Best 22Lr ammo for self defense

[hboswell]

I notice this is a 2 year old thread, but, I still enjoyed reading the pros and cons, mostly cons. It reminded me of a story my Cousin told about an afternoon at a friends ranch when a batch of Coyotes was making its way down the dry wash behind the kitchen. His seat was farthest from the back door so by the time he got there the only rifle left in the rack was an old 22. Everyone was lined up at the back fence firing away when he took aim and fired his only shot. The Coyote he hit dropped in his tracks, not even a wiggle. Some of the others managed 25 or 30 yards before collapsing. When they drove out with the truck to collect the remains, he reached down to pick up his kill and said it was like a bag of rocks. All of the others were in fine shape, minus a hole or two, but his was a wreck. The bullet struck just behind the front shoulder and exited near the tail, shattering the entire spine and several ribs on its way. Yea, maybe a 22 isn't your best choice for self defense, but it still has potential for fatal results. I recall reading an article a few years ago that the 22 was responsible for more fatalities than all other calibers combined. It doesn't matter how big the bullet is, if you don't hit what you're aiming at the net result is zero.

 

[flash-spyder]

And now another four years later

So -- the #1 requirement of a firearm for self defense is to be able to acquire and hit the target reliably and accurately. 6 misses with a .44 magnum do not beat 6 hits with a .22

Many people cannot handle a powerful weapon. They are asleep and weirdly do not have their glasses on nor their hearing protection. Fire 6 rounds of 44 mag or .40 or 9mm in your bedroom, all occupants (wife, pets, attacker) will suffer permanent hearing damage.

Second requirement is penetration -- forget hollow points on a .22 (except for varmints) -- a .22 has low mass with decent speed, you can penetrate the 12 inches you need to.

I keep two weapons -- a suppressed Mark III Ruger Hunter with as powerful a load I can get. With laser. I can be half asleep, no glasses, and put 11 rounds into a half dollar anyplace in my bedroom. If that does not solve the problem then I have a G20 Glock (10 mm with 200 grain Double Tap rounds). I figure if I don't get them out of there with the Mark III I'll at least slow them down and give me time to wake up and get the Glock lined up. If I do, I will still be able to hear.

I use CCI Ultra Mags now ... but I am not sure it matters a lot ... it is not loud, and VERY accurate.

I see many men buy their wife a self defense gun (or other buying a new shooter a gun) -- usually a Lady Smith in .38 (weighs nothing and has no barrel) -- they go to the range. 1-2 shots they want to go home. I bring over my Mark III and all of a sudden the new shooter is having a blast picking off the center ring at 10+ yards (more than you need in your bedroom).

It may not be ideal to use a .22 -- it is definitely a very good way to start a new shooter, and not so bad as one of two handguns in a bedroom. Truth be told, I'd rather have my AR anyway and it is not that far away. The pistol is just good enough to fight your way to your carbine I taught my 10 yo nieces to shoot the AR as the kick is minimal -- with a light and laser it will do the job at any distance (you will still be deaf).

So don't knock the lowly .22 -- it has it's place. I bet I can get more grains into a target faster than most people can with a 9mm ... at my age, in the dark, no glasses, sound asleep. And no -- I don't have time to get electronic hearing protection on as some suggest. My Mark III runs 115db -- I can shoot it indoors all day long with no damage (see chart). And yes, I have a DB meter and have measured it at the range which is not identical to in my bedroom -- I think it is louder.

http://modernsurvivalblog.com/security/hearing-protection-during-indoor-self-defense/

The point I am making is -- there is no right answer. For some a .22 is ideal. For others, not so much. Where you are matters. Age matters. Accuracy matters. Don't write it off -- the Mark III Hunter with a suppressor is pleasant and easy to shoot -- especially with Crimson Trace grips. And you can rapid fire it and do a lot of damage while waking up ... and getting a bigger gun be it a 10mm or an AR carbine (why get a a 9mm or .40 when you can have a 10mm?).

 

[flash-spyder]

Oh -- this makes for interesting reading too: http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/using-22-self-defense Note that the lowly .22 requires the least number of shots to end a fight. AND one can fire a lot more rounds with a .22 Ruger Mark III in the time it takes to fire the 9mm. His point about crappy low quality .22 is correct. But a Ruger Mark III Hunter is far from that, especially sound suppressed. A stat he did not point out is that more people have been killed by the .22 rimfire than all other calibers combined. Note the shot placement comments. I cannot miss a half dollar at 10 yards at rapid fire. I generally get one hole and empty 11 rounds at twice the rate of my 9mm (with a 5+ inch spread). Also, for self defense -- a "psychological" stop is just as good as a "physical incapacitation." Or at least you have time to get the larger weapon out to finish the job if needed. I don't know a lot of people with 11 40 grain .22 in their chest and head that really want to stick around for more ...

