Is .22 that bad for home defense?

[ssdoug]

A 22lr may not be real powerful but it will change there mind

 

[remman]

Look at it this way. If you can guarantee that you can hit the bad guy in the face consistently with a 22 from, say, 7-10 yards, stick with the .22. I can't speak from experience, but I'm willing to bet that 5-10 rounds in the face (most likely unprotected if he/she is wearing any kind of armor at all) is gonna stop the bad guy just as well as a 9 to the chest will. You'll get a few people on here that say you're not a real man unless you're carrying a .45 and that's just not the case. As a recent college grad, I fully understand the idea of budget-minded. The fact of the matter is, .22 is the cheapest round you can get to practice, and no matter what anybody else says, it's still gonna hurt the bad guy when you hit him. Granted, I fall more into the camp of shot placement being of more importance than how big the bullet is, but it still remains that .22 is the cheapest and you can practice hours longer with that than you can a 9. So I say, with your budget, find a nice .22 pistol and practice your heart out. You won't regret it.

 

[CoastieGM]

My 18 year-old son has a 9mm carbine...has proven to be a 100% reliable and remarkably accurate little gun. ...will ring a 6" steel at 100 yards. At that range, it STILL has more energy than a 22 pistol has, at the muzzle!

With that length barrel, his 9mm will punch like a .357 magnum

It's short enough to maneuver in tight quarters...

This is why entry teams use 9mm compact rifles for their primary weapon, not shotguns nor pistols. I'll bet the length of that Hi-Point carbine is a little less than the width of a typical doorway...and for good reason.

With all of that being said, there is a 12 gauge Mossberg within easy reach, should an intruder ever kick in my door...the sound of a shell being racked into the chamber of a pump shotgun is enough to make cowardly men pee themselves.

May want to re-think the 12 gauge pump. You may not have time to cycle the action. This stuff happens so insanely fast. In my 16 year old son's situation, the entire event only 12 or so seconds from beginning to end...he didn't even have time to shoulder his rifle...just had to instinct shoot for center mass less than 5 feet away (thankfully I taught him point-shooting). See link to his shooting. Teen who shot intruder in Spring Branch home: 'I was scared' | khou.com Houston

There are may downsides to using a shotgun inside the house.

 

[chezuki]

Why not just get a BB gun? They hurt like hell and ammo is way cheaper than .22. You could even aim for the eyes! Besides, even if it fails to stop the threat and you're killed, at least you'll die with the satisfaction of knowing you didn't waste any money on equipment or training.

These threads amaze me.

 

[6mm Shoot]

If I was you I would go with a used shotgun. The 20ga has less kick and inside the home with number 4 buck is more than enough to stop an intruder.

From what you have said this will be your first gun. Have you given any thoughts on how or where you will keep it out of the reach of the little ones? You are going to need a locking closet or a case that locks. Some thing of that sort to keep it secured and out of reach when you are not home.

Best of luck on what ever you decide.

 

[AmericanBob]

Mon, July 16, 2012 10:41:24 PMFw: Very Interesting Information on Firearms Stopping Capability



7 Files View Slideshow Download All
ATT00004.jpg (19KB); ATT00003.png (38KB); ATT00006.png (67KB); ATT00002.png (77KB); ATT00001.png (61KB); ATT00005.png (90KB); ATT00007.png (98KB)

If you have no interest in firearms and personal defense, this may not be of interest to you



This is from a firearms professional.



I've been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall's first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately, despite the fact that I was a college student and really couldn't afford its $39 price tag. Over the years I bought all of the rest of Marshall's books as well as anything else I could find on the subject.
I even have a first edition of Gunshot Injuries by Louis Lagarde published in 1915.


Are any of these better than another?

Every source I read has different recommendations. Some say Marshall's data is genius. Some say it is statistically impossible. Some like big heavy bullets. Some like lighter, faster bullets. There isn't any consensus. The more I read, the more confused I get.

