The Survival Podcast Forum

Armory, Self Defense, And EDC => Firearms (Including Long Guns, Pistols) => The .22 Caliber Rifle: An Essential Homestead Firearm => Topic started by: Amerigo on May 07, 2011, 03:55:17 PM

Title: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Amerigo on May 07, 2011, 03:55:17 PM
I know .22LR is possibly the last caliber you want to be shooting in defense of your home or BOL.  But lets say you are in a SHTF/EOTW situation... would firing rapid bursts of hollow point .22LR be worth anything to defend your domicile?  I've never been shot, but I would think that 10 of those little guys to the chest would make me turn around.  Maybe not though.  ???

The reason I ask is because you could stock up on thousands of .22LR for next to nothing.  I already have a few 25 round mags for my 10/22, and it wouldn't be that much money to stock up on more.  I do have an AR15, but I'd imagine in an EOTW situation I'd run out of .223 long before .22LR.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Roknrandy on May 07, 2011, 04:06:11 PM
It's better than a stick. MANY people have died from the little round, it's probably down around number 7 or 8 on the "guns to have on me when the word ends" gun list but it's there.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: CarlD on May 07, 2011, 04:07:20 PM
Yes
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Agmundr on May 07, 2011, 04:12:52 PM
I'm a much larger fan of the "one shot one kill" school of thoughts, but I know *I* wouldn't want to be shot by a 22LR!  Everyone needs a good 22 and plenty of ammo for it, especially if the SHTF; great for hunting and, as Roknrandy stated, better than a stick for defensive situations!
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: NWBowhunter on May 07, 2011, 04:30:21 PM
.22lr to the brain box is a very effective defense. I wouldn't want to be with out it in my SHTF arsenal. The biggest plus is the cost of stock piling ammo.

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: LdMorgan on May 07, 2011, 06:16:19 PM
.22's have a high spin rate, so when you shoot someone in the head with them they tend to ricochet around inside the skull like a marble being shaken in a tin can.

I saw the x-ray of a deader that took a single .22 short to the temple at close range.

There were seven distinct bullet tracks running through the guy's brain, where the round had bounced back and forth across the inside his head.

The .22 Magnum pistol, BTW, was the #1 favorite assassination choice for organized crime in the British West Indies some years ago. I imagine that load will still do the job.






 
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: soupbone on May 07, 2011, 07:41:06 PM
Don't forget that in an shtf or eotw scenario, medical help will not be available. Any wound from any bullet would be far more serious than it is now. Remember, 150 years ago, people thought themselves adequately armed with a .31 cal revolver, and after Smith & Wesson's bored through cylinder patent lapsed, look at all of the .22 short / .32 rimfire revolvers made and carried. What is the difference between then and now?

I think the probability of getting shot will weigh heavily on the minds of evil-doers; a .22 with a gazillion rounds available will make a creditable contribution to your safety.

soupbone
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: joeinwv on May 07, 2011, 07:54:28 PM
Shooting faster is rarely the answer.

Would I feel okay with a 22 as a defensive weapon - sure. Would I feel a hell of a lot better with something else - sure.

My Glock 19 holds 16 rds. Add a spare mag and you have 31 total rounds. I do not anticipate needing to fire anywhere near 31 rounds defending my life in the next 50 years. And if I do need them, I will be glad they are not 22 LR rounds.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: benc on May 07, 2011, 08:21:09 PM
There is no argument that a .22 can be lethal but it is not a good stopper.  Trooper Coates was killed by a .22 but he did not die immediately and continued to present a threat to the fat slob that shot him (though unfortunately not a lethal one).

Most bullets are pretty effective in the brain box.  The trick is getting the bullet in there.

As was said above.  It is better than nothing and I don't want to be shot with one.

I don't think it would be wise to depend on just a .22 to protect yourself but I like soupbone's point about a GSW being far more serious in an emergency, SHTF, EOTW situation.

I haven't thought it through completely but it seems like having a .22 to burn a few rounds at people who need to be somewhere else and a more substantial gun to actually stop them might be an effective system.  Having written that I generally think folks should refrain from shooting unless they actually mean it.

If you'll permit me to develop the idea as I write I think you could set it up where you shoot people (who need to be shot) first with the .22 and then if they are not discouraged follow it up with heavier rounds.

All that is with the idea of defending an area.

You wrote about "rapid .22 fire" though.  For a .22 to have a reliably meaningful impact on a target it will need to be more accurate than fast and even if you can shoot with 0.1 second splits you're still just shooting small lead pellets.

However, there is absolutely no reason not to stock up on .22 ammo.  Even if you don't own a .22 it would be good for barter.

A note on the 25 round 10/22 mags.  Have you shot them with the ammo you plan on storing?  They are famously unreliable.  If yours work then great.  Just be sure.  I've heard that Ruger has just introduced their own full capacity banana mags that are supposed to feed well.

http://www.ruger.com/news/2011-04-29b.html

I have no experience with it though so YMMV.

Ben
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: excaliber on May 07, 2011, 10:12:03 PM
a few points to ponder,
statistically more people have been killed by accident with a .22 than any other gun.

you can carry a butt load of ammo easily, take your pic, 1000 rounds of 22 or 180 rounds of 556 (basic military load) (6 mags)

and you can actually afford a thousand rounds of .22 ammo.

if I was a bad man with a AR, and was looking for food or money and you had a .22,,, I might look for someone else that does not have a .22
if your in anything close to a fair fight, your tactics suck.

I am Iraq vet twice (11B Infantry) been in some bad situations, and something that really didnt cross my mind was how big is the gun that is shooting at me, it's a gun shooting at me, that was all I needed to know.

you are fighting Humans, not lions, you shoot a lion with a 22, he will charge and kill you, you shoot a human, he will stop and seek medical attention (normally)

as you can tell I am a big fan of the 22, I personally went with a 22 MAGNUM

Magnum research 22 magnum semi auto
Leopold 2-7x28 scope
Volquartsen 25 round Magazine
Volquartsen extractor
Extended Mag release
polyurethane bolt stop

and I got a Docter site and am about to mount on top the scope for quick target acquisition, and see if I like it.


