[big shrek]

Quote:       Originally Posted by sbowers5

Texas T you are so right is your assement of this thread originator and the content of his post I am in full agreement with you, fantansy land for sure. Steve

Better to contemplate the possibilities and even be humourous about it than to be caught with your pants down and become zombie food.

You seem like the kind of person who would be still wondering what was going on when the first zombie/Obama supporter latched onto the back of your head.

[big shrek]

Seriously, the DC shooter just prooved the point that a .22 can be viable...as long as you are faced with a bunch of untrained moron rent-a-cops.

He's still alive. One security guard is dead.

I'm not making light of it, I'm pointing out that a .22 is just as deadly as any other firearm. It's not the OPTIMAL choice for combat, but it'll sure work in a pinch.

Same as the .223, teeny little bullet, lots of places it can go in a human to ruin your day. But it's nowhere NEAR optimal.

[JMcDonald]

Quote:       Originally Posted by sbowers5

Texas T you are so right is your assement of this thread originator and the content of his post I am in full agreement with you, fantansy land for sure. Steve

Quote:       Originally Posted by JMcDonald

The ENTIRE original point of this thread was my desire to keep a .22lr for a true survival situation (food gathering, etc), for many reasons (noise, ammo size / weight, muzzle flash, etc)

Didn't I just say that the reason I prefer a .22 rifle is because I DON'T actively plan on being in "combat?" If wanting to carry more ammo and perhaps be a little quieter is a silly idea for survival, then maybe all the people who have survived in the woods with nothing more than .22 rifles are living in "fantasy land for sure," too? I guess anyone who carries anything less than a .338 when lost in the woods is just living in a fantasy land?

According to you and TT, anyone who is prepared for "battle" is "living in a fantasy land." So, why have I never seen you call anyone out for packing a 12g and 200 buckshot shells in a tactical vest? What about the people who plan for all their shots to be at 500 yards? This is as opposed to choosing a weapon that allows one to carry the largest amount of ammo in the least amount of weight. Additionally, it is very effective at acquiring food and is as quiet as possible as to not attract too much attention. Or is it really that you just don't want to agree with the logic of using a .22lr rifle for real survival (as TT likes to put it), so you feel you must dismiss it however you can, whether that dismissal has any merit or not.

And Big Shrek, that is all I was originally trying to find out; if a .22 rifle could work in a pinch for self defensive purposes (as it is great for so many other things). I have found it to definately be "viable" in that regard. But, plus one to your two previous posts.

[thrillbilly]

The Thread That Will Not Die! LOL
I think we've found the zombie everyone's been talking about!

[Rex in OTZ]

As stated from the beginning the use of a .22lr as a SHTF round and also a combat weapon?

If the .22Lr was viable somebody would be useing them like special forces hostage rescue teams or in retakeing aircraft the Russians or Israiles would have developed somthing along those lines and they most likely did but was hosed the project down the drain for the very fact that in any situation involving conflict a round that effectively imcompacitates the opponets is the way to win a fight, you add some heavy clothing or light body armor and the .22 isant viable anymore, factor in stoppages unjambing a rimmed round out a semi auto could be difficult not to mention variances in consistancey of the ammo quality.

The Czechs did come out with the .32 acp scorpion thats the smallist issue round I'm aware of that had been fielded by a established military force.

Spies and such did use .22's in hand guns with sound reducers but that wasent all that wide spread.

The Chinese Army did develope silenced handguns but they use centerfire ammo as well in rounds larger than .25cal

the .25acp as a alternative to the .22Lr isant well thought of as a viable man stopper, they do exist as a deturrant round than a stopping round for getting a knife wielding ruffian a chance to rethink a poor choice in robbing somebody, and getting shot in the guts bu a .25acp wouldent be fun either.

.380acp would be the absolute minimum close quarters round and that is on the wane these days.

Its rroumor'd that the military is looking to replace the current issue 9mm in use today they are intrested in something a littlee more substantial in the stopping dept, this is a round that has pretty good penetration and lobbs a 115gr bullet
now you are asking if a round that lobs a 40gr bullet is as good or better than a marginal one like the 9mm???

