View Full Version : Self-defense 22 LR handgun for age/physically restricted
brushy bill
10-07-12, 19:43
I'll begin with the obligatory, "I am well aware 22LR is not a good choice for self-defense, esp when fired from a pistol, and that more appropriate rounds abound." That out of the way...
I was reading on another site (southnarc's site) about "old man" and "old woman" guns (could also apply to younger folks prematurely afflicted by arthritis or other ailments or simply frail). These individuals may not have the requisite hand strength to cycle the action on a strong sprung semi auto or unwilling/unable to withstand much recoil without pain. One post on this or another site similar topic related how some would not practice because of the discomfort, but were too proud to admit it. Bottom line, if you're recommending a pistol to someone who meets these criteria and 22 LR is the best they can handle, what would you recommend for a handgun they would carry and keep on their person so they were prepared for the worst from the current options? Both in terms of pistol/revolver and load (stinger, velociter, mini mag, etc)? Based on what I've read until now, I was thinking 22 version of the S&W 442 no lock (trigger pull may be too much work), S&W 317 snub, or perhaps a ruger MkII or Browning Buckmark...thoughts? NOTE: posted in the semi-auto section but revolver is certainly valid response
mkmckinley
10-07-12, 20:31
I've never shot a .22 auto that I'd consider reliable enough for defense, caliber aside. If someone cast a spell on me that only allowed me to carry a .22LR I'd probably go with a S&W 43C and the Apex action kit. At least it would be concealable and reliable. I'd load it with whatever ammunition has the most penetration. For someone with little training, low likelihood to train, or poor eyesight I'd probably get a Crimson Trace grip.
In reality I think there are better choices than .22 even for someone with a disability. Even training with .22 and carrying 9mm would be better than carrying .22.
brushy bill
10-07-12, 20:55
I've never shot a .22 auto that I'd consider reliable enough for defense, caliber aside. If someone cast a spell on me that only allowed me to carry a .22LR I'd probably go with a S&W 43C and the Apex action kit. At least it would be concealable and reliable. I'd load it with whatever ammunition has the most penetration. For someone with little training, low likelihood to train, or poor eyesight I'd probably get a Crimson Trace grip.
In reality I think there are better choices than .22 even for someone with a disability. Even training with .22 and carrying 9mm would be better than carrying .22.
I know that a 22 sucks. I wrote that in the preface. I'll reiterate, "A 22 sucks for defense". Think your 90 yr old granny or something or a disabled person who WON'T/CAN'T train if you give them too much gun. Not you training with your 9mm ECD. Think you CAN'T do what you can now. Think they fear the recoil.
A Ruger LCR 22. If they are affected by hand issues to the point of needing to use a .22, then the lighter trigger on the LCR (compared to S&W) would be preferable. With ignition issues more prevalent in rimfire ammo I would prefer a revolver to a semi auto.
Until my gf was comfortable with a 9mm, she carried a Taurus .22 revolver with CCI Stingers. Yes, not ideal, but she was willing to shoot it a lot at the range, and had the confidence she could hit a bad guy at close range. She also felt good with the reliability and simplicity of a revolver.
citizensoldier16
10-07-12, 22:20
Lets face it...you're not going to engage in a firefight at any kind of distance with a .22 pistol. These are nose guns...as in "stick it up the nose of your attacker and pull the trigger". They're accurate out to about 15 feet...that's it. However, If one had to carry only a .22, I would probably go for one of the North American Arms like this one:
http://northamericanarms.com/firearms/magnums/mag/m.html
My father carries one just like that every day, whether he's CCW'ing his 1911 or not. Keys, knife, change, .22 - It's just another one of those things that's always in his pocket, no matter what.
I've never shot a .22 auto that I'd consider reliable enough for defense, caliber aside. If someone cast a spell on me that only allowed me to carry a .22LR I'd probably go with a S&W 43C and the Apex action kit. At least it would be concealable and reliable. I'd load it with whatever ammunition has the most penetration. For someone with little training, low likelihood to train, or poor eyesight I'd probably get a Crimson Trace grip.
In reality I think there are better choices than .22 even for someone with a disability. Even training with .22 and carrying 9mm would be better than carrying .22.
Randy Lee told me that the Apex kit is not designed for either .22 or .22 magnum revolvers. I am told that there is little most 'smiths will do to a Smith J frame .22, out of concerns for compromising reliability. I have a 43, 317 and 351. The 351, .22 magnum, has a horrendously heavy trigger, which I doubt a person without excellent hand strength could shoot well. I carry the adjustable sight, 3.5 +/- inch barrel model 317 in my range bag and try to shoot it every centerfire range session to improve my trigger control on semi-auto pistols. With the 317, I can ring my 8 inch steel, support hand only with ease out to 25 yards, but with my fixed sight model 43, my fast hit range is much less due to the inability to adjust sights and the relative crudeness of the fixed sights compared to the sights on the 317.
If I was carrying a .22, for the OP's purpose, it would be the adjustable sight model 317.
mkmckinley
10-07-12, 22:34
Randy Lee told me that the Apex kit is not designed for either .22 or .22 magnum revolvers. I am told that there is little most 'smiths will do to a Smith J frame .22, out of concerns for compromising reliability.
I didn't know that it was an issue. Thanks for the information.
I would suggest, forgive me I don't recall the model designation, the Beretta 22 with the tip-up barrel. I think it is the bobcat, but I am not sure. It holds 6 or 8 rounds per mag. I have one, I haven't shot in probably 10 years. It is a very small bug, that in my experience, is very reliable and accurate. The trigger, while not great, is certainly better than a revolver. The only problem is, no extractor in the slide to eject the round in the event of a dud. Also, the mag release is in a wierd spot.
Good luck!
DeltaSierra
10-08-12, 01:58
I would suggest, forgive me I don't recall the model designation, the Beretta 22 with the tip-up barrel. I think it is the bobcat, but I am not sure. It holds 6 or 8 rounds per mag. I have one, I haven't shot in probably 10 years. It is a very small bug, that in my experience, is very reliable and accurate. The trigger, while not great, is certainly better than a revolver. The only problem is, no extractor in the slide to eject the round in the event of a dud. Also, the mag release is in a wierd spot.
Good luck!
While I personally have no experience with that particular handgun, a friend of mine does...
He couldn't get the thing to fire reliably (more than a mag or two, IIRC) without the removal of some excess metal on the slide - from what he told me, I certainly wouldn't even consider one of those things - I'm no machinist (like he is) and have no use for a weapon that requires that sort of tuning in order to function.
Calhoun123
10-08-12, 06:01
I'll second the poor reliability of the Beretta. I had one that couldn't fire 3 consecutive shots without jamming. There are also multiple small controls that complicate things as dexterity becomes impaired. I would only consider Smith or Ruger revolvers. The SP 101 is excellent and i think it is now available in an 8-10 shot version. Smith also offers models (or did) in 22 mag for additional power w/o recoil. If it had to be an auto, I would think the M&P 22 to be a contender.
Quiet Riot
10-08-12, 07:28
The problem with 22LR pistols is that most are designed as "budget" guns, so you will always run into reliability issues with a much higher rate than you normally see on larger caliber guns (pistol or otherwise). As you know, magazines are critical to the function of an autoloader, yet the mags that are available for most 22LR pistols are utter crap because of cost constraints. The Ruger MkII you mention is a prime example of this. That is why, caliber aside, I would not suggest any autoloading 22LR pistol for self defense.
Truth be told, if I were infirm enough that I couldn't/wouldn't handle a centerfire pistol, I'd be happier with a pepper spray fogger. I lost a neighborhood friend to a 22LR as a kid, so I appreciate the fact that it is a lethal round. However, the power to kill is secondary to the power to incapacitate. Even an ultimately lethal wound from a 22LR would have to be in a pretty special place to instantly incapacitate the type of attacker who could shrug off a snootful of OC.
Urban_Redneck
10-08-12, 08:00
I've been considering the Ruger LCR 22 as well for my 86` year old Dad. A second alternative I've been mulling over is to go with a .38spl. loaded with wadcutters.
Pepper spray makes a great deal of sense as well.
No matter what is finally chosen, there will have to be a back-up stashed in the bathroom ;)
what I have found in many years of experience is those folks who have trouble racking slides also can't handle double action trigger pulls either. I have found a single action autoloader to be the best choice. With exposed hammers you can cock the hammer first prior to racking the slide to chamber a round which greatly decreases the resistance to chambering the round. Call me crazy but for example with my small statured wife who has grip strength issues the easiest gun for her to manipulate and shoot effectively was a1911 with light target loads.
If you need a .22LR handgun for defensive use, my vote is the Ruger LCR-22. It is a concealable, simple to operate handgun in .22LR, and the trigger is easier to manipulate than the S&W J Frames. I'd feel more confident in the revolver's reliability over a semi in .22LR.
A62Rambler
10-08-12, 10:50
I had a Beretta 21a and it was reliable but only with two specific types of 22lr. As noted revolvers require a heavy hammer spring for reliable ignition of the rimfire round. I'd recommend a Colt Mustang or Govt. 380. Try a 38spl with light loads or even a 32 revolver or 32acp auto. I'm just not convinced that anyone frail enough that they can't handle recoil of those rounds, could handle pulling a double action trigger. If they can't or aren't willing to develop the strength to fire a small centerfire, then pepper spray or a taser might be a better choice.
In the end you can kill a grizzly with a 22lr but it's a moot point if the grizzly kills you before you get that final shot that gets the job done.
Claude Werner's experience with the "Little Old Man Gun" and the other thread with the "Little Old Lady Gun" are well worth reading on Southnarc's site.
I note that Claude, a man of some experience, has found the Beretta 21 and the Taurus ploy copy to be reliable enough to use as carry guns. My experience with the Beretta 21s has always been positive as long as one doesn't use bulk ammo for defensive carry.
I think the .22lr LCR is well worth looking at.
On a side note, it's not always strength but ability to tolerate recoil.
I can fire any trigger pull on a handgun you can give me (still shoot my Nagant revolver just fine and it's 25lb plus on DA), and my bench press is still in the 300lb range, but due to arthritis and carpal tunnel issues over the years my ability to deal with the post effects of recoil is greatly diminished.
I can shoot anything I want and handle it well, but I'll pay for it the next day, and maybe for the next week or more.
I'm getting a lot of good practice in with my snub 317.
[QUOTE=citizensoldier16;1412360]Lets face it...you're not going to engage in a firefight at any kind of distance with a .22 pistol. These are nose guns...as in "stick it up the nose of your attacker and pull the trigger". They're accurate out to about 15 feet...that's it. However, If one had to carry only a .22, I would probably go . .. .. [QUOTE]
.22lr guns can be as accurate than any service pistol. I wouldn't start chunking lead at 150 yards, but I can knock down 6" silloetts at 40 and 50 yards more consistently than with either of my service pistols. It wouln't be my go too gun, but I'd empty the magazine at a bad guy before chunking it at him. Probably more effective than my other reaction of screaming like a 12 year old girl and exposing him to my haletosis.
The problem with most .22's is that the reliable and accurate ones with light trigger pulls (Ruger 22/45, Buckmark, etc) are not conducive to CCW being full size guns and the whole "won't train" thing means they will drop the mag when they mean to take it off safe.
The small ones that are easy to CCW have either horrible reliability, poor DA triggers or both.
The advice of thumbcocking a DA revolver might work or they might slip the hammer half way out and ND into the ground or lock the gun up if it has a half cock notch.
I guess my advice would be some kind of SA only revolver without a halfcock notch. As long as they can be trusted to not leave the hammer cocked the chances of an ND are minimal. They will have lousy sights for anything but daylight shooting.
None of these guns have decent holsters on the market for CCW so that means a custom holster.
Aside from the junkers & pocket guns I've yet to see a .22 that won't shoot as well or better than current service handguns.
My 90yo grandmother keeps a 4" S&W .22mag handy. Forget the model number, but is a stainless steel J Frame.
I'd think the psychology plays into this a bit. If someone is diminutive in physical stature or outwardly confident presence, the simple action of loud noises and stingy little bee's may change a bad guys mind because they looked at that person as an easy target from the get go.
Not saying one should count on that, but having something is better than having nothing, all things being equal. Unfortunately, for folks who can't handle recoil, they are not equal. They won't practice with a 9mm or better gun because of their condition, so it's as good as having nothing at all. Whereas, if they will shoot a .22 and familiarize themselves with it, they're already two steps ahead.
Wouldn't be my first choice, but I don't have debilitating arthritis... yet. :D
I'm not to the stage of needing to downsize to just .22LR/mag, but as someone with degenerative joint disease in both thumbs, I did just recently convert down to 9mm from 45acp.
I found that while I still shot the .45 acceptably well, the fact that my hands ached the rest of the day and night was not a good sign. It would have made for reduced practice and training. Shooting 9mm for practice did not induce the lasting pain that the .45 did. So I sold off my .45 and got into the M&P series.
If I ever end up just being able to manage the .22lr/mag, then I would rather have that, than no firearm at all.
Let me throw out an odd ball choice for you. Taurus has recently come out with a 5 shot .380 revolver (it uses moon clips). Small, light recoil, reliable, and a little more punch than the 22lr.
I traded off my Beretta because of reliability issues. Only once was I able to shoot a complete box of CCI (100 rds) without a FTE. I love the trigger on my LCR .22; that would be my choice if I was limited to that caliber. My wife has been able to stay with her 642 .38- because she got a bigger grip and switched to wadcutters.
Let me throw out an odd ball choice for you. Taurus has recently come out with a 5 shot .380 revolver (it uses moon clips). Small, light recoil, reliable, and a little more punch than the 22lr.
If your post was directed at me, thanks for the info TN. I am doing fine with the 9mm now though, and in a defensive encounter, .45 wouldn't bother me, but for training purposes, it is just a bit more pain in the hands than I wish for. So I will be happy with my 9mm--I am really liking the M&P FS I get to shoot.
brushy bill
10-08-12, 19:37
As you know, magazines are critical to the function of an autoloader, yet the mags that are available for most 22LR pistols are utter crap because of cost constraints. The Ruger MkII you mention is a prime example of this. That is why, caliber aside, I would not suggest any autoloading 22LR pistol for self defense.
Interesting...this is the first time I've ever heard that the Ruger MKII mag was garbage. Anyone else share this impression? I'd sort of formed the impression that the MKII was one of the few very reliable .22 pistols providing the ammo did it's job. When did this change? Esp considering I believe this pistol has been used for some covert applications over the years. Maybe I'm misinformed and happy to hear info to the contrary.
brushy bill
10-08-12, 19:40
Claude Werner's experience with the "Little Old Man Gun" and the other thread with the "Little Old Lady Gun" are well worth reading on Southnarc's site.
I note that Claude, a man of some experience, has found the Beretta 21 and the Taurus ploy copy to be reliable enough to use as carry guns. My experience with the Beretta 21s has always been positive as long as one doesn't use bulk ammo for defensive carry.
I think the .22lr LCR is well worth looking at.
On a side note, it's not always strength but ability to tolerate recoil.
I can fire any trigger pull on a handgun you can give me (still shoot my Nagant revolver just fine and it's 25lb plus on DA), and my bench press is still in the 300lb range, but due to arthritis and carpal tunnel issues over the years my ability to deal with the post effects of recoil is greatly diminished.
I can shoot anything I want and handle it well, but I'll pay for it the next day, and maybe for the next week or more.
I'm getting a lot of good practice in with my snub 317.
Nice post. Actually, this is what got me thinking about this topic combined with some recent RFIs.
Beat Trash
10-08-12, 20:36
I don't know that I would trust a rim fire .22 for a defensive gun. I've had an occasional failure to fire from just about every major manufa tire of 22lr over the years. The rimfire is just not as reliable as a centire fire primed round.
A 38 spec loaded with 148 gr wad cutter ammunition is low recoil and much more effective than the 22lr, in my opinion. If shot out of a steel framed gun then the recoil is even less.
Beretta used to make a tip up barrel 380 also, for those who lacked the hand strength to manulipate the slide. But my experience with the felt recoil of the blow back 380's was that they weren't that much less than many 9mm's as far as felt recoil goes.
If all an individual was about to handle was a 22lr revolver due to a limit in hand strength, then I would be concerned a out their ability to have the finger strength to deal with the heavier DA triggers inhearant with rimfire revolvers.
If you are seriously considering an SP-101, 32 H&R-Mag would be a superior chambering over either of the possible rimfire cartridges.
You would get centerfire reliability (big plus) and it can accept lesser 32 cartridges, like 32 S&W or 32 S&W Long, the same way a 357 Mag can take 38s (so you can dial up as much power as can be tolerated). The 32 Mag has a better chance of expanding than either 22lr or 22WMR out of a handgun barrel.
Keep in mind that if someone has physical infirmaties & general weakness, they might not be able to manage the D/A trigger pull of a revolver.
Salamander
10-08-12, 23:49
OP, if you're helping someone with the decision-making process, good for you.
After my grandmother passed away in her late 80s, in the process of cleaning up her things I found a cheap... I mean really cheap... 25 auto stashed in a drawer with a box of ammo. I would have been afraid to fire it, besides the crude manufacture and obviously sloppy tolerances it had some surface rust and probably hadn't seen any lubricant in years. No one in the family knew she had it, although considering she rented to tenants in marginal neighborhoods when she was a bit younger, it probably shouldn't have been a surprise. I'm guessing she carried it during those years and put it away only when she retired to the suburbs.
She was one tough lady, but I'm very glad she never had to use that gun. It might have been more of a danger to her than to the assailant.
RC51_Texas
10-08-12, 23:52
How about the Kel-Tec .22 Magnum PMR-30?
I don't own one, but have put 200 rounds through one at the range.
Can't speak on the reliability - other than it had no issues in my limited time with it. Seems like if I had to stick with a .22cal, I'd at least go with the .22WMR for a nightstand gun ...
I'd personally recommend a 9mm, or at least a .380 for "Grandma", but the Kel-Tec PMR-30 was easy enough to shoot very accurately and handled like a .22lr - my 2 cents ...
Alaskapopo
10-09-12, 00:16
I know that a 22 sucks. I wrote that in the preface. I'll reiterate, "A 22 sucks for defense". Think your 90 yr old granny or something or a disabled person who WON'T/CAN'T train if you give them too much gun. Not you training with your 9mm ECD. Think you CAN'T do what you can now. Think they fear the recoil.
It they are that bad off its time for your parents to be moved into a secure apartment building or something similar.
I would suggest, forgive me I don't recall the model designation, the Beretta 22 with the tip-up barrel. I think it is the bobcat, but I am not sure. It holds 6 or 8 rounds per mag. I have one, I haven't shot in probably 10 years. It is a very small bug, that in my experience, is very reliable and accurate. The trigger, while not great, is certainly better than a revolver. The only problem is, no extractor in the slide to eject the round in the event of a dud. Also, the mag release is in a weird spot.
Good luck!
I have a 21A. My main issue with it is the fact that it doesn't have an extractor. The blowback of the round is supposed to eject the case. It will not tolerarate a dirty chamber at all and it really needs to be honed to increase reliability. The feed ramp is also fairly steep, particularly when compared to the feed ramp on it's predecessor (model 20) in .25ACP. The upsides are the tip up barrel and the ability to carry DA/SA or cocked & locked in single action.
As puny as it is, I'd think I'd rather have a .25ACP for the standard primers. If you're going to rely on a .22LR for defense, I'd at least use ammo that's Eley primed for better reliability.
Do you think the Beretta Tomcat in .32ACP would be too much? How about the Beretta 86 Cheetah? That's what I usually recommend for someone with limited hand strength.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beretta_86_Cheetah
http://richennis.com/Gallery/SAA/Beretta86_C.jpg
Keep in mind that if someone has physical infirmaties & general weakness, they might not be able to manage the D/A trigger pull of a revolver.
Limited hand strength cited by the OP is why a revolver might be an option worth consideration and why a tiny semi-auto like the Beretta 21 is probably not a good choice.
(If it must be a 22 then pick a manageable size gun like the M&P22.)
Why? The smaller a semi-auto gets, the more firmly it needs to be held in order to keep it from malfunctioning; and the less area it has available to grasp it for a pull start.
My cousin has the Beretta 21, in 22LR (partly because it doesn't need to be racked to load the chamber). He brought this pocket pistol with him one day to the range and we shot it. When he shot the pistol, it would frequently stovepipe. When I shot it (same ammunition) it ran through several magazines without a stoppage.
I suspected he was not getting a firm grip on the gun.
We had a gunsmith lighten the mainspring slightly and it now runs well for my cousin (at least it did when I last saw it).
The other issue with the semi-auto is the tendency of untrained people with marginal hand strength to wrap the left thumb over the back of their right hand thumb to establish a firing grip, especially on a small gun. On a semi-auto, this often brings the left thumb into the path of a cycling slide and results in injury to the user. On a revolver, the off hand thumb might be jabbed during recoil but it doesn't normally result in bleeding.
Revolvers offer their own complications, but they are slightly more forgiving of a bad grip and as long as the cylinder can bring a fresh cartridge in line with the barrel, it's almost certain to shoot.
