Quote :

"Does anyone have a site with data or anything to back these things up? I'm interested in the ".357 is the best" argument"

That is something that takes a lot of research. Problem is there are too many factors at play to call this round or that the self-defense round and you have to accept that no normally carried handgun cartridge is going to be a particularly devastating round but rather a compromise between size and power. I mean you can carry a .454 Casull if you want . . .

I made the comment about the .357 becuase when lined up against every autoloader round, from the 9mm to the .45 ACP to the 40 S&W, it has the most energy at the muzzle. Specifically, using Black Hills Factory New Ammo:

.45 ACP +P w/ 230gr JHP 460 ft/lbs
9mm w/ 124 gr JHP 363 ft/lbs
.40 S&W w/ 180 gr JHP 400 ft/lbs
.357 MAG w/ 158 gr JHP 548 ft/lbs
(http://www.black-hills.com/factorynew.htm)

The down side? Most revolvers chambered for a .357 MAG have only 5 or 6 shots before a reload and recoil is impressive. A 9mm is a lot "weaker" but 2x 9mm holes would be better than one of anything else.

Quote :

"The 5.7 is a stupid handgun round. It does about as much damage as you can expect from a 22 mag...because that's what it essentially is."

Agreed. Overpenetration is a serious problem with the 5.7 as well.

Quote :

"Handgun caliber arguments are stupid too. Get a 380ACP, 9x19mm, 40S&W, 45ACP, 38 Special, or 357 mag and learn to shoot it well."

SIGNED. While its fun to talk shit about rounds, and compare them, the greatest bullet in the world means nothing if you can't hit your target. Most centerfires will do nicely.

[Edited on July 17, 2007 at 4:43 PM. Reason : FWIW, a .22LR shot out of a 22" barrel brings roughlt 115 ft/lbs to the table.]

7/17/2007 4:20:03 PM

Quote :

"The 5.7 is a stupid powerful handgun round. It does about as much damage as you can expect from a 22 mag basically a .223 short ("

Quote :

"Overpenetration is a serious problem with the 5.7 as well"

overpenetration is the intent of the 5.7 round

if FN pistols and the 5.7 ammo werent so expensive i think the round could catch on but as it is its just gonna be another 10mm type round that never catches on big enough

7/17/2007 4:47:34 PM

This from the guy who wants to count rounds in a firefight.
Note: Do not take any firearms suggestions from this man

Do I need to remind you of the legal ramifications of each bullet that leaves your weapon in a firefight? Each one has a lawer attached to it and you will answer in civil and criminal court for any injuries you cause to innocent bystanders. Overpenetration is a huge issue in self defense rounds. On top of that, I don't see anyone touting any .223 rounds as particuarly ballistically impressive rounds out of short barrels, even something with a moderate length barrel like the M4.

7/17/2007 4:58:00 PM

The 5.7x28mm will never even reach 10mm Norma popularity.
I've seen a total of about 15 10mm shooters at different ranges. Never seen anyone bring a 5.7.

With 40gr at 1900 fps it's nowhere near the same scale as the 223Rem (55gr @3200+fps).
Speed kills, but the 5.7 doesn't have enough of that to compensate for its light bullets.
Its purpose isn't stopping power, it's penetration. It'd be a poor choice for self defense.

7/17/2007 5:06:41 PM

the 5.7 round was DESIGNED TO PIERCE ARMOR

OF FUCKING COURSE its going to overpenetrate

but please YOU KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT EVERYTHING

and i dont recall anyone recommending it for self defense but somebody on the first page asked about it

[Edited on July 17, 2007 at 5:14 PM. Reason : .]

7/17/2007 5:12:56 PM

Well other than light kevlar body armor, its not going to penetrate much.

[Edited on July 17, 2007 at 5:18 PM. Reason : i before e]

7/17/2007 5:17:19 PM

Quote :

"The 5.7 is a stupid powerful handgun round. It does about as much damage as you can expect from a 22 mag basically a .223 short "

Quote :

"and i dont recall anyone recommending it for self defense"

Stating that it can do as much damage as a 223 sounds like you're endorsing it when the theme of this thread is a guy asking about self defense pistols.