The .22Lr is a good trainging round and reliable hunting round on animals weighing round 30# anything bigger you should use a better round

Poaching deer with a .22lr can be done but its not the same as shooting a human in defence of your life and property

For a small caliber round I'd suggest useing the .22 for what it was designed for and useing a larger rimfire .38/.44 or better yet a centerfire pistol round carbine like a lever / pump/ semi-auto and I'd suggest 9mm being the absolute minimum, prefering a .357mag, .44mag, .40s&w, .45acp

[thrillbilly]

FWIW a guy was shot memorial day weekend here locally with a .25 pistol. he was shot at conversation distance in the forehead, right above the eyes, and the slug did not penetrate the skull. He was also shot in the abdomen and upper arm. He was still standing when EMTs arrived.

[sbowers5]

It is my belief that I have been in many more combat and survival situations than both of you (big skrek,JMcDonald) and that is why I say what I have said and I see no reason or need to disuss any further a subject that is born and lives in the make believe world of fantsy land.
Steve

[Sam Ruger]

Quote:       Originally Posted by thrillbilly

FWIW a guy was shot memorial day weekend here locally with a .25 pistol. he was shot at conversation distance in the forehead, right above the eyes, and the slug did not penetrate the skull. He was also shot in the abdomen and upper arm. He was still standing when EMTs arrived.

I've owned a .25 Colt semi-auto. Shot an old oil filter with it and had the round bounce off. This weapon/round is a conversation piece only. I imagine the 2" barrel generates insufficient velocity.

The same is not true of a .22. Any .22 round that generates 850 FPS will not bounce off a skull at "conversation distance" - And that is .22 Short velocity (but from a rifle muzzle). If you're using a pistol with 22LR you should be getting 850+ FPS with a 5" barrel easy.

[JMcDonald]

Quote:       Originally Posted by sbowers5

It is my belief that I have been in many more combat and survival situations than both of you (big skrek,JMcDonald) and that is why I say what I have said and I see no reason or need to disuss any further a subject that is born and lives in the make believe world of fantsy land. Steve

So, in essence, we are to assume everything you say is absolutely correct because you have been in combat?


BTW, which is it that is "fantasy?" Is it TT's accusation that I am gearing up with my .22 to go kill a bunch of people? Or is it yours that a .22lr to the head is incapable of killing a man? It's funny, you say both are correct, yet they are both completely contradictory (not to mention untrue). That is like accusing a man of being gay while making fun of him for liking fat girls, all while the man is sleeping with a model...



Why do so many people keeping saying "if the .22lr was a decent round, we'd be seeing it on all the world's battle fields?" When did anyone say the .22lr was the next great combat round? Once again, the purpose was not to ask why our soldiers aren't all issued Model 60s, but to determine whether or not if a .22lr rifle, with skill, could be successfully used against a 2-legged attacker. And the answer is most obviously yes.

[squirrelblaster]

i think this is a stupid concept, for lame people with to much time one there hands to descuss.... anyone that thinks this is a good idea has no concept of reality......obviusly this is not going to convice any of you beleavers.... you are just going to beleave what you want to....and thats ok.....

[ArkansasHunter]

When I went back to work on a route this Thread came to my mind "to often" because I did alot of driveing and had time to think about a lot of things and this Thread was one of them.
I came up with reason upon reason to why a 22 rim fire would be the least viable firearm to use in a SHTF situation.
But if it's all you have it's all you have but in the end you might and probably gonna be dead...A.H

[JMcDonald]

Why would it be the least viable? Are you talking about the "fantasy land" running around the streets fighting platoons of armored soldiers? Or are you talking about surviving against perhaps a few human threats while also providing food for yourself and family and carry more equipment in the same space that would otherwise be taken up by larger caliber ammunition?

Or are you saying a .22lr won't penetrate a skull? If a cheap 36grHP @ 1280fps will penetrate 1/16" steel (even at angles of up to about 30 degrees) at 50 yards, do you not think it would penetrate a skull at the same distance?


It's funny how the only argument the opposition ever brings against the .22 is "you're stupid." That's easy to say. For example, I could just as easily say "you're stupid for not believing a .22lr could penetrate a human skull." But, where does that get us?




