Defensive Terminal Ballistics of the .22 LR for a Prepper

[Mjollnir]

This thread was never intended to be argumentative. I made statements that placed the .22LR in relation to one shot stopping power versus other rounds. But somehow that seems to cause people to defend the .22LR round in reference to that statement.

I think the main issue people were having, or at least I was having, is the whole idea/myth of one shot stops in general. There are no guarantees with any round being capable of one shot stops based on caliber.
example #1 -
(mods delete link if you see fit) Proarms podcast #52 was an interview with Chicago PD Lt. Bob Stasch. He tells the story of his first of four-teen shootings where he and his partner had to shoot a 5'7" 143lb man armed with a knife. Partner shot perp CoM with six rounds of 45LC, they began wrestling and the partner pumped five rounds of 38spl in the perps back with muzzle contact. Stasch arrived on scene and fired two rounds of 44mag in the upper torso from 15' with no effect and fired two more rounds in his leg which is what brought him down. Tests showed the perp had no drugs in his system and had a blood alcohol level of 0.05. http://proarmspodcast.com/2010/05/23...ce-department/

example #2 -
http://www.lawofficer.com/article/tr...er-soulis-inci (article of encounter)
http://www.lawofficer.com/video/trai...er-soulis-inci (video recreation of encounter)
Officer Soulis shot the suspect 22 times with his issued Glock22 loaded with Ranger SXTs. 17 of those hits were said to be CoM hits.

Example #3 -

Jacksonville officer Jared Reston was shot point blank multiple times by a suspect armed with a Glock 21 loaded with 230gr FMJ. The first shot was to the face breack his jaw and exited his neck. He managed to draw his weapon and return hitting the suspect multiple times with his Glock 22 before finishing the fight with three contact shots to the BG head. This is a must watch interview if for nothing else than what he says about the will to stay in fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArDRg5SkuT0

http://proarmspodcast.com/2010/03/14/047-ed-brown-and-jared-reston/

There are no guarantees that any shot regardless of caliber will be a one shot stop unless you significantly damage the CNS. Gunfights are very dynamic in nature with all parties involved moving, shooting from odd positions, in and around cover, etc, etc........ But it doesn't have to be a one round gunfight either. Take what shots you can get as quickly as you can with the goal of working towards/opening up a CNS shot. If you stop the threat before you get there then great but don't hold out for the perfect shot.

[Grand58742]

I respect your opinion. But if you read all the posts, there were some statements arguing that it is a defensive round. I did not start a thread to argue. My point was in highlighting the fact that the .22LR is not a practical defense round in reference to one shot stopping power as it is weak in the area of terminal ballistics when compared to viable defensive rounds.

You are correct, it is not a practical defensive round and there are far better. But again, when push comes to shove and used in that capacity, it can be effective given the proper round choices. And that goes for just about any firearm. I don't believe you'd protect your mother with one given the choice of another caliber, but again, proper round choice can make it more effective. Still not practical, but more effective than a knife or hands on.

Also if you are armed with a .22LR against an opponent with an AR or Ak, you truly are outgunned. Not to say you have no chance of prevailing. You are simply outgunned as far as the power of the cartridge as well as the accuracy and distance.

You may be out gunned in caliber and range sure, but the key factor here that is overlooked is proficiency. Lot's of gang bangers and "disenfranchised urban youth" own and/or use AK rifles, Mac-10 (or whatever they are called these days) Go-lock pistols etc. Does this mean they are proficient in their use given range and the ability to put steel on target? How many of those types do you see at the range doing point shooting, triple taps, rapid reloads, correcting malfunctions, etc? Point is, you typically don't. So while the caliber choice might be on the other side of the equation, proficiency rides with the one that knows their firearm, the ballistics and the aforementioned ability to put steel on target. So one wouldn't necessarily be "out gunned" in that situation. Situation dictates as always.

As far as using what you have at hand, obviously the .22 is better than nothing. But the thread was aimed at preppers - preppers need to be prepared. That means making all efforts to use the right tool for the job that will give you the best chance of prevailing. The .22 LR is not the right tool or the best.

Of which we all would agree it is not the best or maybe even the right tool for the job. But it is not without its merits in the self defense arena.

Actually I brought up penetration in response to a post. I do not choose my defensive weapons by referring to FBI stats or standards.