7/17/2007 5:20:13 PM

JPrater was asking about the 5.7 round when the topic of stopping power of various calibers came up

as far as my response to the initial post, i already said

Quote :

"i agree that one of the best ways to decide is to go to a gunshop and personally handle some of the firearms...just cause i'm partial to Taurus PT145s and Springfield XDs doesnt mean somebody else isnt partial to Sigs or Glocks and then as far as caliber you want to find your own personal happy medium between stopping power, recoil and mag capacity (assuming semi auto)...I am partial to .45 but if you are "recoil sensitive" you might consider something smaller like a 9mm"

am i not allowed to talk about anything else since OneNighter86 might get the wrong idea and go on a killing spree?

let alone he said he was looking for something economical...if he saw the pricetag of an FN and the 5.7 ammo he'd quickly move on

note:

OneNighter86: Do NOT buy any gun in 5.7x28mm caliber.

[Edited on July 17, 2007 at 5:34 PM. Reason : disclaimer]

7/17/2007 5:23:28 PM

Quote :

"am i not allowed to talk about anything else since OneNighter86 might get the wrong idea and go on a killing spree?"

Not with a 5.7mm

7/17/2007 8:55:38 PM

On the subject of .357mag, yes it is historically the best manstopper. The recoil of this round all depends on the gun it's fired from. It's a borderline hand hurter from a lightweight aluminum ot Ti J-frame, but no big deal at all when fired from my L-frame 6-inch Model 586.
Overpenetration is also an issue with .357mag. Even most standard loads will chop right through an attacker and a couple of sheetrock walls as well. It was popular with highway patrol departments back in the revolver days because it punched through car doors very effectively.
I've personally fired FMJ .357 rounds through maple trees 8 inches in diameter.

IMO the .38 spl round is far better suited to personal defense purposes in a small carry gun. Muzzle blast isn't as loud, recoil isn't as bad, and it's still plenty powerful enough to ruin someone's whole day.

5.7x28? Nifty little round, accurate and hot. However, the real reason for this round is lost on us civilians because the good armour piercing ammo is only available to those who carry weapons in service to big brother. The stuff available to us is basically just an expensive version of .22mag, just as previously stated.

Just with any other decision, you have to think about your gun's intended purpose. Pick out a few that you like that would fit it, go shoot em, then decide what you like best and buy it. After that, I'd say that if you are going to carry it, a couple hundred rounds' worth of practice every month should be just about mandatory.

My favorite autopistol is the Glock, followed closely by the 1911. In my opinion, you just can't beat a small J-frame S&W revolver in .38spl for concealed carry.

7/18/2007 9:26:39 AM

of all the guns I own, a S&W Model 60 (.38 spl) is the one I keep by my bed

7/18/2007 11:47:21 AM

To JCASHFAN: Concerning the rounds on the nose post, I was simply indicating that anyone could be very accurate with the .22--I have been trained to aim center mass and that's what I almost always do, unless there are mitigating circumstances. And concerning the sound, you've obviously never heard a weapon shot indoors--the sound is significantly amplified. And it's even worse in a car.

I stand by my original answer to the topic question. For reliability, affordability (pistol and rounds), personal defense, and safety, the Ruger .22 is the best choice for a gun "noob," which was how OneNighter86 described himself in his initial post. If one is concerned about stopping power, simply load hollow points--you'll have all you need. In addition, for the same reasons I listed above, the Ruger .22 is often the weapon of choice for experienced shooters, too.

7/18/2007 9:09:40 PM

I'll buy your reasons, hooksaw, especially as far as a good gun to have to shoot, but I'm not convinced waking up panicked the vast, vast majority of people are gonna be expert marksmen able to put 3 shots on someone's nose, especially in the dark, afraid, with someone creeping around or running at you. (I really doubt I could, though it might make me feel better)
Maybe just a decent shotgun is best for that situation?

