Survey Says…
Murdoch posted a four question survey someone is doing for “research for an article on the suitability of the .22 LR for personal protection.” Murdoch wrote an Email, asking if anyone would be so kind as to help spread the word, and if any of our readers would be so kind in turn as to participate. Murdoch is a good egg who has always done right by me, so here goes.
But, so far as the survey is concerned, I’m not too happy about it. Only four questions, sure, but they seem to be pretty loaded. It appears that the only reasonable answers available would indicate that the person taking the survey is alright with using a .22 LR for self defense.
I’m a big fan of the .22 LR cartridge, but only for training or hunting small game. So far as self defense is concerned, I’m afraid that it doesn’t even make the list.
To those who are inclined to say “But it is better than nothing!” I would say that I agree with you. In fact I’d go even further, and point out that guns chambered for the .22 LR have been able to protect people in the past. Anyone who says that a .22 can’t do the job is peddling fiction.
But why in the world would anyone limit themselves to a .22 when there are so many other, more effective guns out there? Are they adrenaline junkies, devoted to giving violent criminals a sporting chance in order to ratchet up the stress through an increased chance of becoming a victim? When it comes to violent criminal assault, you want to end the attack as quick as possible. If a .22 is all you have when it is do-or-die time, then that is what you use. It is a bad idea to refuse to consider more potent alternatives.
Will I read the article when it is published? Maybe so. But, judging by the survey linked to above, I’ll bet I already know what the author’s conclusions are going to be.
UPDATE
The author of the poll, Richard Mann, addresses some of the concerns mentioned above and in comments here.
October 20th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
I detest push polls.
Be sure to take his poll, and fill it with random non-sense.
October 20th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I have no problem with a .22 for self-defense, if that’s all I have or all I can afford. .22s may not be worldbeaters, but they’ve put their share of men on the slab.
I took my CCW course with a nice gentleman who had served in the Army Air Corps… he used a .22 because his wrists couldn’t handle any more recoil. Hit his target pretty good, though.
So to me, asking
October 20th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
“I have no problem with a .22 for self-defense, if that’s all I have or all I can afford.”
Sure, you bet. Like I said above, if that is all you have then that is what you use.
October 20th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
“Like I said above, if that is all you have then that is what you use.”
Agree
October 20th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
IMO the problem isn’t the caliber, but the fact that it’s a rimfire. I’ve never done a study, but I suspect the failure-to-fire rate is several orders of magnitude larger.
October 20th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Good point, Mulliga!
When I’d take students to the range for the first time, I would rely on the failure rate of .22 LR to train them in hangfire drills. I would always use decent quality ammo from a major manufacturer, but there would always be several bad rounds in the 300 or so I would have my student fire.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:55 am
[...] Hellinahandbasket [...]
October 21st, 2009 at 9:04 am
First, thanks for linking to the poll on GunPundit.
Second, thanks to all that have completed and will complete the survey – honestly.
Third, I especially appreciate the comments. Keep ‘em coming. Those about misfires with .22 LR ammunition are very valid concerns.
Finally, for those that did not like the “push poll” nature of the survey, that think my conclusions are forgone or would like additional background information, you can visit: http://www.ramworks.net/blog/?p=154
October 21st, 2009 at 9:37 am
Over the years I have tested a good many .22 handguns, both auto pistols and revolvers. I haven’t seen anything in new offerings of .22 handguns which is going to make me replace my old Colts or High Standards.
If you search carefully you can still find a “shooter grade” Colt Woodsman, Huntsman or Challenger for around $700. A High Standard A, B, or H-D Military in similar VG to Excellent condition sells for about $200 less than a Colt in similar condition. The High Standard Model B uses the same magazines as pre-war Colt Woodsmans. It is similarly trim, light, reliable and accurate. High Standards pistols in good serviceable condition can be found almost anytime on web sites such as Cabela’s Gun Library, and are worth looking for to have shipped to your FFL dealer, if you are serious about finding a .22 pistol for your survival ruck.
Over 30 years ago I went through a succession of S&W .22 Kit Guns and K-22 revolvers and didn’t find any that would average less than 2″ at 25 yards on the Ransom Rest. Any vintage Colt or High Standard .22 autopistol you can still see rifling in will put all the .22 revolvers ever made to shame in terms of accuracy. A used High Standard costs less than a new Ruger. And a good used Colt Woodsman costs less than buying a new Ruger and having a gunsmith put a decent trigger pull on it.
I have several High Standard Sentinel DA revolvers which I use as class trainers. You can often find these in pawn shops in decent shootable condition for $200 or less. They are strictly plain vanilla, but they are accurate enough for training use and casual plinking and they work. Expect 2 inch groups at 50 feet. Shoot greased, or waxed unplates ammo in .22 revolvers. Plated, dry-lubed bullets lead up the forcing cone and cylinder throats, destroying accuracy. The auto pistols don’t care as long as the ammo has enough recoil impulse to cycle the action reliably. Solids are generally more reliable in feeding than hollowpoints.
Ordinary CCI Standard Velocity, the CCI High Velocity Small Game Bullet (SGB), CCI Subsonic Hollow-Point and Eley Sport are the best bang for the buck. Some batches of CCI Blazer shoot OK, but you need to test. The CCI Subsonic HP is the only standard velocity round I have found which expands reliably in water jugs from my 4-1/2″ Woodsman.
In my water-jug tests I found that the same brands of HP ammunition which expand well from the 4-1/2″ Woodsman will not from revolvers. In revolvers you are better off with solids. High velocity ammo is OK if you can find a batch that is accurate and reliable. Misfires are a problem with cheap promotional pack ammo.
A .22 handgun enables the most rounds with the lowest weight and cube in the pack. Practice frequently from a field position, using a lanyard of parachute cord lanyard to steady your hold unless you ask Mr. Wabbit to stay STILL while you settle the gun in your Ransom rest
October 21st, 2009 at 9:41 am
Thanks for the link, James!
October 21st, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Still irritated.
Push polls anger me.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:11 pm
I’m considering getting a .22 revolver for my mother-in-law to carry in her car when she drives between Vero Beach and Sarasota, FL. Mostly it’s to make her feel more secure. She’s 82, and while in pretty good health, I question whether she could handle the recoil of a .38 enough to become proficient. I’m thinking if you’re not going to practice, it may be better to have 9 or 10 rounds of .22 than 5 or 6 of .38.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Another interesting article on use of .22 pistols
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/tactical-weapons/israeli-mossad-22-lrs/
October 24th, 2009 at 5:25 am
Take a look at this:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=504301&fpart=1