On this, I would disagree since they are the resident experts that keep stats on such things. If the FBI protocols show round X is better and/or more efficient than round Y, it's better to go with round X in my opinion. My defensive load of 5.56 is what the FBI uses. I feel that is it's good enough for them after they spent countless hours and money testing it, I probably can't go wrong choosing it for my own use and to protect those I care about.

I know the lethality of the .22LR - as stated my cousin died of a .22LR. I am trying to emphasize stopping power in a gun fight. As a bodyguard, I would not consider the .22LR as a feasible defensive round and I know of no one in LE or Military (or the FBI) that would prefer to use it, or recommend it, regardless of penetration tests. So I am not sure why there are responses to a post that is discussing stopping power.

I don't believe anyone in their right mind would recommend going into a gun fight with a .22 LR (except Gunkid lol) nor did anyone on here suggest using it as a primary arm that I saw.

"Keeping someone pinned down at 100 yards until they bleed out," as you stated, is fine and dandy, assuming you shot them before they shot you. And there is only one of them, and they are not firing back at you with a more potent round. I am trying to stop the speculation regarding the .22LR and the if type scenarios.

And again, situation dictates as the ability to shoot straight and the psychology of being shot comes into play. Without speculation and "what if" scenarios, in a WROL situation that a untrained opponent that just so happens to have picked up an M1A starts shooting away at me, who has the advantage? Him because his weapon and caliber can reach out a lot more than mine? Do I have the advantage because I know my rifle inside and out, the limitations and advantages and can hit what I'm aiming at? Situation dictates all that.

Your statement, "And many of the "Big Three" of rifle rounds, the 5.56, 7.62x39 and 7.62x51 lack the sufficient penetration and or fragmentation to be reliable "man stoppers." " If we use that as a logical statement - then what exactly is a man stopper? A 7.62 round lacks penetration power? Against humans or rhinos?

Yes, and we go back to wounding ballistics and round types. Take the Hornady TAP-FPD 110 grain 7.62x51 for example. Hornady touts that as "For Personal Defense" although penetration tests show it comes nowhere near the penetration depth to be an effective self defense round. It expends all it's energy and fragments before even coming close to the FBI protocols (which I understand you might not agree with). So with your snippy comment of "rhinos or men," I give you a round that's not the best choice for self defense, even though it's packaged that way. And here we have our baseline problem. You state the .22 LR is not an effective defensive round. Okay, neither are certain loads in the 5.56, 7.62x39 and x51. Varmint bullets (typically the V-Max and some A-Max Hornady and pretty much any rounds under 55 grain with a few exceptions) are not good self defense rounds. They simply lack the penetration to hit vital organs or good CNS shots. Russian animal brands (Wolf, Bear, Tula, etc) have a thicker steel jacket that does not promote fragmentation, yawing or expansion in the hollow point design and are more of a straight through and through bullet. They work great for range time and proficiency, but for self defense? I'd much rather go with something else that's been proven to be more reliable.

So yes Virginia, there are some rounds out there that do NOT live up to the self defense loads or those I would trust my life to without hesitation. Would I use them if it's all I had? Sure would...just like a .22 LR is that's all I had.

If you look at my original post, I am keenly aware of the limitations of handgun rounds, even the .45 - that is why I teach and practice using triple taps. But is there are real comparison of the .22LR versus the .45 in pure stopping power?

This thread was never intended to be argumentative. I made statements that placed the .22LR in relation to one shot stopping power versus other rounds. But somehow that seems to cause people to defend the .22LR round in reference to that statement.

Yes, the .22 LR has limited stopping power in relation to other calibers. However, personally, I'd prefer a .22 LR in a pistol over say a .25 ACP. I know what the .22 LR is capable of and what the .25 ACP isn't capable of. Would I prefer to have a .45 ACP or 9mm? You betcha. Will I use what's on hand? You betcha. Will I ever recommend a .22 LR as a viable self defense caliber? Nope. Will I inform those I meet it can be a useful defensive tool and relatively potent given the right round types as well as shot placement? Better than nothing an if you're out squirrel hunting an end up getting attacked, I for one won't be tossing down my rifle since it's "not effective" and wishing I had my trusty AR. I'm going to use the tools at hand and defend myself.