One thing I remember reading that made a lot of sense to me was an article by Massad Ayoob. He came out with his own stopping power data around the time Marshall published Handgun Stopping Power. In the article, Ayoob took his critics to task. He suggested that if people didn't believe his data, they should collect their own and do their own analysis. That made sense to me. So that's just what I did. I always had a slight problem with the methodology of Marshall and Sanow's work. For consistency purposes, they ONLY included hits to the torso and ONLY included cases where the person was hit with just a single round. Multiple hits screwed up their data, so they excluded them. This lead to an unrealistically high stopping power percentage, because it factored out many of the cases where a person didn't stop!
I wanted to look at hits anywhere on the body and get a realistic idea of actual stopping power, no matter how many hits it took to get it.
So I started collecting data.

Over a 10-year period, I kept track of stopping power results from every shooting I could find. I talked to the participants of gunfights, read police reports, attended autopsies, and scoured the newspapers, magazines, and Internet for any reliable accounts of what happened to the human body when it was shot.

I documented all of the data I could; tracking caliber, type of bullet (if known), where the bullet hit and whether or not the person was incapacitated. I also tracked fatalities, noting which bullets were more likely to kill and which were not. It was an exhaustive project, but I'm glad I did it and I'm happy to report the results of my study here.

Before I get to the details, I must give a warning. I don't have any dog in this fight! I don't sell ammo. I'm not being paid by any firearm or ammunition manufacturer. I carry a lot of different pistols for self defense. Within the last 2 weeks, I've carried a .22 magnum, a .380 auto, a .38 spl. revolver, 3 different 9mm autos and a .45 auto. I don't have an axe to grind. If you are happy with your 9mm, I'm happy for you. If you think that everyone should be carrying a .45 (because they don't make a .46), I'm cool with that too. I'm just reporting the data. If you don't like it, take Mr. Ayoob's advice...do a study of your own.

A few notes on terminology...

Since it was my study, I got to determine the variables and their definitions. Here's what I looked at:

- Number of people shot

- Number of rounds that hit

- On average, how many rounds did it take for the person to stop his violent action or be incapacitated? For this number, I included hits anywhere on the body. To be considered an immediate incapacitation, I used criteria similar to Marshall's. If the attacker was striking or shooting the victim, the round needed to immediately stop the attack without another blow being thrown or shot being fired. If the person shot was in the act of running (either towards or away from the shooter), he must have fallen to the ground within five feet.

I also excluded all cases of accidental shootings or suicides. Every shot in this study took place during a military battle or an altercation with a criminal.

- What percentage of shooting incidents resulted in fatalities. For this, I included only hits to the head or torso.

- What percentage of people were not incapacitated no matter how many rounds hit them

- Accuracy. What percentage of hits was in the head or torso. I tracked this to check if variations could affect stopping power. For example, if one caliber had a huge percentage of shootings resulting in arm hits, we may expect that the stopping power of that round wouldn't look as good as a caliber where the majority of rounds hit the head.

- One shot stop percentage - number of incapacitations divided by the number of hits the person took. Like Marshall's number, I only included hits to the torso or head in this number.

- Percentage of people who were immediately stopped with one hit to the head or torso

Here are the results.

.25ACP

# of people shot - 68
# of hits - 150
% of hits that were fatal - 25%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.2 % of people who were not incapacitated - 35% One-shot-stop % - 30% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 62% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 49%

.22 (short, long and long rifle)

# of people shot - 154
# of hits - 213
% of hits that were fatal - 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38 % of people who were not incapacitated - 31% One-shot-stop % - 31% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 60%

.32 (both .32 Long and .32 ACP)

# of people shot - 25
# of hits - 38
% of hits that were fatal - 21%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.52 % of people who were not incapacitated - 40% One-shot-stop % - 40% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 78% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 72%

.380 ACP

# of people shot - 85
# of hits - 150
% of hits that were fatal - 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.76 % of people who were not incapacitated - 16% One-shot-stop % - 44% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 62%

.38 Special

# of people shot - 199
# of hits - 373
% of hits that were fatal - 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.87 % of people who were not incapacitated - 17% One-shot-stop % - 39% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 55%

9mm Luger

# of people shot - 456
# of hits - 1121
% of hits that were fatal - 24%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.45 % of people who were not incapacitated - 13% One-shot-stop % - 34% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 74% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 47%

.357 (both magnum and Sig)