(http://i622.photobucket.com/albums/tt306/1989_S-10/Guns/DSCF4320.jpg)

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: TexGuy on May 07, 2011, 10:53:53 PM
.22's have a high spin rate, so when you shoot someone in the head with them they tend to ricochet around inside the skull like a marble being shaken in a tin can.

I'm going to have bad dreams tonight now.

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: ZenGunFighter on May 08, 2011, 09:19:09 AM
I'm going to have bad dreams tonight now.

.22s rifling rates around around 1 turn in 16".
About the same as most pistols....
Velocities are similar too....

Get a .45. Even if you just hit the badguy in the arm, it will put him down. Hard. :sarcasm:

I just love gun myths...

Will the .22 do? It will if you will.

Stopping humans is a tricky thing. There is physical stopping and psychological stopping.
We understand physical stopping. Disrupt the central nervous system and you have an instant stop. Disrupt the circulatory system and you have a stop sometime in the future. Bad disruption = quicker stop.

Psychological stop means the badguy gives up. Who knows what will cause this? Just pointing a gun at someone can be enough. A warning shot can be enough. a wound can be enough. Then there is the bastard you have to shoot 33 times before he is convinced.
(cops shot a guy 33 times to the torso with 9mm hollow points. He was in the middle of reloading when they put him down with a 12 gauge slug. It took 2 of those... No drugs, no alcohol in his system)

Or there is the guy in DC that took a 12 gauge slug to the left side of his chest. He ran 6 blocks to the hospital...

I don't care what you are using. Expect it to NOT work. Train hard. Make sure you understand anatomy and 'stopping'. Know where to put the bullets, no matter what the angle the subject is to you. Make sure you can put the bullets where they need to go, no matter how exciting things are.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: benc on May 08, 2011, 03:39:50 PM
I don't care what you are using. Expect it to NOT work.

That is a great line.  The stuff before and after it make perfect sense but that there is Truth.

Ben
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: soupbone on May 08, 2011, 04:42:22 PM
"Make sure you understand anatomy and 'stopping'. Know where to put the bullets, no matter what the angle the subject is to you."

Another great line, Zen. Most people who study firearms self defense spend much, if not all of their time studying the mechanics of firearm manipulation rather than terminal balistics or the physiology and psychology of the target. A head shot can be effective, if you can hit the target.

I don't mean that last to be insulting - try tying a balloon to a branch on a breezy day and then trying to hit it, you'll see what I mean. Ever since I've been shooting seriously (since the early '70s), we've been taught to hit center of mass - the best protected part of the body, heavy muscle and bone - not an easy target even with a duty round. And it moves almost as much as the head. A better target area might be the pelvic girdle, mid way between the belly button and the groin. There's not too mich protection there, and a lot of vital stuff close to the surface (Femoral artery, sciatic nerve, etc.) That, and given the propensity of the .22 to bounce around inside stuff.....

Maybe its time to put aside the copy of whatever shooting guru is in at the moment and pick up a copy of Gray's Anatomy....

soupbone
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: ZenGunFighter on May 08, 2011, 04:54:04 PM


Maybe its time to put aside the copy of whatever shooting guru is in at the moment and pick up a copy of Gray's Anatomy....

soupbone

I was doing some training for the staff of a small private island. One of the students was an ex-cop from Russia. He was with a counter terr unit. We were using targets of actual people, in various presentations. When I looked at the group the Russian shot on this target;
(http://www.letargets.com/images/le-21.jpg)
There was a fist sized group at the base of the spine. Everyone else shot the upper torso. I knew that he didn't 'miss'. I asked him about it. "We shoot lower spine. Stops bad guy. Doesn't kill him. We can ask him questions..."
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: liftsboxes on May 08, 2011, 06:58:23 PM
Crazily enough - we took some time today to talk about home defense with our daughters (10&11).  One of the topics that came up was (they love zombie movies) "Hey Dad! If you and Mom are ever fighting zombies then we can go upstairs and thin them out with our .22's!"

Not the worst idea I've ever heard.

Respect to the kids, they aren't looking for a kill shot every time - just often enough to manage the threat situation.  Volume of fire tactics have worked more than once and have an interesting history. 
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: LdMorgan on May 08, 2011, 08:17:11 PM
.22s rifling rates around around 1 turn in 16".
About the same as most pistols....
Velocities are similar too....
Quote

You are absolutely right. For the LR, 1 turn in 16" is almost universal.

Rifling for the .22 Short is even slower:1 turn in 12".

Apparently the tendency to ricochet  is due almost exclusively to the light weight of the bullet.

Good to know.


Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: LdMorgan on May 08, 2011, 08:27:48 PM
On the subject of rapid fire, I saw a news video many years ago about a guy that built a .22 chain gun.

It wasn't much larger than a kitchen blender, but when he fired it up it purely chopped down small trees, cleared out the local underbrush, and excavated an earth bank very well!

While putting one round where it ought to go is always good, there is still something to be said for the Firehose System of Ordinance Disposal.

I wonder if they have ever tried building a MetalStorm in .22, and (if so) where can I get one?

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Bradbn4 on May 08, 2011, 08:47:38 PM

>>"Rifling for the .22 Short is even slower:1 turn in 12"

1 turn in 12" is a faster than 1 turn in 16 - the lighter the bullet often the slower the spin rate.

A 1/7" 223 is good to go on heavy bullets - while a 40 grain bullet does poorly.
A 1/12" 223 in 40 grain is good to go - while the 70 grain one never stabilizes correctly.

If an insufficient twist rate is used, the bullet will begin to yaw and then tumble; this is usually seen as "keyholing", where bullets leave elongated holes in the target as they strike at an angle. Once the bullet starts to yaw, any hope of accuracy is lost, as the bullet will begin to veer off in random directions as it precesses.

Conversely, too-high a rate of twist can also cause problems. The excessive twist can cause accelerated barrel wear, and also induce a very high spin rate which can cause projectile jacket ruptures causing high velocity spin stabilized projectiles to disintegrate in flight. A higher twist than needed can also cause more subtle problems with accuracy: Any inconsistency within the bullet, such as a void that causes an unequal distribution of mass, may be magnified by the spin.

Just because the bullets are small, don't mean anyone wants to be hit by one - and I do thing they have their use in suppressive fire.  And with the cost of 22 - you could afford to put more down range.
 