[Edited on July 20, 2007 at 7:07 PM. Reason : wanted to]

7/20/2007 7:05:22 PM

.5" round 14" barrel

7/20/2007 7:35:14 PM

.357 SIG

FTW

7/20/2007 10:18:55 PM

^^^ But that's the point: ANYONE can be very accurate with the Ruger .22--it has very little recoil and it doesn't go "BANG!" as loudly as larger calibers. Consequently, the shooter will not be as likely to instinctively flinch, which could cause a miss, see?

Concerning the shotgun, it will definitely do the job. But you are probably going to have a lot of holes in the wall to repair and furniture to replace--unless you use slugs, which obviously require a bit of aiming and puts you back at square one.

7/21/2007 3:53:40 AM

^^ I thought that for all intensive purposes .357 sig matched 9mm, even though it was designed to imitate .357 magnum

7/21/2007 12:14:31 PM

357Sig is a little hotter than the 9mm...at the expense of twice as much muzzle blast and recoil.
It's too much noise for too little gain over the 9mm. The 357Sig can't push heavy bullets like the 357Mag.
If you like 357Sig then that's great. I wouldn't recommend it to a beginner though. Heck, I wouldn't recommend it for myself and I shoot a lot. Just doesn't seem like a practical pistol cartridge. Just mho.

Quote :

"unless you use slugs, which obviously require a bit of aiming and puts you back at square one."

It's a misconception that you don't have to aim when shooting shot. That's horribly wrong.
Lets say the shot spread on a cylinder bore is 1" every yard. Well if the longest distance in your apartment is 21 feet then your shot is going to be 7 inches wide.
Odds are you'll miss unless you're aiming.

7/21/2007 9:24:02 PM

^^^ wrong on a number of accounts, I'm not even sure where to start but I'll give it a shot:

Quote :

"Concerning the shotgun, it will definitely do the job. But you are probably going to have a lot of holes in the wall to repair and furniture to replace"

Pretty irrelevant when your life is on the line especially considering you can expect upwards of $60,000 - $100,000 in legal costs even if the shooting is justified. Also, shotguns loaded with shot are less likely to overpenetrate. I mean, they will, but not like a bullet.

Quote :

"ANYONE can be very accurate with the Ruger .22--it has very little recoil and it doesn't go "BANG!""

Ones ability to hit the target under life and death situations has less to do with the recoil of their particular gun, and much more to do with the fact that you've trained with your gun so long that it has become instinctive muscle memory. Fine shot placement when you're being shot at isn't going to be a strong suit of anyone who isn't suicidal. A .22 anywhere other than a vital area is not likely to cause significant bleeding or incapacitation, is much more likely to be stopped by heavy clothing, is much more likely to be stopped by the sternum and, from a short barreled weapon (like a Ruger .22) could have penetration issues with the human skull. Practice enough with your 9mm and you'll shoot well enough to accomplish with 2 rounds the kind of tissue damage it'd take a whole magazine of .22 to do.

For that matter, when you're being shot at, the other fellow's gun is going bang in your house. Is your little .22 really going to salvage that much of your hearing?

Quote :

"And concerning the sound, you've obviously never heard a weapon shot indoors"

Irrelevant, but yes I have, and without hearing protection.

All of that being said, a nice little .22 pistol like the Ruger is a great place to de-n00bify and learn more about what you'd like in something bigger. It is not and effective self defense weapon and I wouldn't use it as such.

[Edited on July 22, 2007 at 12:15 AM. Reason : if you can't say anything nice . . .]

7/21/2007 11:52:33 PM

I'd say it's in everyone's best interest if you NEVER have a weapon of any kind

7/22/2007 12:30:15 AM

nevermind

[Edited on July 22, 2007 at 12:59 AM. Reason : my bad]

7/22/2007 12:48:07 AM

^^

i dont drink at all anymore.


Just need the gun for home security reasons for whenever i go back home. And just in case. I have a right to defend myself from harm.

