Pistol question

[Skyyr]

There's a lot of misinformation in this thread.

In a shooting scenario, unless a major artery, vital organ, or CNS is struck, then the only damage you have is the hole made by the round, as well as damage done to the surround areas by cavitation due to the shockwave produced by the round.

At one extreme, let's examine a rifle round as it contacts an assailant. We'll assume that hollowpoints are used. The round penetrates, typically at a near-sonic speed. This causes two things to happen:
- Due to the extreme speed and rotation of the round at high speed, the round starts to yaw, destabilizing it and causing it to mushroom. High speed rounds also tend to disintegrate (splinter) as they destabilize, sending out additional shards.
- A shockwave is produced within the tissue and surrounding flesh as the bullet quickly displaces the tissue and imparts energy to it. The tissue moves the opposite direction, tearing and stretching. Once the round has passed, the tissue is left with a semi-permanent cavity.

Now, let's examine a .22 hollowpoint:
- The 22 strikes the assailant, and mushrooms. However, it does not have ample diameter to produce much more than a clean pass-through.
- The 22 has enough energy for penetration, but little left over for cavitation.

It is the expansion and cavitation of a round that typically produces stopping power. This means that, with a .22, unless you shoot someone in the head, heart, or in a major artery, you've simply punctured them with a .22-caliber sized hole. Sure, a lung hit might prove fatal, but not for several minutes. What most people fail to take into account is that during a fight, the body produces huge levels of adrenaline and other chemicals that serve to numb the body to pain and sensation. This is well known in the Law Enforcement and Military fields. Clean-through hits will not incapacitate an attacker, which is why current doctrine is shoot until they're on the ground, incapacitated.

Again, I'm not in any way saying .22's can't kill someone - they can and have. However, many people look a snatch and grab robberies as examples where .22's have performed just fine. What they fail to acknowledge is that the criminals involved in those crimes would have run at the sight of any gun - they weren't trying to kill or stop the victim. Factor in a purposed violent crime where someone wants the victim dead, and the attacker is rarely going to care about being shot after the fact. This is backed up by years of LE and Military studies.

The most important factor in stopping power is the mass+velocity of the projectile. There comes a point where there's diminishing returns, but it suffices to say that 9mm is typically considered the smallest caliber to reliably incapacitate with commercial loads. This is almost universally acknowledged in the LE field, and many departments will not let officers carry anything less than a .40 in caliber.

Lastly, several studies have been done over home defense weapons, and shotguns were found to be one of the least efficient weapons (although arguably they are one of the most intimidating). The safest and most reliable home defense weapons were found to be weapons chambered with hollowpoint 5.56/.223. A single 5.56mm round imparts more energy into soft tissue than a 00 buckshot load. Additionally, 00 buckshot over-penetrated the shooting backdrop and was found to go through numerous walls. In some cases, shotgun loads would go through 4+ internal walls and the outer house walls, and strike houses/structures adjacent to the shooting scene. Pistol calibers yielded the same results.

5.56mm was found to yaw upon contact with a surface and rapidly destabilize, making it both much safer for indoor defense situations, as well as much deadlier. It was also much more accurate than shotgun loads, and the higher capacity (when AR-15's were used) made it better suited for multiple shot scenarios than pistols.

I was looking for the original charts and came across this link. It's posted by Olympic Arms (a questionable AR-15 manufacturer at best), but the information on the page is correct:
Ballistics Tests

[Chalenge]

Yes, but a military battle is vastly different than civilian self defense.  The data isn't a study of 22 pistols used as a primary weapon to stop enemies fighting to the death in a war.

The data is saying that for civilian self defense in the US, a 22 is effective.

I say the data is wrong. I can see that there are scenarios in which a .22 might be effective, but a lot more scenarios where it would be like throwing cotton candy. The way I see it the .22 is only good as a quick defense weapon, where you draw it at close range against an unarmed attacker, or edged weapon.

And just to be clear, the 'war' against the Moro people was a lot more like fighting the Apache where you never knew when one would emerge from cover and attack. Mostly the Moro only had a sword, or another edged weapon against the .38 caliber pistol.

[mbailey]

There's a lot of misinformation in this thread.

Where?  Actually there are a lot of opinions but no real misinformation.

[Brooke]

I say the data is wrong.

Oh -- I reverse my opinion then.  The guy who gathered the data is " . . .the full time firearms and defensive tactics training officer for a central Ohio police department. He holds instructor or master instructor certifications in more than 75 different weapon systems, defensive tactics programs and police specialty areas. Greg has a master's degree in Public Policy and Management and is an instructor for both the Ohio Peace Officer's Training Academy and the Tactical Defense Institute."  Your feeling on the matter is certainly more convincing than this shmoe and his supposed "data." 