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Patriot:Ex Machina on May 09, 2011, 07:09:50 AM


I don't care what you are using. Expect it to NOT work. Train hard. Make sure you understand anatomy and 'stopping'. Know where to put the bullets, no matter what the angle the subject is to you. Make sure you can put the bullets where they need to go, no matter how exciting things are.
That right there is excellent advice. +1 for you.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: joeinwv on May 09, 2011, 11:39:40 AM
Another good / bad aspect of the 22LR is that it just is not very noisy. If I am only going to shoot a few rounds, I do not worry about hearing protection if I am outside in the open.

This is good - because it means the sound doesn't carry, could be mistaken for other noises, draws less attention.

This is bad - because there is a definite awareness when you are in proximity of a high power rifle being fired. Anyone who has been in the woods hunting when someone near by sets of a 30-06, knows how loud and scary unexpected gunshots can be. If I am shooting at someone in my house, loud is good in my book. Make sure there is no doubt in the perps mind that they are receiving gunfire.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: BulkAmmo.com on May 09, 2011, 07:45:49 PM
A 22 LR wouldn't be my first choice, but as long as you recognize the firearm that your using and it's limitations it should work. I would prefer to have a centerfire round, but best case is always a bigger bore.

I was thinking about the same thing when I picked up my GSG. 26 rounds, reliable and zero recoil. I would be a bit concerned with over-penetration though.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: mangyhyena on June 16, 2011, 12:17:30 AM
Quantity has a quality all its own.  The cost of .22 ammo & rifles allows for some serious quantity.

As for stopping power, strap on a machete or keep a bat handy to dispatch anyone crazy enough barrel through the hail of lead you send forth as they come at you.

Honestly, I don't think BG's want to get shot with any caliber.


Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: soupbone on June 16, 2011, 09:04:36 AM


"As for stopping power, strap on a machete or keep a bat handy to dispatch anyone crazy enough barrel through the hail of lead you send forth as they come at you."

Good point, Mangy - ALWAYS HAVE A "PLAN B". Whether or not you are using a .22 or a 12 ga. And never underestimate the power of the lowly baseball bat - it can be quite a fight stopper, although I prefer something a little more specialized:

http://www.museumreplicas.com/p-555-german-war-hammer.aspx?utm_source=Product_Plus&utm_medium=productsearch&utm_campaign=Product_Plus&

 ;D

soup
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: mangyhyena on June 16, 2011, 09:50:15 AM

"As for stopping power, strap on a machete or keep a bat handy to dispatch anyone crazy enough barrel through the hail of lead you send forth as they come at you."

Good point, Mangy - ALWAYS HAVE A "PLAN B". Whether or not you are using a .22 or a 12 ga. And never underestimate the power of the lowly baseball bat - it can be quite a fight stopper, although I prefer something a little more specialized:

http://www.museumreplicas.com/p-555-german-war-hammer.aspx?utm_source=Product_Plus&utm_medium=productsearch&utm_campaign=Product_Plus&

I'd rather get shot than get brained with that thing! 

 ;D

soup
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: donaldj on June 16, 2011, 10:47:01 AM
As the OP stated, this is an EOTW consideration.

Of course, in 'normal' society like now, I'd want high stopping power per hit, not only because of self defense, but because of litigation considerations.

In an EOTW scenario, you don't know what you'll be up against..  Utter and complete desperation on an assailant's part may drive him to greater "resiliency" than he would have if it were in normal society.

In either case, all my firearms instructors have stressed that in an actual gunfight, landing hits on target is VERY hard. You're stressed, moving, pissed, worried, defending your kid, etc etc etc and your "peak training skill level" will not be achieved (unless you're a SEAL?!). Scoring hits, when they happen, had better be as incapacitating as possible.

Don't plan on having superior shot placement than your target
Don't plan on having steadier nerves than your target
Don't plan on having a rate of fire greater than your target

So for defense, don't plan on handicapping yourself with an underpowered round compared to your target's potential resilience.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: A Pirate on June 17, 2011, 07:35:37 AM
My two thoughts on this; one if you wonder on lethality of weapons I recommend reading the book Ice Man about one of the NY mobs most prolific hit men who killed with everything but always carried .22 derringers on him. Two the IDF and others field small amounts of .22s to combat troops.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: 264Win on June 30, 2011, 11:16:55 AM
I am not against the use of a 22 as a defense weapon, but not my first choice. Any weapon can be used it depends on the will of the person defending and the perseverance of the person attacking. Any weapon is a barrier to put before your attacker, but its effectiveness depends on the situation before you and you must be prepared for anything. Use what you have and be prepared to defend yourself and family, its better than a stick in the eye.   
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: welshman on July 05, 2011, 11:45:50 AM
I donno i feel that what ever you shoot just take out the knees and you take out the man ,man is not that hard to kill . the nervous system will usually do it for you and so will gut shooting in any caliber .The .22 is a fine weapon any one can use it woman or child if need be
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: welshman on July 05, 2011, 11:47:35 AM
Check out the new Kel-tec >22 mag pistol with a 30 rd mag
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: endurance on July 05, 2011, 11:57:54 AM
To summarize from firearms instructor, John Farnam:
"Missing is triply disastrous:
It doesn't stop the fight!  The longer this fight goes on, the more
hurt I'm going to get.
It provides me with one fewer round with which to solve my tactical
problem.
When one of my rounds fails to hit something I wanted it to hit, by
definition, it will hit something I didn't want it to hit!"

This certainly applies here.  I want a fight stopper.  I want it over.   Now. 

I also don't want to try to explain why 13 of the 30 rounds I fired ended up missing the target and two of those ended up going through my neighbor's window, one fatally striking my neighbor who was doing dishes.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: mangyhyena on July 05, 2011, 04:29:06 PM
Given the choice, I'd rather fight with an AK than a .22.  Also, given a choice, I'd rather fight with a .22 rifle than no firearm.

I think the advantage of .22, to those planning for teotwawki, is you can more easily afford enough rounds and rifles to supply future generations of your family in addition to having enough ammo to last your own life time.

.22 isn't my first choice for defense, but it's not out of the question, either.