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/using-22-self-defense

 

[ADP3]

I know this thread has some age to it but the historian in me requires that I correct a bit of the John Hinckley, Jr. misinformation. Hinckley used a RG-14 .six-shot .22 Long Rifle revolver loaded with "Devastator" ammunition. This was a .22 Long Rifle Hollow Point with Lead Azide in the hollow point cavity. One reason that Brady and Reagan survived assassination was the bullets detonated upon impact and did not penetrate.

In regards to .22 LR's putting down large animals (cattle, horses, alligators,etc.) with a single shot this is often, but not always, due to the proximity of the muzzle and the "kill spot". It isn't just the bullet entering the kill spot but also the propellant gases that propel the bullet entering the wound channel and providing additional tissue damage. The closer the muzzle the more damage. Fire a blank .22 cartridge with your muzzle against an object (cardboard, plastic, fabric, leather) and note how much damage is done without a projectile.

As for the .22 for self-defense. Of course it isn't the best choice, but it's a free country and we are all entitled to make our own mistakes, or we can wisely make our decisions by learning from the experiences and mistakes of others.

Best Regards,
ADP3

 

[Captain America]

I know this is an old thread that has been gone over and over but.....my wife's boss carries a Glock of some sort and he keeps telling her to ditch her .22 LCR and move up in caliber. Well, a couple of weeks back he invited us to the range where he shoot's and never was the phrase "you can't miss fast enough" more appropriate than when watching him shoot. My wife is very accurate with her LCR, she practices drawing from her purse, shooting with either hand, moving while shooting, she is very aware of her surroundings, and she always has her gun, to me she is more prepared for the unlikely event that she might have to use her firearm than someone who never practices and their carry gun is locked in a safe.

 

[mohavesam]

I stand by the statement that 99% of the time I hear someone say the 22LR is not adequate, it comes from someone who has never put a bullet into another human being.

Of course, there is the mathematics, - same math that proves a honeybee cannot fly.

 

[grobin]

The buckeye article above was very good. One thing I see throughout this thread is the myth of stooping power. If we are to rely on "stopping power " we would be carrying area effect weapons like gernade launchers and tactical nukes (go to Syria please) . Your S&W 460 or Ruger 480 may impress him? But unless you spend a lot more range time than most of us is unlikely to hirt him. It will do lots and lots of collateral damage though.

 

[flash-spyder]

CCI Velocitor 0047 40gr HP 1435FPS - 183FTLBS I mispoke(?) on my post -- these are what I use. I used to use mini mags before. The 1435 number is from a 3.5 inch barrel. My Hunter is a 5.5 inch and will do at least as well, likely better. A 2 inch barrel is always a problem. Penetration of this round (on the 3.5 barrel) is 15.3 inches -- way over the FBI's minimum 12" requirement. As a previous poster put it -- one can rapidly put 4-5 of those rounds into the face of the target with no problem. I like it only as a first choice bedside gun with a 10mm Glock for backup. I don't sleep in my glasses. The laser helps. It stays where you point it (recoil is zero). A sound suppressor means I will have ears when I am done (my wife and dogs and cats too). I cannot miss with this gun, I can with the 10mm. My plan would be 5 to the face with the Mark III -- if the fight is not over, pick up the Glock and add a 10mmm or two or three. Nothing will survive that. Even if the .22 is not a "full stop" it will make them slow and not move much, making the 10mm easier to hit with. 10 40 grain .22 with 15.3 inch penetration is 400 grains in target. 2 .45s or .44 mags. Difference? There is nobody on the planet with bad eyesight, old age, suddenly woken up -- that could get those two rounds where they need to go before my .22s are all in place. More people have been killed with .22 rimfire than ALL other calibers combined (COMBINED). One shot stops are also highest and that is the most misleading "gun statistic" there is -- they count a one stop shot of one fires 8 rounds and one hits and stops the bad guy. With a .22 Mark III Ruger the first shot will hit as will the the other 10 before that 9mm hits. And a 9mm is generally subsonic (very close to the line)at 1100-1200 fps. The .22 from my 5.5 barrel I bet is closer to 1500 fps. It will penetrate. Generally further than a 9mm. Power is not everything -- the forward facing area of the bullet reduces penetration ... a .22 has a lot less forward facing. Note that the FBI claims that handguns rarely expand (consider it a bonus) and that a coroner generally cannot tell if a round was a hollow point or FMJ. Fancy zombie killer rounds are a waste of money and probably losers besides. THIS IS A VERY GOOD READ: gundata.org/images/fbi-handgun-ballistics.pdf

Also -- as to the young lady with the .22 -- good for her! That is what I mean -- combination of person, gun, and round is what make the difference. And I don't think the other author was totally correct about a "poor choice" -- I cannot shoot a .50 A&E period. might as well throw it at the them. It may be a poor choice but it may be a great choice in some cases. I have the same heat problem in AZ -- I often carry a Boberg XR9-S (shorty) giving me 7+1 9mm +p no problem (and two spare mags). When it is 110 degrees coats, vests, etc are out of the question. The Boberg goes into a Bulldog cellphone looking case with an "iPhone" sticker I added. Carried in plain sight.