It ultimately depends on the person who will be carrying the gun, what level of power they are comfortable with, and which action they can manipulate best under stress: Semi-auto pistol, DA/SA revolver or even a SA revolver.
I carried a Ruger SR22 for a little while, very easy to conceal, light weight and the slide is very easy to rack.
Glock 19.
Edited to add:
Just messin' with you, I read the opening post's parameters.
But seriously, how about a G19 w/ a .22LR conversion? Like the one from Tactical Solutions.
brushy bill
10-09-12, 18:18
It they are that bad off its time for your parents to be moved into a secure apartment building or something similar.
Not my parents. They're both long gone. But keep in mind your solution only works if they never leave the house or go outside. No walks around the neighborhood, no trips to the grocery store or pharmacy or doctor's office or whatever.
Alaskapopo
10-09-12, 20:24
Not my parents. They're both long gone. But keep in mind your solution only works if they never leave the house or go outside. No walks around the neighborhood, no trips to the grocery store or pharmacy or doctor's office or whatever.
If they can go for walks then they should be able to handle a .38 or 9mm pistol.
Pat
brushy bill
10-09-12, 20:31
If they can go for walks then they should be able to handle a .38 or 9mm pistol.
Pat
You're right Pat of course. People don't get arthritis in their hands. And walk always means a brisk energetic healthy walk. Thinks for the insightful posts. If you just want to argue why don't you pick another thread? Maybe you can bait S1 into an exchange.
Alaskapopo
10-09-12, 20:34
Your right Pat. People don't get arthritis in their hands. Thinks for the insightful posts. If you just want to argue why don't you pick another thread.
I don't just want to argue. However if your to the point you can't handle the very minor recoil froma 38 revolver in a steel frame like the Ruger Sp101 or a smaller 9mm auto then its time to think of other self defense systems like a taser or pepper spray. A .22 is not going to have the ability to stop an attack unless used with great precision that someone with arthritis is not going to have. A .22 is not a defense round period.
Pat
brushy bill
10-09-12, 21:23
This is definitely a good recommendation to try. Tip up barrel eliminates the issue with racking the slide. Can be carried cocked and locked it appears to overcome the DA first shot. Thanks.
I have a 21A. My main issue with it is the fact that it doesn't have an extractor. The blowback of the round is supposed to eject the case. It will not tolerarate a dirty chamber at all and it really needs to be honed to increase reliability. The feed ramp is also fairly steep, particularly when compared to the feed ramp on it's predecessor (model 20) in .25ACP. The upsides are the tip up barrel and the ability to carry DA/SA or cocked & locked in single action.
As puny as it is, I'd think I'd rather have a .25ACP for the standard primers. If you're going to rely on a .22LR for defense, I'd at least use ammo that's Eley primed for better reliability.
Do you think the Beretta Tomcat in .32ACP would be too much? How about the Beretta 86 Cheetah? That's what I usually recommend for someone with limited hand strength.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beretta_86_Cheetah
http://richennis.com/Gallery/SAA/Beretta86_C.jpg
I don't just want to argue. However if your to the point you can't handle the very minor recoil froma 38 revolver in a steel frame like the Ruger Sp101 or a smaller 9mm auto then its time to think of other self defense systems like a taser or pepper spray. A .22 is not going to have the ability to stop an attack unless used with great precision that someone with arthritis is not going to have. A .22 is not a defense round period.
Pat
There is wisdom in this post.
There is nothing inherently wrong with someone who may not be able to handle a firearm due to physical reasons, however when talking about defending one's self in life-threatening situations, it is our responsibility to be rational about it. OP, for the person you describe, a gun may not be the best answer. A Taser has no recoil and is likely far more effective than a .22. Moreover, it requires less training and is far more intuitive.
.22lr from a pistol is far from ideal, however I personally know of a few people that was disagree to its ill effectiveness if they were still alive to speak on it. Shot placement does matter and I learned that as a teen when I watched a guy take 6 shots COM from a H&R revolver and drop like a sack of potatoes DRT. You guys do you what you want, however I would take a 22lr pistol over a taxed 100% of the time ;)
Don't you typically only get one shot out of a taser device before it becomes a contact tool? In the hands of a 90 year old person that doesn't have the strength to rack a slide but now has to touch someone she just shot at and missed? Or an elderly person using a chemical device that compromises breathing and has a good chance of getting on the user?
Surely the .22LR cartridge is the worst choice for people like us who know that you can't rely on the bad guy giving up when the shooting starts. But I think in this case the elderly person is better served with 8 tries in the minimal caliber and the greater probability that the assailant who picked a frail old person to attack b/c they thought it would be easy, fails to press home the attack when the shooting starts.
Psalms144.1
10-10-12, 09:37
This is a difficult question all around. I agree that the .22LR, while certainly lethal in the right situation, is NOT a good choice for anyone for SD purposes.
WRT the various chemical sprays, having been in/around the use of them on literally dozens of occassions and seeing them fail to really stop aggressive action in most cases, I wouldn't want to put the safety of my loved ones in their care. Added to that the potential complications of an elderly person aspirating a chemical irritant, and I just wouldn't go this route.
As far as Tasers go, electrical-discharge weapons are certainly effective, but have VERY short duration of effect. We probably have all seen the videos where people drop like rocks while the current is active, but get back up just as fast once the 5 second ride is over. I'm not sure how many "charges" a civilian Taser has - but I'd hate to have an elderly person "tase" a hostile target and then get beat to death by an enraged attacker a couple of seconds later. Tasers are simply not effective against multiple targets, and they do still need to be aimed - if the darts don't connect, you're SOL.
Which brings us back to firearms. I agree that any .22LR semiauto that's small enough to reasonably carry is very unlikely to be reliable - even though, back in my ill-trained youth, I used to carry a pair of tip-up barrel Berettas (one in each pocket), and the two I had were reliable when fed Stingers or other "hot" .22 fodder. If you HAVE to stay with a .22LR, I'd agree that a small revolver is a better choice, and, while I personally don't care for the Ruger LCR, it's trigger is likely to be MUCH easier to manipulate for a person with limited grip strength than any J-frame version.
However, I think the BEST solution for this problem is the two-gun approach. Specifically, I'd look for a real fighting gun, like the S&W M&P in 9mm, and mate it to a 22LR version for training. This allows the shooter to get in good, quality training with a soft-recoiling pistol that mirrors in all respects (less recoil) the operation of the larger caliber pistol. The M&P 9mm loaded in the night stand will feel and operate exactly like the M&P 22 they shoot on the range. Therefore, when something goes bump in the night, they grab a (reliable and capable) pistol that is indistinguishable from their trusty "training" pistol. Again, I picked the M&P series as an example, but the same thing could be accomplished with the LCR - a .22LR version for training, and a .357 version loaded with good .38 ammunition for "serious" use.
Lastly, I'd hesitate to suggest the Beretta Cheetah for two reasons - the first being recoil. If the person in question has such limited hand strength/chronic pain that manipulating a slide is out of the question, they're unlikely to be tolerant of the recoil of the .380 round in the Cheetah, which will lead to limited or no practice. Additionally, the safety lever on the Cheetah is very small and (at least on the ones I've handled) stiff, making it hard to operate under stress, especially for someone with stiff joints.
Regards,
Kevin
Alaskapopo
10-10-12, 11:23
I would be willing to bet tasers work a lot better at stopping people than .22 pistols. I have had to use a taser several times at works and its worked great except for 1 time where I did not get both barbs to connect. All the other incidents it worked great. I also know people who have been shot with .22's that are alive and well and who did not stop when they got shot.
Pat
I would be willing to bet tasers work a lot better at stopping people than .22 pistols. I have had to use a taser several times at works and its worked great except for 1 time where I did not get both barbs to connect. All the other incidents it worked great. I also know people who have been shot with .22's that are alive and well and who did not stop when they got shot.
Pat
I usually agree with a lot of what you post, but we differ in oppinion here. I would never advocate using less-lethal methods over any gun against a lethal force threat, particularly for a frail person. In many cases the mere presence of a gun will send a criminal fleeing. If not, getting shot with anything may cause them to break off the attack. Emptying a .22LR into someone will more often than not have a considerable effect on their willingness or ability to continue an attack. After all, there's a reason they're targeting an elderly or infirm person in the first place, easy pickings.
There are a lot of people taking a dirt nap because of the .22LR. Perhaps some of them completed their attack before expiring, but I'd bet most of them didn't...
Alaskapopo
10-10-12, 12:09
I usually agree with a lot of what you post, but we differ in oppinion here. I would never advocate using less-lethal methods over any gun against a lethal force threat, particularly for a frail person. In many cases the mere presence of a gun will send a criminal fleeing. If not, getting shot with anything may cause them to break off the attack. Emptying a .22LR into someone will more often than not have a considerable effect on their willingness or ability to continue an attack. After all, there's a reason they're targeting an elderly or infirm person in the first place, easy pickings.
There are a lot of people taking a dirt nap because of the .22LR. Perhaps some of them completed their attack before expiring, but I'd bet most of them didn't...
With respect a .22 is not a reliable lethal force option. Yes the .22 has been used to murder people but its dysmal at stopping determined attackers. The only way to do that with a .22 is surgical shot placement to the area of the throat and between the eyes. A taser that connets will drop the person now. Been there and done that. Now if you want to talk about reasonable calibers like the .38 or 9mm then it makes a lot more sense to have a gun but to carry a small game and target shooting round for self defense is lunacy. They might as well carry an air soft pistol because at least then when the bad guy takes it from then he would not be able to use it to kill them.
Pat
How about the 5" S&W model 41?
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-10-12, 12:43
How about the 5" S&W model 41?
Sent from my DROIDX
Heavy, huge, unreliable. I own one and love it.
Heavy, huge, unreliable. I own one and love it.
See mine (my Dads) is 50+ years old and is very reliable! My Dad used it in competetion while on the US Army pistol team.
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-10-12, 13:33
Mine is 31 years old. It's OK with certain types of ammo.
A62Rambler
10-10-12, 14:14
I think a Walther pp in 32, a colt govt 380, or a s&w model 10 with wadcutters would be better Choices for little more recoil. To quote the OP a 22 sucks for self defense. I think it provides a false sense of security.
With respect a .22 is not a reliable lethal force option. Yes the .22 has been used to murder people but its dysmal at stopping determined attackers. The only way to do that with a .22 is surgical shot placement to the area of the throat and between the eyes.
Pat
FBI says differently -- 99leoka.pdf from FBI website
Alaska
At approximately 1:30 a.m. on May 15, a 30-yearold
patrol officer with the Palmer Police Department
was mortally wounded while checking on the welfare
of a man slumped over the steering wheel of his
vehicle. The officer woke the man and had him step
out of his truck. The officer, who had nearly 4 years
of law enforcement experience, was notified by
radio that the owner of the vehicle was known to
carry a weapon. At that point, the man jumped back
into his truck, followed by the officer who tried to
gain control of the subject. The subject allegedly
fired a single shot from a .22-caliber handgun. The
bullet struck the victim officer in the front upper
torso/chest, entering above his body armor. The
victim officer fired two shots, wounding the man.
The 52-year-old alleged killer was treated at a local
hospital. He has been arrested and charged with
Homicide.
So a highly trained officer shoots two high caliber rounds and recipient lives. Untrained citizen hastily lands a randomly placed .22 and kills leo.
brushy bill
10-10-12, 20:47
Don't you typically only get one shot out of a taser device before it becomes a contact tool? In the hands of a 90 year old person that doesn't have the strength to rack a slide but now has to touch someone she just shot at and missed? Or an elderly person using a chemical device that compromises breathing and has a good chance of getting on the user?
Surely the .22LR cartridge is the worst choice for people like us who know that you can't rely on the bad guy giving up when the shooting starts. But I think in this case the elderly person is better served with 8 tries in the minimal caliber and the greater probability that the assailant who picked a frail old person to attack b/c they thought it would be easy, fails to press home the attack when the shooting starts.
Exactly. I'd rather go down fighting with a .22 than die with a taser I forgot to charge or missed with or OC that blew back on me or whatever. That's why the "ignore" function is such a nice feature of this site.
gunrunner505
10-10-12, 21:11
In the May 11, 2009 issue of Tactical Weapons they profile the Beretta Model 70/71 22LR pistol. Evidently this little guy was used with huge success by Isreali Mossad and Sky Marshalls. Took down more than one bad guy/terrorist/hijacker.
It's no longer in production but if you can find one, might be worth a look.
Straight Shooter
10-10-12, 21:11
Taser...spray...or .22Lr.
Im taking the .22LR and never looking back.
Taser...spray...or .22Lr.
Im taking the .22LR and never looking back.
+1 on that! I currently OC a .22 LR pistol when I walk the dog at night. I do have to add I'm saving up for an M&P 9mm.
Sent from my DROIDX
I've personally seen 3 people that were killed with .22's, and all happened to be one shot stops, and all in the same year. One of them got shot in the chest and ran for 2 blocks then collapsed. Another got shot in the lower back and the bullet traveled up and through his heart. Can't remember the specifics on the third incident, as I've seen a lot of gun shot wounds and they all tend to become a blur. Several years ago, a guy was hit with 5-6 .40 rounds and was standing, or shall I say leaning against his car talking.
What's with this taser business? If you're put in a lethal force situation, you don't answer it with a less lethal device. As having used a taser on humans before, I would much rather have a .22 if I was put in a situation where lethal force is justified.
gunrunner505
10-10-12, 22:59
A hit with a 22 beats a miss with something else.
Alaskapopo
10-11-12, 00:11
FBI says differently -- 99leoka.pdf from FBI website
So a highly trained officer shoots two high caliber rounds and recipient lives. Untrained citizen hastily lands a randomly placed .22 and kills leo.
That is one case. However the track record of the .22 as a fight stopper is terrible. I can probably find a story of a air rifle stopping an attack as well but that does not mean its a good choice.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-11-12, 00:13
Exactly. I'd rather go down fighting with a .22 than die with a taser I forgot to charge or missed with or OC that blew back on me or whatever. That's why the "ignore" function is such a nice feature of this site.
You don't charge tasers generally you simply keep the batteries fresh and they tell you how much juice is left in them when you turn them on to function theck them. Pepper spray is also a simple weapon to use. Your right ingore is nice and anyone who is sane should ingore foolhardy advice to carry a .22 rimfire as a defense tool. That is pure lunacy.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-11-12, 00:16
I've personally seen 3 people that were killed with .22's, and all happened to be one shot stops, and all in the same year. One of them got shot in the chest and ran for 2 blocks then collapsed. Another got shot in the lower back and the bullet traveled up and through his heart. Can't remember the specifics on the third incident, as I've seen a lot of gun shot wounds and they all tend to become a blur. Several years ago, a guy was hit with 5-6 .40 rounds and was standing, or shall I say leaning against his car talking.
What's with this taser business? If you're put in a lethal force situation, you don't answer it with a less lethal device. As having used a taser on humans before, I would much rather have a .22 if I was put in a situation where lethal force is justified.
If your not able to handle a lethal weapon you use what you can handle. A firearm is only as good as the person using it. If you can't handle a .38 revolver or a 9mm auto you have no buisness carrying a firearm. Simple as that. Carry a weapon requires a certain level of training and a very basic level of physical fitness. If it hurts your hands to shoot anything but a .22 your better off not carrying a gun at all. As for the Taser buisness I know from experience that they work very well. Last time I used mine I brought a 285 pound 24 year old man who was high on prescription drugs to the ground using an X-26. Yes its a less lethal device but its very effective if used properly. I have seen a lot of gunshot wounds myself most suicides. I know of one person who got shot in the arm with a .25 auto and did not bother going to the hospital until the next day when his arm swole up. Friends don't let friends and loved ones carry calibers under .38 special.
Everyone in this thread needs to go up to the terminal performance section of this forum and do some reading. This thread is as idiotic as one I saw once where the poster wanted to get a firearms suggetion for his blind father. Some people just should not carry guns when they are not physically able to use them effectively. A firearm in an untrained uncapable persons hands is a liablity not an asset.
Pat
Nephrology
10-11-12, 07:46
A firearm in an untrained uncapable persons hands is a liablity not an asset.
Pat
I think that the people who are blindly repeating "a .22 is better than nothing!" Should read and re-read this sentence.
We aren't talking about a hitman or even just a jackass here who wants to just hurt people and is only pleased after the fact if they collapse. We are talking about a law abiding citizen coming under relentless assault form an attacker (or attackers) who want to inflict upon them death or serious bodily harm. They need a weapon that they can expect to reliably penetrate bone, connective tissue, muscle, and to still have the energy to drive through the major blood bearing organs or the various tissues of the central nervous system.
simply put, a .22 cannot do that reliably. Has it been done in the past? sure. but those of you rattling off anecdotes about "oh so and so got shot with a .22 and died and the other guy was riddled with .50 BMG and still lived!" are violating two very important rules of critical thinking:
1. The plural of anecdotes is NOT data
2. Correlation does NOT mean causation
Just because you've seen it two or three times doesn't mean you can expect to see it a fourth time. To get to statistically significant sample size you need a values at LEAST into the thousands range if you are going to tackle something as complicated and multivariate as the effects of gunshot wounds on the human body.
Because such studies are rarely done (and when they are, they appear to be very poorly done) we rely on simulant instead. This is the calibrated gel test. We can take these results (which we are able to repeat again and again and again) and extrapolate to human tissue. Are they perfect? no. But they are far more relevant than some random story.
Finally and most importantly, having a gun is not a magic solution to somebody's problem. If they cannot use it well, or the gun itself cannot be expected to reliably function (like most if not all autoloading .22 pistols), then they might have escalated what was perhaps just started armed robbery into a homicide. If you escalate a situation with lethal force, you better be prepared to come out on top. Advising somebody who is old and/or infirm to use a .22 because they can't use anything else might put them in a coffin if luck doesn't roll their way.
If a person cannot handle a service caliber handgun then they don't have the right to use lethal force to protect themselves. They should rely on someone else and/or good luck to help them.
I don't know that just doesn't sit right with me. I do whole heartedly agree that a firearm isn't a talisman and you should learn how to use one and practice with it. Does anyone realize how many untrained, unpracticed (realistically this is most of the handgun owning population in the US) use firearms successfully to save their lives and how many of these same people have the firearm turned against them?
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 09:10
If you can't get basic safety/CCW training or cannot handle recoil, there's an answer.
German Shepherd or Belgian Malinois.
If you can't get basic safety/CCW training or cannot handle recoil, there's an answer.
German Shepherd or Belgian Malinois.
That won't do you a bit of good if the dog is not trained. The cost of the dog plus training will be many thousands of dollars. That does not include the cost to train you to handle the dog either.
I'll stick with my 22 until I get my 9.
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 09:32
That won't do you a bit of good if the dog is not trained. The cost of the dog plus training will be many thousands of dollars. That does not include the cost to train you to handle the dog either.
I'll stick with my 22 until I get my 9.
Sent from my DROIDX
Yeah, what would I ****ing know. Those dogs don't have innate protective instincts. They are worthless without training, sure.
Yeah, what would I ****ing know. Those dogs don't have innate protective instincts. They are worthless without training, sure.
Now THAT I agree with! A protective dog needs to have a specific set of skills, just like we do.
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 09:43
Now THAT I agree with! A protective dog needs to have a specific set of skills, just like we do.
Sent from my DROIDX
I've owned nothing but GSDs and now a Malinois. What skills at a minimum so you think a protective dog must have?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Doc. Holiday
10-11-12, 09:59
Like a lot of people have said, I have shot very few .22 pistols that are reliable. My suggestion would be an FN 5.7. Low recoil and holds 20 rds or so. Those things have no recoil at all. A bit expensive and perhaps a little bulky, but it's more reliable than any other .22 I've shot.
Just my 2 cents...
Theres a big difference between a pet that will attempt to protect you and a "trained" protective dog. Just like you don't agree with using a .22 for self defense, I don't agree with using an untrained dog for self defense. You will not know what the dog will do in a SHTF situation.
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 10:43
Theres a big difference between a pet that will attempt to protect you and a "trained" protective dog. Just like you don't agree with using a .22 for self defense, I don't agree with using an untrained dog for self defense. You will not know what the dog will do in a SHTF situation.
Sent from my DROIDX
So, you're not going to list the skills that you feel are essential in a dog owned for protective purposes but rather continue to blurt out "training?"
So, you're not going to list the skills that you feel are essential in a dog owned for protective purposes but rather continue to blurt out "training?"
LL, step away from the scalpel!!:D
So, you're not going to list the skills that you feel are essential in a dog owned for protective purposes but rather continue to blurt out "training?"
You are correct! I foresee that I will give a certain criteria and you will just shoot back with "well my dog can do that". You believe that a pet is an acceptable alternative to a .22 as a defense, I don't.
I also believe an untrained pet that attacks someone will open that person to legal issues that a defensive shooting may not.
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 11:05
You are correct! I foresee that I will give a certain criteria and you will just shoot back with "well my dog can do that". You believe that a pet is an acceptable alternative to a .22 as a defense, I don't.
I also believe an untrained pet that attacks someone will open that person to legal issues that a defensive shooting may not.
Sent from my DROIDX
For those that cannot safely handle a .22 nor be persuaded to take a basic safety and/or CCW class, an obedient German Shepherd is hard to beat. The Western European patrolling shepherd breeds (Belgian Shepherd, Dutch Shepherd, German Shepherd) are automatically protective and instinctively walk a post; that is patrol a perimeter. These aren't herding dogs in the sense that Border Collie is; these are dogs that are bred to watch, patrol, and protect. Speaking from personal experience, it is absolutely possible to have an protective German Shepherd that has not received formal protective training. Again from personal experience; these dogs are a deterrent to criminals. It's almost comical to watch a few thugs cross the street to get away from a 75lb dog.
Below is a pic of my Malinois on his first day of Schutzhund training. Do you think that bite is the result of instinct or training?
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h251/baxshep/fbad8576.jpg
Also.....
http://www.singleblackmale.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/stay-in-your-lane1-225x300.jpg
I acknowledge that YOUR dog is suitable for your needs.
I also will state that the 140# half trained German Shepard that was owned by a military animal vet that attacked me from behind and bit me is now dead due to lead poisoning dispensed by a Glock 17....
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 11:29
I acknowledge that YOUR dog is suitable for your needs.
I also will state that the 140# half trained German Shepard that was owned by a military animal vet that attacked me from behind and bit me is now dead due to lead poisoning dispensed by a Glock 17....
Sent from my DROIDX
Yup, that's a perfect yardstick to measure all other dogs. Rock on, man.
It's almost comical to watch a few thugs cross the street to get away from a 75lb dog.
Below is a pic of my Malinois on his first day of Schutzhund training. Do you think that bite is the result of instinct or training?
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h251/baxshep/fbad8576.jpg
Also.....
http://www.singleblackmale.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/stay-in-your-lane1-225x300.jpg
Naww. He's hungry.
And your "experiences" holds more weight? I think not!
Apparently despite what you say, you have put your dog through training.
I figured you had an an unspoken motive when you asked me what specific training. This forum has taught me to watch out for people like you that like to bait and frustrate others when their opinion differs from theirs.
Sent from my DROIDX
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 11:45
And your "experiences" holds more weight? I think not!
Apparently despite what you say, you have put your dog through training.
I figured you had an an unspoken motive when you asked me what specific training. This forum had taught me to watch out for people like you that like to bait and frustrate other when their opinion differs from theirs.
Sent from my DROIDX
Got it, you can't answer my question. And you'll whine about forum bullying. My unspoken motive was to ascertain if you really knew what you were talking about when tossing around such platitudes as "protective dogs need training." Got my answer; you don't know but you will cry about being held accountable for what you say.
Anyway, I did four 4-6 hours days of training with my Mal. None with my GSD. The best "training" I ever did with my Mal was playing with him in the backyard and rewarding him when he did what I wanted. My GSD was still more protective than my Mal is now. I stopped doing Schutzhund because those people are all about the ring (at least my local group) and I just wanted to train with my dog. My Mal didn't turn into a protection dog from said training; he already was via instinct. I know these things from experience; from doing it, from living it. Get it?
From my direct personal experience, these dogs will protect you without specialized training. It's hardly uncommon knowledge regarding these breeds and protection. I would rather my grandmother walk down a dangerous street with a GSD bonded to her than a handgun. Thankfully, she's in Wyoming and doesn't have to deal with that shit.
Got it, you can't answer my question. And you'll whine about forum bullying. My unspoken motive was to ascertain if you really knew what you were talking about when tossing around such platitudes as "protective dogs need training." Got my answer; you don't know but you will cry about being held accountable for what you say....
So now that you have become frustrated you resort to name calling and such. That's fine. Actually it just shows your true colors when you are unable to articulate a proper point. I am also not about to post my resume for you or anyone else on this forum. I relay my experience as I see them, just as you do. You don't have the ability to bully me, you are lacking in that department. We shall all be held accountable for what we say one way or the other.
Rock on, Brother!
This thread is going nowhere fast, but before it gets closed, I will add my 2 pennies:
First, my employees use .22 RIFLES to shoot multiple 35-80 LBS animals per week (depredation hunting) and these animals rarely go down quick. A 175-220 LBS attacker shot with a 3" barreled .22 pistol is not going to be any better.
Secondly, My grandparents were saved from an attacker who tried to enter their home while they were asleep by a 9 year old yellow lab. The lab took a knife for them, and all the evidence shows that he chewed on the perp pretty well.
Having a (well behaved/obedient) dog of one of the protective breeds seems like a good solution for elderly people who commonly want/need a dog anyways. They are likely to give attention and training to the dog, and the dog can be effectivelly employed without digging it out of a dresser in the dark.
This thread is going nowhere fast, but before it gets closed...
Your right, for the sake of the OP, I shall post no further in this thread.
Sent from my DROIDX
If you can't get basic safety/CCW training or cannot handle recoil, there's an answer.
German Shepherd or Belgian Malinois.
I agree with Littlelebowski , check into getting a dog. IMNHO unless there is a .22 out there that is as reliable as my Glock 19 (Gen 3) and the owner can shoot it like Rob Leatham under stress its a no-go.
Even then the odds are not tilted in your favor.
I have a Rotty that was the runt of the litter, size wise not as intimidating as many other dogs,yet He intimidates!. He has had no training,only interaction with me and family. NO ONE that has encountered him can deny his protective instincts, he is all business in that dept.
The good thing about many dogs is that they are early warning systems. Everyone that is not family/friend will ALWAYS step back a good 10 ft or so from the front door when they hear him /see him through the front window.I have the torn up inside window screening as proof he means business. Most times cars can't make it into the driveway without me knowing, he's a house dog. As a side benefit studies show elderly people with dogs live longer.
My .02
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 14:37
There's more to this story but I'm having a hard time finding it and I wish I had saved it. Basically the woman was at home with her infant and she opened the door to the "cable guy."
He bounds in, pins her down, starts pulling off her pants on the living room floor where her infant son was playing. Her young female German Shepherd leaps from the stairs, latches on to the guy's shoulder and bites and holds. He jumps up, wrenches the dog off, throws the dog across the room. Undeterred, the German Shepherd goes right back into attack, latching on to his wrist immediately. He beats a hasty retreat to the door, I think he got the dog off right before he exited.
I don't think she would have been better served with a .22 unless she was packing and a graduate of South Narc's ECQC. This happened in St Louis, around 2008. It was a black, juvenile German Shepherd named Gracie that saved her family. I suppose the argument could be made that the single mom living in an apt had the time and money to get the dog trained but really, give me a break.
If anyone finds the original article, please post it.
http://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/metro/news/crime/new-german-shepherd-stops-attempted-rape/article_62894e0f-fae2-56c7-bfc7-5a8729bf9f61.html?mode=comments
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 14:40
Found the original article (http://www.pantagraph.com/news/article_e739eff2-9a4a-5fc0-8e38-48933861458b.html).
For those that have no personal experience with training protection dogs, know that no reputable trainer would train that young of a dog.
Read the article, it's uplifting.
Beat Trash
10-11-12, 15:51
I posted early on about using a steel framed 38 revolver with wad cutter loads. A 2"-3" S&W model 10 or a Ruger SP101 would be a good choice. Even if the individual had to cock the hammer with each shot.
As far as a .22lr being able to kill, yes it can.
But there is a huge difference between stopping aggressive behavior and killing. As a tool to assinate, a supressed .22 has proven effective. But to stop a violent attack prior to becoming a victim, I wouldn't recommend it to any of my loved ones.
I personally would not use any .22 pistol for defense. But if you feel ok doing so, have at it.
the_halfie
10-11-12, 16:13
I usually don't post (obviously) and just soak up any and all quality information this site has to give instead. That being said, I have to agree with LittleLebowski. I have owned dogs my whole life, and never sent any of them through any sort of formal training. I have had 2 black lab mixed with golden retrievers, a golden retriever, and 3 (2 of them are currently laying in different areas of the house at the moment) St Bernards. ALL of these dogs either can and/ or have been deterrents before. I just don't think it's a good idea for somebody to have a firearm for self defense if they're not going to train or at least attempt to train for that type of scenario. Just my thoughts. Either way good luck to the OP and I hope you find value in the information you're being given by the others. :)
Alaskapopo
10-11-12, 17:28
I had not thought of the dog angle and its great advice and not only can dogs provide protection they can help up lift the spirts of the elderly. I know a man who is 85 who keep shooting with us in IDPA and USPSA. He has 3 great dogs that he once told me were part of the reason he keeps getting out of bed every day. He has an emotional attachment to them which I think has helped him since his wife past on.
Pat
I lied!
I talked with my wife, who's grandfather bred and trained German Shepherds for the German police. She stated that she has observed trained police bitches teaching/imparting their training onto their pups. She also stated that she'd take a German Shepherd or Rot over a .22 LR.
1. The wife is always right.
2. If the wife is wrong see rule 1.
I still think I'm right...
I'll begin with the obligatory, "I am well aware 22LR is not a good choice for self-defense, esp when fired from a pistol, and that more appropriate rounds abound." That out of the way...
I was reading on another site (southnarc's site) about "old man" and "old woman" guns (could also apply to younger folks prematurely afflicted by arthritis or other ailments or simply frail). These individuals may not have the requisite hand strength to cycle the action on a strong sprung semi auto or unwilling/unable to withstand much recoil without pain. One post on this or another site similar topic related how some would not practice because of the discomfort, but were too proud to admit it. Bottom line, if you're recommending a pistol to someone who meets these criteria and 22 LR is the best they can handle, what would you recommend for a handgun they would carry and keep on their person so they were prepared for the worst from the current options? Both in terms of pistol/revolver and load (stinger, velociter, mini mag, etc)? Based on what I've read until now, I was thinking 22 version of the S&W 442 no lock (trigger pull may be too much work), S&W 317 snub, or perhaps a ruger MkII or Browning Buckmark...thoughts? NOTE: posted in the semi-auto section but revolver is certainly valid response
For a pistol, I think the .38 with wadcutters that Beat Trash suggested is an excellent choice. Low recoil and at short distances will do better than a .22LR. Second, I think the dog suggestion is a good one as long as the person is willing to take care of the dog and train it. Third, if he/she has problems with constantly shooting the.38, then a .22 revolver to supplement some of the training is also a possibility. Finally, a knife is an excellent weapon at close distance for anyone, provided they're willing to work with it a bit. Obviously, your physical conditions will dictate how much you train and how you train. But most people can do some training and it has to be realistic for the individual.
I'm not suggesting one of these things separately, rather I"m suggesting them as a defensive package. I think too many people overlook everything outside of firearms because they get stuck in that "bring a knife to a gunfight" mentality. Except sometimes the knife is the right choice.
mkmckinley
10-11-12, 18:06
Someone already suggested a Glock with a conversion kit. I just picked up an G19 AA kit and just for the heel of it I weighed the sucker. It's only 13.9 oz unloaded and the slide is very easy to manipulate. It uses standard Glock sights. I haven't shot it yet but assuming it's reliable it may fit the bill.
http://i.imgur.com/7MFNN.jpg
brushy bill
10-11-12, 19:08
Mods, feel free to close this thread. It's served it's purpose. Some useful posts (thanks for those) and some...well, let's just leave it at that. If you can't say something nice, just don't say nothing. Thanks.
Quiet Riot
10-11-12, 19:33
Mals are great protection dogs with or without training, but I don't think someone who has arthritis so bad that s/he can't hold a centerfire pistol should get a mal puppy. They are a JRT in a GSD body and require a lot of hands-on training and physical exercise to be happy. Heck, my 11yo mal still runs with me 4x/wk.
Good working mals are very "mouthy" as pups, too, and will bite the crap out of your hands and legs trying to play with you. I couldn't imagine a joint-impaired eldery person having to deal with that phase when ours was so bad that he'd make my wife cry. :)
brushy bill
10-11-12, 19:39
Exactamondo little Fonzie! Between the silly Mal posts for an older person not active enough to exercise said dog, not able to control it on a leash, etc...and the ridiculous Tazer / OC advocacy and continued assertions that 22 LR is not a great defense rd despite my initial post that said 22 LR quote "sucks", this thread jumped the shark.
That's why I updated the title to add "mods delete" and posted a request to close the thread.
Some good information can be found on M4C, but sadly, there are some folks with high post counts who really take more away from the forum than they contribute...too bad.
Littlelebowski
10-11-12, 19:46
I love passive aggressive jabs like "some people" :D
Anyway, a GSD is my first recommendation. I also recommend starting off with juvenile dogs as opposed to pups although I do need to tell my 4'9" wife that she cannot control my Mal.
Any time you need to tell me something BrushyBill, send me a PM.
Mals are great protection dogs with or without training, but I don't think someone who has arthritis so bad that s/he can't hold a centerfire pistol should get a mal puppy. They are a JRT in a GSD body and require a lot of hands-on training and physical exercise to be happy. Heck, my 11yo mal still runs with me 4x/wk.
Good working mals are very "mouthy" as pups, too, and will bite the crap out of your hands and legs trying to play with you. I couldn't imagine a joint-impaired eldery person having to deal with that phase when ours was so bad that he'd make my wife cry. :)
This is what I would be concerned about--that a high energy dog like a Malinois might need more exercise than an elderly person with health issues might be able to manage. From what I understand, a Malinois can require more activity than many ablebodied people are willing to or have the time and energy to provide.
And not all dogs are naturally protective--this is coming from someone who had to have a Rottweiler protection trained after he slept through an attempted break-in.
Getting back to the issue of an older person with physical limitations buying a gun. An FN 5.7 might be an option. As much as I think the round is underpowered, at least you have better reliability and detonation than a .22 rimfire. It gives you better range than a civilian Taser and better ability to fire more than once.
Whenever you are talking about limitations--be it financial, physical capabilities of the user, legal limitations, etc, you are going to be compromising. Sometimes that compromise is quite a big one.
brushy bill
10-11-12, 20:59
I don't care enough about your opinions, your mal, or anything about you to send you a PM. Don't want your reccos and frankly, the passive agressive comment is comical...sophmoric...like your emoticon...easy to talk big on the errornet. Usually those that do don't in person, but again, I'm not going there. You are what you are. I'm amused that you are still allowed to post here frankly.
I love passive aggressive jabs like "some people" :D
Anyway, a GSD is my first recommendation. I also recommend starting off with juvenile dogs as opposed to pups although I do need to tell my 4'9" wife that she cannot control my Mal.
Any time you need to tell me something BrushyBill, send me a PM.
brushy bill
10-11-12, 21:07
duplicate post
brushy bill
10-11-12, 21:09
Thanks Ed. Well put as usual. Hadn't thought of the 5.7. I need to research the ammo availability for this round.
This is what I would be concerned about--that a high energy dog like a Malinois might need more exercise than an elderly person with health issues might be able to manage. From what I understand, a Malinois can require more activity than many ablebodied people are willing to or have the time and energy to provide.
And not all dogs are naturally protective--this is coming from someone who had to have a Rottweiler protection trained after he slept through an attempted break-in.
Getting back to the issue of an older person with physical limitations buying a gun. An FN 5.7 might be an option. As much as I think the round is underpowered, at least you have better reliability and detonation than a .22 rimfire. It gives you better range than a civilian Taser and better ability to fire more than once.
Whenever you are talking about limitations--be it financial, physical capabilities of the user, legal limitations, etc, you are going to be compromising. Sometimes that compromise is quite a big one.
I love passive aggressive jabs like "some people"
So you like being rude? I thought it was just your character, not intentional.
Alaskapopo
10-12-12, 00:47
I don't care enough about your opinions, your mal, or anything about you to send you a PM. Don't want your reccos and frankly, the passive agressive comment is comical...sophmoric...like your emoticon...easy to talk big on the errornet. Usually those that do don't in person, but again, I'm not going there. You are what you are. I'm amused that you are still allowed to post here frankly.
Frankly you're the one acting like a child. Most here have tried to be civil with you and you go flying off the handle when someone disagrees with you. Many on here have tried to give you good ideas for what could work for your relatives far better than a .22 pistol would be in poorly trained and infirm hands.
Pat
Littlelebowski
10-12-12, 07:13
I don't care enough about your opinions, your mal, or anything about you to send you a PM. Don't want your reccos and frankly, the passive agressive comment is comical...sophmoric...like your emoticon...easy to talk big on the errornet. Usually those that do don't in person, but again, I'm not going there. You are what you are. I'm amused that you are still allowed to post here frankly.
Actually, one of the reasons I'm here is that many of the people here know me in person and have shot with me. Heck, some even served with me in the Corps. I'm sure I'll see you at a training class anytime, because you do more than what-if on the internet and make insults, right? You know, because you're keeping it real and don't lower yourself to being rude just over the internet, right? Looking forward to hear about your training, scores on drills, and actual shooting related talk (this isn't).
However, don't let my real world experience with dogs sway your foregone conclusion with this thread. I would recommend a tougher skin but that's not going to happen in this. Please don't pay attention to the real world experience I'm posting below as it will only make you whine further.
I have owned GSDs and one Mal. The Mal is the victim of a lot press describing the breed as too neurotic to be owned as pet, too powerful for old people, etc. I adopted a large (for Mals, 85lb) full grown neutered male off of Craigslist. He was completely untrained, a wild child with no real owner. His first owners got divorced and he was pawned off on a family friend with a yard. By all internet accounts, he should have been a danger to all and uncontrollable. He wasn't. He needed a firm hand but with said firm hand and attention, he turned into a great, friendly dog that is fine with strangers but extremely watchful and ready to bite should the command be given.
I think a juvenile to young adult (maybe even older on a case by case basis) German Shepherd is best for protection if the person needing protection has problems with the manual of arms on a weapon, won't carry it or keep it readily accessible, and is not interested in basic training of some sort or cannot complete said training due to physical infirmities. I think there's other breeds that are also very protective (many) but it's hard to beat a GSD. No dog is a turn key, perfect solution but with a slight bit of work and bonding on the owner's part, the owner will have a an alarm system that can literally smell intruders, a companion that enhances quality of life as Alaskapopo pointed out, and an animal that will literally die for its owner. The barking alone is well worth it to persuade intruders to find an easier target. Obviously, if it's at all possible to have a protective dog and a firearm, said elderly person would have time to retrieve the weapon while the dog barks; knowing that something is wrong and therefore in the right mindset as opposed to say waking up at zero dark thirty to a crash or even a click.
Otherwise, a security system if financially feasible should be strongly considered.
Littlelebowski
10-12-12, 07:16
This is what I would be concerned about--that a high energy dog like a Malinois might need more exercise than an elderly person with health issues might be able to manage. From what I understand, a Malinois can require more activity than many ablebodied people are willing to or have the time and energy to provide.
And not all dogs are naturally protective--this is coming from someone who had to have a Rottweiler protection trained after he slept through an attempted break-in.
Getting back to the issue of an older person with physical limitations buying a gun. An FN 5.7 might be an option. As much as I think the round is underpowered, at least you have better reliability and detonation than a .22 rimfire. It gives you better range than a civilian Taser and better ability to fire more than once.
Whenever you are talking about limitations--be it financial, physical capabilities of the user, legal limitations, etc, you are going to be compromising. Sometimes that compromise is quite a big one.
I think that the barking at intruders alone is worth the price of admission. If one is looking at the high powered .22s and 5.7 ammo availability is a problem, the Kel Tec .22 mag might be an option.
I just don't think it's a good idea for somebody to have a firearm for self defense if they're not going to train or at least attempt to train for that type of scenario.
Would you concede that it's still their right to choose though? Would you concede that firearms are successfully used for self-defense by thousands of people who've never trained a lick? Would you concede that many of these people have repelled attackers with shitty, small caliber guns that most of us wouldn't use for a paperweight?
I'm not picking on you personally, I just thought your post succinctly illustrated a commonly held belief on this forum.
Not one single person in this thread has said that a .22LR is a good defense round. Everyone has agreed that it sucks. Yet the overbearing, elitist opinions posted here have resulted in a virtual pissing contest over who can trash the idea best. It's ****ing retarded.
Let's see if I can sum this up. We've had a strong, able bodied, highly trained LEO who can effect an arrest after using less-lethal force on a person not presenting a lethal threat, suggest that elderly or infirm people who couldn't restrain or escape a 12 year old use the same for repelling predatory felons.
We've had a strong, able bodied, highly trained former Marine suggest that an elderly or infirm person that can barely take care of a small, gentle pet, get a large breed active dog. A dog they couldn't properly exercise, couldn't properly play with, couldn't take to the doctor's office and couldn't take grocery shopping.
A firearm in an untrained uncapable persons hands is a liability not an asset.
There are plenty of anecdotal instances where this is simply not true. They have saved lives. Overall, statistics simply don't mean a thing. The only statistic that means something to a person trying to decide whether they have the ability to continue living an independent lifestyle vs. a virtual prison has a sample rate of ONE. I'll concede that they may choose pepper spray, a taser, a shitty little gun they think they could actually fire, or to simply shuffle off to the old folks home and use the handicapped shuttle for their off-site needs. But that's it. They're not going to get a GSD or BM or a goddamned high dollar combat sidearm and hi-speed training that all the "operators" have blessed with their vaunted seal of approval.
Seriously people, where does this shit come from? Do we spend so much time researching equipment, training and tactics for the able bodied warrior, that we forget there are average people with average problems living average lives that survive serious assaults every day of the year without our intervention? Some of you act like nothing short of a fully trained and equipped cop or soldier could ever defeat the average street urchin. Get a grip!
Perhaps someone needs to assemble a willing squad of wheelchair, cane and walker types for a study of what THEY say they could or would be willing and able to use for defense. Because at this point, I seriously doubt some of your abilities to walk a mile in their shoes. :(
That is one case. However the track record of the .22 as a fight stopper is terrible. I can probably find a story of a air rifle stopping an attack as well but that does not mean its a good choice.
Pat
True, but there are many more. All I was pointing out is that you paint it as a blanket "is not a defensive" consideration. In fact it can be viable both defensive and offensive.
I would take a .22lr over a taser any day of the week. Taser, one shot while you are probably shaking and fumbling. Good chance of a miss. Same with the .22, but the .22 will give you more chances and the noise will draw attention and possibly help from others.
I have taken people shooting that have never shot before. Put them at 10 yards and give them a .22. they can pretty well tear up the better part of a 4" square. Move them to 7 yards with a full sized .45 that is very light shooting or a compact 9mm and they are routinely missing a letter sized sheet of paper.
Most of the people I have ever known don't want to be shot for any reason by a .22. Now why would a criminal not want to get shot even if it doesn't kill him. Probably because it will lead to him being caught for his crime. If he gets tazed he has the ability to get up and walk away.
I agree it's not the perfect situation but it is effective in many was.
Noise
Sight of Gun
Most people are pre-conditioned to know a .22 is "easy to shoot".
Wounding or killing ability both of which will probably lead to criminal being caught.
In reading the OP, all of that is understood. The question is not how to replace the .22lr but how to acquire the best possible .22lr for it's intended user ( someone physically challenged with regards to hand strength and mobility ).
Littlelebowski
10-12-12, 10:24
We've had a strong, able bodied, highly trained former Marine suggest that an elderly or infirm person that can barely take care of a small, gentle pet, get a large breed active dog. A dog they couldn't properly exercise, couldn't properly play with, couldn't take to the doctor's office and couldn't take grocery shopping.
I'm sorry; where was it mentioned that the elderly person couldn't walk nor throw a ball? And that said elderly person needed protection 24/7, even when shopping and at the doctor? Certainly if they need that level of protection, get a gun. Maybe the new Ruger polymer .22.
I appreciate the compliments though. I don't feel that strong after being shot and apparently it's a danged miracle that I was able to handle these breeds of dogs while physically disabled for 2 yrs.
A62Rambler
10-12-12, 11:15
The original post was that a 22 sucks for self defense but what's the best 22 handgun and ammo for self defense. What was offered were suggestions of other options from lighter recoiling alternatives to non-lethal yet effective alternatives to dogs as an alternative.
Maybe some were hard on the OP but hey, when you state you want the best bad choice you are going to get a wake up call. The 22 is a bad choice. If the OP has tried letting the person shoot a 38 with wadcutters or some other choice that was offered fine. Buy a 22 revolver but don't let the person or yourself be fooled into thinking it is a good choice.
My sister asked what kind of firearm to buy for home defense. I asked her if she was willing to kill someone who was there to rape or murder and she said NO! I answered none! I suggested martial arts training. She's a brown belt now. Sometimes you have to accept reality for what it is.
To address a couple of earlier posts in this thread. I seriously question the viability of the recommended .38 wadcutter as a defensive load. Most .38 wadcutters are loaded to beteen 600-800fps, with 800fps being the upper end. That is all the bullet design is capable of before strange things start to happen to bullet shape inside the barrel, which is why jacketed bullets are such a wonderful invention. Why anyone would want to give up 400-600fps depending on which factory load you compare wadcutters against and the jacketed bullets barrier penetration ability for a wadcutter is beyond me. A .38 wadcutter is right on par with a muzzleloaded ball (here come the muzzleloading crowd) as a defensive load and I don't see those being recommended anywhere outside of Boone and Crockett country since 1860. Bad guys sometimes wear multiple layers of clothing and carry lots of crap in their pockets, being able to get past all of that makes having a modern jacketed bullet important. Having a slow moving, low energy, wadcutter rendered inert by a thick nylon or leather jacket and an iPhone, or a car door or windshield, is low on my list of want.
Alaskapopo
10-12-12, 12:10
There are plenty of anecdotal instances where this is simply not true. :(
Anecdotal evidence is about worthless because there is plenty that shows it to be true as well. Unless your saying firearms have never been taken from poorly trained users and used against their owners. Which I assure you is false. As a member of M4carbine I thought you would understand the value of training. A firearm without training is worse that useless its a liablity. There are plenty of police officers who are trained who have been killed with their own firearms. It used to be as high as 25% in the 1970's now that training and holster technology has impoved that number has dropped to 12%. Do you think an infirm person is going to fair better?
Pat
I agree a .22 isn't the best choice for self defense, but physical ailments and age can't be simply trained around. I think an M&P 22 would fit the bill.
And I've heard countless people arguing that so and so round/caliber is any good, but I have yet to meet anyone who would volunteer to get shot by one and see how it feels firsthand.
Alaskapopo
10-12-12, 12:50
I agree a .22 isn't the best choice for self defense, but physical ailments and age can't be simply trained around. I think an M&P 22 would fit the bill.
And I've heard countless people arguing that so and so round/caliber is any good, but I have yet to meet anyone who would volunteer to get shot by one and see how it feels firsthand.
Yea not many people will volunteer to get shot with a pellet gun but that does not mean its a good choice to carry one. Its not just that the .22 sucks for self defense. Its also the fact that if you are going to be able to use a .22 for self defense you will need to have very good shot placement something that someone with arthritis an crippled is going to have a hard time doing.
Pat
I think that the barking at intruders alone is worth the price of admission. If one is looking at the high powered .22s and 5.7 ammo availability is a problem, the Kel Tec .22 mag might be an option.
This is part of the problem. If the original poster was asking about guns in service caliber there would be a lot of people able to answer from extensive experience. The Keltec PMR .22 mag that holds 30 rounds might be an option for this situation. But I have no idea how reliable and durrable it is. That's why I suggested the FN 5.7 pistol as I have fired one and have a friend who owns one.
Again, I think everyone acknowledges that the calliber is sub optimal, but is a compromise to allow someone who couldn't handle a centerfire caliber have a defensive firearm and one that works more reliably than a rimfire.
If there were some type of .380 available in a handleable size (like Glock 19 size), as opposed to a minigun that is hard to grasp, that might be an option to offer a more potent round in a managable package.
I have owned GSDs and one Mal. The Mal is the victim of a lot press describing the breed as too neurotic to be owned as pet, too powerful for old people, etc. I adopted a large (for Mals, 85lb) full grown neutered male off of Craigslist. He was completely untrained, a wild child with no real owner. His first owners got divorced and he was pawned off on a family friend with a yard. By all internet accounts, he should have been a danger to all and uncontrollable. He wasn't. He needed a firm hand but with said firm hand and attention, he turned into a great, friendly dog that is fine with strangers but extremely watchful and ready to bite should the command be given.
Not everyone is set up to handle a Malinois. They seem to be having a wave of recognition that is attracting people who are not comitted enough to give the dog the stimulation and exercize that they need. I have a constant discussion with some neighbors on my street who want to get one and treat it the way I do my dogs (with one 20 min walk before going to work or going out for an extended period of time but otherwise letting them out in the 10 foot x 30 foot fenced in back yard most of the rest of the time to do their business. While it works for my dogs (Spanish Alanos--a rare breed) I don't think it would work for a Malinois as it needs more exercise and stimulation, and might result in a dog that would start getting destructive in the house.
Littlelebowski
10-12-12, 13:29
Not everyone is set up to handle a Malinois. They seem to be having a wave of recognition that is attracting people who are not comitted enough to give the dog the stimulation and exercize that they need. I have a constant discussion with some neighbors on my street who want to get one and treat it the way I do my dogs (with one 20 min walk before going to work or going out for an extended period of time but otherwise letting them out in the 10 foot x 30 foot fenced in back yard most of the rest of the time to do their business. While it works for my dogs (Spanish Alanos--a rare breed) I don't think it would work for a Malinois as it needs more exercise and stimulation, and might result in a dog that would start getting destructive in the house.
I can agree with that but a middle aged GSD would probably be fine. My Mal gets about 20-40 minutes a day of play. Gets walked 2-3 times a week but I have an acre of yard. His stimulation comes from being on watch around my house and family. The neighbors say he is always watching.
I think GSDs are better than Mals for most people. I love my Mal but my next dog will be a Czech or East German GSD. Something along the lines of the below:
http://www.ehretgsd.com/luke6629.jpg
I can agree with that but a middle aged GSD would probably be fine. My Mal gets about 20-40 minutes a day of play. Gets walked 2-3 times a week but I have an acre of yard. His stimulation comes from being on watch around my house and family. The neighbors say he is always watching.
That is the issue. These people want a Mal the way some first time gun buyers want a .44 magnum. They don't have the acre of land to let it run. Their yard is probably around the size of mine. And I don't see them giving it as much attention as it needs--walks and playtime. I fear if they get one it will wind up with a rescue group.
I wouldnt recommend a 22lr for SD because of the nature of the ammo. I do agree that you have to have good shot placement but if the semi auto jams or mis-fire happens your going to be in deep shit.
I did stumble across Hornady Critial Defense in 22wmr that seems to be a better option.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3opMF8iqC5k&feature=player_embedded
To address a couple of earlier posts in this thread. I seriously question the viability of the recommended .38 wadcutter as a defensive load. Most .38 wadcutters are loaded to beteen 600-800fps, with 800fps being the upper end. That is all the bullet design is capable of before strange things start to happen to bullet shape inside the barrel, which is why jacketed bullets are such a wonderful invention. Why anyone would want to give up 400-600fps depending on which factory load you compare wadcutters against and the jacketed bullets barrier penetration ability for a wadcutter is beyond me. A .38 wadcutter is right on par with a muzzleloaded ball (here come the muzzleloading crowd) as a defensive load and I don't see those being recommended anywhere outside of Boone and Crockett country since 1860. Bad guys sometimes wear multiple layers of clothing and carry lots of crap in their pockets, being able to get past all of that makes having a modern jacketed bullet important. Having a slow moving, low energy, wadcutter rendered inert by a thick nylon or leather jacket and an iPhone, or a car door or windshield, is low on my list of want.
The other choice is .22LR. So you're saying you would rather have that?
The other choice is .22LR. So you're saying you would rather have that?
I don't find either viable.
brushy bill
10-12-12, 18:17
Frankly you're the one acting like a child. Most here have tried to be civil with you and you go flying off the handle when someone disagrees with you. Many on here have tried to give you good ideas for what could work for your relatives far better than a .22 pistol would be in poorly trained and infirm hands.
Pat
Many have. You did not. I did not ask for LTL reccos.
brushy bill
10-12-12, 18:25
Actually, one of the reasons I'm here is that many of the people here know me in person and have shot with me. Heck, some even served with me in the Corps. I'm sure I'll see you at a training class anytime, because you do more than what-if on the internet and make insults, right? You know, because you're keeping it real and don't lower yourself to being rude just over the internet, right? Looking forward to hear about your training, scores on drills, and actual shooting related talk (this isn't).
However, don't let my real world experience with dogs sway your foregone conclusion with this thread. I would recommend a tougher skin but that's not going to happen in this. Please don't pay attention to the real world experience I'm posting below as it will only make you whine further.
Stating that I'm not interested in your perspective because it comes across as obnoxious and misinformed is not whining. And there were no foregone conclusions...I asked a well framed question and got reccos for a dog...reasons this makes little sense have been pointed out by others and don't require elaboration. You also make foregone conclusions that your experiences are beyond others in multiple areas to include dogs when you have by your own admission owned a mal and a shepherd. When's your book out? I'll bet it is an interesting read. Hope my ego never requires me to inflate it as often as yours must.
Dollylamma
10-12-12, 18:50
I will say this. My Grandfather born in 1931 spent most of his entire life pulling tits (aka dairy farmer) retired from said profession 4 years ago. A year before he retired he fell and busted his shooting shoulder, as to which he went to the hospital, at that point this was the 4th time he had ever seen a doctor in his entire life. He now has cancer in his colon, lungs, and prostate. He spends most of his days watching T.V. on his chair. Last year, a rash of robberies were occurring during the midday. He armed himself with his 15 year old 10/22 ruger, which I know is not a pistol however somewhat relevant to this discussion. My response to him was “don’t you at least want the 20 gauge”? His reply “nope, this gun shoots good and nobody likes to be shot, no matter the caliber”. I said ok.
My personal thoughts, he is dying, but still trying the best he can to live. I personally believe the reason for most home robberies is meth/heroin related so if meth’d out dude walks in and tries to rob the place, the meth head wins, but at the old man defended his shit till the end.
I don't find either viable.
Then what would your choice be? The thread is about someone who has physical limitations and is physically incapable of handling a full size/full power weapon. That limits the choices. .38 wadcutter is better than .22LR. Can't choose something with a slide because the scenario also includes the person is incapable of manipulating a slide.
brushy bill
10-12-12, 19:40
[QUOTE=A62Rambler;1415601]The original post was that a 22 sucks for self defense but what's the best 22 handgun and ammo for self defense. Maybe some were hard on the OP but hey, when you state you want the best bad choice you are going to get a wake up call. QUOTE]
Dude, did you read your post? It says I asked a question with defined parameters, conceded that it would necessarily be a 'better than a stick' compromise, and that requires a 'wake up call'? Wake up to what?
brushy bill
10-12-12, 19:43
Would you concede that it's still their right to choose though? Would you concede that firearms are successfully used for self-defense by thousands of people who've never trained a lick? Would you concede that many of these people have repelled attackers with shitty, small caliber guns that most of us wouldn't use for a paperweight?
I'm not picking on you personally, I just thought your post succinctly illustrated a commonly held belief on this forum.
Not one single person in this thread has said that a .22LR is a good defense round. Everyone has agreed that it sucks. Yet the overbearing, elitist opinions posted here have resulted in a virtual pissing contest over who can trash the idea best. It's ****ing retarded.
Let's see if I can sum this up. We've had a strong, able bodied, highly trained LEO who can effect an arrest after using less-lethal force on a person not presenting a lethal threat, suggest that elderly or infirm people who couldn't restrain or escape a 12 year old use the same for repelling predatory felons.
We've had a strong, able bodied, highly trained former Marine suggest that an elderly or infirm person that can barely take care of a small, gentle pet, get a large breed active dog. A dog they couldn't properly exercise, couldn't properly play with, couldn't take to the doctor's office and couldn't take grocery shopping.
There are plenty of anecdotal instances where this is simply not true. They have saved lives. Overall, statistics simply don't mean a thing. The only statistic that means something to a person trying to decide whether they have the ability to continue living an independent lifestyle vs. a virtual prison has a sample rate of ONE. I'll concede that they may choose pepper spray, a taser, a shitty little gun they think they could actually fire, or to simply shuffle off to the old folks home and use the handicapped shuttle for their off-site needs. But that's it. They're not going to get a GSD or BM or a goddamned high dollar combat sidearm and hi-speed training that all the "operators" have blessed with their vaunted seal of approval.
Seriously people, where does this shit come from? Do we spend so much time researching equipment, training and tactics for the able bodied warrior, that we forget there are average people with average problems living average lives that survive serious assaults every day of the year without our intervention? Some of you act like nothing short of a fully trained and equipped cop or soldier could ever defeat the average street urchin. Get a grip!
Perhaps someone needs to assemble a willing squad of wheelchair, cane and walker types for a study of what THEY say they could or would be willing and able to use for defense. Because at this point, I seriously doubt some of your abilities to walk a mile in their shoes. :(
Brilliant! Thanks for providing a disinterested reality check. Couldn't have phrased this better.
A62Rambler
10-13-12, 11:26
[QUOTE=A62Rambler;1415601]The original post was that a 22 sucks for self defense but what's the best 22 handgun and ammo for self defense. Maybe some were hard on the OP but hey, when you state you want the best bad choice you are going to get a wake up call. QUOTE]
Dude, did you read your post? It says I asked a question with defined parameters, conceded that it would necessarily be a 'better than a stick' compromise, and that requires a 'wake up call'? Wake up to what?
You asked a question and stated the solution wasn't good and then eliminated alternatives. The wake up call is that you perhaps need to consider that you may not have considered all the possible alternatives. Had you considered the 5.7, the 380 tip up barrel, 38 with wadcutters. If you just wanted people to reinforce your predetermined solution then what's the point of asking it here at all?
I lost a leg below the knee. I do know something about working around limitations but I never refuse a person offering suggestions for how to accomplish my goals. They mean well even if it doesn't work. Every now and then I learn outsiders can see more clearly and get good advice.
Submariner
10-13-12, 12:41
What about something in .25 ACP? It is center-fire so it ought be more reliable than .22LR. Not that much difference in controlability than .22LR. A Beretta 418, say. (Shaken, not stirred...)
Speer Gold Dots in .25 ACP. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I70osPSorzQ)
brushy bill
10-13-12, 15:19
[QUOTE=brushy bill;1415908]
Had you considered the 5.7, the 380 tip up barrel, 38 with wadcutters. If you just wanted people to reinforce your predetermined solution then what's the point of asking it here at all?
Every now and then I learn outsiders can see more clearly and get good advice.
I acknowledged the 5.7 and .380 Beretta suggestions in previous posts as definitely worthy of consideration and stated I had not considered the 5.7.
brushy bill
10-13-12, 15:52
What about something in .25 ACP? It is center-fire so it ought be more reliable than .22LR. Not that much difference in controlability than .22LR. A Beretta 418, say. (Shaken, not stirred...)
Speer Gold Dots in .25 ACP. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I70osPSorzQ)
Admittedly better ballistics, but I don't know any readily available reliable guns in this category. I generally think Raven or Jennings when it comes to a .25. Beretta 418 has been out of production for sometime and doubt they are easy to come by or service. Will check gunbroker as this is another option. Thanks.
Admittedly better ballistics, but I don't know any readily available reliable guns in this category. I generally think Raven or Jennings when it comes to a .25. Beretta 418 has been out of production for sometime and doubt they are easy to come by or service. Will check gunbroker as this is another option. Thanks.
The Beretta model 20 is out there if you can find one. I found a used one for a relative locally for $240. It's proven reliable and has a much better feed ramp than than the 21A. It's the predecessor of the 21A BTW.
brushy bill
10-13-12, 17:44
The Beretta model 20 is out there if you can find one. I found a used one for a relative locally for $240. It's proven reliable and has a much better feed ramp than than the 21A. It's the predecessor of the 21A BTW.
Appreciate it. Will look into this one as well.
Alaskapopo
10-13-12, 22:02
[QUOTE=A62Rambler;1415601]The original post was that a 22 sucks for self defense but what's the best 22 handgun and ammo for self defense. Maybe some were hard on the OP but hey, when you state you want the best bad choice you are going to get a wake up call. QUOTE]
Dude, did you read your post? It says I asked a question with defined parameters, conceded that it would necessarily be a 'better than a stick' compromise, and that requires a 'wake up call'? Wake up to what?
Wake up to the fact that people are trying to tell you the .22 is not a viable option. But you don't want to hear it. They have given you good alternatives that do make sense but you seem to have your mind made up.
Pat
brushy bill
10-14-12, 10:27
[QUOTE=brushy bill;1415908]
Wake up to the fact that people are trying to tell you the .22 is not a viable option. But you don't want to hear it. They have given you good alternatives that do make sense but you seem to have your mind made up.
Pat
Thanks Pat...addressed in previous posts.
HeadHunter
10-17-12, 15:54
This is an entertaining thread. I am really enjoying all the comments.
But I think modifications need to be added not deleted.
The 21A really benefits from some sight improvements. I file the rear face of the front sight flat and then serrate it with a metal checkering file. Finally, I paint it with red fluorescent paint. You can see the difference in visibility in this pic.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Heaters/22%20Pocket/Oldman006.jpg
Improved sight visibility makes it a lot easier to do good work with the gun. This actual size eye target was shot at 5 yards doing individual presentations from low ready. I also like to note which types of ammunition work reliably and which have issues since .22s can be picky about ammo. In general, I find the Federal Premium Gold Medal Target HV (http://www.midwayusa.com/product/953451658/federal-premium-gold-medal-target-ammunition-22-long-rifle-high-velocity-40-grain-lead-round-nose) ammo to be quite good, albeit a little expensive compared to other .22s but not compared to centerfire ammo.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Heaters/22%20Pocket/21Aeye800.jpg
I also like to add a malfunction clearance tool to the grip by slotting it with a hacksaw and inserting a piece of heavy wire. As long as the chamber is kept clean with a bore snake, simply pressing the barrel release lever will almost always eject a stuck or unfired case but it's good to have a back up plan.
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Heaters/22%20Pocket/Oldman004.jpg
http://i150.photobucket.com/albums/s91/HeadHunter_album/Heaters/22%20Pocket/Oldman003.jpg
It's also worthwhile to note that many malfunctions are caused by an improper grip. With these small autoloaders, the thumbs forward grip is generally inadvisable. It puts the base of the firing thumb in the way of the recoilling slide for most people. Thus the slide experiences drag and doesn't function at full velocity. The thumb over thumb grip commonly used for revolvers works best.
RickyRifle
10-20-12, 14:24
"Dark Arts for Good Guys: The .22 LR Pistol and You"
http://straightforwardinacrookedworld.blogspot.com/2012/10/dark-arts-for-good-guys-22-lr-pistol.html
Littlelebowski
10-20-12, 14:39
"Dark Arts for Good Guys: The .22 LR Pistol and You"
http://straightforwardinacrookedworld.blogspot.com/2012/10/dark-arts-for-good-guys-22-lr-pistol.html
Ahh......the old "CIA spook" reasoning. Bullshit.
Alaskapopo
10-20-12, 15:35
Ahh......the old "CIA spook" reasoning. Bullshit.
Complete and utter BS I agree. Most of your so called Clandestine CIA guys don't get into gun fights. Their job is to not be seen and collect intel.
Pat
Nephrology
10-20-12, 15:50
"Dark Arts for Good Guys: The .22 LR Pistol and You"
http://straightforwardinacrookedworld.blogspot.com/2012/10/dark-arts-for-good-guys-22-lr-pistol.html
Wow, that was an incredibly annoying read. I wonder how much cheeto dust that guy got on his keyboard while writing up that little gem...
I honestly didn't read every last post in this long thread, but I have to ask why the OP is limiting this to semi-auto pistols?
If the user is not willing to train enough to handle malfunctions, there is something to be said for the reliability of a revolver for this application, esp. given the limitations of rimfire for ammo problems. No bang, re-cock the hammer and try again. The main liability with any revolver would be reloading, but for SD use, it's not often any civilian will require a reload mid-fight, imho.
I recently took a CQ class where one student ran a .22 Mag revolver (a S&W J-frame, I believe). He had zero FTF or any other problems. However, watching him reload in longer strings of fire was a little painful since I don't think there are speedloader setups for rimfire revolvers that I'm aware of, so this would be a significant trade.
Regardless, I don't think anyone in their right mind would want to shot by anything, be it .22 Mag or even .22LR. It's probably still more effective than hoping you can dial 911 fast enough...
PS not sure what is the point of posting an info request on a public forum and then requesting deletion afterwards... seems a bit silly. just let the discussion carry on however tangential it may get... it's the internet! ;)
RickyRifle
10-20-12, 16:11
Ahh......the old "CIA spook" reasoning. Bullshit.
"Breathe man.... breathe.
If you are going to compare the calibration of the .22 long rifle to anything else (minus the .25) you have to ask why are you even having the internet figh....I mean discussion. Obviously it falls short so if you can bear that in mind you should be fine reading the rest of the post. If not there's not much I can do for you."
(quoted from the blog post linked above.)
:D
All kidding aside, I purposely posted the link without comment with the intention of having folks read it and think independently. My hope was for people to read and thoughtfully comment on - seeing as the blog author and the individual referred to by the OP find themselves in differing scenarios and under different circumstances - what conditions a .22 lr is viable option, even if perhaps not optimal.
I don't believe anyone can claim that no one who depends on firearms professionally has ever used one outside of training. Hasn't the IDF used rimfires for a mission specific role previously?
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a144/AKS-74/IDF22.jpg
The question, as I see it, is again under what circumstances - however limited - can a rimfire firearm be used for the purposes of combat, self-defense, E&E, etc., etc., even if it's not the optimal solution for the situation?
Or is there never a legitimate, mission specific role for such outside of training and/or recreational shooting and hunting?
I'm not taking a position one way or the other; I don't believe I have enough knowledge to make an informed decision concerning what role(s) a rimfire can fill. However, if one were to bifurcate (a logical fallacy - perhaps there is another option?), it seems reasonable to at least me to believe that, for example, a loaded Ruger 10/22 pointed at someone's head at 15 feet is a better deterrent than, say, a comb or ball point pen in the hand.
What I'd like to see is a rational discussion of the pro and con arguments without resorting to abusive ad hominem arguments.
Littlelebowski
10-20-12, 16:20
Do you know how old that IDF pic is?
RickyRifle
10-20-12, 16:27
Do you know how old that IDF pic is?
Can I assume that you agree with the following statement: there is "never a legitimate, mission specific role for such [i.e. rimfires] outside of training and/or recreational shooting and hunting"?
Littlelebowski
10-20-12, 17:24
Can I assume that you agree with the following statement: there is "never a legitimate, mission specific role for such [i.e. rimfires] outside of training and/or recreational shooting and hunting"?
I cannot think of such a mission role that cannot be better fulfilled by modern firearms. There are small 9mms and there are .300Blackouts with 8" barrels.
I have answered your question. Do you possess operational experience with .22s outside of the range? If not, do you have data on the same outside of spy novels, blogs, and decades old pictures?
DeltaSierra
10-20-12, 17:38
Do you know how old that IDF pic is?
I'm entirely sick of the "Oh, the Israelis did it, so it must be awesome..."
Using a .22 to kneecap someone, is an entirely different game than using a .22 to incapacitate someone that is an immediate threat to you...
Nephrology
10-20-12, 17:46
I cannot think of such a mission role that cannot be better fulfilled by modern firearms. There are small 9mms and there are .300Blackouts with 8" barrels.
I have answered your question. Do you possess operational experience with .22s outside of the range? If not, do you have data on the same outside of spy novels, blogs, and decades old pictures?
Watch out dude, he's going to find a photo of some random guy in cammies with a suppressed browning buckmark.
RickyRifle
10-20-12, 17:53
Do you possess operational experience with .22s outside of the range? If not, do you have data on the same outside of spy novels, blogs, and decades old pictures?
No, none.
So that we do not misunderstand ourselves, let me be clear that I am not advocating either a pro or con position, but instead would like to see a principled discussion of the 'why/why not' rimfires 'can/cannot' be used to fill any particular role, no matter how narrow or broad.
Please do not confuse any for/against argument as an attack on you, your intellect, informed opinion, character, etc., etc., etc.
One of the appeals of M4C as valuable knowledge base is due to the higher level of informed, dispassionate content over and against other forums where abusive ad hominems and other fallacies of relevance are more prevalent.
Littlelebowski
10-20-12, 17:57
RR, take a look at the .300 Blackout, the AAC HoneyBadger, the S&W shield, and the Walther PPS. Watch a video of the suppressed .300 BLK.
Alaskapopo
10-20-12, 18:51
Can I assume that you agree with the following statement: there is "never a legitimate, mission specific role for such [i.e. rimfires] outside of training and/or recreational shooting and hunting"?
Sure there is shooting out street lights and for assasisns shooting hand cuffed prisioners in the back of the head.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-20-12, 18:57
RR, take a look at the .300 Blackout, the AAC HoneyBadger, the S&W shield, and the Walther PPS. Watch a video of the suppressed .300 BLK.
The quietest gun I have ever fired was a .300 Whisper with the gas system in the off setting on a integrally suppressed AR. I was 22 at the time and a guy at the range with lots of class 3 toys let us shoot it. I could hear the hammer it the firing bit and the bullet smack the log we where shooting at and not much else. I had my ear protection off. It was amazing. The 300 black out is supposed to be similar.
Pat
RickyRifle
10-20-12, 19:27
RR, take a look at the .300 Blackout, the AAC HoneyBadger, the S&W shield, and the Walther PPS. Watch a video of the suppressed .300 BLK.
Thanks, LL, I was familiar with the Blackout and PPS but not the Honeybadger or Shield. I'll have to check those out.
brushy bill
10-20-12, 23:36
Thanks for the inputs...after careful review, it seems the answer is a a full auto .300 whisper mounted to the back of a high drive but rarely exercised working line Malinois with OC and TASER mounted on a saddle back carrier as back up/failsafe handled by someone with reduced handstrength.
Alaskapopo
10-21-12, 01:44
Thanks for the inputs...after careful review, it seems the answer is a a full auto .300 whisper mounted to the back of a high drive but rarely exercised working line Malinois with OC and TASER mounted on a saddle back carrier as back up/failsafe handled by someone with reduced handstrength.
That sounds about as sane as putting someone out with a 22 pistol and telling them their safe with the full knowledge that they don't have the skill required to use the pistol. An untrained person is better off unarmed.
Pat
Nephrology
10-21-12, 06:38
As long as we're dealing with self defense myths, how about an MP3 player that plays the sound of a shotgun being racked at high volume?
Thanks for the inputs...after careful review, it seems the answer is a a full auto .300 whisper mounted to the back of a high drive but rarely exercised working line Malinois with OC and TASER mounted on a saddle back carrier as back up/failsafe handled by someone with reduced handstrength.
.... and lots of training!! Don't forget that. Might have to throw a Dillon 650 in there to make some custom loads as well. Oh and don't forget to set aside some cash for Cesar Millan. :)
On the PPS ... it's nothing like a .22. Non-shooters that can do really well with a .22 are not necessarily going to do the same with a PPS.
IF... your people can deal with a PPS... which I doubt from your description... they will at least need a "Limbsaver" grip on it to help with their grip limitations. The PPS has a very narrow grip feel which can twist in a weak grip. If they could handle the 9MM the M&P9c as I recall has a bit more rounded feel to it and once gripped might be less prone to movement. That would of course depend on their hands.
Oh, about your kit above... you might as well throw a cattle prod in there as well.
An untrained person is better off unarmed.
Pat
Never thought I would hear that on this forum.
Here’s a fine article on the 32 ACP by C.E. “Ed” Harris
Is the .32 ACP Pistol still “Mission Feasible”?
http://shilohtv.com/?p=2720
(http://shilohtv.com/?p=2720)
It’s a pity that gun companies no longer produce moderate caliber autos in a shootable form factor.
I wonder how the BERSA THUNDER .32 stacks up?
Light-weight revolvers have stout recoil and heavy triggers. The polymer S&W and Ruger pocket revolvers have somewhat better triggers, and 38 Special wad cutters have somewhat less recoil. Here we’re accepting some comprise due to an individual’s limitations.
Winchester 130 gr bonded +P JHP (RA38B) is the lightest load on DocGKR’s list for 38 Special.
It can be difficult to rack an automatic. Practicing with the right technique may overcome this difficulty for some people.
Also, do not underestimate the importance of having the right size grip. I find the M&P Shield much easier to shoot well then my Glock 26.
DeltaSierra
10-21-12, 17:24
The Bersa Thunder is a total piece of junk.
I had the pleasure of having first hand experience with one when a family member of mine purchased one, and then couldn't use the thing.
Because it is a blowback operated pistol, the recoil spring is very stiff, and can be very difficult for someone with weak hands to operate (it was even mildly hard for me...) The safety is in a horrible location, and if you are as unlucky as I was with this thing, the safety also "stuck" horribly - to the point where you almost needed some kind of tool to pry on the safety in order to take it off....
In short, don't waste your money.
brushy bill
10-21-12, 17:31
I honestly didn't read every last post in this long thread, but I have to ask why the OP is limiting this to semi-auto pistols?
Refer to first post in the thread:
"I was thinking 22 version of the S&W 442 no lock (trigger pull may be too much work), S&W 317 snub, or perhaps a ruger MkII or Browning Buckmark...thoughts? NOTE: posted in the semi-auto section but revolver is certainly valid response"
brushy bill
10-21-12, 17:35
An untrained person is better off unarmed.
Pat
This may or may not be true, but was never stated as part of OP. It is an assumption. Reduced physical capacity does not equate to untrained...an aged member of the "greatest generation" with more real time experience on a two way range than virtually anyone posting here, but with serious arthritis along with other conditions that limit their capabilities would not be 'untrained' or inept at handling firearms. Post was about reduced ability, not incompetence.
Littlelebowski
10-21-12, 18:05
Refer to first post in the thread:
"I was thinking 22 version of the S&W 442 no lock (trigger pull may be too much work), S&W 317 snub, or perhaps a ruger MkII or Browning Buckmark...thoughts? NOTE: posted in the semi-auto section but revolver is certainly valid response"
Think I've said it before in this thread but I think the Ruger SR22 is a good bet with an easy to rack slide and it is much lighter than the metal frame guns.
My wife had carpel tunnel and could not pull the trigger on new lightweight S&W revolvers, nor rack a semi-auto. The 442 ( I'm pretty sure it was a 442 ) I know it was the old style / no lock .38SPL.
She could operate that much easier. I would expect the .22 version to have a nice trigger as well.
If you can find someone to work on that trigger a bit just to smooth it out makes a world of difference as well. It will seem like an entirely different gun.if done properly.
I was very impressed with the LCR 22. Decent trigger, good sights & in my case a great cheap practice gun for the LCR 357. Have about 2K through the 22 at present.
andrewbolin214
10-21-12, 22:30
I dont care who you are, you get thumped with a few .22's you will reconsider what you are doing...
Littlelebowski
10-22-12, 07:51
I dont care who you are, you get thumped with a few .22's you will reconsider what you are doing.... I have put a P22 on my hip a few times in extreme confidence that it will perform.
Outside of Jennings/Brycos, I can't think of a worse gun for carry. Are you aware of the P22's propensity for breaking its pot metal slide?
Obviously they're extreme cases but there's more than a few cases of multiple shots of 9mm, .40, and .45 failing to neutralize a perp. If you're able bodied, why limit yourself to .22?
Do a search on "P22 slide broke."
andrewbolin214
10-22-12, 08:19
**** the bull shit. End.
Littlelebowski
10-22-12, 08:23
Yes, I am aware of the model downfalls. But after 3 years and not a single issue with mine, i guess i got lucky with it. And I am scary accurate with it out to 30-35 yards. I am looking to replace it with the SR22 possibly just because i like my other Ruger SR's, but I want to gather some more information on it first. As far as the question "Why?", there are times where it is handy. Usually it is when I am on my Harley and it is comfortable on the ankle or slightly deeper ITW than I can get my 9. There are cases where people defeat the rounds no matter what caliber they are, we all know that, so what is the argument? Not everyone can carry around .454 Magnums... I was skeptical about the .22 at first, just as everyone else, and I don't feel like I am an expert on the matter, just adding my $.02 to the thread.
I understand where you're coming from. The SR22 I shot was filthy and had never been lubed. Ran great. I lubed it for the owner on principle. It appeared to have been shot a lot.
Were I you, I'd be looking at the M&P Shield and M&P 9c. The Walther PPS is great as well. All compact and/or slim 9mms that can handle full power defensive 9mm ammo.
An untrained person is better off unarmed.
Pat
That's horseshit.
andrewbolin214
10-22-12, 08:47
I understand where you're coming from. The SR22 I shot was filthy and had never been lubed. Ran great. I lubed it for the owner on principle. It appeared to have been shot a lot.
Were I you, I'd be looking at the M&P Shield and M&P 9c. The Walther PPS is great as well. All compact and/or slim 9mms that can handle full power defensive 9mm ammo.
Thats nice to hear on the SR22. And I have plenty of options in my safe for carry pieces. Like I said earlier, sometimes I am just more comfortable with the 22.
I hope we arent getting this thread too far off topic. And I hope the OP is getting the information they are looking for.
TriviaMonster
10-22-12, 11:41
I have been following this thread for awhile now. It's just a sticky situation.
Most .22LR's that I have shot have not been particularly great. The SR22 was a fine gun, MkIII's have always run well for me, but not much else outside of some revolvers.
This may be terrible advice, but I would just have the person handle/shoot as many guns as possible until they find one that fits the bill. I think it's early to rule out some larger calibers.
One super easy gun to rack was a PK380 I shot. I swear it didn't have a recoil spring in it. The trigger was fairly light and it was easy to handle the recoil. However, the recoil is not super light like a .22LR so that may limit that gun.
I will also add that I have an LCP (terrible gun, hurts to shoot and has no sights-I use it for CCW when I am in my birthday suit). The reason I bring this up is that ammo for the .380 is very frustrating. There is no expansion if you want penetration and vice versa. I keep it loaded with 95gr (I believe) Remington Golden Sabers. I have little faith in the ammo.
I suppose there are worse things to shoot with than a .380.
Nevermind, don't get a .380- the ammo debate stresses me out.
How well does he throw? Every once in awhile a MkII "Pineapple" grenade shows up I am sure.
I will also add this. yes the .22LR sucks for SD. It's true, no way around it. But, even a 9mm Para, .40S&W, .45ACP, they all suck. Handgun rounds just suck. They are full of compromise and cannot hold a candle to even a basic carbine round like a .223 or a 7.62X39. They make a 7.62NATO seem like a freakin' missle.
I don't have tons of confidence in pretty much any handgun round (I shoot 9mm and .40) so I make up the deficit the only way I know how. Training. Accuracy.
Whatever gun/round that they end up choosing, just make sure that they can put those rounds exactly where they need to be. We can talk hardware all day long, but software is what makes the difference.
Give me a Mk18 and a head start and Larry V a Taurus PT22 and I will show you what I mean.
Nephrology
10-22-12, 11:52
That's horseshit.
Do you care to elaborate, SN? I happen to agree with Alaskapopo but would like to hear why you disagree.
That's horseshit.
I think I probably agree with this but first I would like to hear the definition of "trained".
DeltaSierra
10-22-12, 12:25
Do you care to elaborate, SN? I happen to agree with Alaskapopo but would like to hear why you disagree.
I'm interested in a reply as well.
I fail to see how having an untrained person armed with a firearm is a good idea. They will only hurt themselves, or an innocent person.
If you think that it is their "right" or whatever to carry, I might suggest that I have first hand experience dealing with untrained individuals that, for whatever reason, were in possession of a weapon, and I sorta think that my life is more important than their supposed necessity to maintain control over a weapon....
If you can't safely handle a weapon, get pepper spray... simple as that.
TriviaMonster
10-22-12, 12:26
Do you care to elaborate, SN? I happen to agree with Alaskapopo but would like to hear why you disagree.
I would also tend to lean the way of AlaskaPopo. Note he said "better off", not "shouldn't be allowed to".
I can think of an example (sorry to derail). My mom has zero experience with guns. She has never shot one, is afraid of them, and has no idea how to operate one. Let's say a perp busts in her house while she is alone. She knows where a pistol is, and has access to it. Let's say her perp is armed, but is only there to rob the house and didn't plan on greeting anyone.
She meets the perp in the hall. The perp draws his/her weapon and so does my mom. Oops, the safety is on. Mom gets shot by the perp who thinks that mom is going to kill them.
This is obviously just a hypothetical story, but I imagine that cases like this do happen. Of course, on the flip side, the perp could have just shot her no matter what and she would be in the same boat. But there is always that chance that mom would have been okay, right?
Of course, Mom would have been better off taking a few LAV classes and showing up at the police station with said perp hog tied in the trunk of her car, but that's life.
Maybe mom should get a .22 huh? :D
EDIT: I could have just said, spend a couple of hours at any local range just watching people and you will see why AlaskaPopo is right. Who here hasn't seen someone check if it's loaded by looking down the barrel?
There are a lot of examples of children killing attackers with the family firearm. Or the guy who bought a gun and never fired it, but used it in defense.
I have absolutely no formal blade training at this point, but I carry a defensive knife. If I can't carry a firearm (many places in MI are a no-go for concealed carry), then I will be depending on that knife. Should I get training? Absolutely, and I will be very soon. But I'm also confident that I am better off with the knife, even without training, then not having anything.
I think it's a case of having something to fight back with. Even if someone isn't formally trained, it's hard to argue that their chances of survival are better with having nothing at all. Most everyone here wouldn't pick up a beer bottle in self defense, but if cornered in an alley with no weapons, most of us would grab a beer bottle since it beats nothing at all.
I also understand that guns are more unique in that there is a much higher chance to harm innocent bystanders as compared to bottles and blades. But I think it's fair to say a majority of us got a gun before we got trained to use it. I'm willing to bet that most us, prior to any formal training, felt like we could hold our own. If you strip everything else away, it's not that hard to point and pull a trigger.
It is important to try and encourage those who carry firearms to seek out formal training. Or at the very least, try and educate them as much as possible personally.
More than happy to guys.
Thousands of untrained people defend themselves succesfully with sub-optimal firearms every year.
To say that an untrained person is better off unarmed than armed is absurd. I don't think it's optimal but do we really believe that unarmed is better than armed? If so then I'm not sure there's any elaboration that can get us to a consensus.
andrewbolin214
10-22-12, 13:09
I would say that the training would be along the lines of when to use, not how to use. Anyone who has turned on a tv knows "just point and squeeze"... But, how many people know how to handle the situation as a whole? I believe the point in the training is to know how to handle the situation, because those who feel that they can "just point and squeeze" when they are threatened are not always right. And that goes beyond weapons handling and marksmanship.
Also, this thread is way off course, haha
More than happy to guys.
Thousands of untrained people defend themselves succesfully with sub-optimal firearms every year.
To say that an untrained person is better off unarmed than armed is absurd. I don't think it's optimal but do we really believe that unarmed is better than armed? If so then I'm not sure there's any elaboration that can get us to a consensus.