Plan A for defense is to avoid trouble in the first place.  I realize plan A isn't fool proof.  That's the reason for plan B; fight like Hell with firearms.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Windage and Elevation on July 05, 2011, 06:06:22 PM
You need to look at what your situation is. IF you are beseiged by many, you need effective large caliber fire - you don't have time to 'double tap" each approaching bad guy. If you are part of a fire team being beseiged by many, you need a rapid fire weapon, as part of a fire team to lay down supressive fire, to cause your enemies to duck, cover, and "reconsider" their desires.

In a WAR scenario, It is better to wound an enemy and therefore tie up the other groups rescources, by having people who have to tend to the wounded. If you kill an enemy, you have removed one person from the fight. If you mortally wound an enemy, then medics and others are tied up tending to the wounded.

All that said, it is simply this - a 22 beats nothing, a 30 caliber weapon (30-30, 308 or 30.06)  or larger beats most.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: donaldj on July 05, 2011, 08:03:38 PM
I donno i feel that what ever you shoot just take out the knees and you take out the man

I would caution anyone against taking this advice seriously for a number of reasons.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: welshman on July 06, 2011, 06:17:28 AM
Have you had much experience with a .22 hollow point (like a stinger round ) don't down grade the .22 you have a better chance of a more controled fire than with some of the other larger calibers . Yes the larger caliber can shoot through walls I understand that but we are talking about dispatching a human,  enough pain will stop a fight ,the majority of people don't have the mine set or the stomach for killing. Also, anyone can handle a .22.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: donaldj on July 06, 2011, 10:23:49 AM
Have you had much experience with a .22 hollow point (like a stinger round ) don't down grade the .22 you have a better chance of a more controled fire than with some of the other larger calibers . Yes the larger caliber can shoot through walls I understand that but we are talking about dispatching a human,  enough pain will stop a fight ,the majority of people don't have the mine set or the stomach for killing. Also, anyone can handle a .22.

I'm not dissing the caliber, just the tactic I quoted above. It appears you're trying to steer the argument into a caliber/cartridge debate rather than the shot placement statement I was critical over.

Shooting someone in the knees may immobilize them.

Good luck scoring a knee hit.
Good luck destroying the knee
Good luck with the pain over adrenaline resilience being so severe it incapacitates the enemy.

Lastly, an immobilized enemy with a gun is still an enemy with a gun. While movement is nice, last I checked a firearm was a ranged weapon, and shooter mobility was not absolutely necessary to endanger his targets.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: srayburn870 on July 06, 2011, 12:26:59 PM
Interesting post and there are many ways to describe "defense". Obviously with three heavily armed Rambo's jacked up on meth crashing your door down the lowly .22lr is not going to be a good choice, but then what actually is?  Neither is it in a true military/SWAT situation where you are up against long range automatic weapons with highly trained personnel etc. I would think 99% of the time anyone with the element of surprise to fire the first shot wins no matter what the caliber and these would be the rule rather than exception. Emptying a Ruger 10/22 clip in someone across the living room is quite a formidable a defense.   

However in a more urban anarchy type situation even food supply disrupted for a month etc, it can be an very good choice.  The German snipers in WWII used them a great deal in urban type settings for many reasons.  They found a wounded person that did not die quickly served many purposes.  First it actually incapacitated 2 or 3 people because they had to help the fallen person not to mention medical resources etc.  It also created plan disruptions and fear with the perpetrators.  Having a wounded person groveling out in the open made for hesitation and reluctance as well as a powerful distraction.  It was very difficult to figure out where the shots came from allowing protection and the victim generally died anyways due to lack of a qualified medical etc .  So it actually was very effective in many ways.

Although a large military caliber weapon is good for full frontal assault against like firepower their usefulness beyond that deteriorates quite rapidly.  Misplaced rounds can take out friends and family through cars, walls etc.  The loudness is counterproductive and you might as well ring a dinner bell for everyone within miles as well as scaring all game for miles.  It shreds small game assuming you can even hit it with heavy recoil.  Due to inability to move or carry significant amounts of ammo those will also be the first guns abandoned making confrontations with them more seldom all the time.   
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Scottman on July 07, 2011, 06:32:53 PM
There is no argument that a .22 can be lethal but it is not a good stopper.  Trooper Coates was killed by a .22 but he did not die immediately and continued to present a threat to the fat slob that shot him (though unfortunately not a lethal one).

Most bullets are pretty effective in the brain box.  The trick is getting the bullet in there.

As was said above.  It is better than nothing and I don't want to be shot with one.

I don't think it would be wise to depend on just a .22 to protect yourself but I like soupbone's point about a GSW being far more serious in an emergency, SHTF, EOTW situation.

I haven't thought it through completely but it seems like having a .22 to burn a few rounds at people who need to be somewhere else and a more substantial gun to actually stop them might be an effective system.  Having written that I generally think folks should refrain from shooting unless they actually mean it.

If you'll permit me to develop the idea as I write I think you could set it up where you shoot people (who need to be shot) first with the .22 and then if they are not discouraged follow it up with heavier rounds.

All that is with the idea of defending an area.

You wrote about "rapid .22 fire" though.  For a .22 to have a reliably meaningful impact on a target it will need to be more accurate than fast and even if you can shoot with 0.1 second splits you're still just shooting small lead pellets.

However, there is absolutely no reason not to stock up on .22 ammo.  Even if you don't own a .22 it would be good for barter.

A note on the 25 round 10/22 mags.  Have you shot them with the ammo you plan on storing?  They are famously unreliable.  If yours work then great.  Just be sure.  I've heard that Ruger has just introduced their own full capacity banana mags that are supposed to feed well.

http://www.ruger.com/news/2011-04-29b.html

I have no experience with it though so YMMV.

Ben

Interesting discusssion. MY TI 25's composites and BX 25's are working flawlessly. A couple days ago I shot 600 rounds through my let's test the 10/22 barrel (just a regular extra 16 inch factory ruger barrel I have) non stop. I shoot CCI blazer which I've done immersion tests on and it has very good qualities. I've never had a dud. The gun kept firing till I was out of 600 rounds. I experienced no misfeeds, stove pipes etc. FLAWLESS. The gun was VERY hot (again just for testing) that I could feel heat through the magwell.

Was this test extreme? yes it was, but it shows how a 10/22 with BX-25 mags and or TI 25's can keep on ticking. An asset if the chips are down for sure.

(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/270515_227567117274792_100000645178491_780113_2735152_n.jpg)

Taken from what i've posted before on hoodswoods.

Thoughts on 22's.

1. Low report. Low muzzle flash compared to the other firearms. Lower gas volume. Easy to suppress. Easy to get subsonic ammo which is pretty quiet on it's own right. If I set up a hide in an urban room, the whole room wouldn't shake from the excessive muzzle flash and recoil of the .22's like some of the more powerful cartridges. On the ground, it's not going to stir up the a large amount of dust/ leaves like shooting a 308 will. Prepping your hide is still a good idea....

Israel used modified 10/22's at one point http://www.ruger1022...aeli_sniper.htm The Russians fielded the Izhmash SV-99 a 22 rifle http://www.pmulcahy....iper_rifles.htm

2. I trust most have seen the 300 yard turkey test with a .22 LR.
3. Easy to teach people to shoot 22's with it's light recoil.
4. If you have a mag fed bolt or semi reloading is easy and quick. The low recoil of 22's make delivering rapid fire easy. I would not want to to take 3 shots of rapidly delivered .22LR from a 10/22 to my windpipe/neck/head from 100 yards. Don't think the 22's can penetrate the skull at your given distance? The neck is such a fragile target, so many vital components to the human animal in there. Is it a quick kill like a CNS shot, no, but who wants to get hit in the spine/windpipe/carotid arteries??? Not I, says I 
5. Quotes taken from 1993 Gun Digest, article The Quiet Rifle.
a. " The Lethal Range of the Long rifle cartridge is far beyond it's "effective" range- close to three-fourths of a mile on an adult human, hit in a vital area. Paper ballistics are rather misleading in this respect. While they show a significant declines in velocities and foot pounds of energy over a hundred yards, author tests with a 22 high velocity solid bullets, for penetration in solid plywoods, evidenced only a .2 inch decrease between 25 and one hundred fifty yards.
b. "The Remington Yellow Jacket, with it's large cavity, expands with explosive results which are enhanced by the cavity being filled with bullet lubricant, which behaves as a semi fluid. The effect on woodchucks is very lethal. Grackles and starlings are often pulped to a point of being blow in half; so are squirrels, which makes it a poor choice for pot hunting.
c. The short qualifies as the most quiet of useful hunting rounds, making a pop a little loader than a pellet rifle. It's small size and mild report belie it's deadliness. In solid plywood tests, the high velocity solid will go through 1.5 inches at 25 yards, as compared to the high velocity 22 LR at 2 inches at this distance. A penetration of capability of .5 inch of plywood is enough to cause death in a vital area hit on a person. Documented fatalities with the 22 short have occurred at 600 yards. The short does best in a barrel bored for it alone, but is remarkable accurate in some Long Rifle barrels.

http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/index.php?showtopic=38197&st=45&p=449926&hl=fatalities&fromsearch=1&#entry449926

http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/index.php?showtopic=43701&hl=hide&st=15
Peter's post as usual has reallygood points.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Ken325 on July 07, 2011, 08:09:11 PM
I think you could send more lead downrange with a shotgun and #4 buck than with a 22 with a big magazine.  You will not be very accurate if you are pulling the trigger quickly on a 22.  It is easier to explain 20 hits from one shot than 20 individual hits in court.  The only way I see a 22 as a defensive weapon is if you are arming a group and you have a limited number of guns. I would give the 22 to a inexperienced shooter.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: joeinwv on August 01, 2011, 10:24:12 PM
...
Shooting someone in the knees may immobilize them.

Good luck scoring a knee hit.
Good luck destroying the knee
Good luck with the pain over adrenaline resilience being so severe it incapacitates the enemy.
...
Not even taking into account the potential legal ramifications of intentionally maiming someone. If you didn't have a need to kill, you probably aren't legal to shoot.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Metaldog on January 31, 2012, 05:34:56 AM
I got to shoot an American 180 full auto .22LR a few years back with the 177round drum magazine.

I shot a number of full auto weapons that day, but I have to say that was by far my favorite - it was a laser, a recoilless stream of lead from the muzzle to the target.  You couldn't miss.  I would hate to be on the wrong end of one of those no matter the skill level of the aggressor.

Almost 9 full seconds at 1200rpm - I think I recall that this was considered for law enforcement but cancelled because lawyers would have a field day if criminals were found with 100 little holes in them.

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: cranston on January 31, 2012, 10:12:39 AM
Years ago I used to train with a small town police chief who wouldn't issue AR rifles like the surrounding PDs.  He said "nothing beats the intimidating sound of a 12 gauge pump racking a round."   

"-Except a 12 year old shooting holes through your body armor with a semi auto "squirrel gun" from behind cover a hundred yards away." says I.

The reason I mentioned it is the "ting-ting-ting" sound of a .22 hitting near me is going to have me scrambling for cover as fast as anything.  I have a .22 adaptor in one of my AR's, and part of the reason is quiet, inexpensive, high rate of "GTF outta here!" should the need arrise to discourage varmints of two and four legged variety.  It also has a fixed four scope that I'm comfortable with taking standing or slow moving head shots out to a hundred years, should it be needed.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: FrugalFannie on January 31, 2012, 11:11:11 AM
There is no argument that a .22 can be lethal but it is not a good stopper.  Trooper Coates was killed by a .22 but he did not die immediately and continued to present a threat to the fat slob that shot him (though unfortunately not a lethal one).

Most bullets are pretty effective in the brain box.  The trick is getting the bullet in there.

As was said above.  It is better than nothing and I don't want to be shot with one.

I don't think it would be wise to depend on just a .22 to protect yourself but I like soupbone's point about a GSW being far more serious in an emergency, SHTF, EOTW situation.

I haven't thought it through completely but it seems like having a .22 to burn a few rounds at people who need to be somewhere else and a more substantial gun to actually stop them might be an effective system.  Having written that I generally think folks should refrain from shooting unless they actually mean it.

If you'll permit me to develop the idea as I write I think you could set it up where you shoot people (who need to be shot) first with the .22 and then if they are not discouraged follow it up with heavier rounds.

All that is with the idea of defending an area.

You wrote about "rapid .22 fire" though.  For a .22 to have a reliably meaningful impact on a target it will need to be more accurate than fast and even if you can shoot with 0.1 second splits you're still just shooting small lead pellets.

However, there is absolutely no reason not to stock up on .22 ammo.  Even if you don't own a .22 it would be good for barter.

A note on the 25 round 10/22 mags.  Have you shot them with the ammo you plan on storing?  They are famously unreliable.  If yours work then great.  Just be sure.  I've heard that Ruger has just introduced their own full capacity banana mags that are supposed to feed well.

http://www.ruger.com/news/2011-04-29b.html

I have no experience with it though so YMMV.

Ben

While I agree that 22 are not going to cause the same amount of damage as a 45 in the same spot, the 22 is not a 'pellet.' There is less recoil with a 22 so being able to punch a lot of holes quickly into a person with accuracy is a big benefit. My brother was killed with one well placed, yet accidental, shot. (Long story - no I am not getting into it). It pierced his back, entered his heart and he was dead within minutes. I would never 'pooh pooh' the ability of the 22 to kill.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: inbox485 on March 15, 2012, 07:24:18 PM
Just noticed this thread. My big question (should it be relevant to the OP or other readers) is are we talking about .22lr from a rifle or a handgun. From a handgun, I'd call it iffy at best. IIRC the gel penetration from .22lr mouse gun was like 2". If you are talking about a rifle, then not just yeah but heck yeah it'll be plenty useful. It wouldn't be my first choice if I had a centerfire rifle or shotgun to choose from, but a .22lr hollow point from a rifle penetrates enough and does the damage. I could also easily put several rounds on a target in a very short amount of time and at close range it would be easy to aim. Frankly, if I had to choose between a .22 squirrel rifle and a handgun of any caliber for home defense, I'd choose the .22 rifle.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Perfesser on March 17, 2012, 11:31:06 AM
I would have said no but after the podcast #855 I'm rethinking the effectiveness of the .22. 
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: trekker111 on March 18, 2012, 06:49:50 AM
Would I go with just a 22? Not by choice, but it's a far sight better than throwing rocks. I seem to remember reading or hearing back in the late 90's of a man from somewhere in south America who was the victim of an attempted car jacking and also happened to be on his countries Olympic shooting team who killed both his attackers with his 22 match pistol. One at fairly close range the other at around 75 yards, 2 shots 2 kills both headshots.

Shooting into living flesh is a funny thing, I've seen deer drop in their tracks to a single round of 22 from 50 yards, and I've seen deer run 100 yards after taking 300gr bullet from a 375 Holland and Holland magnum through the heart. I went to an attempted murder suicide a while back where the husband shot his wife twice in the head with a 25 acp at point blank range, then shot himself once. He died, she was kept overnight for observation and released the next day with some stitches because the bullets did not penetrate her skull and lodged under her scalp. The muzzle was around an inch from her head when he fired.

There have been lots of people killed by a 22.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Fire Ant on March 18, 2012, 03:03:51 PM
Several thoughts:

I saw the trooper Coates video every year in training for several years.  Probably 6 or 7 times.  He was hit in the left biceps with a .22 short.  It apparently followed the artery into the chest and ripped his aorta. I think it took him about 15 to 18 seconds to fall. He died at the scene.  He was able to return fire and get hits on his attacker. I do not know what Trooper Coates was carrying, but I am sure it was a lot heavier than a .22 short.  The dirtbag lived.

Even with that in mind, my preferred duty pistol was a .45.  But, on duty then it was my job to stand and fight at close range with all kinds of restrictions.  That was not a "survival" situation.

In my house, for stay and fight protection, I prefer a .357 revolver because it can live uncared for at the head of my bed and still go bang and because of hit power and close quarters handling.

But I have great respect for the .22 rifle.  Today, if I knew I had to travel on foot (bug out) for 200 miles and could only take one firearm, I would choose the .22 rifle. Several others have talked about the whys: weight of rifle and ammo, accuracy, stealth, most targets would be small game -- and it would be adequate in defense for a run-away-fight.

side note: Some time in the 1970s the Ft Lauderdale, FL police (Tactical Response Unit) were using some kind of laser targeted .22 full auto.  It looked like a Thompson.  They brought it to the range and offered 30 of us a chance to shoot it with a prize for the shortest burst. The winner was 7 rounds.  It sounded like a very quiet chain saw.  I do not know how many rounds/second, but it was like water from a hose.  So, if that is what you mean by "rapid fire" --that would work!

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: will3117 on March 27, 2012, 09:42:33 AM
Shooting faster is rarely the answer.

Would I feel okay with a 22 as a defensive weapon - sure. Would I feel a hell of a lot better with something else - sure.

My Glock 19 holds 16 rds. Add a spare mag and you have 31 total rounds. I do not anticipate needing to fire anywhere near 31 rounds defending my life in the next 50 years. And if I do need them, I will be glad they are not 22 LR rounds.

I will take a scoped 10/22 .22lr over any handgun,  you and your glock will probably never even see me and if you do so what,  I would have the effective range all you could do is hide, If you did fire at me so what the chances of hitting anyone carrying a long gun whos smart enough to engage you from outside your handguns effective range are slim to none. OP I cant believe you said that 10 in the chest from a .22 might not stop someone..I have taken a buck in Texas twice with .22lr its not about firing as fast as you can its about knowing where to aim..I would be amazed to see anyone not be dropped by 2-3 in the chest at the very least we are talking collapsed lungs probably a perforated heart. Our bug out group practices movement with the long guns providing over watch using short range radios for coordination in case we ever have to bug out through a hostile area and have no vehicles plus its fun LOL...I dont think in a TEOTWAWKI situation someone with only a handgun would have much of a chance..It forces you to rely too heavily on never being seen. I think you should seriously consider getting a cheap scoped .22 not only does it give you range its a good way to eat if theres game around...
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: themonk on March 27, 2012, 06:57:25 PM
I think with head shots the 22lr will do just fine out of a rifle. I would perfer something else but I think i would feel at home with my 10/22 or Marlin 22mag.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: PistolWhipped on March 27, 2012, 08:56:44 PM
Would rapid-fire .22 be a viable defensive option?  I don't see why not.

Are there better options? Absolutely.

It's better than nothing.  And even Winchester White box .22 Hollowpoints are nasty on impact.  I dug a slug out of a wood backing I was shooting at the other day.  It mushroomed into a triangle shaped slug of slightly over .30 caliber with some rather sharp burrs on the edges.  I'd hate to see that going through anything important.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Wingman115 on March 27, 2012, 10:02:54 PM
I'm not a big pray and spray guy when it comes to shooting but there are time when you may have to lay down some cover fire. I don't care what round it is you don't want to get hit by it..
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: will3117 on March 27, 2012, 10:19:54 PM
On my uncles ranch growing up we would put down injured cattle with a regular .22 short pistol round one shot to the head, never did this shot ever fail to penetrate and kill a cow, steer or bull instantly, cattle have very thick skulls and a .22 has more than enough power to penetrate it, the round then proceeds to break apart and the pieces bounce around inside the skull creating many paths of destruction in the brain,  it is a very underestimated and extremely deadly round.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: rjfortuna on May 03, 2012, 03:45:34 PM
http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=27008/Product/CMMG-AR-15-22-LR-CONVERSION-KIT

I picked one of these up to turn the AR into a multi round option. .22 is extremely cheap. The drop in conversion works flawlessly. .22 is an inharentally dirty round so be ready to clean the AR OFTEN or put the .223 sear back in and fire off 2 or 3 after using the .22 conversion to blow all the crap out of the gas port.

I like the 2 in one gun option as .22 if there is a SERIOUS collapse will be around and probably "easily" bartered for, much more so than .223 or 7x62...

You can take down game if your worried about loosing some (Obviously not unless it was COMPLETELY necessary and you were out of other ammo) so .22 coming out of an AR REAL fast will work as a stop gap. Especially if your out of .223.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Scottman on May 03, 2012, 04:35:36 PM
In Fer Fal's book, he discusses that the government made trading/selling ammo illegal, even the once unregulated 22 lr.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: inbox485 on May 03, 2012, 06:45:47 PM
In Fer Fal's book, he discusses that the government made trading/selling ammo illegal, even the once unregulated 22 lr.

IIRC it was circa 2003 that buying more than 50 rounds per month became illegal, and selling w/o a license, and trading, giving, etc was banned. I remember reading about it. It was long after the "collapse". The issue with Argentina is it has "recovered" into a nationwide Chicago that will of course eventually re-collapse for all the same reasons Chicago will die a painful death.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: rogersorders on May 04, 2012, 06:04:25 AM
I think it would be a great asset if for nothing else than suppressive fire. Take a look at FM 7-8, squad attack and react to contact or watch a paintball tournament. They always have a dedicated person with a ton of ammo providing covering fire so the other members can maneuver.

If you don’t go lone wolf and have some friends/family around, having a dedicated “suppressive fire” shooter would definitely give you the upper hand in a fire fight.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: SheepdogSurvival on May 05, 2012, 08:49:29 PM
I'm of the opinion that it is 99% the Indian not the arrow so to speak. Most of the time it is how big the fight is in the man not how big the man in the fight is.  Violence of action is key to success, just like mangly suggested a machete or tomahawk in a determined person's hands is extremely dangerous and effective. A .22lr can be an extremely effective tool for violence if the person wielding it has the capacity to use it that way. I would not feel under gunned unless outnumbered, surprised, or facing a well armed/trained opponent  with a 22. But if you choose to use a .22 for defense you should be prepared to either egress to an another position of advantage while you allow your rounds to incapacitate your target or 'finish' the target with some other means of violence. Bottom line your mind is your greatest weapon.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Fyrediver on May 20, 2012, 10:20:40 AM
The ability of a bullet to kill someone is definitely linked to shot placement and post shooting medical aid. 

There's a 9 year old girl in Bremerton, WA that was shot by a .45 and survived.  Obviously she was grievously wounded and required numerous surgeries but the powerful and renowned .45 didn't kill her outright.  Keep her in mind.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: chrisdfw on May 21, 2012, 11:27:48 PM
Interesting post and there are many ways to describe "defense". Obviously with three heavily armed Rambo's jacked up on meth crashing your door down the lowly .22lr is not going to be a good choice, but then what actually is? 

If you get to the point where three heavily armed rambos have made it all the way to your door and are trying to crash it, your tactics are awful and you have already failed on so many levels.

the 22 is not a great fight stopper, but beats the hell out of harsh language. It is on par with pistol rounds, all of which are terrible fight stoppers when compared to long guns, it isn't all that different from 9mm or 40 or any PISTOL round, but can't compare with a centerfire rifle or shotgun, which are vastly superior for home defense.

However, if has great training applications, and is reasonable to stock up on. I own over 10,000 rounds of ammunition in several calibers... but 22LR is the only one I have ever bought 10,000 rounds in a single order. I'd love to have 10,000 rounds of 50 BMG, but that would cost more than any vehicle I've ever owned. (but I did order 100 rounds of 50 API today to add to the inventory)
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: soupbone on May 22, 2012, 06:42:32 AM
The OP asked about the .22 in a SHTF/EOTW scenario. To repeat and reinforce what many have said, a key element here is sustainability. If (or when) a serious event occurs, it could be months or years before things return to "normal". Even then, there is no telling what new laws, policies or procedures might be enacted to curtail firearms ownership or ammunition availability.

I can remember when all pick-up trucks were licensed as commercial vehicles (big $$$), except those legitimately used in agriculture. To get farm plates, you had to prove you actually were a farmer. I can see something similar happening with ammo: sure you can buy all of the ammo that you want, but to avoid a prohibitively large luxury or recreational tax, you have to prove a legitimate need for it, eg - a police, military, security guard ID, a farm address, etc.

For the cost of a couple of thousand rounds of "high power" ammo, you can have a multi-generational supply of quality .22 ammo. And you can stock up without attracting unwanted attention.

Be careful with statistics, though. While a .22 may not seem - or be - as "effective" as a larger caliber, that does not mean it is harmless. As with high powered air guns, successful employment requires a different technique - precision placement - regardless of whether you are using rapid or slow aimed fire.

soupbone
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: jpbearit on May 22, 2012, 12:48:44 PM
Buy the best gun you can afford. Buy the best gun you can afford to shoot in practice. OFTEN!!! You can make up alot of the inadequacies of your budget with payments of time and investments to skill.

The rest is just aguments on the fine points of physics. 
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: endurance on May 22, 2012, 01:22:30 PM
The OP asked about the .22 in a SHTF/EOTW scenario. To repeat and reinforce what many have said, a key element here is sustainability. If (or when) a serious event occurs, it could be months or years before things return to "normal". Even then, there is no telling what new laws, policies or procedures might be enacted to curtail firearms ownership or ammunition availability.

