View Full Version : 22WMR for self defense
This sounds crazy, but just for the fun of argument, let's consider the 22WMR for self defense. This came out of the Keltec PMR-30 announcement. It brings up some points about how we measure performance. Let's start with the basics
The good
30 round capacity
ultra low recoil
~14" penetration http://www.brassfetcher.com/22WMR.html
cheapish to shoot increasing training time
The bad
limited temporary and permanent cavities
I'm going to base this on an average shooter with a < 20% hit rate against say a crack head with a knife.
If we are trying to not get stabbed by the guy with a knife, we pretty much have to make a CNS shot. A shot that might be deadly, but takes 20 seconds for the bad guy to pass out and then eventually bleed out, does us no good.
The crux of the argument is this: your average shooter misses most of the time under stress. If you can improve accuracy even slightly it significantly increases your likelihood of incapacitation. If shooting a 22WMR increases accuracy more than it decreases instant incapacitation, it's a better choice. So let's say we have 2-4 seconds to stop the bad guy. Our sub 20% hit rate with 9mm or .45 puts us at 1-2 hits. The likelihood of instant incapacitation is really low. Given that we have lots of penetration out of the WMR would doubling our accuracy or speed make up for lack of permanent cavity?
I believe that while a 22 is going to reduce the amount of deadly lung shots for example, accurate CNS shots may not be reduced because of increased accuracy and number of shots placed on target.
This brings up some important points. It seems that most of our research is centered around terminal effectiveness. But terminal effectiveness is not our goal. Terminal effectiveness per firefight or terminal effectiveness as a function of time is our goal. If we reduce effectiveness by 20% but we increase shots landed in the same amount of time by 30% we are ahead.
Another problem is the dichotomy between theoretical performance and anecdotal performance. We constantly here "I put two X calibers in the guy's chest and he didn't go down. A 45 would have done it." But we never hear "I dumped an entire magazine of 45s into the sky, and he didn't go down" because no one brags about how bad a shooter they are. It's much more interesting to hear about the .22 that bounces of the guys forehead so it get's discussed way more than the fact that 22s kill more people (though usually from ND). We can't base our strategy on anecdotal performance that doesn't measure the uninteresting stories.
What do you guys think? Obviously, larger caliber makes sense for people who are highly skilled, and we should all be on our way there, but for an average shooter, could the reduced recoil/increased accuracy of a .22WMR be more effective?
This sounds crazy, but just for the fun of argument, let's consider the 22WMR for self defense.
I think you should seriously reconsider using a rimfire platform for self defense. You're much better off with centerfire.
Exactly how many police units issue or authorize .22 magnum for standard carry?
that should answer your question.
This is really no different than FN's 5.7 pistol in terms of wound producing potential and handling characteristics.
And the 5.7 is not great for defensive use--especially in a handgun:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19913
I don't think you will improve accuracy with a lower powered round, as the cause of poor accuracy under stress is not directly linked to level of recoil. Poor accuracy under stress has to do with fear induced physiological responses that require proper training to overcome. So the key to higher hit rates is better/more training, not lower powered weapons. That is my opinion anyway.
I don't think you will improve accuracy with a lower powered round, as the cause of poor accuracy under stress is not directly linked to level of recoil. Poor accuracy under stress has to do with fear induced physiological responses that require proper training to overcome. So the key to higher hit rates is better/more training, not lower powered weapons. That is my opinion anyway.
This is a very good point.
Remember the rules of a gun fight.
Do not attend a gun fight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with anything smaller than "4".
Remember the rules of a gun fight.
Do not attend a gun fight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with anything smaller than "4".
You mean like 9mm? :cool:
You mean like 9mm? :cool:
Exactly!!! :p
"Do not attend a gun fight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with anything smaller than "4"."
When I am King of the World this kind of bullshit will be banned. It gets good people hurt and/or killed, and brings nothing realistic to the discussion.
Back to the topic;
I have an issue with rimfires for defensive use, and this has to do with the reliability of the ignition of rimfires, I also think that the .22mag case leaves alot to be desired in feed reliability.
IMHO, the 5.7 is a .22mag made to feed and go bang more reliably.
Remember the rules of a gun fight.
Do not attend a gun fight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with anything smaller than "4".
There was a shootout about 5 years ago in Pennsylvania that occurred following a pursuit. It was 5 officers with .45s versus 2 dirtbags with 9mms. When the pursuit came to a hault, the the suspects got into position around their vehicle and fought it out. They ended up killing 3 of the officers despite taking multiple .45 rounds each. Only one suspect died of his wounds.
Larger calibers do give you the benefits of more tissue destruction and better internal bone damage, but none of that matters unless you get rib cage or head shots at ideal entry angles. Overall though, the intelligent fighter that uses good tactics, brings a lot of ammo, and aggressively executes his plan will usually be the victor. Worrying about what caliber to use(9mm, .357sig, .40S&W, .45acp) is what Colonel Cooper would call........"Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments".
.....back to the original topic of discussion. A .22WMR is better than a .22lr, however the wound channel is relatively thin. It only damages about half the amount of tissue that a 9mm JHP can. Then of course you get into the reliability problems with rimfires. If you insist on using such a small caliber, you're better off using a .25acp for the more reliable centerfire primer.
