If someone decides to carry a firearm, they obviously feel that there is a realistic need for it and acknowledging that there is a possibility they could have to use the gun to save their life. Why carry one that is so inefficient at the task? Stopping power does matter. It doesn't mean everyone must carry only the very top performers based on the stats, but whatever is chosen should be acceptable in stopping power. One could argue that what's acceptable is debatable, but most instructors and informed people pretty much draw the line around the same place...9mm/.38 special with some including .380 ACP and a .38 snub revolver has it's own particular strengths and even some advantages over a full size semi-auto, so it isn't all simply about caliber.
A .22 is nice to carry, but simply inadequate for defense use in the opinion of almost everyone who is has least a decent amount of knowledge on the subject.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm
About the only time I'd see making an exception is perhaps if there were a health problem such as severe arthritis, injury or severe loss of strength with advanced age. Even then, there must be a distinction made with tolerating higher volume range or practice shooting vs being able to manage to handle getting off a few close quarter shots as would be the case in an actual dense shooting. If someone is extremely frail, they probably aren't going to shoot much anyway, if at all which IMO isn't necessarily an insurmountable issue as the vast majority of civilian self-defense shootings occur at extremely close distances and historically there are countless examples of untrained individuals successfully defending themselves with firearms.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handguns_handicapped_shooters.htm
A .22 is nice to carry, but simply inadequate for defense use in the opinion of almost everyone who is has least a decent amount of knowledge on the subject.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm
About the only time I'd see making an exception is perhaps if there were a health problem such as severe arthritis, injury or severe loss of strength with advanced age. Even then, there must be a distinction made with tolerating higher volume range or practice shooting vs being able to manage to handle getting off a few close quarter shots as would be the case in an actual dense shooting. If someone is extremely frail, they probably aren't going to shoot much anyway, if at all which IMO isn't necessarily an insurmountable issue as the vast majority of civilian self-defense shootings occur at extremely close distances and historically there are countless examples of untrained individuals successfully defending themselves with firearms.
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handguns_handicapped_shooters.htm
Last edited:
