Author Topic: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?  (Read 40872 times)

endurance

  • Guest
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #30 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.

Offline mangyhyena

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 906
  • Karma: 38
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #31 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.

Offline Windage and Elevation

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: 0
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #32 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.

Offline donaldj

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1382
  • Karma: 87
    • Keep and Bear, LLC
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #33 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.

Offline welshman

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Karma: 1
  • New TSP Forum member
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #34 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.

Offline donaldj

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1382
  • Karma: 87
    • Keep and Bear, LLC
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #35 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.

Offline srayburn870

  • Fledgling Prepper
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: 0
  • New TSP Forum member
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #36 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.   

Offline Scottman

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 847
  • Karma: 16
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #37 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.



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.

Offline Ken325

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
  • Karma: 49
  • "Winter is Coming"
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #38 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.

Offline joeinwv

  • The Bee Whisperer
  • Survival Demonstrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 2578
  • Karma: 92
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #39 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.

Offline Metaldog

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: 0
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #40 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.


Offline cranston

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: 11
  • New TSP Forum member
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #41 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.

Offline FrugalFannie

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1247
  • Karma: 64
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #42 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.

inbox485

  • Guest
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #43 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.

Offline Perfesser

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
  • Karma: 24
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #44 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. 

Offline trekker111

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 916
  • Karma: 71
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #45 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.

Offline Fire Ant

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 30
  • Karma: 5
  • Awakened 2009, Oath Keeper
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #46 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!


Offline will3117

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 28
  • Karma: 1
  • New TSP Forum member
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #47 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...

Offline themonk

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: 3
    • Fleeting Survival
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #48 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.

Offline PistolWhipped

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1978
  • Karma: 87
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #49 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.

Offline Wingman115

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 185
  • Karma: 12
    • Wingman115 YouTube Channel
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #50 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..

Offline will3117

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 28
  • Karma: 1
  • New TSP Forum member
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #51 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.

Offline rjfortuna

  • Prepper
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • Karma: 3
  • New TSP Forum member
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #52 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.

Offline Scottman

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 847
  • Karma: 16
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #53 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.

inbox485

  • Guest
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #54 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.

Offline rogersorders

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
  • Karma: 16
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #55 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.

Offline SheepdogSurvival

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
  • Karma: 18
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #56 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.

Offline Fyrediver

  • Survivalist Mentor
  • *****
  • Posts: 344
  • Karma: 22
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #57 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.

Offline chrisdfw

  • Dedicated Contributor
  • ******
  • Posts: 1300
  • Karma: 63
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #58 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)

Offline soupbone

  • Once made a pun out of "Mephistopheles"
  • Survival Demonstrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 2446
  • Karma: 146
  • If you think you're close enough - get closer.
Re: Rapid .22 fire as defense... would it be useful?
« Reply #59 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