# of people shot - 105
# of hits - 179
% of hits that were fatal - 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.7 % of people who were not incapacitated - 9% One-shot-stop % - 44% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 81% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 61%

.40 S&W

# of people shot - 188
# of hits - 443
% of hits that were fatal - 25%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.36 % of people who were not incapacitated - 13% One-shot-stop % - 45% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 52%

.45 ACP

# of people shot - 209
# of hits - 436
% of hits that were fatal - 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 2.08 % of people who were not incapacitated - 14% One-shot-stop % - 39% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 85% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 51%

.44 Magnum

# of people shot - 24
# of hits - 41
% of hits that were fatal - 26%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.71 % of people who were not incapacitated - 13% One-shot-stop % - 59% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 88% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 53%

Rifle (all Centerfire)

# of people shot - 126
# of hits - 176
% of hits that were fatal - 68%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.4 % of people who were not incapacitated - 9% One-shot-stop % - 58% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 81% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 80%

Shotgun (All, but 90% of results were 12 gauge)

# of people shot - 146
# of hits - 178
% of hits that were fatal - 65%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.22 % of people who were not incapacitated - 12% One-shot-stop % - 58% Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 84% % actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 86%

Discussion

I really would have liked to break it down by individual bullet type, but I didn't have enough data points to reach a level of statistical significance. Getting accurate data on nearly 1800 shootings was hard work. I couldn't imagine breaking it down farther than what I did here. I also believe the data for the .25, .32 and .44 magnum should be viewed with suspicion. I simply don't have enough data (in comparison to the other calibers) to draw an accurate comparison. I reported the data I have, but I really don't believe that a .32 ACP incapacitates people at a higher rate than the .45 ACP!

One other thing to look at is the 9mm data. A huge number (over half) of 9mm shootings involved ball ammo. I think that skewed the results of the study in a negative manner. One can reasonable expect that FMJ ammo will not stop as well as a state of the art expanding bullet. I personally believe that the 9mm is a better stopper than the numbers here indicate, but you can make that decision for yourself based on the data presented.


Some interesting findings:

I think the most interesting statistic is the percentage of people who stopped with one shot to the torso or head. There wasn't much variation between calibers. Between the most common defensive calibers (.38, 9mm, .40, and .45) there was a spread of only eight percentage points. No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.

The average number of rounds until incapacitation was also remarkably similar between calibers. All the common defensive calibers required around 2 rounds on average to incapacitate. Something else to look at here is the question of how fast can the rounds be fired out of each gun. The .38 SPL probably has the slowest rate of fire (long double action revolver trigger pulls and stout recoil in small revolvers) and the fewest rounds fired to get an incapacitation (1.87). Conversely the 9mm can probably be fired fastest of the common calibers and it had the most rounds fired to get an incapacitation (2.45). The .40
(2.36) and the .45 (2.08) split the difference. It is my personal belief that there really isn't much difference between each of these calibers. It is only the fact that some guns can be fired faster than others that causes the perceived difference in stopping power. If a person takes an average of 5 seconds to stop after being hit, the defender who shoots a lighter recoiling gun can get more hits in that time period. It could be that fewer rounds would have stopped the attacker (given enough time) but the ability to fire more quickly resulted in more hits being put onto the attacker. It may not have anything to do with the stopping power of the round.

Another data piece that leads me to believe that the majority of commonly carried defensive rounds are similar in stopping power is the fact that all four have very similar failure rates. If you look at the percentage of shootings that did not result in incapacitation, the numbers are almost identical. The .38, 9mm, .40, and .45 all had failure rates of between 13% and 17%.


Some people will look at this data and say "He's telling us all to carry .22s". That's not true. Although this study showed that the percentages of people stopped with one shot are similar between almost all handgun cartridges, there's more to the story. Take a look at two
numbers: the percentage of people who did not stop (no matter how many rounds were fired into them) and the one-shot-stop percentage. The lower caliber rounds (.22, .25, .32) had a failure rate that was roughly double that of the higher caliber rounds. The one-shot-stop percentage (where I considered all hits, anywhere on the body) trended generally higher as the round gets more powerful. This tells us a couple of things...