I would never recommend ANY gun for anyone. I'd first see what they can shoot well that fits their needs (a bedside gun is different than a carry gun -- in CA carry guns are almost non-existent). Once I know what they shoot well that put the weapon at the top of the list. Now check rounds. Do they meet the FBI's 12 inch penetration test? That is the most critical -- you have to destroy vital organs and a big splattering hollowpoint that penetrates 6 inches is useless. If I can get the 12 " which I do (over 15 on my .22) then we move to things like ease of use, practice, etc. And cost. And in my case I prefer the ability to shoot in my house and not damage my ears. BTW -- the really heavy .22 (usually a short case with huge bullet) are great if you don't have a suppressor. Otherwise you will get baffle strike and ruin it. But without they can be amazing!

 

[flash-spyder]

One other thing for Erich. A heart shot takes 15-30 seconds before the bad guy can't fight back effectively. Only brain and spinal cord achieve full stop. See FBI report above. The Velocitor is a better choice than faster 32 grain rounds. Mass matters for penetration. Especially .22. Most 9mm are subsonic or on the edge (1100 - 1200 fiscal) which is why you don't see subsonic 9mm rounds for sale! Ditt0 .40. Like all things not all true as there are hot fast rounds. But then why not get a real gun? 10mm with 200 grain 1400 fps rounds from double tap? 357 speed 44 mag mass 16 rounds. And at home I would want my carbine pretty fast if things go south.

 

[CraigC]

CCI Velocitor 0047 40gr HP 1435FPS - 183FTLBS I mispoke(?) on my post -- these are what I use. I used to use mini mags before. The 1435 number is from a 3.5 inch barrel.

BS. No way is ANY .22LR load going to hit 1400fps in a 3.5" barrel. You'll be lucky to break 1000fps.

I stand by the statement that 99% of the time I hear someone say the 22LR is not adequate, it comes from someone who has never put a bullet into another human being.

Of course, there is the mathematics, - same math that proves a honeybee cannot fly.

It's not adequate. Sure, it can be made to work. I would have 100% confidence in my ability to defend myself with a 10/22. Problem is, it might take one shot but odds are good it will take many more to get the job done. For that reason, I would never call the cartridge "adequate".

 

[Mobuck]

I've dropped some really BIG animals with a brain shot from a 22lr pistol. Of course they weren't dead, just stunned but they went down on the spot. On several occasions, I did this under considerable stress. Am I going to pick a 22lr intentionally as a common self defense strategy?? Not a chance!!
I've been in some tough spots and have seen what happens. With this in mind, I know and expect precise shot placement to be next to impossible. If you are sure you can do otherwise, you're one cool dude(or maybe a closet Spec-Ops operator).
If a 22 is what I have, I'll just have to hope I'm lucky or the other is less inclined to get shot than he first appeared.

 

[flash-spyder]

@mobuck -- anyone can fire at 5-10 yards 11 rounds into a single hole with a Mark III. It is not hard. No kick. Mine make no noise. Just hold it in place and keep (properly) pulling the trigger. Like I said, I don't carry the .22. It is for at home when I think I can manage with it ... I have plenty of other bigger weapons if I need them. I just don't want to go deaf. Or make my wife deaf. See the Buckeye article -- it will surprise you. Another interesting stat -- more people have been killed with a .22 rimfire than ALL other calibers combined. A mostly BS statement if not well understood. It is from a study that said "probably" and it was limited to civilians in this country. And probably is because a lot of cheap .22 can be found. But it does not have zero meaning either. A .22 will get the job done.

 

[Captain America]

I've dropped some really BIG animals with a brain shot from a 22lr pistol. Of course they weren't dead, just stunned but they went down on the spot...

Stunned is good, my wife will be long gone before her assailant comes around.

 

[Mobuck]

"@mobuck -- anyone can fire at 5-10 yards 11 rounds into a single hole with a Mark III. It is not hard. No kick. Mine make no noise. Just hold it in place and keep (properly) pulling the trigger."

And you can do this with the boogie man bearing down on you or in the dark, or after being knocked half senseless? I can't even though as I said, I've had a little experience with violent confrontations.
In fact, I'll place some serious doubt on anyone who claims to put "11 rounds in a single hole @ 10 yards" under optimum conditions.