In my opinion, you should always select the largest caliber that you can shoot quickly and accurately in a timed course of fire under variable conditions. Such conditions would be strong hand only, weak hand only, wearing gloves, shooting on the move, and more importantly shooting after raising your heart rate to over 150bpm to simulate combat stress. Most of my students tend to stick with 9mm after I put them through the paces.
Do yourself a favor and go with 9mm, .40S&W, or .45acp before you learn a lesson the hard way.
There was a shootout about 5 years ago in Pennsylvania that occurred following a pursuit. It was 5 officers with .45s versus 2 dirtbags with 9mms. When the pursuit came to a hault, the the suspects got into position around their vehicle and fought it out. They ended up killing 3 of the officers despite taking multiple .45 rounds each. Only one suspect died of his wounds.
Larger calibers do give you the benefits of more tissue destruction and better internal bone damage, but none of that matters unless you get rib cage or head shots at ideal entry angles. Overall though, the intelligent fighter that uses good tactics, brings a lot of ammo, and aggressively executes his plan will usually be the victor. Worrying about what caliber to use(9mm, .357sig, .40S&W, .45acp) is what Colonel Cooper would call........"Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments".
.....back to the original topic of discussion. A .22WMR is better than a .22lr, however the wound channel is relatively thin. It only damages about half the amount of tissue that a 9mm JHP can. Then of course you get into the reliability problems with rimfires. If you insist on using such a small caliber, you're better off using a .25acp for the more reliable centerfire primer.
In my opinion, you should always select the largest caliber that you can shoot quickly and accurately in a timed course of fire under variable conditions. Such conditions would be strong hand only, weak hand only, wearing gloves, shooting on the move, and more importantly shooting after raising your heart rate to over 150bpm to simulate combat stress. Most of my students tend to stick with 9mm after I put them through the paces.
Do yourself a favor and go with 9mm, .40S&W, or .45acp before you learn a lesson the hard way.
In addition to all of the other points that Marcus lays out in favor of centerfire pistol rd's, one should also take into consideration that light barriers and other obstacles may be interfere with your line of sight / ability to hit the threat(s).
While I am not familiar with the .22WMR's barrier penetration record, I am willing to bet that it's not as good as 9mm, .40cal, or .45 acp.
Beat Trash
12-12-09, 10:19
I personally would not recommend a rimfire round for self defense because I have seen too many dud rounds over the years.
I have shot rimfire rounds for the last 38 years. I have yet to see a manufacture that can produce rimfire ammunition as reliable as centerfire ammunition.
Having your gun go "bang" vs. "click" is kind of a big deal when fighting for one's life...
There are too many easy shooting platforms in decent calibers for me to ever consider, or recommend a 30 shot Kel Tec 22 WMR pistol for a dedicated self defense gun.
Yes I know the numbers show each year than many are killed with the lowly 22lr round. But that doesn't really prove much of anything to me. Talk to a trauma Doc sometime about how the human body works, and what it takes to make it stop working (not kill, stop). Dr. Gary Roberts has posted basically the same thing from time to time. Remember you are not being attacked by a piece of paper with somebody's picture printed on it. If you are engaging a 260lb male wearing a leather jacket, and he is standing at an angle, you may have to shoot through his arm to place your rounds where you need to. That's a lot of leather flesh and bone to have to penetrate.
If out squirrel hunting, or plinking with my kids, and suddenly forced to protect myself, yes, I'd use that 22 rimfire vs. a sharp stick.
But if given the choice of defensive handguns, I'll go with my M&P 9mm or Glock 19. (Even though the caliber doesn't begin with a "4".)
I've worked intercity law enforcement for the last 17 yrs. I've seen people shot with just about every caliber one can steal. I firmly believe that within the major calibers, there really isn't that much difference. The important thing is shot placement and good tactics. Yet with that said, I have a personal minimum caliber I would use in a defensive handgun. That would be 9mm and/or 38 spc.
I'm not trying to get this off topic, or to argue or push my views. If one disagrees and feels comfortable protecting themselves with a 22WMR handgun made by Kel Tec, than go in peace. But if someone was to ask my advice if they should, I'd say, "Nope".
What do you guys think? Obviously, larger caliber makes sense for people who are highly skilled, and we should all be on our way there, but for an average shooter, could the reduced recoil/increased accuracy of a .22WMR be more effective?
I think you have this the wrong way around. The more training you have the more likely you are to get away with using the wrong tool for the job.
In a high stress situation it's not going to make much difference anyway. You are not standing on a range. An untrained person is not likely to feel any difference between shooting a rimfire and centerfire when in a bad situation and in my opinion if they can't train and understand what they need to know they should not be carrying a firearm.
Alaskapopo
12-13-09, 22:35
Remember the rules of a gun fight.
Do not attend a gun fight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with anything smaller than "4".
Really. First off don't attend a gun fight. Second if you must bring a rifle. As for handguns 9mm, 40 and 45 all do fine.
Pat
Wayne Dobbs
12-14-09, 09:20
Alaskapopo/Pat,
Brother, you've come a long ways from your .357 Sig obsession days! You are right, any of the service calibers will work very well or poorly depending on how well they are applied.
Wayne
Alaskapopo
12-14-09, 14:15
Alaskapopo/Pat,
Brother, you've come a long ways from your .357 Sig obsession days! You are right, any of the service calibers will work very well or poorly depending on how well they are applied.
Wayne
Yea I used to have different views. But then I started reading what Dr. Fackler and Dr. Roberts had to say and it made sense.
Pat
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.