My first post...(gonna get yelled at!)

[snubbiefan]

You got a gun JUST LIKE one of mine.....and for the same purpose. It patterns CCI shot-shells very well and most of the pellets will stay in a 12 x 12 target at 10 to 12-feet-or-so. I let the wife carry it with two shot-shells first and the the other 6 are Quick-Shock. Her instructions are to shoot the eyes first. If he is blind....she can take her time to decide where she wants to place the remaining 6 rounds.

 

[.357magger]

Anyone actually wanting to be shot in the face with 8 rounds of .22s please raise your hand?

John

I don't want to be poked in the face with a dinner fork either. Why not carry that?

It's lighter, slimmer, and it also makes multiple holes.

 

[.357magger]

You got a gun JUST LIKE one of mine.....and for the same purpose. It patterns CCI shot-shells very well and most of the pellets will stay in a 12 x 12 target at 10 to 12-feet-or-so. I let the wife carry it with two shot-shells first and the the other 6 are Quick-Shock. Her instructions are to shoot the eyes first. If he is blind....she can take her time to decide where she wants to place the remaining 6 rounds.

Seriously, are you recommending that someone carry .22 shot cartiridges as ANY type of defensive round other than a rodent? Your basis for this recommendation is that it "patterns very well" on paper? How about, due to the FACT that that "rat shot" (they call it that for a reason) didn't penetrate his skull, the miscreant in question makes it to your wife whereupon he rapes and kills her? How much time do you allow for that?

This thread has just reached "Ludicrous Speed" as far as rational discussion goes.

Peace to all, and my hope is that none of your loved ones ever have to be the proving ground for some of the theories I've seen expressed here.

 

[photoman]

1. A .22 through the eye socket is going to take the fight out of just about anyone.

2. It's ~real~ difficult to hit the eye socket with a snubby handgun beyond anything other than contact distance and especially if the target is moving.

3. If a .22 snub is all a person can handle, it's better than nothing.

 

[snubbiefan]

That is a pretty stupid remark. Nobody can expect rat-shot to penetrate a skull and everybody on here with any sense knew what I meant. I would expect it to penetrate his eye-balls.

I would be willing to wager that the vast majority of people posting here on the forum carrying any caliber weapon have not and never will actually shoot anybody. That takes guts. Packing a 44 Magnum, or a 22LR is not where the issue lies. The issue is in whether you will REALLY use it. Just showing the bad guy your cannon may not matter a twit, if you want pull the trigger. That 44 Magnum is going to be hard to swallow when he shoves it down your throat, or up the orifice on the other end.

 

[jessegpresley]

Anyone actually wanting to be shot in the face with 8 rounds of .22s please raise your hand?

John

Well if we had to pick a caliber to be shot with, guess which one we'd pick? Doesn't bode to well for that caliber.

I don't want to get lemon in my eye, but don't see that as an endorsement for carrying concealed fruit.

 

[617X10]

Exactly. A carry weapon is supposed to get you enough time to escape from a bad situation. Look up the story of the guy who went on a rampage around Gaffney, SC with a .25 Auto a couple of years ago, and you'll understand why having something is much better than having nothing. The smaller and lighter, the better....because that means you might actually carry the darn thing. For those who say they won't have anything that doesn't start with .4, sure but are you going to carry it? Are you willing to purchase a holster that rides your ribcage? Are you going to drop some coin on a tactical vest and try to look cool in 100 degree weather? Bet you'll look funny trying to get used to that ankle holster.

 

[.357magger]

1. A .22 through the eye socket is going to take the fight out of just about anyone.

2. It's ~real~ difficult to hit the eye socket with a snubby handgun beyond anything other than contact distance and especially if the target is moving.

3. If a .22 snub is all a person can handle, it's better than nothing.

All true, with particular emphasis on #2. And imo the only reason to arm in this caliber for defensive purposes is #3. With the exception of some deep cover assignments or as a last ditch backup. And that was the point. If you have a person who cannot, or will not, become proficient with the weapon then well...like an earlier post...you take your best shot and someone wins. It is better than nothing. But can anyone name one person who is a reputable source or trainer who would advocate this caliber as a primary defensive one? Just one will do, in .22 LR please.

I've spent a lot of years wearing iron daily, and it was my distinct misfortune to have to use it. My comments are not based on internet theory, idle conjecture, or gunstore conversations. And other than personal involvement, I've investigated a whole lot more. A self defense shooting is not cool, or romantic, or gutsy. It is, in point of fact, extremely brutal, horrific, very messy, and "normally" short in duration from start to finish. It has emotional and legal consequences that last much longer than the events themselves. And the whole point of the entire matter is that YOU can lose your life. Or your mates life. Or your child's life.

So...knowing what I know, what I've seen, and what I've experienced, it seems to me to be idealistic and unrealistic to make the choice being discussed for the intended purpose of stopping a determined person from trying to kill or harm you. They already made that choice, what you've done up to that second will determine whether they win or not. You want to bet your life on your skill at a moving and/or charging target with a .22 loaded with rat shot for a couple of rounds (which frankly, regardless of eyeball or not, is not the smartest idea I've heard of late) then more power to ya. Or rather less power to ya as it were.

Don't think anyone is going to change anyone else's opinion at this point. Others have expressed theirs, I've given mine. God Bless to all.

 

[snubbiefan]

Gob bless you too magger...hey....all in lively discussion and good fun. Each one of us will do what we think we have to do based on the environment we run-around in and we all know what opinions are like....everybody has one. I have a closet-full of calibers like many others do and it's up to the individual to decide on what he/she will/can carry.

Take care!

 

[Cpo1944]

First of all, I am NOT old...just "chronologically gifted". A VietNam vet, who has over the years collected everything but money! Lots of J-frames...especially the stainless stuff from the eighties and early nineties. Here is my conundrum...I have carried an early 640 (no dash, no-lock, no clear-coat) as my CCW for several years. Been pretty proficient with Federal Match Wadcutters, but wouldn't win prizes. I recently took in a Model 317 (LNIB) as part of a trade and have been amazed at how well I shoot this little ten ounce .22...especially with CCI Stingers. How crazy is it for me to give up a .38 and switch to an 8-shot .22 for a CCW? To me, the .22 Stinger has similar ballistics to the 5.7FN sometimes used for personal protection. (Remember the terrorist Army Major psychologist that killed so many with his 5.7 ??) I know, most will tell me to stick with the 640, but I am soooo accurate with the Stingers. Regards.

Bob B

Bob,
If you like those stingers Try some of those Mexican Aquilla`s very high velocity. They bark like a .38. They are the hardest shooting .22`s I ever shot!!!