Your original post about it not being a good defensive round was correct. You are correct in saying there are far better rounds out there for defensive purposes. But generally speaking, the .22 LR has been an probably will continue to be used in the defensive role. Is it the best choice? Not at all, but again, sometimes you have to use the tools on hand you have or are highly proficient with instead of wishing for something better. I'd much rather have one good aimed shot that hits the target with a .22 than seventeen 9mm shots out of a Glock that miss each time. So to ex-nay the .22 LR completely as a defensive cartridge is not correct.

As you say, it isn't the best choice as there are far better, but it's not a round that can't be effective.

[Patriot Prepper]

Nobody on here is arguing the .22 LR is a viable defensive round. Nor are they arguing a .22 should be a primary defensive round. However, when push comes to shove, I would not feel "under gunned" by having a .22 against an untrained opponent. I'd much rather have something else, an AR, AK or 7.62x51, but again, if it comes down to shooting what I happen to have in my hands or wishing for something else, I'm going to negate the threat to the best of my abilities. If I only have a bolt action .22 on hand at the time, I'm going to use that and make sure every shot counts.

And funny you mention penetration as a factor. Very true and in calibrated ballistic gel, 12 inches is the FBI minimum for defensive rounds. And certain brands (the CCI Velocitor for example) generally penetrates 12+ inches from a rifle. Is it a viable defensive round? No, again, there are better. Does it meet the penetration minimums designated by the resident experts? It does. Does it offer reliable expansion (as velocity plays an important part in this) in tests? Studies show it does. And knowing such ballistics makes me aware the round can be used in a defensive situation. Is it the "best?" No it is not, but it is a round capable of negating a threat, hence why people say it can be used in a defensive situation. Is it a "defensive round?" Absolutely not. But frankly, there are plenty of rounds out there that are not "defensive" enough to meet the criteria of the FBI protocols for temporary or permanent crush and wounding channels, to include your 9mm and .45 ACP ammo. And many of the "Big Three" of rifle rounds, the 5.56, 7.62x39 and 7.62x51 lack the sufficient penetration and or fragmentation to be reliable "man stoppers."

But even as a .22 is not the best choice as a defensive round, it is capable of being used in that situation. Most people don't think it is as they know what it is (or rather isn't) capable of. But what most people don't know is the other "defensive" rounds aren't as capable either. As a matter of fact, many of the .223/5.56 rounds are not viable either due to the fact they offer little to no fragmentation and/or expansion. The Russian animal brands namely which people tend to stock up on. There are far better defensive rounds out there for use in an AR. Now having said that, I'd rather have a reliable AR with a mag of Tula than a Ruger 10/22 with a mag of Velocitor. And I'd rather have a 10/22 with a mag of Velocitor than a handgun. Range is important in a fight and the further out you keep a bad guy, the better off you are. And if shooting someone at 100 yards and keeping them pinned down while they bleed out is what happens, you've now accomplished your mission.

I respect your opinion. But if you read all the posts, there were some statements arguing that it is a defensive round. I did not start a thread to argue. My point was in highlighting the fact that the .22LR is not a practical defense round in reference to one shot stopping power as it is weak in the area of terminal ballistics when compared to viable defensive rounds.

Also if you are armed with a .22LR against an opponent with an AR or Ak, you truly are outgunned. Not to say you have no chance of prevailing. You are simply outgunned as far as the power of the cartridge as well as the accuracy and distance. As far as using what you have at hand, obviously the .22 is better than nothing. But the thread was aimed at preppers - preppers need to be prepared. That means making all efforts to use the right tool for the job that will give you the best chance of prevailing. The .22 LR is not the right tool or the best.

Actually I brought up penetration in response to a post. I do not choose my defensive weapons by referring to FBI stats or standards. I know the lethality of the .22LR - as stated my cousin died of a .22LR. I am trying to emphasize stopping power in a gun fight. As a bodyguard, I would not consider the .22LR as a feasible defensive round and I know of no one in LE or Military (or the FBI) that would prefer to use it, or recommend it, regardless of penetration tests. So I am not sure why there are responses to a post that is discussing stopping power.

"Keeping someone pinned down at 100 yards until they bleed out," as you stated, is fine and dandy, assuming you shot them before they shot you. And there is only one of them, and they are not firing back at you with a more potent round. I am trying to stop the speculation regarding the .22LR and the if type scenarios.