[Serenity]

Brooke, you keep assuming that just because it's bigger than a .22 it's not going to be carried. Again, I'm not saying you CAN'T take a .22, but the cost in both size AND weight to go from a .22 to a 9mm is negligable.

Your recommended .22 compared to my recommended 938:

OAL: 4" vs 5.9"
Width: 13/16" vs 1.1"
Weight: 4.5oz vs 16oz
Capacity: 5x.22 vs 6x9mm

The 938 compared to your average cell phone (Samsung Galaxy)

OAL: 5.5"
Width: .3"
Weight: 5.11 OZ

Size wize, they're both right around the size of the cell phone in my pocket. The 938 is about three times the weight of either, (Still a mere pound) and roughly the same dimensions as the .22.

If you're going to carry a .22 that MIGHT do the job, why not go a LITTLE farther (Still fits in your front pocket just fine) and carry one more round of a more serviceable caliber.

[Chalenge]

Oh -- I reverse my opinion then.  The guy who gathered the data is " . . .the full time firearms and defensive tactics training officer for a central Ohio police department. He holds instructor or master instructor certifications in more than 75 different weapon systems, defensive tactics programs and police specialty areas. Greg has a master's degree in Public Policy and Management and is an instructor for both the Ohio Peace Officer's Training Academy and the Tactical Defense Institute."  Your feeling on the matter is certainly more convincing than this shmoe and his supposed "data."  

Again, it's his data that disagrees with the real professionals. That guy has spent so much time teaching he has convinced himself that his knowledge level is superior. Don't bet your life on it.

When I was a young man I spent so many hours at eskrima, arnis, kali, kendo, and kudo that I could not be beat. I could do things no one else could. That does not mean you can, but only that I could.

[SmokinLoon]

I dont care what caliber of gun a person has or how many rounds the gun can carry or how fast the pistol can be reloaded.  As a backup or trench partner I'd take a tried and true veteran armed with a .22LR revolver any day over some banana who thinks his fondling a 15+ capacity wonder gun auto loader makes him king of the gun fight.

First, be able to step up and fight through the "flight" stage that consumes most people when a threat presents itself. Until you get put in that situation (THREAT font and center!!!), or at minimum get hammered by a few dozen simmuntion rounds, you wont know how you will react. Most people flinch and sprint for safety until taught differently. Trust me.

Second, be able to USE the platform effectively. No sense in carrying a .357 Magnum snub nose revolver if you cant handle the gun. Too much gun = fail since the user is intimidated by the recoil, noise, etc. Start small, learn it, perfect it, advance to "better" platforms.

Third, accuracy is key.  This ties in to the point above. Until a person can pick up a pistol time and time again, and not have a "bad day" at the range, keep practicing. Practice some more. Learning on the .22RL is good, then to the .380 ACP or 9mm (depending on shooter comfort and ability), then to the bigger revolver calibers, if need be. Leave the .40SW in the gun store for those people in the "learning" stage.  The 9mm is just as effective with LOTS of other positive attributes (recoil, muzzle jump, ammo costs, weight, etc).   

[Brooke]

Brooke, you keep assuming that just because it's bigger than a .22 it's not going to be carried.

Yes.

I don't have data on how many of which type of gun are carried by non-police civilians (not bought, but actually carried).  It might exist somewhere, but I couldn't find it in 15 minutes of looking.  But it does seem plausible to me, and it is how I feel about it.  I would not carry something larger than would fit unobtrusively in my pocket or with more burden than a large key fob.  I would not and do not carry a large cell phone in my pocket -- I use a belt clip instead, but wouldn't do that for a handgun.  4" vs. 6" and especially 4.5 oz vs. 16 oz are major differences to me -- the difference between something I would carry in my pocket routinely (like a pocket knife) and something that I would almost never carry.

[Brooke]

Again, it's his data that disagrees with the real professionals.

He *is* a real professional.

It's hard to disagree with data -- data is data unless it is faked or cherry picked.  It's possible to disagree with analysis if one can point out how the analysis technique has a flaw.  Opinions that are backed up neither by data nor analysis are often nearly useless.

[SilverZ06]

Second, be able to USE the platform effectively. No sense in carrying a .357 Magnum snub nose revolver if you cant handle the gun. Too much gun = fail since the user is intimidated by the recoil, noise, etc. Start small, learn it, perfect it, advance to "better" platforms.

