Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
i have never shot at a person or been shot at. but i feel my .22lr is my gtg (go to gun) its light weight easy to manuver and i can put all 10 rounds in a 1" square at 50 yds in just under 6 seconds so im extreamly comfortable with it and i know what i can do with it. i practice alot with speed shooting how fast can i accurately empty the clip. i guess i want some input from you guys and ladies
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,218 Posts
.22lr has definate maerrits. i have sr22 and the ruger 10/22. i enjoy the plinking and the variables. being a gun nut i have a few choices in each the hand gun and long rifle department. but i sure am fond of my 22s.

:smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,258 Posts
Seems people are having trouble coming to grips with the fact that there is no single caliber that covers all the bases.
You are good with your .22. That is good. I've dropped running and dodging rabbits with mine. I figure that ain't too shabby, huh. I have had that rifle since I was 14. I'm 49, now. I guess I'm not going to get any more acquainted with a rifle than that.

You know what I know about it? It's still a .22LR.

Please do not misunderstand me, I am not trying to lecture, I am trying to make sure that reality is not lost in one's thoughts.

Why is it that armies do not use the .22LR? Why wouldn't police SWAT marksmen use the .22LR? Why do we use them for small game and high powered rifles for deer?

Yes, the .22LR is better than a slingshot, but please, understand that no single tool can be used for all needs, and a rifle is a tool.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,224 Posts
You are willing to bet the lives of you and your family on a .22?

A .22lr should be for hunting and a last resort gun. Have you shot one under stress? Shooting at a target is one thing, protecting yourself is another. Shooting at a steel target the only way I can tell if I hit it is because of the sound. It doesn't even vibrate. If you want to simulate stress, try shooting in an USPSA or equivalent match. No one is shooting back at you but you are under time and round limitations. This will give you and idea about your reaction and accuracy.

Knock down power is what I have. If I am forced to defend myself, I need to know that when I shoot someone, they will stay down. When they come it will be a group and you need to be sure that someone you think is down won't get up and blindside you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
...A .22lr should be for hunting and a last resort gun...
Yeah, for self-defence I wouldn't consider anything less than .38.
Remember when Serpico got shot in the mug pointblank? I hear it was a .25 calibre handgun and all it did was make a little hole in his cheek (below)-



PS- And in my humble opinion the British and American armies must have been nuts to switch to 5.56mm rifles because 5.56mm is only about .22", crazy!
left to right- 5.56mm/ .30"/ 7.62mm

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
The diameter is not what sets it apart from the .22LR.
The 5.56mm flies a lot faster than a standard .22, but is still subject to the laws of physics, namely that it loses it's kinetic energy a lot faster than say a 7.62mm due to air resistance, making it not so good at longer ranges.
Also, if the enemy is in light cover such as behind a wooden fence or saplings or soft-skin vehicle, the wood/tin will absorb a chunk of the 5.56's kin energy, meaning that even if it penetrates it and hits the man it won't hurt him as much as a heavier round would.
By contrast, a 7.62 would go through light cover as if it wasn't there, so I'd choose to have something like a 7.62 AK-47 every time..;)

 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
14,872 Posts
"Anyone who has ever survived a gunfight has ever wished for a smaller gun or less ammo." Clint Smith
I only carry a hand gun because walking around with a rifle is a tad too obvious. If I knew I was going to be in a gunfight I would rather have a rifle, and some friends with me who had rifles too.
I have used the 5.56 NATO round, and while it can be effective, my defensive rifles today are .30 caliber or larger. There is no way I would voluntarily use a 22 rimfire rifle for self defense against anything bigger than a fox or bobcat.
I may be a dumb old truck driver who barely graduated high school, but I ain't stupid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Anyone here listen to Gun Talk?

There was a guest speaker there at one point that had researched thousands upon thousands of shootings. Everything from .22 up to .44 mag. Ya know what he found? On average, regardless of caliber, it took four critical hits before the attacker ceased his assault. Does that mean that there were no one or two shot stops? No. Just that by and large, once again regardless of caliber, that the vast majority of them took that number. One would think that the larger calibers saw more one or two shot stops. But across the board all calibers were equal.

Yeah, being a .45 girl myself I was very surprised.
 
  • Like
Reactions: survival

·
Administrator
Joined
·
14,872 Posts
Anyone here listen to Gun Talk?

There was a guest speaker there at one point that had researched thousands upon thousands of shootings. Everything from .22 up to .44 mag. Ya know what he found? On average, regardless of caliber, it took four critical hits before the attacker ceased his assault. Does that mean that there were no one or two shot stops? No. Just that by and large, once again regardless of caliber, that the vast majority of them took that number. One would think that the larger calibers saw more one or two shot stops. But across the board all calibers were equal.

Yeah, being a .45 girl myself I was very surprised.
Handguns are relatively low powered. Shoot someone center mass with a 30-06 soft point once and it's over. Or a 30-30.
 