Anyways, this thread has just about run its course, for now. Nothing but flaming going on that will never end. I say "for now" because I'm sure knightrider will bump the thread next year to make himself feel better, if for some reason posting pictures of his tens of thousands of dollars worth of guns doesn't do it for him.

[TexasT]

So let's try to make this situation a little more realistic.

No, you're not going to be in fantasy land shooting your supremely viable .22 at armored soldiers. Let's say you get stuck in the woods for whatever reason and have to scavenge for food and protect your family. If you shoot them at 100 yards you're a murderer because you don't even know why they are there. You can't say someone who is 100 yards away is an imminent threat. I'd say the same for 50 yards.

So let's take 25 yards. Imminent danger at 25 yards? Sure, I guess if they're pointing a gun at you. And I guess if they're pointing a gun at you at 25 yards that they've got something that will be effective at 25 yards. They might have a .22, maybe a handgun that's at least a 9mm or bigger, but more than likely a higher powered rifle or shotgun. I wouldn't go pointing a .22 or handgun at somebody at 25 yards unless they're in my house or pointing a gun back at me.

Now let's look at distances below 25 yards. Let's say 5 to 8 yards away. Which is the typical distance of self defense. Definitely a .22 would be effective at that distance if you aim well and put enough bullets in. But at that distance I'd go for something bigger and with more stopping power. And pointing a rifle at someone that close to you, you're darn near touching them with it. If they were smart they'd run away and you should not shoot someone in the back who's running. It's not self defense anymore. If they've got a gun on you at that distance it's fair game, but it might be a little cumbersome to whip up a long gun. And again the issue with stopping power. Depending on who fires first and who's more effective at stopping, yeah you might put several rounds in him, but he might also get to put some in you. I don't like those odds. So are you gonna put bullets in his head or in his chest? Again, is anybody gonna let you stand there and strategically aim at their head with your rifle? If they're smart they'll run.

So is the .22lr supremely viable? Sure, under IDEAL circumstances, which SHTF situations are not.

[big shrek]

Quote:       Originally Posted by thrillbilly

FWIW a guy was shot memorial day weekend here locally with a .25 pistol. he was shot at conversation distance in the forehead, right above the eyes, and the slug did not penetrate the skull. He was also shot in the abdomen and upper arm. He was still standing when EMTs arrived.

.22 LR Worked pretty good for Von Brunn...a little too well IMHO.

Yawn...yeah, you are right JM, folks have taken this thing WAY out of where it was supposed to be.

Even a local cop using a .22lr out of an ankle holster to stop a knife-wielding redneck racist with one shot a few months ago wouldn't register to some of these guys.

It ain't perfect, but the little .22's (.22 s/l/lr/wmr) have been used for a variety of purposes over the years...even the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) uses them quite often for a nice quiet alternative when they have to snuff out a scumbag. The .22, while almost as maligned as the .38 special, still has a use and a place in self defense. Granted it's the Last Line, but it's still there.


Would anyone choose a .22 to be their "First On Deck Weapon"? Only if it was all they had & all the other guns were totally empty.

Is a .22 a VERY handy thing to have around? Definitely.

Would I grab a Ruger Charger or my bow first?? Depends on what's knocking...but in all honestly I'd prefer to have my Glock 20 at hand...unless its squirrels, for those it's .22lr all the way.

Tactics change dependant on the situation one is in. Use what you have, make the most of it, and try to stay within legal bounds.

But until you've had to shoot at bungholes trying to burglarize you after a hurricane, don't count a .22 out.

[JMcDonald]

And Big Shrek, I do agree that I don't think I'd plan on using the 10/22 for SD or even patrolling the yard / checking the windows. I have the PT92 for that.



I do wonder if I'd be living in a fantasy land for getting a 9mm carbine that is obviously designed for more "tactical" purposes, though? I mean, the only reason I'd get one would be to have more power specifically for situations like running around the streets shooting MBZs (where the limited accuracy I can achieve with my pistol might not cut it)...