Thank you, SouthNarc.
I am the furthest thing from a fan of a .22 for self defense or being untrained, but if that is all you have, all you can handle, and all you are, you have to make the best of it.
I think this is where this thread goes sideways. Saying that all someone can handle is a .22 because of physical limitations is not the same as saying all someone needs to defend themself is a .22. It is recognizing that a person has limitations that may lead to very suboptimal results in terms of terminal effects and even reliability.
Likewise, acknowledging that many untrained people successfully defend themselves sith subpar firearms is certainly not the same as saying that people are good to go without training or a decent firearm. We've all seen scary examples of untrained people and crappy firearms at shooting ranges and sometimes in classes--with guns that barely worked, people who could not operate them effectively, could not hit the target, and displayed dangerous gun handling.
BTW, I got to see your Practical Unarmed Combat DVD. Probably the best put together and articulated DVD on recognizing and dealing with criminal street encounters.
More than happy to guys.
Thousands of untrained people defend themselves succesfully with sub-optimal firearms every year.
To say that an untrained person is better off unarmed than armed is absurd. I don't think it's optimal but do we really believe that unarmed is better than armed? If so then I'm not sure there's any elaboration that can get us to a consensus.
Sadly, we appear to have quite a few elitists on here that actually believe that. I'd bet there have been far more people who've successfully used all manner of firearms for defense against crime that were untrained than "trained", but for the holier than thou the risk of an unfavorable outcome is simply too great.
I can only shake my head at this thought process. :confused:
TriumphRat675
10-22-12, 14:44
Probably the best elaboration for SN's statement is reading a year's worth of "Armed Citizen" features in American Rifleman. How many of those people do you think took a training class?
Nephrology
10-22-12, 14:57
Probably the best elaboration for SN's statement is reading a year's worth of "Armed Citizen" features in American Rifleman. How many of those people do you think took a training class?
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of terms. When I think training in the context of this argument, I don't necessarily mean you need to spend 8 grand a year on fighting handgun class tuition; I mean "do you know how to make it work." Can you load it, unload it, reload it, get it ready to fire, put rounds where you want them, etc.
My big fear - and I assume Alaskapopo's too - is that providing somebody who is completely unversed in the use of firearms with a gun they don't know how to use can make a bad situation worse. I.e. someone who may be unfamiliar with the external safeties on a firearm, who might not even know how to properly load it or to keep it safe when not in use - that sort of thing.
My nightmare would be providing a loved one with a firearm only to find out their lack of familiarity either prevented them from using it when they needed to and had it used against them, or otherwise caused an escalation to lethal force. Similarly, I would be equally devastated if they were to touch off a round negligently and it were to hurt either themselves or another.
In the context of somebody who is elderly or feeble, this is a legitimate concern. Providing them with a firearm they may not be able to properly manipulate might end up pissing off their aggressor and getting them killed. Certainly a fighting chance is better than none - but I am not convinced that just having a gun gives you a fighting chance.
Hell, even that 12 y/o girl on the news lately had the advantage of her mom walking her through where to get the gun, and presumably it was already loaded for her or she was at some point instructed how to make it hot. The least you should do if you are going to give someone a deadly weapon is to be sure they know how to use it, how not to use it, and when to do both of those things.
TriumphRat675
10-22-12, 16:26
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding of terms...
If we're talking about someone who is deathly afraid of firearms, mentally incapable of learning how to use them, or someone that you otherwise are foisting a gun on who doesn't want it, I would agree. Going to granma's house and dropping off a 10/22 in an unopened box with 50 rounds of ammo and calling it a day is not smart.
Having said that, the learning curve for, say, a .22 revolver just ain't that steep. And if you accept Gary Kleck's studies, the vast, vast majority of defensive gun uses are resolved either by oral warning ("I have a gun!") or brandishing of the firearm. I'm sure there are instances of dudes getting shot with .22's and then beating the shooter to death, but I will bet you pretty much anything that for any one of those I can find you 20 instances of a bad actor getting shot (or just shot at) with a .22 and running away hasta pronto.
All of which leads me to believe that a .22 in the hand is going to beat a fist-full of nothing, pepper spray, or a Taser approx. 99 out of a 100 times. And it won't mess on your carpet, run up vet bills, or demand to go on walkies.
Alaskapopo
10-22-12, 18:26
If we're talking about someone who is deathly afraid of firearms, mentally incapable of learning how to use them, or someone that you otherwise are foisting a gun on who doesn't want it, I would agree. Going to granma's house and dropping off a 10/22 in an unopened box with 50 rounds of ammo and calling it a day is not smart.
Having said that, the learning curve for, say, a .22 revolver just ain't that steep. And if you accept Gary Kleck's studies, the vast, vast majority of defensive gun uses are resolved either by oral warning ("I have a gun!") or brandishing of the firearm. I'm sure there are instances of dudes getting shot with .22's and then beating the shooter to death, but I will bet you pretty much anything that for any one of those I can find you 20 instances of a bad actor getting shot (or just shot at) with a .22 and running away hasta pronto.
All of which leads me to believe that a .22 in the hand is going to beat a fist-full of nothing, pepper spray, or a Taser approx. 99 out of a 100 times. And it won't mess on your carpet, run up vet bills, or demand to go on walkies.
A .22 pistol that you're not skilled with definately does not beat a taser because they work. I have used them several times on people and know from experience that it is an effective self defense tool. I think everyone who is physically capable and willing to get training should be armed. I don't agree with putting a small game round in a pistol and giving it to someone who is infirm and unable to train. They are better off not being armed because at least then the suspect won't be able to disarm them and kill them with their own gun. A .22 pistol can be used to stop a violent attack but the shot placement and skill required to do that is no easy matter.
Pat
For .22lr, I'd also say the Ruger LCR. For something a little bigger, what about a Bersa Thunder in .32ACP? Also, has the .327 Magnum pretty much fizzled out?
Pat you are usually spot on, but having a 22lr at least givesthe infirmed a chance ,as compared to no chance at all. Getting shot to death with your own 22 is just as dead a getting beat to death.
Alaskapopo
10-22-12, 22:43
Pat you are usually spot on, but having a 22lr at least givesthe infirmed a chance ,as compared to no chance at all. Getting shot to death with your own 22 is just as dead a getting beat to death.
I want them to have a chance. I just think that truth be told if they can shoot a .22 auto they could probably muster enough strength to fire a 38 with standard pressure ammo as well. My own mother has bad arthritis and She can still handle a limited amount of 38 special out of the revolver I purchased her. I fully understand the OP's predicament but I chose to arm my parents with rounds that were designed to stop human aggression. There are lots of good revolvers that fit the bill for those with poor hand strength.
Pat
A .22 pistol that you're not skilled with definately does not beat a taser because they work. I have used them several times on people and know from experience that it is an effective self defense tool. I think everyone who is physically capable and willing to get training should be armed. I don't agree with putting a small game round in a pistol and giving it to someone who is infirm and unable to train. They are better off not being armed because at least then the suspect won't be able to disarm them and kill them with their own gun. A .22 pistol can be used to stop a violent attack but the shot placement and skill required to do that is no easy matter.
Pat
So we can assume that every taser shot you've performed or witnessed has resulted in a perp that can't resume his combative behavior once the shot is complete? Do you think a taser would anchor the perp long enough for a cop to arrive and detain him in someone's home? Even if it took 20 minutes for them to arrive? What happens IF a perp gets the barbs out between hits? Should the elderly or infirm have TWO tasers? The whole "two is one and one is none" concept?
I'm playing devil's advocate here and you'll never get me to agree that pipsqueak rounds are excellent defensive tools. I have a 629 Mountain Gun and I've shot an IDPA match with 305 pf loads. I've also shot a regular monthly 6 stage IDPA match with a Kel-Tec P-32 and tied a local PD firearms instructor for lowest points dropped in that match (and 18th overall out of 42). I can shoot the P-32 far better than I ever could a J Frame. It has a lot less recoil, plus it holds 1.6X the ammo (2.2X with the available 10 round mag). Do I carry it as a primary? Only when I'm feeling foolish. :)
I still don't think you're taking all factors into account. I would always recommend as much gun as the person can handle, but in some cases, that may actually be the lowly .22. It sucks to be that person, but not nearly as much as the person with zero self-determination and weaponry, or the person with a taser shoved up their ass once the perp got the barbs out. The victim might wind up dead either way. If that were me, I'd at least want the perp hitting the ER to remove eight .22 slugs, as opposed to rubbing his eyes or bandaging a couple of dart hits. :)
Alaskapopo
10-22-12, 23:41
So we can assume that every taser shot you've performed or witnessed has resulted in a perp that can't resume his combative behavior once the shot is complete? Do you think a taser would anchor the perp long enough for a cop to arrive and detain him in someone's home? Even if it took 20 minutes for them to arrive? What happens IF a perp gets the barbs out between hits? Should the elderly or infirm have TWO tasers? The whole "two is one and one is none" concept?
I'm playing devil's advocate here and you'll never get me to agree that pipsqueak rounds are excellent defensive tools. I have a 629 Mountain Gun and I've shot an IDPA match with 305 pf loads. I've also shot a regular monthly 6 stage IDPA match with a Kel-Tec P-32 and tied a local PD firearms instructor for lowest points dropped in that match (and 18th overall out of 42). I can shoot the P-32 far better than I ever could a J Frame. It has a lot less recoil, plus it holds 1.6X the ammo (2.2X with the available 10 round mag). Do I carry it as a primary? Only when I'm feeling foolish. :)
I still don't think you're taking all factors into account. I would always recommend as much gun as the person can handle, but in some cases, that may actually be the lowly .22. It sucks to be that person, but not nearly as much as the person with zero self-determination and weaponry, or the person with a taser shoved up their ass once the perp got the barbs out. The victim might wind up dead either way. If that were me, I'd at least want the perp hitting the ER to remove eight .22 slugs, as opposed to rubbing his eyes or bandaging a couple of dart hits. :)
Civilian tasers are set up to deliver continueous current or 30 seconds while the victim puts the taser down and flees the area. While this is not as good as a real gun in a real caliber (38 special/9mm or larger) it beats the hell out of mouse rounds. I am not advocating the use of a taser in place of a good firearm for a trained person. However for those that can't shoot adiquate calibers or don't train its a very viable option.
Also if you think you can shove a taser up any part of my body good luck. You will not be enjoying life.
So you yourself consider it foolish to carry your .32 as a primary weapon but your ok arming others with a .22 auto?
Pat
Civilian tasers are set up to deliver continuous current or 30 seconds while the victim puts the taser down and flees the area. While this is not as good as a real gun in a real caliber (38 special/9mm or larger) it beats the hell out of mouse rounds. I am not advocating the use of a taser in place of a good firearm for a trained person. However for those that can't shoot adiquate calibers or don't train its a very viable option.
Also if you think you can shove a taser up any part of my body good luck. You will not be enjoying life.
So you yourself consider it foolish to carry your .32 as a primary weapon but your ok arming others with a .22 auto?
Pat
Good to know about the 30 second pulse on civvy tasers. I wonder if every owner knows this and understands to flee and not just stand there, transfixed by the chicken dance? :)
I can get by with the .32, but have no illusions about it demonstrably narrowing my response parameters. If my response parameters were already narrowed by physical limitations, the gun and caliber would have much less impact on that equation, particularly if hand strength and/or recoil sensitivity were added to the mix. To be honest, the felt recoil of the P-32 is lower than .22LR rifle out of the 21A. The 21A's DA trigger pull is comparable to the DAO P-32. However, the 21A can be carried cocked and locked, and the tip up barrel is another factor. I still don't consider it to be a proper defense gun though, due to the lack of an extractor. Mine is a woods gun with AAC Pilot attached. I always have a 9mm or larger on hand along with the 21A. The 21A is for dispatching critters and plinking, quietly. :)
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 01:03
Good to know about the 30 second pulse on civvy tasers. I wonder if every owner knows this and understands to flee and not just stand there, transfixed by the chicken dance? :)
I can get by with the .32, but have no illusions about it demonstrably narrowing my response parameters. If my response parameters were already narrowed by physical limitations, the gun and caliber would have much less impact on that equation, particularly if hand strength and/or recoil sensitivity were added to the mix. To be honest, the felt recoil of the P-32 is lower than .22LR rifle out of the 21A. The 21A's DA trigger pull is comparable to the DAO P-32. However, the 21A can be carried cocked and locked, and the tip up barrel is another factor. I still don't consider it to be a proper defense gun though, due to the lack of an extractor. Mine is a woods gun with AAC Pilot attached. I always have a 9mm or larger on hand along with the 21A. The 21A is for dispatching critters and plinking, quietly. :)
The 32 is a arguable option with ball ammo. At least it can penetrate 15 inches and its far more effective than a .22. I can not in good conscious recommend a .22 for someone. I mean sure if it was all I had I would use it and I have the skill to put a magazine into somones face and throat area in just a few seconds however the op's parents don't have this ability based on what he has said. They have hand strength issues and will probably have difficulty firing with precision accuracy and speed.
Pat
So we can assume that every taser shot you've performed or witnessed has resulted in a perp that can't resume his combative behavior once the shot is complete?
As a TASER Intl. instructor since '04 I can tell you that they are pretty effective for what they are designed to do; control a NON-LETHAL threat. I've taken 9 probe hits personally and a bunch of drive stuns. I've had varying levels of incapacitation but have been able to yank out the probes on two occasions. The TASER C2 indeed has a 30 second ride at a slower pulse rate. What that means essentially is that it's less powerful. I know because I've also ridden one of those. Nothing I'd arm any member of my family with.
Tasers malfunction just like firearms do and can send probes spiralling in crazy directions. I have a video of me teaching a TASER class and picking up a '21 foot cartridge not even attached to the device, off a table and discharging it from static electricity, sending one probe through my little finger.
The closer a subject is to someone the less effective the Taser is because to elicit the neuro-muscular incapacitation we're looking for we need a good spread on the probes. So there's a sweet spot of distance that Taser application is optimal.
All that being said Electronic Control Devices (ECDs) are LE subject control tools, not lethal weapons that are appropriate for citizens to defend themselves from bad guys, despite TASER Intl. marketing to the contrary.
This is going to be my last post in this thread but I feel compelled to address two things that have been said:
1. That an untrained person is better off unarmed than armed.
2. That a Taser is preferable to a .22.
I think this is probably some of the worst advice I've ever seen given and I really hope no one follows it because I think it very well could kill somebody.
As a TASER Intl. instructor since '04 I can tell you that they are pretty effective for what they are designed to do; control a NON-LETHAL threat. I've taken 9 probe hits personally and a bunch of drive stuns. I've had varying levels of incapacitation but have been able to yank out the probes on two occasions. The TASER C2 indeed has a 30 second ride at a slower pulse rate. What that means essentially is that it's less powerful. I know because I've also ridden one of those. Nothing I'd arm any member of my family with.
Tasers malfunction just like firearms do and can send probes spiralling in crazy directions. I have a video of me teaching a TASER class and picking up a '21 foot cartridge not even attached to the device, off a table and discharging it from static electricity, sending one probe through my little finger.
The closer a subject is to someone the less effective the Taser is because to elicit the neuro-muscular incapacitation we're looking for we need a good spread on the probes. So there's a sweet spot of distance that Taser application is optimal.
All that being said Electronic Control Devices (ECDs) are LE subject control tools, not lethal weapons that are appropriate for citizens to defend themselves from bad guys, despite TASER Intl. marketing to the contrary.
This is going to be my last post in this thread but I feel compelled to address two things that have been said:
1. That an untrained person is better off unarmed than armed.
2. That a Taser is preferable to a .22.
I think this is probably some of the worst advice I've ever seen given and I really hope no one follows it because I think it very well could kill somebody.
Thank you!
Not to mention the spread at distance (21-25') of the probes makes it less likely to get good contact with both probes, making it useless. Like you said, there's a sweet spot with Tasers.
Littlelebowski
10-23-12, 12:54
I totally forgot about the .327 Magnum. I'm sure its weight precludes but still....interested in a never-gonna-buy-one way.
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 13:17
1. That an untrained person is better off unarmed than armed.
2. That a Taser is preferable to a .22.
I think this is probably some of the worst advice I've ever seen given and I really hope no one follows it because I think it very well could kill somebody.
Really? So you’re saying arming someone with a .22 and no training is great advice?
The worst advice out there is saying its good to arm someone who is un-trained with a .22. In fact that advice is idiotic and will get someone killed.
Also yes the taser is a less lethal weapon but we do use it all the time to end lethal threats. This is generally done with lethal over watch but that has not made the taser any less effective at dropping threats with knives and in some cases gun.
I would think on a site like M4 carbine most members would realize the importance of training. As Jeff Cooper said giving a man a gun does not make him armed any more than giving a man a guitar makes him a guitar player.
Stories about a TASERs effectiveness are just as valid as stories of a .22LRs effectiveness. There are many positive and negative (see what I did there?) stories about them both. I would much rather give an untrained person a .22LR versus a TASER. I wouldnt feel great about it, but good enough. Sometimes feeling good is good enough (again, see what I did there).
The TASER gives you one shot, the .22 gives you more. Sure, you can claim that a TASER has an extra cartridge, but if a person is incapable of using a gun the chances of them being able to quickly reload the TASER is remote. Yes, I understand the TASER can be used like an impact device when empty, but so can a gun.
The Beretta 84 stoked with FMJs is a good choice, I had a friend that carried a laser equipped KelTec P32 loaded with FMJs as his third gun. It was soft shooting, had the benefit of the laser, and was centerfire. I yearn for a Ruger SP-101 with the LCR trigger in it (in 9mm too, damnit!).
No the worst advice out there is saying its good to arm someone who is un-trained with a .22. In fact that advice is idiotic and will get someone killed.
Also yes the taser is a less lethal weapon but we do use it all the time to end lethal threats. This is generally done with lethal overwatch but that has not made the taser any less effective at dropping threats with knives and in some cases gun. If you have been through the trainng you would know this to be true or if you have had any actual experience with it in the real world you would also know it to be true.
Umm yeah. I do believe he has the experience you are attempting to call him out on.
That said, how do you answer to the hundred, if not thousands, of people that have no training, no skill set, and have a .22LR for defense? How many of them die each year? How many of them dont? How many of them are successful in defending themselves?
How many LE or citizen deployments of a TASER have failed to stop an aggressor? How many have succeeded? I dont know. I doubt you do either. I am happy your TRAINED use of the TASER has been positive, I know firsthand others that have not been.
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 13:29
Stories about a TASERs effectiveness are just as valid as stories of a .22LRs effectiveness. There are many positive and negative (see what I did there?) stories about them both. I would much rather give an untrained person a .22LR versus a TASER. I wouldnt feel great about it, but good enough. Sometimes feeling good is good enough (again, see what I did there).
The TASER gives you one shot, the .22 gives you more. Sure, you can claim that a TASER has an extra cartridge, but if a person is incapable of using a gun the chances of them being able to quickly reload the TASER is remote. Yes, I understand the TASER can be used like an impact device when empty, but so can a gun.
The Beretta 84 stoked with FMJs is a good choice, I had a friend that carried a laser equipped KelTec P32 loaded with FMJs as his third gun. It was soft shooting, had the benefit of the laser, and was centerfire. I yearn for a Ruger SP-101 with the LCR trigger in it (in 9mm too, damnit!).
Actually they have 3 shot tasers now. The .22 does give you more shots and if the person was skilled enough to use it effectively it would be a better choice. However we are talking about un-trained and infirm people here they are not going to have the skill or physical ability to place the rounds where they need to be placed to stop the threat. There is the real issue if the taser is ineffective it will be a lot harder for the suspect to kill them with it after he disarms them vs the .22 pistol. Now you have just armed another thug. The real answer is not to send untrained people out on the streets with guns its a false sense of security. I personally have used the taser more than a dozen times in my 13 years as an officer with only one failure and that was due to the suspect waiving his jacket waiving his jacket around in front of us and the barbs not striking him. 1 failure in over 12 uses that is pretty good. That is not second hand stories but rather first hand uses by me. Also the taser is not used as an impact weapon it has a drive stun feature which admittedly is of limited effectiveness. Yes the taser has sweet spot for range however I have had it work great from as close as 2 feet to as far as 18 feet. They have cartridges that go out to 35 feet now as well. However the average range that a bad guy approaches a victim is generally arms reach which is inside the Tasers sweet spot.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 13:38
Umm yeah. I do believe he has the experience you are attempting to call him out on.
That said, how do you answer to the hundred, if not thousands, of people that have no training, no skill set, and have a .22LR for defense? How many of them die each year? How many of them dont? How many of them are successful in defending themselves?
How many LE or citizen deployments of a TASER have failed to stop an aggressor? How many have succeeded? I dont know. I doubt you do either. I am happy your TRAINED use of the TASER has been positive, I know firsthand others that have not been.
I have no idea what his experience is but I do know what my first hand experience is and I have a lot of respect for the taser. There are a lot of people on here posting who have no experience with it . Also alot of you are by your posts endorsing sending people out on the street with no firearms training and weapons. That is very surprising on this site which is partly dedicated to firearms training. Like I have said the real answer is not the .22 target pistol or the taser. The real answer is to get them a reasonable amount of training with a pistol in .38 or 9mm or larger, hell even a .32 auto is a far better choice than a .22.