...

For the cost of a couple of thousand rounds of "high power" ammo, you can have a multi-generational supply of quality .22 ammo. And you can stock up without attracting unwanted attention.

Be careful with statistics, though. While a .22 may not seem - or be - as "effective" as a larger caliber, that does not mean it is harmless. As with high powered air guns, successful employment requires a different technique - precision placement - regardless of whether you are using rapid or slow aimed fire.

soupbone
I agree with you in some ways, but then I stop and think about what's realistic.  I just don't think I'm "that good" that I can survive firing 10,000 round without having someone on the other side getting lucky and hitting me.  If my number one goal in any lethal force engagement is to have it end as quickly as possible so I stop being at risk, then I want to be firing a round that has the highest probability of stopping the fight with a single hit, whether it's to the opponent's forearm, calf or thorax.  Every second longer that the fight goes on is a second that I'm taking incoming fire and sooner or later the SOB just might get lucky and hit a family member.

Do I still want 10k rounds of .22?  Absolutely, because there is no more cost effective way to train, acquire small game, and deal with nuisances on the 'stead.  But when there's lead heading my way, I'm sure that a thousand rounds of .308 (or .223) will be a more effective at stopping the fight, so that's my first choice in that situation.  If they're behind a tree, I don't care.  If they're wearing Level II or Level III body armor, I don't care.  If they're jacked up on crank and I hit them in the shoulder, I don't care.  The fight is over and my family is safe.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: BillyS on May 22, 2012, 06:54:55 PM
Well, there's a lot of advice. After all of it, think about this:

Are your shots well-placed?

If yes, then your answer is yes. Nobody much likes a belly full of bullets.

If no, then your guess is as good as anyone else's. You'll either scare them off or they'll keep coming until you send a few rounds properly home.

And the answer is the same for any other kind of firearm. If you're hitting 'em where it hurts, you're weapon is effective. If not, it is not.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: endurance on May 23, 2012, 01:11:12 PM
Despite extensive quality training over a period of over 25 years, countless hours of training, and the best equipment I can afford, I still don't know if my shots will be well placed. 

If two of New York's finest can fire 84 rounds and only get 14 hits between them (and have the suspect live), why should I believe that I'm going to hit 95% of the time at a time I'm in grave fear for my life?  I'm at least hoping to hit something with enough ooomph to stop the fight.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: chrisdfw on May 23, 2012, 02:55:32 PM
Despite extensive quality training over a period of over 25 years, countless hours of training, and the best equipment I can afford, I still don't know if my shots will be well placed. 

If two of New York's finest can fire 84 rounds and only get 14 hits between them (and have the suspect live), why should I believe that I'm going to hit 95% of the time at a time I'm in grave fear for my life?  I'm at least hoping to hit something with enough ooomph to stop the fight.

All true, I also train extensively, but have never had anyone shooting back. 

I know it probably won't help to say it now, but take your time and score a hit, you can never miss fast enough to win a firefight.

If you are at home, presumably you can have ammo stored, use a larger caliber if possible.
Where 22 might be good is bugging out on foot, where you have to carry all your supplies, you can carry far more 22 than other calibers.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: Mike Honcho on September 29, 2012, 03:28:19 PM
Yes... I bought my first .22 rifle because my daughter was turning 13 and wanted to go shooting for her birthday. At the time I only owned a 12 ga and a 9mm handgun, neither in my opinion are good starting weapons for a young first time shooter.

Okay I admit that I was embarrassed even buying the little gun in a store full of grown men, but that was my own ignorance. It wasn't long before I fell in love with that little Plinkster and not soon after got my own 10/22 (takedown) with the BX-25 mags...Both .22's are an essential part of my preps, including self defense they are reliable, accurate and cost effective plus my daughter loved it! And wifey who didn't like shooting loves it now after seeing my daughter be so excited, so now both of them understand the mechanics of the weapon... It's a win - win! Yes if there's a bump in the night imma grab my 9mm, but there's no knocking having mama backing me up with the ol' sturdy .22LR  ;D

-MH

Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: cbowseriii on September 29, 2012, 07:18:31 PM
This is why I love this forum tons of great information!
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: phuttan on October 01, 2012, 11:26:18 PM
22 rifles, pistols and lots of ammo are part of my preps. They wouldn't be my first choice for defense, but they would be among my top choices for bugging out on foot or generally living in the woods. This is for all the reasons mentioned by others. I consider cheap accurate food procuring tools to be top choices. And the ability to carry a thousand rounds or more is sweet. The ability to afford thousands of rounds to cache is another selling point. I would carry one in SHTF and would defend myself with it if necessary. So I have to say that I would agree that it's adequate in the right hands.

If you look at it the way I do then train with it as often as you can. By train I means tactical drills, speed drills and training to instinctively target soft areas like the neck and face. Do all the stress drills that you can come up with. Multiple targets, moving targets and good/bad guy drills are a good start. Do what you can where you train. But train with what you think you'll carry. Learn all it's weaknesses as well as it's strengths. Make it your own.

And have fun.

Pat
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: FrugalFannie on October 02, 2012, 05:15:46 AM
I was thinking about this and I think the advantages of using this as a defense are 1) ammo is cheap now and easy to stockup on and 2) because it's cheap, and hopefully plentiful when SHTF from your preps, you could put a rifle/pistol in the hands of someone with little or no experience and not worry about how many rounds they were expending, relative to a more expensive caliber.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: devildog78 on October 15, 2012, 02:11:29 AM
I agree with most of the posts, but I must say a nice grouping of well placed shots to the brain housing group will drop just about any oncoming threat.  Not to mention follow up shots from a small caliber are easy to attain.  What it boils down to is if I have a larger caliber that is what I am going to use.  If I am all out of the big stuff, I would definitely rather use the .22 than a rock.
Title: Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
Post by: David in MN on July 15, 2019, 04:27:31 PM
To revive something old...

Paul Harrell did a little testing on this back in 2016.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w4Z5azEPWk

I'm not saying it's my first choice but I was surprised how effective the *right* hollow point ammo could be. And if that's all your budget/shoulder/ears can take it can be put into use.