*edit*

But, TT, I will add that I do agree about realistic shootings, even in really bad events, not needing to be that far. I have long been a proponent of "run before you fight," which was a large factor in me allowing myself to rely on a .22 rifle (because I didn't plan on trying to win any firefights, as if anything I'd rather lay down some cover fire and book it). At this poit I can reliably hit a 5" target (roughly the forehead / eyes / nasal cavity area) at about 20 yards using a red-dot scope on a pistol. I only have around 500 rounds through my pistol as opposed to around 6500 through my rifle, but I am hoping with more practice I can gain the same confidence with it that I have with my rifle. When I get to the point where I could hit a head-sized target at 15-20 yards consistently under stress (time constraints), and a torso-sized target at 50 yards under the same stresses, I think I'd feel confident using my pistol as a "primary" weapon and my .22 rifle a "backup" for most situations.

[Sam Ruger]

Quote:       Originally Posted by TexasT

Let's say you get stuck in the woods for whatever reason and have to scavenge for food and protect your family. If you shoot them at 100 yards you're a murderer because you don't even know why they are there. You can't say someone who is 100 yards away is an imminent threat. I'd say the same for 50 yards.

This is not an argument against 22’s as it applies to any weapon – be it a .22 or 30.06.

Quote:      

So let's take 25 yards. Imminent danger at 25 yards? Sure, I guess if they're pointing a gun at you. And I guess if they're pointing a gun at you at 25 yards that they've got something that will be effective at 25 yards. They might have a .22, maybe a handgun that's at least a 9mm or bigger, but more than likely a higher powered rifle or shotgun. I wouldn't go pointing a .22 or handgun at somebody at 25 yards unless they're in my house or pointing a gun back at me.

Quote:      

Read what you wrote. You said you’d point a .22 at someone “pointing a gun back at me.”

Quote:      

Now let's look at distances below 25 yards. Let's say 5 to 8 yards away. Which is the typical distance of self defense. Definitely a .22 would be effective at that distance if you aim well and put enough bullets in.

Quote:      

Two bullets to the head=game over.
Notice your words:
”Definitely a .22 would be effective at that distance”

Quote:      

But at that distance I'd go for something bigger and with more stopping power.

What I’m hearing is, at 5-8 yards you’re not a good enough shot to hit someone in the head with a .22 and so must aim lower – which means “something bigger and with more stopping power.”
But “something bigger and with more stopping power” is generally more difficult to aim so now you’re even a worse shot than before. It seems all you’ve done is trade one problem for another. And exactly what does have more, or faster, stopping power than two .22 rounds to the head? That’s two seconds to stop your attacker max – And probably less than that. What handgun do you have that will do that with body shots?
The odds are your opponent at 5-8 yards will be FULLY FUNCTIONAL for at least 10 seconds after you hit him with “something bigger and with more stopping power.” That’s enough time for him to hit you five times.
I guess you’re gambling that he’s as bad a shot as you are.

Quote:      

And pointing a rifle at someone that close to you, you're darn near touching them with it. If they were smart they'd run away and you should not shoot someone in the back who's running. It's not self defense anymore.

Again, an irrelevant point – This applies equally to all weapons and not just .22’s.

Quote:      

If they've got a gun on you at that distance it's fair game, but it might be a little cumbersome to whip up a long gun.

And a .40 Glock or .44 Magnum isn’t cumbersome?

Quote:      

And again the issue with stopping power. Depending on who fires first and who's more effective at stopping, yeah you might put several rounds in him, but he might also get to put some in you. I don't like those odds.

Again, an irrelevant point - Nobody would like the odds of taking on another armed person at 5-8 yards. The odds are you’ll both be hit.

Quote:      

So are you gonna put bullets in his head or in his chest? Again, is anybody gonna let you stand there and strategically aim at their head with your rifle? If they're smart they'll run.

In which case the .22 was successful if “they’re smart” and run or successful if they’re stupid and stay and take two rounds to the head. Either way, the guy with the .22 wins.

Quote:      

So is the .22lr supremely viable? Sure, under IDEAL circumstances, which SHTF situations are not.