7/22/2007 12:57:24 AM

^^^^
1. Why cause unnecessary damage to your property? If I accept that your figures are correct concerning legal costs, why would I want to add even more costs on top of them? And concerning the shot, it depends on what kind of shell is loaded in the shotgun--obviously.


2. WTF are you talking about with "when you're being shot at"? This is supposed to be a defense against an intruder scenario--not the shootout at the fucking OK Corral, for God's sake! If a guy gets a chance to shoot at you in your own house, he's already got the drop on you--if you don't get off the first shots, you're probably going to be killed.

3. And if you're so damned concerned about stopping power, LOAD FUCKING HOLLOW POINTS! Do you even know that hollow points exist for .22s? I ask because you haven't acknowledged that fact once. It's irrelevant, though; I guarantee that I can stop even the largest, meanest intruder with regular .22 ammo in a Ruger pistol--even if it takes five shots. And, yes, I am confident that I can get off at least five shots before he reaches me.

4.

Quote :

"It is not and effective self defense weapon and I wouldn't use it as such."

I am not wrong--you are. You can keep saying I am, though, if it makes you feel better.



FTW

[Edited on July 22, 2007 at 8:17 AM. Reason : .]

7/22/2007 8:15:50 AM

economical and chambered in 9x18

PA63: cool walther pp design, though you'll probably want to get a stronger recoil spring and a lighter hammer spring ~$130



CZ-82: bigger capacity, better all around gun ~$210



comblock surplus ftcheap!

7/22/2007 10:20:37 AM

im no gun expert, but unless i had one myself i certainly would run away after getting shot, even if it were with a little rutger.

[Edited on July 22, 2007 at 10:25 AM. Reason : im no masochistic home alone style burglar]

7/22/2007 10:24:42 AM

Quote :

"Why cause unnecessary damage to your property?"

Because its useless to you if you're dead.

Quote :

"WTF are you talking about with "when you're being shot at"? This is supposed to be a defense against an intruder scenario"

OneNighter86 read North Carolina state law carefully before using a firearm in your own home. As a matter of fact, I'd recommend taking a concealed carry class even if you don't plan on carrying simply because it goes through the scenarios where lethal force is justified. In short, unless a reasonable person would feel that you were in danger of death or serious bodily injury lethal force is not authorized. If you're female you can add sexual assault to that list. hooksaw while well intentioned, is assuming you're going to have the upper hand in all self-defense scenarios, and if you did then yes, a .22 might suffice. I chose not to buy self defense handguns on the assumption that I will always have the momentum in a life and death scenario. If the fact that your life is legitimately in danger does not cause a stress response in your system then either a) you're exceptionally cool under pressure or b) your life isn't really in danger.

Quote :

"And if you're so damned concerned about stopping power, LOAD FUCKING HOLLOW POINTS! Do you even know that hollow points exist for .22s?"

Don't try to counter your ignorance by attempting to point out mine. Yes I do know they exist, yes I have used them in my squirrel rifle, and if you look below, you'll see the results of a .22 hollow point fired into water. It's almost as big as a 9mm FMJ and doesn't carry near the energy.

Quote :

"And, yes, I am confident that I can get off at least five shots before he reaches me."

You are aware that 21 feet is the legal limit in the state of North Carolina for using a firearm against an intruder with an edged weapon right? An intruder can cover that distance in under 2 seconds. You probably could get 5 shots off, I mean I'm sure you're almost as good as Jerry Miculek, but he shoots a .38, which will actually stop someone.

Quote :

"im no gun expert, but unless i had one myself i certainly would run away after getting shot, even if it were with a little rutger."

This works quite a bit actually, even though its never reported, but again, you don't get a gun for a best scenario. If that were the case we'd all walk around with cap guns and be safe.



OneNighter86 I hate it when two people dominate a forum with their petty arguments and ruin it for everyone else, and I realize I'm participating in that at this point, so I'll bow out and give hooksaw the last word. In summary though, here are my parting pieces of advice:

1) A Ruger or any other .22 is a great / fun gun to learn on but insufficient for self defense. Buy one, shoot it, learn the fundamentals, talk to other gun owners, shoot their guns, and figure out what you like, then buy it.

