Why does everyone falsely say the .22 is useless for self-defense and has no stopping power?

Question

First, I am not talking about against bears, etc. I am talking about the .22 for personal defense against another person.

Everyone says that .22LR is worthless for self-defense, will just tick your attacker off, etc. I've heard it all. Yet, the .22 causes more homicides each year than any other caliber. Yet again today I pick-up a newspaper and a man in the city was gunned down with a .22 pistol. He was shot 3 times with a .22 and was pronounced dead when the paramedics arrived. All you have to do is pick-up any newspaper to realize that the .22 is deadly and has pretty decent stopping power. Shooting after shooting is committed with the .22 Small caliber handguns are responsible for alot of deaths each year. Everyone bashes it and says it is too small, too wimpy, etc but the crime statistics prove otherwise. Why does everyone say it is useless for self-defense when it clearly is not?

Answer 1

There are a lot of good answers here, and I would like to express my opinion. I believe the .22 is a good self defense weapon. If a person had a .22 and practiced with it, and got good with it..(ammo is cheap), they would be better off in a situation, than if they had a higher caliber gun that they could not afford to shoot. I have a .22 that I can buy 500 rounds for less than half of the price of 50 rounds for my .45. I am good with the .22 and would use it for self defense anytime. Only my opinion, so take it easy on me!

Answer 2

The reason you see so many people use .22 for shootings is the guns are cheap, so there are a lot of them, they can carry a lot of ammo, they have little to no recoil, and they are pretty accurate. The stopping power and deadlyness of a round are not directly related. Obviously if you die from the gun shot it is effective, but a superior wound channel is desireable because not every shot is a kill shot. If you are shot in the leg with a .22 it is not the same as being shot with a .45. Everyone can agree with that. You have to factor in the preformance of the shooter in a high stress scenario. There may be a lot of people killed from .22 but there are also a lot more people that walk away after being shot by one. These stats are not reported though. Personally, I would feel comfortable with a .22 in my hand. I carried a Walther for a few years because it was small, light, and easy to opperate. I would also trust a 9mm in a heartbeat for home defense. I sleep with one every night. The simple fact is that most people do not know a damn thing about what makes a round effective and are all to happy to tell you that you need a .50 cal to be safe. I would bet that someone will tell you that you need a Barrett instead of a .22

Answer 3

You're argument is flawed because you are confusing a fatal wound with stopping power. Someone dying because they bled out from 3 gun shot wounds or 3 shots to the head is not stopping power.

Stopping power is neutralizing someone with as few *center of mass* shots as possible. A 200 grain .45 ACP +P hollow point will transfer more "stopping" energy into the target than a .22, and thats a fact.

Some just-out-of-jail, 6'4" muscle man hopped up on meth isn't going to feel that .22. Theres a good chance he may not even feel the .45. The point is, the heavier and wider the projectile, the better chance you have at neutralizing your attacker. Not everyone is going to go "ow" and fall down in pain when you engage them in self-defense. Stopping power is based on raw, pure, knock-the-bad guy-on-his-***, TRAUMA. Getting stung by a bee doesn't put the body into shock trauma - getting hit by a truck will.

The only reason you see so many crimes committed with .22's is because they are cheap and plentiful. Thats all. Most of these fatal homicides with .22's were at point-blank range, as in right into the victims head.

Now I'm not saying you need a hand cannon for self defense. A .22 is better than nothing, as is a .32 ACP. The .380 ACP, 9mm, and 38 Special are fine. The .357 Magnum, .357 Sig, .40 S&W, 45ACP, .44 Special, are all just as well, as are calibers I neglected to mention. The idea behind a self defense gun is something you can handle and shoot accurately under pressure.

But saying the .22 has "stopping power" just simply erroneous.

Answer 4

It truly doesn't matter what you carry. True self defense happens long before the fire fight. If you are left to drawing your gun then your self defense has already failed. Also the chances you will actually be attaccked out on the street are low and the attacker being some huge drugged out superfreak are lower still. Here is an idea. First learn to defend yourself. Once that has been accomplished then add a firearm to the mix. Your whole pespective will change. But if you must then carry something you like and you are comfortable with. My girl has a .38. The have been many men killed with that round for many years. But it hurts her hand to shoot so you know what? That weapon doesn't get much use. She likes the .22 so guess what she will be more likely to go and practice with? I would not have a problem carrying a .22. I say shoot them and if they want more then either reload and shoot them again or beat the crap out of them. Fighting is already hard enough without holes in your body. In short, carry what you like. "Fear the man, not the weapon."

Answer 5

That depends on where you hit the person. A 5' 6" 130 lbs guy shot center mass will fall dead, 6' 8" 350lbs shot in a arm or shoulder would only get spun…and pissed. Practice is more important than caliber. It doesn’t matter if you are Clint Eastwood carying a Desert Eagle, if you cant hit your target you might as well have pepper spray. There is also the question of what drugs your assaliant is on. Speed, cocaine or the like mixed with adrenaline may keep them going just a few steps longer no matter what you hit them with. Go with a good size caliber as long as you can handle it. Try out several guns, not all are created equal. One may be a natural extension of your hand, another will hurt so bad you will hesitate to pull the triger because of the pain the recoil causes. A local nurse was leaving work one night. There had been several rapes in the area lately. She heard footsteps so put her hand on her gun in her bag. He came up behind her and spun her around; she shot him in the face from 6 inches away. They had a hard time finding the parts of his head. Yes that was with a 357. Be prepared, be practiced, be responsible.

Answer 6

Americans have a tendency to overstatement. It's also true, though, that a 22 is not a good choice for most. You've made your case for the lethality of the 22, but that isn't the argument you were trying to make. You seem to have gotten side-tracked. The question is whether it's adequate to stop an attack with immediacy, and the 22 has a poor track record. Whether you kill your attacker is quite beside the point if he has time to kill you between your shot and his death, and that is the point these people are trying to make.

Answer 7

True, a .22 LR bullet would not be very effective against a large beast like a bear, or a wild hog.

I tend to agree with your point of view. Although the .22 does not have a whole lot of energy in terms of pound/feet, nor a whole lot of power in terms of penetration, if it is used properly, a .22 rifle or pistol can be an effective self-defense weapon. It depends on a lot of factors.

If your assailant is a small framed person, and you hit the individual in a vital area on his/her body, then it follows that the .22 will be effective and will have some degree of stopping power.

On the other hand, if you are dealing with a large framed man who is high on illegal drugs (like crack), and you only cause a "flesh wound" to the assailant, then he is not going to be neutralized by the bullet. But if you have a repeating firearm, you are better off. I used to own a Marlin .22 caliber semi-auto rifle, and it could hold up to 18 shells.

The .22 is a deadly weapon in the right hands.

Answer 8

No ballistic trauma same as with the 9mm most who say they were shot with it did not even know it until they started feeling the burn now with a 40 cal 44 cal even 38 they know the second they are hit cause they may be taken off their feet by the tramma.There was a bouncer in my home town who got shot 7 times with a .22 and took the gun from the guy and allmost beat him to death with it he has arm problems today but I don't think the outcome would have been the same if a larger caliber had been used.

Answer 9

The .22 is lacking on energy on target and that is what is needed for self defense. The .22 is deadly with a head shot, but anything else death will be caused by the loss of blood pressure which will not immediately stop an aggressor. Death of the attacker is not the goal for defense it is to stop the attack and a .22 is just not up to the task unless you are referring to a .223.

Answer 10

A .22 should be your last resort for self defense and only as a backup to your primary carry gun. The light bullet will not penetrate as much as some of the bigger ones and has very little thump when it hits something. The smallest caliber anyone should carry for self defense is a .40 S&W (in my opinion).

Yes, one .22 round can kill a man, a deer, a cow, or other animal with proper shot placement, but in a self defense situation, you dont want to rely on shot placement.