I had no problem using my .357 snub nose. The gun was not too much for me. The only draw back was the skin tearing after 20 rounds at the range but that shouldn't be a factor after 5 rounds in a defensive situation. If I cant stop the threat with 5 rounds then I'm in trouble anyway and a little torn skin would be the least of my worries. I was never intimidated by the recoil or anything else. I could hit a 4" circle with all 5 rounds at 10yards out.

[mbailey]

To say this gun kicks like a mule on cocaine is an understatement.

I've shot the 360. Pewter,  that's about one of the best metaphors I've ever heard describing the recoil.  I took 5 rnds of Corbon 140gr JHPs.  That was like putting a cattle prod up the arse of the coke fueled mule. I swear my thumb and pointer finger and the inner palm of my hand had a religious experiance. Personally I'd rather dip my nuts in honey and tbag a grizzly bear than ever do that again  

[10thmd]

Smith and Wesson Bodyguard .380 in the back pocket with my thin wallet. Just in case somebody catches me slipping.... Oh hello there you want my wallet? ok here it is... BAM!BAM!BAM!BAM!BAM!BAM!BAM! There it is all 7 rounds to the gut.

Also Brooke one thing to remember states that do have concealed carry usually make you take the shooting portion with a .32 or larger.

[Widewing]

Irrespective of caliber, be it a .22LR or a .454 Casull, shot placement is the single most important factor.

Many a perp has collected a .45 ACP and NOT stopped his behavior. Likewise, many a thug has been stopped in his tracks by a .22 round. Obviously, the effectiveness of the .45 ACP is far greater than the .22 LR when striking a portion of the body where instant death will not result. Nothing ends a violent attack like a bullet to the head. The problem is, very few can shoot that accurately while at ease on a range, much less during the extreme stress of defending one's life.  

Whatever you are armed with, you must be proficient with it. Practice and practice some more. Not only shooting, but drawing the pistol from where ever you conceal it. It should be nearly automatic, or like they say nowadays, "muscle memory". This will go a long way to overcoming the loss of fine motor skills when the adrenalin starts flowing.

Speaking of bullet effectiveness, I read a piece about a shooting in 1949. A large, very angry man dragged his estranged wife from her house and was beating her on the front lawn with a copper pipe. A 58 year-old man living across the road heard the ruckus and observed what was going on. He grabbed a loaded revolver and ran across the street, ordering the man to stop the beating. He was told to mind his own business and the man resumed beating the woman. The neighbor took aim, and fired one round. The crazed man dropped like a sack of wheel weights, dead.

This story doesn't sound unlike shootings we see in the news now and then, right?

Not exactly.

The revolver used was an Colt Model 1860 Army, manufactured in 1865. A .44 caliber, cap and ball pistol. It originally belonged to the neighbor's grand father. Passed down through the family, the neighbor found it functioning. Figuring that it may come in handy one day, he bought powder, balls and caps. Every year he would walk out into the woods and "shoot it out", clean and reload the revolver. He kept it in the drawer of his night stand for over 20 years. It did, eventually, come in handy.

An autopsy of the dead man revealed massive internal damage. The .451 diameter lead ball entered the man's torso, just below the right armpit. The ball broke two ribs, traversed the man's chest, nicking the liver, going through the right lung, heart, and left lung. The ball exited the man's torso, breaking another rib doing so, then went completely through his left bicep and was found having penetrated the clapboard siding of the woman's house. The 138 grain lead ball was badly distorted, but had retained more than 95% of its initial weight.

Transverse hits often require greater penetration than hits square on the front of a person. The little .22 LR is a good penetrating round, having a small section and a round nose. The wound cavity is small, but the damage it can do is sometimes very large, because of the round's tendency to change direction within the body. The .22 LR round that nearly killed Reagan was fired from a short barreled revolver, and it did a great deal of damage, leading to near fatal internal bleeding. It traveled almost 14 inches through the President's upper body. The bullet was "flattened like a dime", and found about 1" behind Reagan's heart.

Despite all of the discussion on ballistics of handgun rounds, and test results of shooting ballistic jelly, the fact remains that the little .22 LR is lethal if placed where it counts... Will it stop a crazed, drugged up Moro? If I shoot him in the face or head... It surely will.

[Chalenge]

... Will it stop a crazed, drugged up Moro? If I shoot him in the face or head... It surely will.

That's a BIG if. . .

[Widewing]

That's a BIG if. . .

Of course, but there's always the testicles.....