2) Remember when you buy your gun, you're buying it for you and not for anyone else. If you don't like shooting anything other than a Ruger .22, then just learn to shoot it very, very well. You know how I feel about a .22 as a stopping round, ask around when you look at guns and see what others say.

3) Whatever you get, PRACTICE.

[Edited on July 22, 2007 at 10:58 AM. Reason : i yield the remainder of my time]

7/22/2007 10:48:08 AM

You know, a 22lr would be a great first gun.
It wouldn't be a great choice of a first self defense gun though...
If you do get one and want to use it for self defense then I wouldn't load it with just any type of hollow point.
You'd want to get a hollow point with some good penetration such as a CCI Stinger or CCI Velocitor (I'd vote for the Velocitor).

22LR are notorious for under penetration on bigger critters (such as fat Americans). If you have to pick between diameter of wound channel and penetration then it's definately better to go with penetration.
I bullet won't do damage to vitals if they never reach the vitals...

7/22/2007 10:16:32 PM

^ FYI, I have taken the Firearms Safety Training Course--and I didn't have any incorrect answers on the test. In addition, I earned and maintained the Army's Expert Rifle Badge; I was a police expert with pistol, rifle, and shotgun; and I have owned and fired numerous weapons over the years.

But don't believe me--listen to the experts:

Infantry Magazine

Quote :

"Some equate effectiveness with 'stopping power,' a nebulous term that can mean anything from physically knocking the target down to causing the target to immediately stop any threatening action. Others may measure effectiveness as foot-pounds of energy delivered to the target--by calculating the mass and impact velocity of the round--without considering what amount of energy is expended in the target or what specific damage occurs to the target. In the end, 'foot-pounds of energy' is misleading, 'stopping power' is a myth, and the 'one-shot drop' is a rare possibility dependent more on the statistics of hit placement than weapon and ammunition selection [emphasis added]."

Quote :

"What the wound ballistics community at large has long known is that the effectiveness of a round of ammunition is directly related to the location, volume, and severity of tissue damage. In other words, a well-placed .22 caliber round can be far more lethal than a poorly placed .50 caliber machine gun round [emphasis added]."

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-158733704.html

Guns & Ammo Magazine

Quote :

"The .22 LR autoloaders have a distinct advantage, as the bullet simply has to leave the case and engage the rifling, the same as a rifle. It is not uncommon for modestly priced guns, such as the Ruger Mark II, to produce one-inch 50-yard groups with target-grade ammo. And world-class target pistols can perform even better [emphasis added]."

http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ga_handguns/defining_handgun_accuracy/index1.html

JCASHFAN is wrong. I am right--trust me on this one.

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 12:36 AM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 12:29:00 AM

^ Congratulations, you've sucessfully added nothing to your argument. Shot placement is important and a .22 can be accurate. We know that. And? You can hit far more places with a 9mm and stop an assailant than you can with a .22. Period.

Anyway, I said I was bowing out, but I found something too compelling to let it go:

Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness FBI Firearms Training Unit, Quantico, Virginia:

Quote :

"Shot placement is an important, and often cited, consideration regarding the suitability of weapons and ammunition. However, considerations of caliber are equally important and cannot be ignored. For example, a bullet through the central nervous system with any caliber of ammunition is likely to be immediately incapacitating. Even a .22 rimfire penetrating the brain will cause immediate incapacitation in most cases. Obviously, this does not mean the law enforcement agency should issue .22 rimfires and train for head shots as the primary target. The realities of shooting incidents prohibit such a solution. Few, if any, shooting incidents will present the officer with an opportunity to take a careful, precisely aimed shot at the subject's head. Rather, shootings are characterized by their sudden, unexpected occurrence; by rapid and unpredictable movement of both officer and adversary; by limited and partial target opportunities; by poor light and unforeseen obstacles; and by the life or death stress of sudden, close, personal violence. Training is quite properly oriented towards "center of mass" shooting. That is to say, the officer is trained to shoot at the center of whatever is presented for a target."

http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

If the .22 is so great as a self-defense round, how come no agency in the United States; federal, state, or local, carries it as their primary sidearm? No matter what hooksaw's best case scenario about getting the drop on your opponent is, it is a poor basis for planning.