Your statement, "And many of the "Big Three" of rifle rounds, the 5.56, 7.62x39 and 7.62x51 lack the sufficient penetration and or fragmentation to be reliable "man stoppers." " If we use that as a logical statement - then what exactly is a man stopper? A 7.62 round lacks penetration power? Against humans or rhinos?

If you look at my original post, I am keenly aware of the limitations of handgun rounds, even the .45 - that is why I teach and practice using triple taps. But is there are real comparison of the .22LR versus the .45 in pure stopping power?

This thread was never intended to be argumentative. I made statements that placed the .22LR in relation to one shot stopping power versus other rounds. But somehow that seems to cause people to defend the .22LR round in reference to that statement.

[Patriot Prepper]

Thanks MJ, I appreciate your clarification. Have a great day!

[Mjollnir]

Patriot Prepper, I wasn't out to bust your balls or give you a hard time. I meant no offense toward you and if you took any that was certainly not my intent. It can sometimes be hard to convey emotion through text alone. I was merely sharing my opinions based on my experiences and research on the subject. I respect your opinion and can agree to disagree about our conclusions.
Take care,
MJ

[Mjollnir]

Hey hot shot. Guess you were not able to place your shots accurately. Gee wiz, missed the head? Wonder how you good you would be placing shots if the rabbit were shooting back at you.

I hit where I was aiming. The round struck the base of the skull where it joins the neck and destroyed/shreaded the front half of the rabbit and sent the contents of the rabbit's stomach, bladder and intestines over the remaining meat.

The energy, in terms of foot pounds, that a caliber delivers will certainly play a role in the amount of penetration. Given the same type of bullet, the more energy the more penetration. The .22 LR does not have the penetration of more powerful defensive rounds.

Do a search on youtube for .22lr ballistic gel tests. Some round nose .22lr will penetrate 17" which exceeds FBI testing standards.

As far as everyone agreeing that the .22LR is not an ideal defensive round, you would be surprised. There are people who argue that it is. There is a person in this thread that claim if a round were used as a defensive round it is classified as a defensive round.

I believe I said something to the effect of any round used in a defensive situation...... has by definition has become a defensive caliber.

A person could use a pencil or a sharp stick in a defensive situation and win a conflict - would anyone consider a pencil or a sharp stick a defensive weapon - look at my concealed weapon defensive stick.

Absolutely! You as a martial artist and instructor should know and understand full well and good..... it is not about the implement used, it is about the person using it. Like the old sayings, " its the Indian not the arrow", "the mechanic and not the tool", etc. YOU are the weapon!!!

I owned several martial arts schools and taught bodyguards, LE, Military, etc. I am well versed in bladed weapons including knives. But if I planned in advance, I would not want to take a knife to a gun fight.

Why not take a knife too? At close contact distances a knife may very will indeed be more effective especially in skilled hands.

Why are people planning to carry a .22LR in a bug out situation, where defense may be one of the most critical factors. Preppers are supposed to be prepared ahead of time. So why plan on bringing a .22LR to a gun fight?

Because it may be the only thing availible to them at the time. Maybe they ran out of ammo for their primary. Maybe their primary was rendered inoperable. Maybe they lost their weapon some how and this is what some one else gave them to use.

Yes a .22LR is better than a sharp stick or screaming bad words at an enemy. But is that really a standard for measuring its defensive capability? In other words, any weapon better than a sharp stick or screaming bad words can be classified as an effective self defense weapon.

Nobody on here is arguing the .22 LR is a viable defensive round. Nor are they arguing a .22 should be a primary defensive round. However, when push comes to shove, I would not feel "under gunned" by having a .22 against an untrained opponent. I'd much rather have something else, an AR, AK or 7.62x51, but again, if it comes down to shooting what I happen to have in my hands or wishing for something else, I'm going to negate the threat to the best of my abilities. If I only have a bolt action .22 on hand at the time, I'm going to use that and make sure every shot counts.

This is what I was getting at!

But even as a .22 is not the best choice as a defensive round, it is capable of being used in that situation. Most people don't think it is as they know what it is (or rather isn't) capable of. But what most people don't know is the other "defensive" rounds aren't as capable either. As a matter of fact, many of the .223/5.56 rounds are not viable either due to the fact they offer little to no fragmentation and/or expansion.