But to summarize get them a real gun and teach them how to use it.
Pat
Actually they have 3 shot tasers now. The .22 does give you more shots and if the person was skilled enough to use it effectively it would be a better choice. However we are talking about un-trained and infirm people here they are not going to have the skill or physical ability to place the rounds where they need to be placed to stop the threat. There is the real issue if the taser is ineffective it will be a lot harder for the suspect to kill them with it after he disarms them vs the .22 pistol. Now you have just armed another thug. The real answer is not to send untrained people out on the streets with guns its a false sense of security. I personally have used the taser more than a dozen times in my 13 years as an officer with only one failure and that was due to the suspect waiving his jacket waiving his jacket around in front of us and the bargs not striking him. 1 failure in over 12 uses that is pretty good. That is not second hand stories but rather first hand uses by me.
Pat
Yeah, 3 shots.
Yes, we are indeed talking about the elderly or otherwise incapable. In a perfect world everybody will be trained. Sending an untrained person into the world with a TASER isnt a positive thing. "Oh look, we include a single training cartridge", whoopty shit. If LEOs need hours of training, what in the hell makes you think a citizen using a lower powered version wont?
Oh, yours worked 12 out of 13 times. Awesome! How many times did you have backup, either with another TASER or with lethal response? A citizen isnt going to have that. Furthermore, if they arent able to put accurate rounds on target, what makes you think they will be accurate enough to put a TASER on the target? Magic? If the TASER fails on the first try or if they miss, they just get bludgeoned or stabbed to death. Of course, thats worst case scenario. So is the one about the pistol being taken from them.
A TXDPS Trooper that is a friend of the family is recovering at home after his TASER failed to incapacitate an irate driver. Both barbs dug into the bad guy's flesh, the electricity got to him, but he still bludgeoned the Trooper with his flashlight about the head. Bad guy never felt the electricity, but the dashcam shows he did. Thats from our friends mouth.
Anyone have any idea what the percentage of gun owners in this country that have had any training? 5%? Less?
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 14:00
Yeah, 3 shots.
Yes, we are indeed talking about the elderly or otherwise incapable. In a perfect world everybody will be trained. Sending an untrained person into the world with a TASER isnt a positive thing. "Oh look, we include a single training cartridge", whoopty shit. If LEOs need hours of training, what in the hell makes you think a citizen using a lower powered version wont?
Oh, yours worked 12 out of 13 times. Awesome! How many times did you have backup, either with another TASER or with lethal response? A citizen isnt going to have that. Furthermore, if they arent able to put accurate rounds on target, what makes you think they will be accurate enough to put a TASER on the target? Magic? If the TASER fails on the first try or if they miss, they just get bludgeoned or stabbed to death. Of course, thats worst case scenario. So is the one about the pistol being taken from them.
A TXDPS Trooper that is a friend of the family is recovering at home after his TASER failed to incapacitate an irate driver. Both barbs dug into the bad guy's flesh, the electricity got to him, but he still bludgeoned the Trooper with his flashlight about the head. Bad guy never felt the electricity, but the dashcam shows he did. Thats from our friends mouth.
In 3/4 of my incidents with the taser I have been alone. As for your failure with the taser if the barbs hit flesh it should have worked unless the taser was faulty. I would like to get the actual information from that incident. Because those of us who carry the taser know it works we have also been hit with it. I have had to ride the lightening twice. Once with the M26 and then later with the X26 when it came out. There is no fighting through it.
Also the taser doe snot require much accuracy you put the dot on the target and pull the trigger. Your have a much larger target to worth with than you a do the .22 which is the year between the eyes and the throat.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 14:01
Anyone have any idea what the percentage of gun owners in this country that have had any training? 5%? Less?
I think that highly depends on how you define training. A father teaching his son to shoot is training.
pat
Well.....I guess it's not my last post.
Really? So you’re saying arming someone with a .22 and no training is great advice?
In either of my three posts in this thread prior to this one, did you see me say that arming someone without training was great advice?
No. What I said was untrained and armed is better than untrained and un-armed.
I have no idea what his experience is....
Which is why I actually posted what my specific TASER experience was in my last post.
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 14:15
Well.....I guess it's not my last post.
In either of my three posts in this thread prior to this one, did you see me say that arming someone without training was great advice?
No. What I said was untrained and armed is better than untrained and un-armed.
Which is why I actually posted what my specific TASER experience was in my last post.
With all due respect I think your very wrong. Sending someone out with a gun they don't know how to use or can't use effecively is worse than sending them out unarmed. Your just arming bad guys with your plan.
Yes I saw where you said your a taser instructor with a lot of experience. How many times have you actually deployed it yourself in a non training enviroment? For me at least it has worked as advertized on all but one occaision. I am not saying the taser is a wonder tool but it is very damn good. It has been the best tool introduced to law enforcement in a long time. It has saved me from getting injuried on numerious occasions. I have to work alone a lot and the taser is about the closet thing they they have come up with to ass kicking in a remote control.
I think we are both going to have to agree to disagree. No offense is meant personally but I strongly disagree with sending people out who are untrained with .22 pistols for self defense.
Pat
In 3/4 of my incidents with the taser I have been alone. As for your failure with the taser if the barbs hit flesh it should have worked unless the taser was faulty. I would like to get the actual information from that incident. Because those of us who carry the taser know it works we have also been hit with it. I have had to ride the lightening twice. Once with the M26 and then later with the X26 when it came out. There is no fighting through it.
Also the taser doe snot require much accuracy you put the dot on the target and pull the trigger. Your have a much larger target to worth with than you a do the .22 which is the year between the eyes and the throat.
Pat
The TASER still requires a level of accuracy and proficiency. There is no logical argument otherwise. It has less capacity, it is harder to reload, more costly to practice (assuming they are even going to practice), they must make sure the batteries are charged, etc. The TASER has a laser! Woot! A .22 can have one as well.
Your just arming bad guys with your plan.
Uh...not my plan, and there's not a single crime trend that shows that untrained citizens get their guns used against them at a higher rate than they sucessfully defend themselves.
Yes I saw where you said your a taser instructor. How many times have you actually deployed it yourself in a non training enviroment?
Conservatively? 20-25.
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 14:35
The TASER still requires a level of accuracy and proficiency. There is no logical argument otherwise. It has less capacity, it is harder to reload, more costly to practice (assuming they are even going to practice), they must make sure the batteries are charged, etc. The TASER has a laser! Woot! A .22 can have one as well.
The taser training I went through was 8 hours long. The basic firearms training an officer is required to do varies but is generally over 80 hours. Yes the taser like any tool requires training and the physical ability to use it. However the skill required to use a .22 pistol to effectively stop a threat is a lot higher than the skill needed to use a taser to end the a threat. You don't really need to practice with the taser. I have had 2 trainings with the taser both 8 hours long and nothing else in 13 years and it has worked fine for me. Its about as close to simple as you can get in a self defense tool. Again its not perfect and I am not advocating carrying one over a standard carry gun. However we are arguing about less than desirable options. 1. carrying a inadiquate round that we can all agree on has dismal terminal ballistics. (.22) or 2. carrying a less lethal device that has a great record of working within a admittedly narrow set of paramaters. The real answer is option 3. Train the person to a reasonable level with a weapon like a .38 steel framed J frame revolver with mild ammo that they can control.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 14:38
Uh...not my plan, and there's not a single crime trend that shows that untrained citizens get their guns used against them at a higher rate than they sucessfully defend themselves.
Conservatively? 20-25.
Frankly there is not enough data out there on this kind of issue to see any trends one way or the other. We do know that it used to be 1 in 4 officers that were shot was with their own pistol in the 1970's to 1980's. Now that number has dropped to 12% thanks to better training and holsters. That is with police who are able bodied and trained. We are talking about elderly people with arthritis and no training. I am not willing to play those odds. Of all the non gun suggestions in this thead the dog option may be the best. As a firearms instructor I can not endorse sending people out with guns they don't have the ability or training to use.
Pat
I think that highly depends on how you define training. A father teaching his son to shoot is training.
pat
Pat, by training I am thinking what you would consider good enough to be armed with a gun. Not M4C level training obviously, but the bare minimum that you would feel that the pendulum would swing in their favor for being armed with a firearm instead of less than lethal.
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 16:54
Pat, by training I am thinking what you would consider good enough to be armed with a gun. Not M4C level training obviously, but the bare minimum that you would feel that the pendulum would swing in their favor for being armed with a firearm instead of less than lethal.
Yes that is what I mean. I would want them to be able to hit a man sized target at 7 yards within a reasonble amount of time. Nothing super hard more along the lines of most CCW standards in states that have them. I just don't think the .22 is a viable option due to the level of precision it requires to stop the threat. Your looking at the area between the eyes on the face and the throat area. Chest hits with the .22 are not going to have an immediate effect.
I admit however if all I had was a .22 I would use it. I think the OP should at least try to take the people he is talking about out to the range and try a .38 revolver with waddcutter ammunition. I think he might be suprized that they are able to handle the mild recoil this round gives.
Pat
brushy bill
10-23-12, 22:03
As indicated in the original post a .22 is NOT (underlined, italics, bolded, whatever emphasis is required to make the point clear) the preferred option in this scenario. YES, one would clearly exhaust other options before going this route, such as trying .38 wadcutters in steel framed handgun, etc...given, conceded, admitted, etc.
BUT, why is it continuing to be an "untrained" argument when that was never included in the original post?
For reasons I don't understand, the argument has become "an untrained/incompotent user" when that was never stated....simply less capable and impaired function.
Also, keeping in mind an aged/physically impaired user, who can't sprint out of harms way in the 30 seconds required for a civilian TASER before the perp revives, why is that a preferable option over a less than optimal (NOT ideal) fiream?
Let's leave the "untrained" argument alone. No strawman arguments or red herrings. Question was best of a less than desriable option after other options exhausted. Not a "hey, .22LR 40 grain really kicks the crap out of a .38 revolver in plus P plus and is 'as good'" But, again, many are not reading the preceeding posts and merely posting what they THINK was previously posted, NOT what was presented.
My last post this subject as some good information was received and appreciated despite various tangents.
Yes that is what I mean. I would want them to be able to hit a man sized target at 7 yards within a reasonble amount of time. Nothing super hard more along the lines of most CCW standards in states that have them. I just don't think the .22 is a viable option due to the level of precision it requires to stop the threat. Your looking at the area between the eyes on the face and the throat area. Chest hits with the .22 are not going to have an immediate effect.
I admit however if all I had was a .22 I would use it. I think the OP should at least try to take the people he is talking about out to the range and try a .38 revolver with waddcutter ammunition. I think he might be suprized that they are able to handle the mild recoil this round gives.
Pat
Alaskapopo
10-23-12, 22:45
As indicated in the original post a .22 is NOT (underlined, italics, bolded, whatever emphasis is required to make the point clear) the preferred option in this scenario. YES, one would clearly exhaust other options before going this route, such as trying .38 wadcutters in steel framed handgun, etc...given, conceded, admitted, etc.
BUT, why is it continuing to be an "untrained" argument when that was never included in the original post?
For reasons I don't understand, the argument has become "an untrained/incompotent user" when that was never stated....simply less capable and impaired function.
Also, keeping in mind an aged/physically impaired user, who can't sprint out of harms way in the 30 seconds required for a civilian TASER before the perp revives, why is that a preferable option over a less than optimal (NOT ideal) fiream?
Let's leave the "untrained" argument alone. No strawman arguments or red herrings. Question was best of a less than desriable option after other options exhausted. Not a "hey, .22LR 40 grain really kicks the crap out of a .38 revolver in plus P plus and is 'as good'" But, again, many are not reading the preceeding posts and merely posting what they THINK was previously posted, NOT what was presented.
My last post this subject as some good information was received and appreciated despite various tangents.
To bring it back on topic how much are they impaired by their medical condition?
As for the taser another option is to simply keep the juice going to them why you wait for police to arrive. You can get 2 minutes and 30 seconds before the taser makes you stop. I had to hold down the trigger on one suspect while the officers were cuffing him because when the current stopped he wanted to start fighting again. That said what firearms have your tried? Have you tried a 38 with light loads or a .380 pistol or even a .32 acp. Heck even a .22 mag would beat a .22 lr.
Pat
Pat,
I have the utmost respect for you and your level of experience, but SouthNarc is a highly regarded professional in the training world. You might want to look him and Shivworks up. Between the two of you, I'm gonna go with him, and not just because he and I happen to agree on this subject. If he and I disagreed, I'd still pick his side. :)
Alaskapopo
10-24-12, 12:37
Pat,
I have the utmost respect for you and your level of experience, but SouthNarc is a highly regarded professional in the training world. You might want to look him and Shivworks up. Between the two of you, I'm gonna go with him, and not just because he and I happen to agree on this subject. If he and I disagreed, I'd still pick his side. :)
No worries and I do have the utmost respect for SoughNarc but we just don't agree. If we all agreed this discusison forum would be pretty useless.
Pat
The taser training I went through was 8 hours long. The basic firearms training an officer is required to do varies but is generally over 80 hours. Yes the taser like any tool requires training and the physical ability to use it.
And both are amounts of training an elderly or physically deficient person are NOT going to receive. Either way, they are being sent into the world unprepared.
However the skill required to use a .22 pistol to effectively stop a threat is a lot higher than the skill needed to use a taser to end the a threat.
Then how is it hundreds, if not thousands, of people in good working order or not still manage to do it without getting themselves killed? Luck? Sure. Lack of skill by both parties? Sure Nevertheless many people are still able to successfully defend themselves every year that have not sought formal training.
You don't really need to practice with the taser. I have had 2 trainings with the taser both 8 hours long and nothing else in 13 years and it has worked fine for me. Its about as close to simple as you can get in a self defense tool.
What if someone who has never trained with the TASER misses? They didnt practice reloading, they are dead because they didnt train. People need to train with whatever weapon they have, to claim otherwise is just plain wrong.
You've been trained with the TASER for 16 hours. Thats exactly 16 more hours than an elderly person is going to train with the TASER. For you, its mandated. For them, its optional.
Again its not perfect and I am not advocating carrying one over a standard carry gun. However we are arguing about less than desirable options. 1. carrying a inadiquate round that we can all agree on has dismal terminal ballistics. (.22) or 2. carrying a less lethal device that has a great record of working within a admittedly narrow set of paramaters. The real answer is option 3. Train the person to a reasonable level with a weapon like a .38 steel framed J frame revolver with mild ammo that they can control.
Pat
With regards to "dismal terminal ballistics", I'd be curious as to what load would atleast meet FBI/IWBA penetration results (expansion isnt going to happen). That said you are comparing something that has terminal ballistics against something that does not.
Carrying a lees lethal device may a great record of working, but my question is by whom? Trained personnel?
No argument about the .38spec being far and away superior. Heck, even a .380 like the Beretta 94. A .32 would even be fine.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not advocating the .22 over most centerfire pistols. I do have experience try to arm a handicap person for defense, my mom. My mom is very much disabled, and I have forced her to come to the range and shoot. She shoots OK, but I am satisfied that "OK" is better than nothing. A .38 J-frame is out of the question due to her inability to handle the DA trigger. She shoots the M&P9 and Glock 19 well enough. I wouldnt feel good about it, but if its a .22 or a TASER, I'm giving her a .22, and hoping for the best.
I just don't think the .22 is a viable option due to the level of precision it requires to stop the threat.
Pat
But aren't you simply making that up? You don't really have facts to support that. It's your belief.
How many times have you used your taser in a confrontation?
Of those, had you instead shot them anywhere in the torso, legs, forehead, arms, with a .22lr.... how many would have continued what they were doing? I'm guessing not many to none.
You keep insisting that a .22lr needs something on the order of surgical precision to utilize. The very sight of a gun is enough to deter many confrontations much less getting shot at.
Not only that, with a taser one needs their adversary to be within 15' I believe.
I can tell you, except for LEOs, when I see someone with a taser type device. I see a victim.
This guy only landed 2 shots. Two armed robbers! I didn't see either one asking him what caliber his gun was. He was obviously not trained to your required level as he missed easy shots. No one in that room would have been better off had he not been armed except the bad guys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGFZDhCjvj0
Never shot the gun before. 1 shot that missed. Bad guy gone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4866_B-wPE
Maybe some Deluth, GA LEOs here could look that one up and see where the shots landed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFJte6Sic44&feature=related
Alaskapopo
10-24-12, 15:35
But aren't you simply making that up? You don't really have facts to support that. It's your belief.
How many times have you used your taser in a confrontation?
Of those, had you instead shot them anywhere in the torso, legs, forehead, arms, with a .22lr.... how many would have continued what they were doing? I'm guessing not many to none.
You keep insisting that a .22lr needs something on the order of surgical precision to utilize. The very sight of a gun is enough to deter many confrontations much less getting shot at.
Not only that, with a taser one needs their adversary to be within 15' I believe.
I can tell you, except for LEOs, when I see someone with a taser type device. I see a victim.
This guy only landed 2 shots. Two armed robbers! I didn't see either one asking him what caliber his gun was. He was obviously not trained to your required level as he missed easy shots. No one in that room would have been better off had he not been armed except the bad guys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGFZDhCjvj0
Never shot the gun before. 1 shot that missed. Bad guy gone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4866_B-wPE
Maybe some Deluth, GA LEOs here could look that one up and see where the shots landed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFJte6Sic44&feature=related
If the taser gets a good hit the subject is not able to fight. A person hit with a .22 other than to the CNS can keep fighting and beating you to death for minutes to hours to maybe even days depending on where you hit him.
I will leave this thread at this.
1. I believe people should carry a gun for protection but that gun needs to be of a fight stopping caliber.
2. Everyone who carries a gun or other self defense tool should recieve training in the amount to be proficient.
3. The taser is one hell of a good less lethal option for those that can't or won't carry a firearm in a adiquate caliber.
4. I support laws requiring CCW holders to attend basic training in firearms usage and the law before they can carry.
Some people on here are posting from their experience and others simply are not.
Pat
A person hit with a .22 other than to the CNS can keep fighting and beating you to death for minutes to hours to maybe even days depending on where you hit him.
The same could be said for ANY pistol, rifle, or shotgun cartridge. Its all about the 3 Ps; Proper Product Placement. Seriously, how you make a successful business and how you win a gunfight are the same. Location Location Location.
I will leave this thread at this.
1. I believe people should carry a gun for protection but that gun needs to be of a fight stopping caliber. Nobody disagrees. That said, some people simply cannot do it. They have to make do.
2. Everyone who carries a gun or other self defense tool should recieve training in the amount to be proficient. No doubt. People should, but people wont.
3. The taser is one hell of a good less lethal option for those that can't or won't carry a firearm in a adiquate caliber.Training in its use is still needed, contrary to your previous statements. In fact your second point in this very post contradicts your earlier statements.
4. I support laws requiring CCW holders to attend basic training in firearms usage and the law before they can carry.Non issue in my state. That said, the "basic training" here is utterly ridiculous.
Some people on here are posting from their experience and others simply are not. And some people that are posting from their own experience are being told they are wrong.
Pat
However the skill required to use a .22 pistol to effectively stop a threat is a lot higher than the skill needed to use a taser to end the a threat. You don't really need to practice with the taser.Pat
Can't we all just get along?
Enough arguing about .22LR vs taser, everyone should just carry a damn Glock 19 anyway.
:D
Some people on here are posting from their experience and others simply are not.
Pat
Yep, doesn't preclude us from analyzing data and making sound decisions on the matter. Like you mentioned above this is a training site. One need not pull the cover off their electrical panel and grab the mains leads to know that it may lead to electrocution.
I learned from you that a taser in the hands of a well trained professional might have a near 10% failure rate.
I learned from SouthNarc that tasers are subject to static electricity and may misfire.
It's a shame there is so little data complied on the .22lr regarding failure, effectiveness, etc.. such that reports of it's use have to be dismissed as anecdotal. Might have to email myth-busters... between them doing the show and the Internet gun community proving them wrong afterwards, we might actually get some facts from people with experience. ;)
Yep, doesn't preclude us from analyzing data and making sound decisions on the matter. Like you mentioned above this is a training site. One need not pull the cover off their electrical panel and grab the mains leads to know that it may lead to electrocution.
I learned from you that a taser in the hands of a well trained professional might have a near 10% failure rate.
I learned from SouthNarc that tasers are subject to static electricity and may misfire.
It's a shame there is so little data complied on the .22lr regarding failure, effectiveness, etc.. such that reports of it's use have to be dismissed as anecdotal. Might have to email myth-busters... between them doing the show and the Internet gun community proving them wrong afterwards, we might actually get some facts from people with experience. ;)
Not trying to be argumentative, but there's probably a reason there isn't piles of data on .22LR. It's generally not regarded as a self defense round, regardless of it's effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Why would someone spend money on the research if it isn't something that is expected to be utilized on a two legged bad guy?
DeltaSierra
10-25-12, 14:13
Can't we all just get along?
Enough arguing about .22LR vs taser, everyone should just carry a damn Glock 19 anyway.