I really am done this time, I'll let him argue with FBI studies as long as he wants.

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 8:34 AM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 8:30:28 AM

^

Quote :

"OneNighter86 I hate it when two people dominate a forum with their petty arguments and ruin it for everyone else, and I realize I'm participating in that at this point, so I'll bow out and give hooksaw the last word."

JCASHFAN

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! I knew you would post again--you just couldn't stand it!

In any event, I'm willing to agree to disagree on this one. I mean, I am convinced of my position. On the other hand, you made some good points--but not good enough to change my mind. And it doesn't appear that I'm going to change yours, either.

No matter what weapon OneNighter86 eventually chooses, I hope that he never has to use it in defense of his person. We can agree on that, yes?

7/23/2007 10:30:28 AM

Wow, this wasn't as much of a train wreck as I thought it would be.. a little shitting on the 5.7.. some recommendations of a .22 for defense.. bout usual.

While a .22 isn't the best choice for self defense, a .22 in the hand is worth a .45 in the safe. If a .22 is something you find you can carry ALL the time, it is better than the most tacticool .45 you only carry occasionally.

Still, .380 is about the smallest I'd go for a defensive caliber, and with arms the size of P3AT, carrying a .22 just doesn't make tactical sense. But again.. if its the maximum firepower you are comfortable carrying...

7/24/2007 1:48:40 AM

Really, though, .380 seems pointless to me anymore, as far as those little automatics like the PPK and such that everybody loves, since you can get 9mm or even .45s the same size. Unless you just like .380, then more power to you, I guess. Way to make plenty of sense, as well.

7/24/2007 11:06:34 AM

I haven't found anything as small as the P3AT in any larger caliber. I'd prefer it be at least a 9mm, if for no other reason than a wider range of ammo choice. The PF9 single stack and the P11/40 Kel Tecs are about the smallest you can get, and while on paper they seem only marginally bigger, in carrying they're exponentially bigger... not fitting or disappearing nearly as well as the P3AT.

Ideally, I'd like a Detonics for a deep cover piece or something rare, like a Semmerling or AMT, but I know that for now, the lightest, smallest, most concealable gun I'll carry is the P3AT. I should mention though, that it is rarely a primary carry weapon. That is a Steyr S9A1.

7/24/2007 2:12:15 PM

Quote :

"Really, though, .380 seems pointless to me anymore, as far as those little automatics like the PPK and such that everybody loves, since you can get 9mm or even .45s the same size. Unless you just like .380, then more power to you, I guess. Way to make plenty of sense, as well."

Price.
I got a Bersa Thunder 380 Duo-tone for $200.
You don't find a cheap quality metal framed 9mm that size and that fits your hand well.
Kahrs, Sig 239s, etc that are the same size in 9mm will set you back more than twice the price of a Bersa.

A friend has a S&W sub compact Sigma in 380. I agree with you and I think it's a stupid choice because S&W made the same thing in 9mm. However, he got it realllly cheap and there's nothing wrong with that.

I think something people often overlook is the importance of the platform and they over emphasize the caliber.
You find a platform you like for whatever reason (ergos, shootability, size, weight, etc) then pick a suitable cartridge.
I think a 380ACP is a good choice on the low end of power...but if you're going to get a subcompact that is offered in a bigger caliber then you should pick a bigger caliber.

[Edited on July 24, 2007 at 2:37 PM. Reason : ]

7/24/2007 2:33:15 PM

Good point.

7/25/2007 11:46:44 AM

Quote :

"You are aware that 21 feet is the legal limit in the state of North Carolina for using a firearm against an intruder with an edged weapon right? "

There is no legal limit for this. At most there may be some case law.