Paul Howe talked about his experience as a Delta Operator in Somalia using issued SS109 steel core ammo from a carbine length barrel not having reliable fragmentation and often taking five or more rounds to bring down Somalis.


The Russian animal brands namely which people tend to stock up on. There are far better defensive rounds out there for use in an AR. Now having said that, I'd rather have a reliable AR with a mag of Tula than a Ruger 10/22 with a mag of Velocitor. And I'd rather have a 10/22 with a mag of Velocitor than a handgun. Range is important in a fight and the further out you keep a bad guy, the better off you are. And if shooting someone at 100 yards and keeping them pinned down while they bleed out is what happens, you've now accomplished your mission.

+1

[Grand58742]

The energy, in terms of foot pounds, that a caliber delivers will certainly play a role in the amount of penetration. Given the same type of bullet, the more energy the more penetration. The .22 LR does not have the penetration of more powerful defensive rounds.

A .22LR is not very effective in creating temporary crush cavities or cavitation. In fact, most hand gun rounds that I know do not have the velocity and muzzle energy to where temporary cavitation is a factor. Rifle rounds, however, can cause considerable damage to surrounding organs without hitting them due to temporary cavitation and hydrostatic shock.

As far as permanent crush cavities the .22LR is not as effective as a larger round at creating a permanent would cavity. The .22LR is lethal and can cause damage that is not measured by some of the factors you mentioned. In the case of my cousin the .22 penetrated the lower abdomen and caused too much damage for the surgeons to repair. If the surgical team were more skilled perhaps they could have saved him. Keep in mind that although he died, it did not cause immediate incapacitation. He responded to the threat and was active until hospitalized. This activity could have contributed to the internal bleeding. I am not a doctor, and am only speculating on the extent of his injuries and repair. But he did die later.

The transference of energy into the body is very important regarding stopping power, as it creates a shock to the system, as well as fragmentation. A bullet that penetrates may be more lethal causing two holes where blood escapes but at the same time not has as much shock to the nervous system. The .22LR although it can be lethal, it cannot be considered or classified as a defensive round.

As far as everyone agreeing that the .22LR is not an ideal defensive round, you would be surprised. There are people who argue that it is. There is a person in this thread that claim if a round were used as a defensive round it is classified as a defensive round. A person could use a pencil or a sharp stick in a defensive situation and win a conflict - would anyone consider a pencil or a sharp stick a defensive weapon - look at my concealed weapon defensive stick. I am just highlighting that there are people out there that are not aware. There are people out there who constantly ask about the defensive nature of the .22LR.

I owned several martial arts schools and taught bodyguards, LE, Military, etc. I am well versed in bladed weapons including knives. But if I planned in advance, I would not want to take a knife to a gun fight. Why are people planning to carry a .22LR in a bug out situation, where defense may be one of the most critical factors. Preppers are supposed to be prepared ahead of time. So why plan on bringing a .22LR to a gun fight? I am merely highlighting the limitations of the .22 RL in relation to stopping power for preppers in a self defense situation.

Yes a .22LR is better than a sharp stick or screaming bad words at an enemy. But is that really a standard for measuring its defensive capability? In other words, any weapon better than a sharp stick or screaming bad words can be classified as an effective self defense weapon.

Nobody on here is arguing the .22 LR is a viable defensive round. Nor are they arguing a .22 should be a primary defensive round. However, when push comes to shove, I would not feel "under gunned" by having a .22 against an untrained opponent. I'd much rather have something else, an AR, AK or 7.62x51, but again, if it comes down to shooting what I happen to have in my hands or wishing for something else, I'm going to negate the threat to the best of my abilities. If I only have a bolt action .22 on hand at the time, I'm going to use that and make sure every shot counts.

