shoot back. I know a cow isn't a human, but it still taught her a lot about the right tool for the job. I was sent out to do the same three days ago (with my .44mag rifle), but he was allready gone. I hate that part of being a rancher.

 

[Kayback]

You need better lawyers if you think something as simple as the look of your firearm is going to get you into trouble. It is easy to call expert witnesess to testify why the suppressed SBR with the H-1 and PEQ is a good defense tool. The easiest thing is to point to what the cops use. Even better what SWAT use.

The right tool for the job does not mean you are out for trouble. It does mean trouble can be most effectively handled though.

KBK

 

[CrazyFingers]

In my state, as long as the shooting itself is ruled legal self-defense, castle law provides an affirmative defense against any civil suit brought by an invader's relatives. This applies whether I used my bone-stock 1911 or my BCM with the evil adjustable stock, insidious flash suppressor, demonic pistol grip, and downright maniacal Aimpoint. And I could use all 30 rounds from my ruthless "high capacity" magazine, if that's what it took to stop the aggressor.

 

[Kayback]

Have you seen SF's 60 rounder?