  • Like
Reactions: preppermama

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
Was I talking about rifle rounds?

Edit: Yeah, that sounded a lil bitchy. It wasn't supposed to. Im sorry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rice paddy daddy

·
Administrator
Joined
·
14,872 Posts
Was I talking about rifle rounds?

Edit: Yeah, that sounded a lil bitchy. It wasn't supposed to. Im sorry.
No problem, ma'am.
The thread had pretty much assumed the OP was talking about a 22 LR rifle (at least I did).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lattice

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
@ Lucky Jim
Quote: PS- And in my humble opinion the British and American armies must have been nuts to switch to 5.56mm rifles because 5.56mm is only about .22", crazy!
left to right- 5.56mm/ .30"/ 7.62mm

Make that just about every major army in the world, Russia uses a 5.45 x 39 which isn't as powerful as the 5.56 x 45 NATO
The 5.56x45 (1250 ft/lbs) which I hear so many saying is under powered is more powerful than the Civil war rifles shooting a 58 cal minie ball (1000 ft/lbs) that everyone thought was so devastating.
The commercial 5.56x45 can be more lethal than military ammo because of restriction on military ammo by the Geneva convention.
One of the reasons that early 1900 rifles used such powerful rounds like the 30-06 is that they envisioned wars would be fought at very long ranges, and the troops would all fire volleys at the enemy almost a mile away, that is why some of the old rifles had rear sights that could raise very high. The British 303 Lee-Enfield had sights that go up to 1700 yards . The 5.56x45 weighs the same as a 115gr 9mm with 3 times the energy, the 7.62 x 51 weighs twice as much as the 5.56x45 but does have twice the energy so a good trade off, The other advantage is that the 5.56x45 can use lighter guns and easier to train someone because of the reduced recoil.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
No problem, ma'am.
The thread had pretty much assumed the OP was talking about a 22 LR rifle (at least I did).
I suppose that we could assume it either way. When someone talks about .22, even from a rifle, I only compare it to pistol or pistol caliber rifles because the energies seen in .22 are so much lower than those of other rifle calibers.

Incidentally, that same researcher also researched many different shootings which involved rifles. And came to much the same conclusion. Average number of effective shots to stop was 2 across the board.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
466 Posts
One thing I know and most hear don't seem to know. IF you are shot with even the lowly .22, it kinda sorta takes the fight out of you real quick like. I know this, because I have been nailed with one. Not a very pleasant experience for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
To the OP

1. Becoming proficient with a firearm = Good
2. Depending on a small caliber for self defense = rethink that.

No offense to Lattice, but as a Cop, I can tell you that the reason all agencies that had 9mm went up in caliber to .40S&W (or .357Sig or .45GAP) is to ensure that when there is a gun fight, the amount of damage created by the round in question would cause the perp some considerable damage. Remember, we are trained to Shoot to STOP, not kill. Problem is the bad guys (and you will also go through this in a SHTF scenario) don't STOP, they keep going until they are completely incapacitated and that usually means death. If you look at the findings from the research done after the Battle of Mogadishu, and the problems suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military is still having issues with the lack of lethality of the 5.56 round. Don't get me wrong, I love my AR's (own 3 of them) but when I chose to build a new rifle in that platform, I went with the 6.8 SPC II since it shoots a heavier bullet (115 grains versus 55 or 62 grain) at the same or faster velocity. I want whatever I shoot at to go down, if it is a deer, a zombie or someone threatening my life or that of my family.

Continue practicing (and as a previous poster mentioned, go shoot USPSA or IDPA) and then become proficient in several different types (and calibers) of firearms. My Agency uses the .40S&W but off duty I carry a 1911 in .45ACP (.38 Super is a cool round but hard to find and expensive)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,281 Posts
Shot placement is more important than caliber. Being armed is better than not being armed. Use what you have until you can get something better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
Shot placement is indeed important, but you can't guarantee that you'll always be able to place a shot in a critical area. If the bad guy only presents a shoulder, or a foot, you want to be able to do maximum damage, and really make him regret giving you that target. Another thing to consider is penetration through light cover. Whatever rifle you have, you could very well end up in combat with, you need to be able to hit the bad guy if he dives behind some light cover, such as cinder blocks. A .22 doesn't have the power to punch through a cinder block, it barely makes a dent. A metric crap ton of rounds are required to even crack a cinder block, thus negating any quantity advantage you may have had. 5.56 or 7.62 NATO, however, can both penetrate after a round or two, thus eliminating the bad guy quicker, making your life easier. And because this is the internet, and thus, "pics or it didn't happen":

Cinder block vs .22LR (1 round):


Cinder block vs Crap-ton of .22LR:


Cinder block vs 5.56 (1 round):


Cinder block vs 7.62NATO (1 round):


Now, which one would you want to trust your life to?
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top