And funny you mention penetration as a factor. Very true and in calibrated ballistic gel, 12 inches is the FBI minimum for defensive rounds. And certain brands (the CCI Velocitor for example) generally penetrates 12+ inches from a rifle. Is it a viable defensive round? No, again, there are better. Does it meet the penetration minimums designated by the resident experts? It does. Does it offer reliable expansion (as velocity plays an important part in this) in tests? Studies show it does. And knowing such ballistics makes me aware the round can be used in a defensive situation. Is it the "best?" No it is not, but it is a round capable of negating a threat, hence why people say it can be used in a defensive situation. Is it a "defensive round?" Absolutely not. But frankly, there are plenty of rounds out there that are not "defensive" enough to meet the criteria of the FBI protocols for temporary or permanent crush and wounding channels, to include your 9mm and .45 ACP ammo. And many of the "Big Three" of rifle rounds, the 5.56, 7.62x39 and 7.62x51 lack the sufficient penetration and or fragmentation to be reliable "man stoppers."

But even as a .22 is not the best choice as a defensive round, it is capable of being used in that situation. Most people don't think it is as they know what it is (or rather isn't) capable of. But what most people don't know is the other "defensive" rounds aren't as capable either. As a matter of fact, many of the .223/5.56 rounds are not viable either due to the fact they offer little to no fragmentation and/or expansion. The Russian animal brands namely which people tend to stock up on. There are far better defensive rounds out there for use in an AR. Now having said that, I'd rather have a reliable AR with a mag of Tula than a Ruger 10/22 with a mag of Velocitor. And I'd rather have a 10/22 with a mag of Velocitor than a handgun. Range is important in a fight and the further out you keep a bad guy, the better off you are. And if shooting someone at 100 yards and keeping them pinned down while they bleed out is what happens, you've now accomplished your mission.

[Grand58742]

Hey hot shot. Guess you were not able to place your shots accurately. Gee wiz, missed the head? Wonder how you good you would be placing shots if the rabbit were shooting back at you.

This is a friendly discussion, no need for name calling or snippy comments...

[Patriot Prepper]

patriot.
thanks for the post..

i've learned a lot.
rr

Hey rockriver, glad you enjoyed the thread. The Rock River is on of my favorite ARs.

[Patriot Prepper]

Actually, not true as indicated by Doctor Gary Roberts.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=34714

Penetration, temporary and permanent crush cavities has everything to do with wounding rather than energy transfer.

We can all agree the .22 LR isn't the best or first choice for a defensive caliber, but it certainly beats a sharp stick. And if I had a choice between screaming bad words at an enemy or having a .22 LR, it's a simple choice.

The energy, in terms of foot pounds, that a caliber delivers will certainly play a role in the amount of penetration. Given the same type of bullet, the more energy the more penetration. The .22 LR does not have the penetration of more powerful defensive rounds.

A .22LR is not very effective in creating temporary crush cavities or cavitation. In fact, most hand gun rounds that I know do not have the velocity and muzzle energy to where temporary cavitation is a factor. Rifle rounds, however, can cause considerable damage to surrounding organs without hitting them due to temporary cavitation and hydrostatic shock.

As far as permanent crush cavities the .22LR is not as effective as a larger round at creating a permanent would cavity. The .22LR is lethal and can cause damage that is not measured by some of the factors you mentioned. In the case of my cousin the .22 penetrated the lower abdomen and caused too much damage for the surgeons to repair. If the surgical team were more skilled perhaps they could have saved him. Keep in mind that although he died, it did not cause immediate incapacitation. He responded to the threat and was active until hospitalized. This activity could have contributed to the internal bleeding. I am not a doctor, and am only speculating on the extent of his injuries and repair. But he did die later.

The transference of energy into the body is very important regarding stopping power, as it creates a shock to the system, as well as fragmentation. A bullet that penetrates may be more lethal causing two holes where blood escapes but at the same time not has as much shock to the nervous system. The .22LR although it can be lethal, it cannot be considered or classified as a defensive round.

As far as everyone agreeing that the .22LR is not an ideal defensive round, you would be surprised. There are people who argue that it is. There is a person in this thread that claim if a round were used as a defensive round it is classified as a defensive round. A person could use a pencil or a sharp stick in a defensive situation and win a conflict - would anyone consider a pencil or a sharp stick a defensive weapon - look at my concealed weapon defensive stick. I am just highlighting that there are people out there that are not aware. There are people out there who constantly ask about the defensive nature of the .22LR.