Quote:      

That’s an interesting conclusion considering you didn’t come up with a single situation where the .22 didn’t win. Or did you not notice that?
Since most anyone reading your post would likely conclude the .22 to be the ultimate self defense weapon ever invented as you could find no fault and only favor with it, I’ll take the opposite position and disagree with you. In an exchange of bullets the owner of “something bigger and with more stopping power” can shoot through sheetrock walls, furniture, and hollow core doors. In a gun battle indoors, the .22 owner has no cover. But the owner of “something bigger and with more stopping power” does have cover from the .22 owner if he can get behind a desk.
Of course, will you live long enough to behind that desk? Not with me – No. Unless that “something bigger and with more stopping power” is an uzzi, the only way you’re leaving that room is in a body bag.
Most .22 self defense thinkers also fail to realize that about 1/3 of every day is darkness. Thus, there’s about a 33% chance the .22 owner will find himself in a shooting situation in the dark. Can he see down his sights in the dark? I’m betting he can’t. In an exchange of wild gunfire in the dark at close range, the owner of the “something bigger and with more stopping power” will probably get his body shots in before the .22 owner gets in his head shots.
Will that work against me? No. My .22 is equipped two different ways for night aiming. You’ve probably got zero. If so, measure yourself up for that body bag again.
In the hands of a knowledgeable shooter, a .22 can be deadly not only to squirrels and gophers but also to people. That makes it a true SHTF weapon. For versatility, it’s second to none. There’s nothing you can do that it can’t do except shoot through cover. And it can do things you can’t, like shooting your guard dog without waking you up.
But the average .22 owner is not knowledgeable. His weapon was manufactured by Raven Firearms and it’s loaded with “blazers”. You can use him for target practice. The first rule of a .22 owner that encounters a non .22 owner is always to run like hell.
If you cannot trust your aim you cannot trust the weapon.
But if he trusts his aim, the .22 owner can always fall back on the second rule:
“When in a hurry, take your time.”
I personally think JMcDonald trusts his aim, don’t you?
No offense intended as I'm sure you mean well but if I had to partner up with anybody here in the debate in a SHTF situation, it would be with JMcDonald. Are we going to survive flying saucer attacks and waves of communist troops with AK47's and Dragonov rifles? No. But neither are you.

[JMcDonald]

Very nice post. Some things I didn't think of in there.





BTW, I think this is quite interesting. The .22lr almost has a philosophical quality, in that there seem to be relatively so FEW facts about it for something SOOO popular in our culture (firearms in general, let alone this which is probably THE most popular one). I mean, only the most unsolvable debates conclude with "...you're stupid for not believing... well you're stupid for believing!" It's like we're arguing over the existence of God!

Just an interesting note.

I personally am pretty satisfied with my basic HV round's capability to penetrate 16 guage steel at 50 yards, go through a 2x4 at 100 yards, go through 12" of tightly packed steel wool and 6" of tightly packed dirt before lodging itself half way into a 2x4.

Also, about the cover issue. According to www.theboxotruth.com , a .22lr will quite easily go through the same amount of sheelrock walls as most common defensive rounds. Also, something I recently discovered. #1 buckshould would easily go through a car door, correct? Well, each of those pellets weighs 40gr and is .3" in diameter. A 40gr .22lr has almost twice the sectional density of one of those pellets! That means more weight is in a smaller frontal area, so meaning it would be even easier!



BTW, there are rare stories exaggerating the ineffectiveness of EVERY caliber. We've all heard the stories of guys taking 17 and 33 9mm before falling. We've all heard the claims that it takes several .223 to put down a target. We've all heard the story of the woman who survived a .380 point blank because it passed between her brain's lobes and strait out the back with minimal damage. We've all heard the story about the woman who was shot with a .357 who had the round fragment on her forehead and just travel under the skin. Hell, I've even read a confirmed news article about a guy walking to the hospital with an axe stuck in his brain!!!!

Etc etc. Counting on your caliber (especially any of the common low- and medium-power calibers) to ALWAYS do what is expected of it is silly. I'd much rather hone my own skill so that I can count on MYSELF to do what I need to do, and in this case that is put a couple of rounds into a forehead before I am taken down myself.

[larmus]

hot damn this is gettin good...