In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don't want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases.
And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these "psychological stops"
occurring. The problem we have is when we don't get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a "physical stop" rather than a "psychological" one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this.

One other factor to consider is that the majority of these shootings did NOT involve shooting through intermediate barriers, cover or heavy clothing. If you anticipate having to do this in your life (i.e. you are a police officer and may have to shoot someone in a car), again, I would lean towards the larger or more powerful rounds.

What I believe that my numbers show is that in the majority of shootings, the person shot merely gives up without being truly incapacitated by the bullet. In such an event, almost any bullet will perform admirably. If you want to be prepared to deal with someone who won't give up so easily, or you want to be able to have good performance even after shooting through an intermediate barrier, I would skip carrying the "mouse gun" .22s, .25s and .32s.

Now compare the numbers of the handgun calibers with the numbers generated by the rifles and shotguns. For me there really isn't a stopping power debate. All handguns suck! If you want to stop someone, use a rifle or shotgun!

What matters even more than caliber is shot placement. Across all calibers, if you break down the incapacitations based on where the bullet hit you will see some useful information.

Head shots = 75% immediate incapacitation Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation Extremity shots (arms and legs) = 14% immediate incapacitation.

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!


Conclusion

This study took me a long time and a lot of effort to complete.
Despite the work it took, I'm glad I did it. The results I got from the study lead me to believe that there really isn't that much difference between most defensive handgun rounds and calibers. None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s. I've stopped worrying about trying to find the "ultimate" bullet. There isn't one. And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough "stopping power." Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.

Take a look at the data. I hope it helps you decide what weapon to carry. No matter which gun you choose, pick one that is reliable and train with it until you can get fast accurate hits. Nothing beyond that really matters!

You may also enjoy this Greg Ellifritz story: A Parent's Guide to School Shootings

Greg Ellifritz is the full time firearms and defensive tactics training officer for a central Ohio police department. He holds instructor or master instructor certifications in more than 75 different weapon systems, defensive tactics programs and police specialty areas. Greg has a master's degree in Public Policy and Management and is an instructor for both the Ohio Peace Officer's Training Academy and the Tactical Defense Institute.




--
Bruce




​

7 Images | View Slideshow | Download Selected | Download All

ATT00004.jpg
(19KB) ATT00003.png
(38KB) ATT00006.png
(67KB) ATT00002.png
(77KB) ATT00001.png
(61KB) ATT00005.png
(90KB) ATT00007.png
(98KB)

 

[chezuki]

6) Do not post any written content that is not yours on INGunOwners.com.
Do not post news articles, content from blogs or any other content from sites around the web on INGunOwners.com . Feel free to post your own words and a link to the content but DO NOT copy and paste any text that does not belong to you on INGunOwners.com.

Beware of mods.

 

[CoastieGM]

Why not just get a BB gun? They hurt like hell and ammo is way cheaper than .22. You could even aim for the eyes! Besides, even if it fails to stop the threat and you're killed, at least you'll die with the satisfaction of knowing you didn't waste any money on equipment or training.

These threads amaze me.

BB guns don't kill (normally)...a burst of 40 grain round nose .22 LR bullets out of a rifle will drop you dead real fast.

 

[SSGSAD]

BB guns don't kill (normally)...a burst of 40 grain round nose .22 LR bullets out of a rifle will drop you dead real fast.

THIS, I agree !!!!!

 

[chezuki]

BB guns don't kill (normally)...a burst of 40 grain round nose .22 LR bullets out of a rifle will drop you dead real fast.

You're right. That's why .22lr is the the preferred round of police officers and military's world wide.

Just because a pointy stick could be deadly, doesn't mean it's an ideal tool for self defense.

Welcome to INGO.

 

[walleyepw]

For home protection, why limit your self to a hand gun? A used 12 gauge pump shot gun falls in the price range nicely.

 

[CoastieGM]

You're right. That's why .22lr is the the preferred round of police officers and military's world wide.

Just because a pointy stick could be deadly, doesn't mean it's an ideal tool for self defense.

That's painting with a pretty broad brush. Wouldn't you agree that every selection is situation-specific? Would you disagree that there are certain circumstances where a .22LR would be preferable, say, a child or a woman with lesser skills and tolerance to a larger caliber?