 

[flash-spyder]

@mobuck -- how would you like me to prove it? And I forgot to mention, 5 seconds max. I think it is the gun and the suppressor more than skill. And when I say one hole I don't mean all in the same place, just that there are not gaps ... the hole is usually quarter size. Precise shot placement is hard -- unless the gun is huge and heavy and the rounds light and no kick at all. That is why I like the Ruger Hunter with target (fluted) barrel. The don't come threaded any more, bummer.

 

[flash-spyder]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/10/daniel-zimmerman/stopping-power-one-doctors-point-view/

 

[blackhawknj]

Not my 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even 4th choice, but beats fists. feet and foul language. Jfee Cooper said if you have to rely on the 22 aim for the eyes, I recall a case where an elderly person stopped a perp with a throat shot.

 

[flash-spyder]

Sort of my point -- for carry when I am awake, glasses on, so forth -- I prefer .40 or 10mm, at very least 9mm. In the woods a .44 magnum rocks although my Blackhawk is a bear to shoot. Enough so that I sold it. Beautiful gun, but my saddle guns get pretty dirty and nasty so I keep using my old SSA.

At night when I can't see well, have one hand to shoot with, and am just awake enough to know whomever is in the bedroom does not belong, not bad to have in the arsenal.

But, for the many small, elderly, or female people that carry ... and won't shoot a 9mm or .38 ... not a bad choice, maybe better than .32, .380 -- and certainly better the .25 ...

eyes and throat are perfect (brain, spinal cord -- only sure instant stops by any caliber). A man with his heart completely destroyed has 10-30 seconds (depends what you read or perhaps how much crack they are on) to continue to fight you. A lot can happen in 10 seconds. Although a .22 may not kill a person immediately I am certain of my ability to one-handed no glasses hit the face in the dark 11 out of 11 shots. It would be distracting to say the least. Probably fatal. By then lights and glasses are on and I have a 10mm in hand in case the .22 was not sufficient (11 to the face has got to be disturbing enough most times. And if it a flock of bad guys I'd want my AR anyway ... so much easier to use a carbine than handgun, the problem is getting to them as they are big and really can't be left lying about.

I just don't like seeing people dismiss a .22 -- especially in cases where it is the only round that the person can handle at the time. No I won't be in a Weaver stance with headgear and glasses while sleeping. I can swing that Mark III up, put the laser on anything in my room and put a hole in it. And it is so easy to shoot I can probably move about enough to grab the 10mm and make a swap if needed. And having someone carry a Lady Smith that can't hit a barn with it and won't practice because they hate it may be better off with a Mark III -- at least they'll practice and at least they'll hit the bad guy.

 

[22/45 Fan]

@mobuck -- how would you like me to prove it? And I forgot to mention, 5 seconds max. I think it is the gun and the suppressor more than skill. And when I say one hole I don't mean all in the same place, just that there are not gaps ... the hole is usually quarter size. Precise shot placement is hard -- unless the gun is huge and heavy and the rounds light and no kick at all. That is why I like the Ruger Hunter with target (fluted) barrel. The don't come threaded any more, bummer.

I think you missed the point. Yes, the gun and you are capable of that level of accuracy but, as mobuck wrote, could you do it in the heat of a surprise violent confrontation? Precise shot placement requires a steady hand and you won't have one under those conditions.

 

[flash-spyder]

I did not miss it. One handed fast followups will always be easier with a laser and .22 than a .44 mag -- for any shooter of equal skill. Which was my point. Having the .22 is handy for that first set of shots ... just a matter of perspective. And some people will never hit anything with a Lady Smith farther than a few feet away. It would be situational ... if I woke up and someone is already in the bedroom they get a face full of .22. If I hear noises in the house then I get my 10mm. If I hear noises outside I get my AR ... I'm just saying first priority is to hit the target and second penetrate. We can argue all day long about the actual speed of a .22 -- but they are faster than a 9mm (.38) and since they are smaller will have less surface area to prevent penetration. I do this for fun with people all the time that think they "need" a big gun -- place a 2x4 10 yards out and you get 5 seconds. I almost always do more damage to the 2x4 than the .44 mag. Often because the .44 mag shooter gets zero or one hit. I get 11 and at 40 grains that beats 2 hits with a 44 mag. I am not advocating that a .22 is superior to a 9mm, 10mm, .40, .44 mag, .357 mag -- I am advocating that the shooter and the weapon must match up well for maximum effect. I'd give up power for hits. I'd give up power to get someone to practice and enjoy shooting instead of never training and practicing (or owning a gun because the powerful one was so unpleasant to them). I'd chose different weapons for different situations. There is no one-size-fits-all firearm, caliber, magic bullet, etc.