[knightRider]

Quote:       Originally Posted by Sam Ruger

[/FONT][/COLOR] This is not an argument against 22’s as it applies to any weapon – be it a .22 or 30.06. Read what you wrote. You said you’d point a .22 at someone “pointing a gun back at me.” Two bullets to the head=game over. Notice your words: ”Definitely a .22 would be effective at that distance” What I’m hearing is, at 5-8 yards you’re not a good enough shot to hit someone in the head with a .22 and so must aim lower – which means “something bigger and with more stopping power.” But “something bigger and with more stopping power” is generally more difficult to aim so now you’re even a worse shot than before. It seems all you’ve done is trade one problem for another. And exactly what does have more, or faster, stopping power than two .22 rounds to the head? That’s two seconds to stop your attacker max – And probably less than that. What handgun do you have that will do that with body shots? The odds are your opponent at 5-8 yards will be FULLY FUNCTIONAL for at least 10 seconds after you hit him with “something bigger and with more stopping power.” That’s enough time for him to hit you five times. I guess you’re gambling that he’s as bad a shot as you are. Again, an irrelevant point – This applies equally to all weapons and not just .22’s. And a .40 Glock or .44 Magnum isn’t cumbersome? Again, an irrelevant point - Nobody would like the odds of taking on another armed person at 5-8 yards. The odds are you’ll both be hit. In which case the .22 was successful if “they’re smart” and run or successful if they’re stupid and stay and take two rounds to the head. Either way, the guy with the .22 wins. That’s an interesting conclusion considering you didn’t come up with a single situation where the .22 didn’t win. Or did you not notice that? Since most anyone reading your post would likely conclude the .22 to be the ultimate self defense weapon ever invented as you could find no fault and only favor with it, I’ll take the opposite position and disagree with you. In an exchange of bullets the owner of “something bigger and with more stopping power” can shoot through sheetrock walls, furniture, and hollow core doors. In a gun battle indoors, the .22 owner has no cover. But the owner of “something bigger and with more stopping power” does have cover from the .22 owner if he can get behind a desk. Of course, will you live long enough to behind that desk? Not with me – No. Unless that “something bigger and with more stopping power” is an uzzi, the only way you’re leaving that room is in a body bag. Most .22 self defense thinkers also fail to realize that about 1/3 of every day is darkness. Thus, there’s about a 33% chance the .22 owner will find himself in a shooting situation in the dark. Can he see down his sights in the dark? I’m betting he can’t. In an exchange of wild gunfire in the dark at close range, the owner of the “something bigger and with more stopping power” will probably get his body shots in before the .22 owner gets in his head shots. Will that work against me? No. My .22 is equipped two different ways for night aiming. You’ve probably got zero. If so, measure yourself up for that body bag again. In the hands of a knowledgeable shooter, a .22 can be deadly not only to squirrels and gophers but also to people. That makes it a true SHTF weapon. For versatility, it’s second to none. There’s nothing you can do that it can’t do except shoot through cover. And it can do things you can’t, like shooting your guard dog without waking you up. But the average .22 owner is not knowledgeable. His weapon was manufactured by Raven Firearms and it’s loaded with “blazers”. You can use him for target practice. The first rule of a .22 owner that encounters a non .22 owner is always to run like hell. If you cannot trust your aim you cannot trust the weapon. But if he trusts his aim, the .22 owner can always fall back on the second rule: “When in a hurry, take your time.” I personally think JMcDonald trusts his aim, don’t you? No offense intended as I'm sure you mean well but if I had to partner up with anybody here in the debate in a SHTF situation, it would be with JMcDonald. Are we going to survive flying saucer attacks and waves of communist troops with AK47's and Dragonov rifles? No. But neither are you.

as long as your not knocking on my door. with a post and attitude like that i would send your butt packing . wearing my bullet proof vest and helmet from my military gear and my Remington 700 12 gauge .





oh and i have 2 uzis

and here is my families gear





and my friends SHTF gear they can barrow from me

[knightRider]

god i love the 22lr debate ... and sam ruger has become the new j MacDonald . And now i awiat the response that not everyone has the money to buy all that blah blah blah .

WORK HARD .

and i only posted a pic of my conceal class 1 vest but its good up to 357 mag so it will always take care of mr rugers 22lr.

i have also a class 3 armor plated vest with groin and neck protection . And a Teflon bullet resistant helmet <both are my old military stuff in foliage green the U.S. has gone to desert tan now so i got to keep them.> good up to one 7.62/39 if you want pics of those you will have to wait till tonight.