Welcome to INGO.

Thanks. It's been a pleasure.

 

[thompal]

You're right. That's why .22lr is the the preferred round of police officers and military's world wide.

I know two people who were shot multiple times. One person was hit 8 times in the chest and stomach with 9mm.

The other person was hit 5 times in the stomach and chest with .22lr.

Both lived. By the only personal evidence I have, must I conclude that both are useless?

Just because a pointy stick could be deadly, doesn't mean it's an ideal tool for self defense.

But it's better than no stick at all.

 

[AmericanBob]

I know two people who were shot multiple times. One person was hit 8 times in the chest and stomach with 9mm.

The other person was hit 5 times in the stomach and chest with .22lr.

Both lived. By the only personal evidence I have, must I conclude that both are useless?



But it's better than no stick at all.

There are two factors involved. The first being shot placement. The second being the will of the person being shot to survive. Any round can be deadly or not, out of a hand gun. Bump up to a long gun and the game changes dramatically.

 

[thompal]

There are two factors involved. The first being shot placement. The second being the will of the person being shot to survive. Any round can be deadly or not, out of a hand gun. Bump up to a long gun and the game changes dramatically.

Well, the one who was hit with 9mm wasn't shot with a handgun. It was by an MP40.

 

[CoastieGM]

But it's better than no stick at all.

​

 

[chezuki]

Well, the OP didn't ask whether to get a .22 or nothing at all, he asked about a.22 or something bigger, stated a price point, and specified handgun.

Personally the only defensive handgun I would recommend in the $250 range would be a used .38 special. Another $100 would drastically open up the choices. There are certainly .22 handguns for that price, but they lack the energy and penetration to consistently stop an attack. Also, just the design of a rimfire cartridge in a semi-auto causes reliability issues. If you absolutely positivity MUST choose to purchase a .22 handgun for the purpose of self defense, I would recommend a revolver. They are not as ammo finicky and still hold up to 9 shots.

To the OP:

If you are set on a handgun, save a little longer. $350 opens up a large number of quality defensive pistols, especially in the used market.

To fill an immediate need on a budget of $250, I know you specified a handgun, but a used Mossberg 500 or Remington 870 can't be beat for home defense. You could even get a new Maverick 88 for that price. Otherwise, keep an eye out for a used .38 revolver.

 

[Broom_jm]

I know two people who were shot multiple times. One person was hit 8 times in the chest and stomach with 9mm.

The other person was hit 5 times in the stomach and chest with .22lr.

Both lived. By the only personal evidence I have, must I conclude that both are useless?

But it's better than no stick at all.

Really? You consider that evidence? With a sample size of one (1) for each cartridge, you can reach an authoritative conclusion? Now, you go find us hundreds of people shot 8 times with a 9mm that lived...and we'll talk.

I'd like to see the details on these "stomach and chest" shots. I'm guessing the reality does not match up well to your anecdotal relating of events. Got a news story to share with us on this one?

 

[thompal]

Really? You consider that evidence? With a sample size of one (1) for each cartridge, you can reach an authoritative conclusion? Now, you go find us hundreds of people shot 8 times with a 9mm that lived...and we'll talk.

I'd like to see the details on these "stomach and chest" shots. I'm guessing the reality does not match up well to your anecdotal relating of events. Got a news story to share with us on this one?

You didn't read the entire thread, did you?? I was presenting those two examples from my personal experience to rebut someone who stated that 9mm is so absolutely reliable that it always performs better than .22lr.

As for news articles, I have no idea. For the guy shot with the 9mm, you'd have to find an article from sometime around the Battle of the Bulge. The other one was a guy I worked with at one time who was engaged in a poker game which got invaded by some thugs who were robbing the players. Other than it happening sometime in the early 70's, I don't have any other details.

I did see the scars on both guys, so the description of shot placement is merely what I observed.

 

[darrent]

.22 LR will work fine "if" you are well trained and can quickly and accurately place rounds on target. Larger calibers just make the knockdown easier. Multiple rounds in critical areas will work in any caliber. Since your new, I would recommend shooting a lot until the firearm is an extension of yourself (hundreds of rounds a week for an extended period).