I owned several martial arts schools and taught bodyguards, LE, Military, etc. I am well versed in bladed weapons including knives. But if I planned in advance, I would not want to take a knife to a gun fight. Why are people planning to carry a .22LR in a bug out situation, where defense may be one of the most critical factors. Preppers are supposed to be prepared ahead of time. So why plan on bringing a .22LR to a gun fight? I am merely highlighting the limitations of the .22 RL in relation to stopping power for preppers in a self defense situation.

Yes a .22LR is better than a sharp stick or screaming bad words at an enemy. But is that really a standard for measuring its defensive capability? In other words, any weapon better than a sharp stick or screaming bad words can be classified as an effective self defense weapon.

[Patriot Prepper]

I would have advise against this. I've shot rabbits, perched grouse and turkeys with a 14.5" AR and 45gr WWB JHP varmit loads. Grouse was total loss and there wasn't much left of the rabbit and turkey either. Varmit rounds are designed to fragment extremely rapidly and cause a llot of meat loss/destruction on small game. Had better results with cheap wolf poly coated casing rounds. They move at slower speeds and due to the thicker jacketing and bullet design they don't fragment hardly at all. Just the same, aim for the tip of the nose on rabbits and head/neck shots on large birds.

Hey hot shot. Guess you were not able to place your shots accurately. Gee wiz, missed the head? Wonder how you good you would be placing shots if the rabbit were shooting back at you.

[rockriver]

patriot.
thanks for the post..

i've learned a lot.
rr

[Grand58742]

Stopping power, in part, can be measured by the amount of energy that is transferred into the body. The .22LR delivers about 120 foot pounds of energy from the muzzle - not all of it may be transfered if it passes through the body. A .380 pistol caliber has 200 foot-pounds (ft-lbs) energy for JHP. A 9mm has about 320 ft-lbs. The .45 ACP has 400 foot pounds.

Actually, not true as indicated by Doctor Gary Roberts.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=34714

Penetration, temporary and permanent crush cavities has everything to do with wounding rather than energy transfer.

We can all agree the .22 LR isn't the best or first choice for a defensive caliber, but it certainly beats a sharp stick. And if I had a choice between screaming bad words at an enemy or having a .22 LR, it's a simple choice.

[Mjollnir]

The AR can be used for hunting small game, if you use a varmint round. The rifle is light and is a great defensive tool.

I would have advise against this. I've shot rabbits, perched grouse and turkeys with a 14.5" AR and 45gr WWB JHP varmit loads. Grouse was total loss and there wasn't much left of the rabbit and turkey either. Varmit rounds are designed to fragment extremely rapidly and cause a llot of meat loss/destruction on small game. Had better results with cheap wolf poly coated casing rounds. They move at slower speeds and due to the thicker jacketing and bullet design they don't fragment hardly at all. Just the same, aim for the tip of the nose on rabbits and head/neck shots on large birds.

[Mjollnir]

You must have been working in the ER a long long time or you work in a bad area. Jumping jiminy. I live in South Florida war zone and we don't get that many gun shot wounds.

Been there quite a while, we are the only level one trauma center in a 150 mile radius and the city has a significant gang/drug/******* problem.

The statistics that I spoke of are taken from real incidents and indicate that caliber size has a great impact on first shot stopping power. Not sure if your "great in length" discussions were about first round stopping power. If your read the OP I concede that the .22LR is a deadly round - my cousin was shot and killed by a .22LR.

Please by all means cite your sources. I'm and avid student of the subject so I eagerly looking forward to seeing the data on these real incidents.


My point is in reference to the terminal ballistics of a round. Not whether a round is lethal. I am referring to a round being a defensive round. The .22 LR is simply not a defensive round. The .22 is designed and best used as a small varmint round or a sporting round.

Any round used in a defensive situation by defenition has become a defensive round.

Everyone who uses a gun professionally is highly aware of shot placement. Shot placement? Hmm - maybe your are talking about Vito Corleone having a couple of guys holding the bad guy and placing a shot under the skull.

Not familar with this incident but no, not what I was talking about.

Every sane person strives for perfect shot placement. However in the real world in a real gun fight, it does not always happen. Attempting to place the shot is a bit more difficult than many people think. When someone is moving and shooting at you, and you are moving and shooting, even hitting center mass is difficult.

Agreed. It can certainly be difficult. You have to take what you can get, when you can get it and set up where you can until you can deliver the fight stopping blow.