:D
OK, the thread can be closed now.....
If you don't already know that .22LR is not ideal for self defense, shame on you, go read the terminal ballistics subforum. No large volume of work is necessary to prove this. .22LR lacks penetration and leave a very small wound track.
While I chew on a reasoned response to some of what I read in this thread I'm going to just drop this right here;
http://www.theoutdoorwire.com/specials/2012concealed_story.html?id=226741
Psalms144.1
11-06-12, 12:24
TPD - excellent article, thanks!
Regards,
Kevin
RickyRifle
11-16-12, 23:10
http://youtu.be/dFJte6Sic44
It's hard to argue she would've been better off unarmed than with her .22 pistol. (I hope no one is denying that she would have probably been better served with another caliber...still, dead is dead.)
Alaskapopo
11-16-12, 23:36
http://youtu.be/dFJte6Sic44
It's hard to argue she would've been better off unarmed than with her .22 pistol. (I hope no one is denying that she would have probably been better served with another caliber...still, dead is dead.)
She got lucky it happens.
Pat
Alaskapopo
11-18-12, 00:03
She won. It happens.
Yea she could have used a baseball bat or sharp stick that does not make them ideal choices either. But hey Fail-Safe your free to arm yourself with a .22. Let us know how it works out for you.:rolleyes::rolleyes:
One lucky person does not a trend make.
Pat
HeadHunter
11-19-12, 08:42
One lucky person does not a trend make.
No, but hundreds do. I have 100s of incidents in my database of private citizens who have successfully defended themselves with .22s.
Conversely, there is a paucity of identifiable incidents where private citizens sustained injury after shooting an attacker with a .22. The outrage against .22s is almost universally based on deductive logic that essentially states: laboratory medium tests show that .22s aren't "powerful" enough, therefore they shouldn't work, therefore they don't work. The end outcome of that premise is rarely demonstrable with specific incidents.
crusader377
11-19-12, 09:35
I think some people are overrating the recoil of modern service pistols. The vast majority of people can successfully shoot a modern pistol chambered in 9mm. For example, recently my mom who is 62 purchased a 9mm M&P based on my good experiences with the platform. Although she had never fired an handgun and had some of a typical beginners lack of confidence, with patient instruction her confidence improved very quickly and her weapon handling skills have greatly improved in a few range sessions. Also although the first range session her recoil tolerance was only about 50 rounds, now she can fire 150 rounds comfortably.
I think the best route even for older or more recoil sensitive shooters is to use gradual and patient training to build comfort in shooting a service pistol.
That said, a .22 is not the worse option for home defense but for me it is more of a last ditch weapon rather than a optimum or preferred choice. I think if you are recommending an individual to get a firearm for home defense you should invest the time and effort to ensure that they can use a effective firearm like a quality 9mm service pistol.
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 12:41
No, but hundreds do. I have 100s of incidents in my database of private citizens who have successfully defended themselves with .22s.
Conversely, there is a paucity of identifiable incidents where private citizens sustained injury after shooting an attacker with a .22. The outrage against .22s is almost universally based on deductive logic that essentially states: laboratory medium tests show that .22s aren't "powerful" enough, therefore they shouldn't work, therefore they don't work. The end outcome of that premise is rarely demonstrable with specific incidents.
You have 100's of shootings on file with a .22 then share.
Pat
HeadHunter
11-19-12, 14:47
You have 100's of shootings on file with a .22 then share.
Why certainly. Here's a few easy ones.
*ARMED CITIZEN* August 2009
It was the middle of the night, but a homeowner was awake in his living
room after working the third shift. And so he was ready, rather than
sleeping, when he heard a man force his way into the home. Police say
the homeowner investigated a strange noise and found the suspect
standing by the front door. He aimed his .22-cal. revolver at the
intruder and yelled at him to leave. The intruder charged the homeowner,
forcing him to shoot. At the shot's report, the intruder fled the home.
Police alerted area hospitals to be on the lookout for a man seeking
treatment for a gunshot wound. (The Lima News, Lima, Ohio, 05/09/09)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN* October 2009
Two men trying to enter Cassidy Lockett's home had to be aware it was
occupied. They'd likely seen Lockett in the front window as they
arrived, and there was a lot of noise as she hurried her three young,
frightened children into a bedroom. With the children secure, she phoned
police and loaded her .22-cal. semi-automatic pistol. Police say the
men, escapees from a nearby state prison, thrust a window open. One of
the men leaned inside. "I was pointing the gun at him and, you know, I
used a few choice words and told him to get out or I was going to
shoot," Lockett said. The men fled the property, only to be caught
within minutes by police. (/Lewiston Tribune/, Lewiston, ID,
07/27/09)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN* - April 2010
Police said that shortly after midnight three men broke into a home
seeking money and drugs. There were no drugs in the home, but there was
a .22-cal. rifle—and an 11-year-old boy trained in its use. The boy
leapt to the defense of his mother and sister. One of the intruders shot
the boy, slightly injuring him. The boy returned fire, seriously
wounding a suspect and causing the men to flee the home. Police found
all three intruders nearby. The wounded man was airlifted to a hospital
and will be charged after his release. (/San Antonio Express-News/, San
Antonio, TX, 01/20/10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN*
July 2010
"He was a big, burly guy," said 89-year-old Beatrice Turner of the man
who allegedly smashed in her front door and entered the home. "He was
pulling at his shorts and talking crazy ... I always said if they come
inside, it's me or them." Armed with a .22-cal. revolver, Turner yelled
at the man to leave. According to police, the burglar instead advanced
on Turner, and she fired a shot in self-defense, narrowly missing her
assailant. A neighbor heard the gunshot and phoned police. Officers
arrested the burglar in the front yard. "All of [the police officers]
were hugging me and telling me how brave I was," Turner said. The
friendly officers even helped Turner reload her gun before leaving.
(/The Des Moines Register/, Des Moines, Iowa, 04/21/10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
An elderly couple proved that a firearm is all that's needed to
counteract a burglar's youth and strength. Police say a 28-year-old thug
learned that fact the hard way when he entered their barn toting a crow
bar, metal cutters and flashlight. Charles and Kathleen Smith, whose
barn had been broken into earlier in the week, stopped to check on the
property and spotted the prowler. Kathleen shouted at the prowler not to
move and held him with her .22-cal. rifle. The couple called police, who
arrested the suspect. Neighbors have expressed much gratitude for the
Smiths' brave actions. (/WIVB-TV/, Buffalo, NY, 04/16/10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Armed Citizen Extra
(The following account did not appear in the print version of American Rifleman.)
According to State Police, a 43-year-old West Virginia man was looking
to steal from another man's home and tried to enter it. The homeowner
called out to him, warning him not to enter, but the suspect did so
anyway. The homeowner fired one shot with a small caliber firearm,
striking him in the abdomen. The suspect was transported to the
hospital where he was listed in critical condition.
(Charleston Gazette, Charleston, WV, 04/29/10)
*ARMED CITIZEN*
August 2010
The Armed Citizen Extra
(The following account did not appear in the print version of American Rifleman.)
A 74-year-old man was home alone when an intruder broke into his house.
The homeowner and the intruder knew each other from the neighborhood,
but were not friends. The intruder began beating the homeowner in the
face and demanding money. Then the homeowner grabbed the .22-caliber rifle
he kept next to his bed and fired two shots at the intruder, killing him.
The homeowner sustained wounds to his eye and head, and was taken to the
hospital but was later released. (The Herald Tribune, Sarasota, FL, 05/19/10)
*ARMED CITIZEN*
September 2010
A 15-year-old boy was alone in his mother's apartment when he heard a
strange sound. Upon glancing into the living room, he discovered a
masked man armed with an illegally possessed firearm. Police said the
boy fled to his mother's bedroom and grabbed a .22-cal. pistol. He then
locked himself inside the attached bathroom and listened to the burglar
ransacking the home. When the burglar attempted to enter the bathroom,
the boy fired three shots. The burglar fled the scene. It is unknown if
he was injured. (/TimesDaily/, Florence, AL, 06/18/10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN*
November 2010
The Armed Citizen Extra
(The following account did not appear in the print version of American Rifleman.)
Scott Knight was alarmed when he heard a knock at the door at 1:30 a.m. on a Saturday.
When he asked who it was, a young woman responded, claiming she had car trouble
and requested to use his phone. As a precaution, Knight grabbed a .22 caliber pistol
before answering the door and it's a good thing he did. When he opened it, two armed
men jumped at him, trying to force their way inside. The two men began firing and
Knight fired back, killing the woman and causing the two men to flee the scene.
Knight did not obtain any injuries. (Knoxville News Sentinel, Knoxville, TN, 05/08/10)
*ARMED CITIZEN*
February 2011
A woman was placing her child in a car seat when two barking pit
bulls—problem dogs already scheduled to be seized by animal control
officers—charged the vehicle. The woman hurried inside her vehicle, but
one of the dogs bit her foot through the shoe before she could get it
inside. The dogs looked for another victim just as Gary Buch walked
outside to take his daughter to school. He spotted the growling dogs
just in time as they ran toward him. Buch grabbed a .22-cal. rifle and
fired nine shots at the charging dogs from a distance of 10 to 12 feet.
The dogs were killed. (/The Daytona Beach News-Journal/, Daytona Beach,
FL, 11/24/10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN*
March 2011
While returning to their car after visiting a cemetery, an 82-year-old
man and his 76-year-old wife were accosted by a man wearing a mask. The
suspect drew an illegally possessed gun and ordered the couple to the
ground. But his elderly targets were no easy victims. The husband, who
has a concealed-carry permit, drew a .22-cal. revolver from his pocket.
The suspect took cover behind a pine tree and both men opened fire. The
husband's shots forced the suspect to retreat from the area. Police
arrested the suspect and an alleged accomplice, aided by a witness who
described the getaway car as white with an "abnormally loud muffler."
(/Chronicle Independent/, Camden, SC, 12/17/10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN*
July 2011
A woman and her husband pleaded with a man to quit attempting
to break into their home. As the woman dialed 9-1-1, the suspect banged
on the front door and shattered the surrounding glass. The husband shouted
that he was armed with a rifle—he even fired two warning shots in an attempt to
halt the break-in—but the suspect forced the door open anyway. As he entered the
home, the husband fired a single shot from his .22-cal. rifle. The suspect was
shot once in the chest and killed. (The World, Coos Bay, Ore., 04/08/11)
*ARMED CITIZEN*
August 2011
(This incident happened locally and the lady involved shoots at my gun range)
A woman in her early 50s was getting out of the shower when the bathroom
lights suddenly went out. An intruder collided into her in the dark,
causing her to fall backward into the shower and injure her back. She
fought the man, but he put a knife to her throat. “She was telling him
that she has money and please don’t hurt her,” said Police Cpl. Edwin
Ritter, adding that the attack was an attempted sexual assault. The
intruder forced the woman into her bedroom, but that’s exactly where she
kept her .22-cal. pistol. She broke free, retrieved the gun and shot her
would-be rapist several times. He ran outside, collapsed and died.
“Thank God she’s okay and she had a weapon to protect herself with,”
said a neighbor. “She’s a nice lady, just a sweet lady.” (/The Atlanta
Journal-Constitution/, Atlanta, GA, 05/12/11)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ARMED CITIZEN*
September 2011
A 9-1-1 dispatcher received a call at 4:34 a.m. that someone was trying
to break into a 4-year-old girl’s bedroom. The female caller remained on
the line, but before police could arrive, the suspect threw a concrete
block through the glass portion of a back door. Fortunately, the
caller’s husband had a Plan B—one that did not involve waiting for
police to arrive. He quickly retrieved his .22-cal. revolver and fired
three shots through the broken glass window. Moments later the brazen
suspect returned and stuck his hand through the window. The husband
fired two more shots, this time striking the suspect in the head and
abdomen. When police arrived, the suspect was sitting on the back porch
covered in blood. At press time he was listed in critical condition at
the hospital. (/The Baxter Bulletin/, Mountain Home, AR, 06/14/11)
*ARMED CITIZEN*
April 2012
Christopher Oster, 28, and John Shanks III, 29, broke into the home of a
resident said to have been involved in a break-up and alleged domestic
dispute with Oster’s sister, police said. With their identities
concealed and an apparent intent to assault the tenant, they forced
their way into the home. Inside, they were met by a citizen armed with a
.22-cal. handgun. Shanks was shot once in the chest. Oster attempted to
drag Shanks out of the home, but fled when he was confronted by the
armed resident. Shanks’ wound was fatal and Oster was later arrested and
charged with first-degree burglary. (/Enterprise Record/, Chico, CA,
12/22/12)
*ARMED CITIZEN*
August 2012
Sometime before 5 a.m., Jesse Home, 24, began to bang on the door of a
residence and yell for a woman. The homeowner, who was not acquainted
with Home, explained that he lived alone and asked Home to leave. After
damaging vehicles outside of the residence, the assailant turned his
attention to a side door of the home. He kicked in the door and entered,
only to be met by the homeowner’s .22-cal. handgun. Home was shot
several times in the leg before fleeing the scene. He was later arrested
and charged with first degree home invasion after being released from
the hospital. (UpperMichiganSource.com, Marquette, MI, 5/22/12)
This one is my favorite - the woman pulled a .22 cal Dixie Derringer
out of her bra and plugged him with one shot. He was DRT.
Just before 6:00 a.m., a clerk was attempting to prepare breakfast at a Days
Inn in Columbia, S.C. when she was confronted by an armed robber.
The criminal put a knife to the clerk’s throat and made clear his intentions
to rob and sexually assault her. Despite being 100 pounds lighter and a
foot shorter than her attacker, the clerk fought back, retrieved a gun
and shot the criminal in the chest, killing him. The Days Inn has been a
recent target of criminal activity, with two previous robberies taking
place in as many months. The deceased criminal was wanted by police for
his connection to two other motel robberies.
http://www.wistv.com/story/15140008/female-motel-clerk-kills-robber
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 14:53
Like I figured seen those too. In most cases the suspect either fled or gave up. Not exactly good stopping power. Same thing could have happened if they used a pellet gun and its not 100's of cases by the way.
Pat
HeadHunter
11-19-12, 15:27
Like I figured seen those too. In most cases the suspect either fled or gave up. Not exactly good stopping power. Same thing could have happened if they used a pellet gun and its not 100's of cases by the way.
Pat
To each his own.
....its not 100's of cases by the way.
Pat
Like he said.....he listed a few. Claude's been tracking citizen shootings for a long time and if he says he has 100s, he has 100s.
Like I figured seen those too. In most cases the suspect either fled or gave up. Not exactly good stopping power. Same thing could have happened if they used a pellet gun and its not 100's of cases by the way.
Pat
I completely understand why stopping all activity is desired if we have to pull the trigger. However, in a defensive shooting, our primary goal is to stop the attack, and whatever does or does not happen to the attacker is secondary. If stopping the attack means that the attacker runs to his car 3 blocks away, drives himself 10 miles to the hospital, walks into t he emergency room under his own power, and checks himself in, isn't that still a win? Didn't the attack still stop?
Obviously if the attacker is capable of that much activity, he is capable of continuing the attack. However, Headhunter's point is that, when looking at a large number of actual defensive shootings with .22's, this is rarely what happens. Instead, the bad guy gets shot, and the attack stops, even if that stop comes in the form of the attacker running away rather than dropping where he stands.
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 15:53
I completely understand why stopping all activity is desired if we have to pull the trigger. However, in a defensive shooting, our primary goal is to stop the attack, and whatever does or does not happen to the attacker is secondary. If stopping the attack means that the attacker runs to his car 3 blocks away, drives himself 10 miles to the hospital, walks into t he emergency room under his own power, and checks himself in, isn't that still a win? Didn't the attack still stop?
Obviously if the attacker is capable of that much activity, he is capable of continuing the attack. However, Headhunter's point is that, when looking at a large number of actual defensive shootings with .22's, this is rarely what happens. Instead, the bad guy gets shot, and the attack stops, even if that stop comes in the form of the attacker running away rather than dropping where he stands.
I agree all is well that ends well. However I don't want to bank on good luck as a self defense plan. I want to have a round that will put a determined attacker down. Some people simply will not give up. You plan for the worst case and hope for the best case. (Plan for the worst hope for the best and deal with what you get).
Pat
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 15:54
Like he said.....he listed a few. Claude's been tracking citizen shootings for a long time and if he says he has 100s, he has 100s.
So are you recommending people carry .22 pistols based on these 100's of shootings? Do you carry a .22? I know the answer to the questions already so why are we debating this. Most of us agree that a .22 is a crappy choice for self defense. Sure it can work so can a sharp stick when used with precision. But that does not make either a good choice. I feel your doing a big disservice to your loved ones by giving them a rounds that is designed for small game hunting and little to know training and saying good luck, let me know how it works out for you. There are a lot of better options even for those with minimal hand strength and the ability to train. Both my parents are in that catagory and they can still handle a .38 revolver with standard pressure rounds.
Pat
Like he said.....he listed a few. Claude's been tracking citizen shootings for a long time and if he says he has 100s, he has 100s.
Some people have no idea who they be arguing with while on the interwebs.
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 16:01
Some people have no idea who they be arguing with while on the interwebs.
Yes I know and I have PM'd him. I have respect for what he has done and this is not personal. I am also not into hero worship. If we stop depating with people just because of who they are then we will end up with a buch of yes people running around never questioning their faviorate SME. I also have my own experience and training to fall back on. I have seen failed suicide attempts and a murder with a .22. I know what it can and cannot do. Then their is also the fact that SME's also have conflicting opinions.
Pat
So are you recommending people carry .22 pistols based on these 100's of shootings? Do you carry a .22?
No and no.
I know the answer to the questions already so why are we debating this
Sooooo......if you know the answers to the questions then why did you ask them?
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 16:35
No and no.
Sooooo......if you know the answers to the questions then why did you ask them?
I was attempting to make a point. Instead of trying to make the .22 work why not try to help people in this situation the OP describes handle a gun with enough power to do the job in a more acceptable manner. If you look I am sure we can dig up tragic stories of the .22 failing to stop attackers as well. Granted that can be done with any caliber but I am willing to bet their are a lot more failures with the .22 vs the the .38,9mm, 40sw, 45 acp etc.
Pat
I was attempting to make a point. Instead of trying to make the .22 work why not try to help people in this situation the OP describes handle a gun with enough power to do the job in a more acceptable manner. If you look I am sure we can dig up tragic stories of the .22 failing to stop attackers as well. Granted that can be done with any caliber but I am willing to bet their are a lot more failures with the .22 vs the the .38,9mm, 40sw, 45 acp etc.
Pat
HH's point is that in all his digging he has yet to find such a case involving an armed citizen.
He has challenged folks to come up with such a case. So far, nada.
For those who insist that one must carry at least <insert your favorite choice here> in order to be properly prepared, what percentage of the time are you actually armed?
If you are honest, there are probably places you are not taking your favorite blaster. Wouldn't you rather have something?
Now, consider those you care about who are never going to be persuaded that they need to strap on a bat belt every time they leave the house. Would you rather tell them it is all or nothing, or present them with an option they might actually consider?
This thread has gone a little awry. We all know that the .22 is not a reliable stopper and neither is any particular handgun or round for that matter.
OP, if you feel this has been answered to your satisfaction please say so. Otherwise I think we can let it die because otherwise people will continue to go round and round trying to prove or disprove their point of view until 12/21/2012.
HeadHunter
11-19-12, 17:37
HH's point is that in all his digging he has yet to find such a case involving an armed citizen.
He has challenged folks to come up with such a case. So far, nada.
And I would like to find some cases that disprove my point. That's part of the Scientific Method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method). One person did point to a case in South Carolina where the defender had a .22 and was killed during a robbery; the poster thought by a 9mm. When I emailed the Chief of Detectives for that department, he put me in touch with the lead detective. As it turns out, the defender was, in fact, killed with another mousegun, so they sort of cancelled each other out.
If anyone can provide any documentable incidents where a private citizen has been killed or seriously injured after shooting an attacker with a .22, I'm all ears. I've made that request to many different groups and the above incident is the only one that's ever had any evidence rather than Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Degrees_of_Kevin_Bacon).
Alaskapopo
11-19-12, 17:53
For those who insist that one must carry at least <insert your favorite choice here> in order to be properly prepared, what percentage of the time are you actually armed?
If you are honest, there are probably places you are not taking your favorite blaster. Wouldn't you rather have something?
Now, consider those you care about who are never going to be persuaded that they need to strap on a bat belt every time they leave the house. Would you rather tell them it is all or nothing, or present them with an option they might actually consider?
I am armed off duty with a Glock 19 99% of the time other 1% I am carrying a J Frame 340 in .357 mag when I am running.
Pat
brushy bill
11-19-12, 20:10
This thread has gone a little awry. We all know that the .22 is not a reliable stopper and neither is any particular handgun or round for that matter.
OP, if you feel this has been answered to your satisfaction please say so. Otherwise I think we can let it die because otherwise people will continue to go round and round trying to prove or disprove their point of view until 12/21/2012.
Feel free. I actually asked for that at post 95. Jumped the shark a long time ago.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.