If using a .22LR you would have to hit the central nervous system to be certain of stopping an assailant with the first hit.

True of any handgun round. The only "certain" way to stop an assailant with a first round shot is shot placement to the CNS with a round that has enough penetration to shut it down.

In the gun fights that I experienced, it was difficult enough to hit center mass - let alone trying to hit a vital organ, CNS, or a head shot.

If caliber is not critically important in reference to stopping power, why do you think so many police department are dumping the 9mm and packing a .40 cal? Because they believe it has more stopping power.

Actually, the majority of the reason is due to reliably expanding bullet technology(limiting overpenetration and thus shoot through liability) of the time, performance against auto glass, politics and public relations, and largely being cut a deal on the new pistols chambered in the caliber when it was first introduced. Massad Ayoob has talked and written about the 9mm to 40S&W transition on numerous occasions. I know of several PDs that are still using 9mm with modern bullet technology with great effect.

I do not know of one LEO who would trade their service weapon for a .22LR - or anyone in the military who would trade their AR for a .22LR. It would be insanity.

I wasn't aware that was the reason for this thread. I was under the impression you were just bagging on the .22lr not that people were forsaking all other calibers at their disposal in lieu of the .22lr. If that is the case then I agree they may be better served with their current weapons.

The FBI does extensive testing on defensive ammo and the .22LR would not come close to passing any of those tests.

I would love to see the FBI's official test data if you could provide it.

I do not know of anyone in LE, or military who would not feel outgunned in a conflict if they were only holding a .22LR.

Even though you might not feel outgunned, its a simple fact, if you use a .22LR against someone with a real defensive round, you are outgunned.

Sorry grasshopper, more often than not it is the mechanic and not the tool.

Stopping power, in part, can be measured by the amount of energy that is transferred into the body. The .22LR delivers about 120 foot pounds of energy from the muzzle - not all of it may be transfered if it passes through the body. A .380 pistol caliber has 200 foot-pounds (ft-lbs) energy for JHP. A 9mm has about 320 ft-lbs. The .45 ACP has 400 foot pounds.

Also you could compare would area in square inches and the .22LR comes up short every time. It is lethal but not an effective defense round.

This is a quote from a chuckhawks.com -- "The .22 Long Rifle high velocity and hyper velocity hollow point ammunition allows humane hunting of game up to about 7 pounds in weight at .22 ranges with solid hits in the heart/lung area." Most bad guys weigh a bit more than 7 pounds. And yes, I know of guys who shoot deer with the .22LR even in places where it is illegal. And sometimes they are lucky enough to hit a vital organ. But usually the deer runs off, bleeds out, and experiences a painful death.

I'm an avid hunter myself. When and where I grew up it was still legal to take deer with rimfire. In addition to cleanly taking countless whitetails I've taken numerous varieties of game and put down all types of livestock with the .22lr. So you'll have to forgive me if my opinion differs from Chuck's.

An yes, there are incidents where a .22LR is used in a defensive situation and stops the criminal with one shot. But the truth is, and the reality is, the .22LR is not considered an effective defensive round.

By you. The people who have used them successfully that I've encountered might disagreee.

As far I as know it has never been used anywhere in the world as a main battle rifle. No LE agencies use it as a service round. That is reality.

Except for the Israelis with their silenced Ruger 10/22's and the Russians with their SV-99 sniper rifles.

If you rely on the .22LR - you are in fact outgunned. But you might be a quick guy who can draw fast, jump around, and dodge bullets - you might be the Edward Michael "Bear" Grylls of gun fighting - if you are, then knock yourself out and use .22LR when facing a group of ganstas drawing down on you with AKs or their 10MMs. As for me, I'll stick with my 9mm and .45s in pistol and 5.56 - 308 - and larger calibers in a rifle. Caliber counts baby.

This thread was written to dispel the myth of the .22 LR having first shot stopping power. Many individuals feel they are adequately armed for a self defense situation using a .22LR. This thread is to convince those individuals to consider a more effective round. It could help save their lives.

Plain and simple........ there are more effective rounds. But the myth of one shot stops not only applies to .22lr but all handgun rounds and many rifle rounds. Any round can fail to stop if it is not put where it will do the most good(for you) regardless of diameter. Don't rely on "one shot stops", shoot until the threat is no longer a threat.