7/25/2007 7:48:19 PM

Quote :

"no price range hand gun... something not over the top. But a nice gun thats easy to handle and packs a punch "

how big? autopistol or revolver?

If you can swing the price, a SIG is the machine to beat, in my opinion. I had a P226 (full size, 9mm, double-stack mag) that was AWESOME. They make compacts and other calibers, too.

Quote :

"or I am actually looking to sell a sig p226 in .357 sig. PM me if interested for details"

that would be a killer pistol. I thought the calibers besides 9mm were called something else (i.e., 226=9mm)?

Quote :

"Ruger .22 pistol--it's all you need. The ammo is cheap, it's fun to plink with, and you don't have to be concerned about a big kick. In addition, you should be able to become quite accurate with it, which should offset any concern about lack of knockdown power. "

I love .22 target pistols (I've put about a zillion rounds through a High Standard Duramatic), and I also sure as hell don't wanna get shot by a .22LR, but a .22 as a self-defense round is inadequate. Like, ridiculously inadequate.

Quote :

"Not so concerning home defense. I can load the pistol with hollow points and put every round on the intruder's nose if I choose. "

That's the way the High Standard was. even out to 25 yards, I could put 10 rounds into a face sized target pretty quickly and consistently...and I'd never want to get shot with a .22 or anything else...and with the minimal recoil, I could put 10 rounds in your chest about as quickly as I could squeeze the trigger.

All of that said, if I'm ever in a position where I need to shoot someone, I want no question about whether or not I'm hitting him with something big or powerful enough, and I don't want to have to score a headshot (that STILL might not work with a .22, depending on where and how you hit) or empty the magazine into his chest. Where the chips are down and my adrenaline is pouring, I want to be able to make one or two decent shots to a large vital area (chest) and stop him.

Could I kill someone with a .22LR pistol? Sure. Would I ever choose one as a home/self-defense round? Not in a million years, and neither would hardly anyone else.

Quote :

"If you have to ask, you don't want 5.7mm "

Pretty much.

Quote :

"Handgun caliber arguments are stupid too. Get a 380ACP, 9x19mm, 40S&W, 45ACP, 38 Special, or 357 mag and learn to shoot it well. That's all you need to know. "

Exactly. The differences are all but academic between these when the bullet hits the bone (although unless you like a particular pistol that's chambered in 380, there's no reason to go lighter than 9mm, in my opinion).

Quote :

" FWIW, a .22LR shot out of a 22" barrel brings roughlt 115 ft/lbs to the table.] "

...and even less out of a 3-6" barrel on a handgun...and a far smaller wound channel.

Quote :

"And concerning the sound, you've obviously never heard a weapon shot indoors--the sound is significantly amplified. And it's even worse in a car."

I have. What's the problem? You worried about hearing loss or something? Maybe it'll startle you or something, but I'm pretty confident that the noise would hardly even register with me if I were in that situation.

Quote :

"Maybe just a decent shotgun is best for that situation?"

I'd say there's no "maybe" about it. You can't carry it, but for the home, a 12 gauge loaded with something like #1 buck would be my choice.

Quote :

"Consequently, the shooter will not be as likely to instinctively flinch, which could cause a miss, see? "

By the time you hear the "BANG", much less flinch, it's already a done deal. If you don't know how loud a pistol is without earplugs, you aren't gonna flinch anyway, b/c you don't know any better.

Quote :

"But you are probably going to have a lot of holes in the wall to repair and furniture to replace--unless you use slugs, which obviously require a bit of aiming and puts you back at square one. "

dude

why are you even worried about that? You're gonna have the same thing (just maybe on a lesser scale) after a squeezing a few rounds out of a pistol, esp since they'll likely penetrate more if you're using smaller (but still adequate) shot in the shotgun. Furthermore, a couple of quarts of blood pooled on the floor and sprayed on the walls and furniture is gonna make a helluva mess. Oh, and the legal expenses could prove substantial. I wouldn't be worried about pinching pennies in a situation where I was gonna kill someone. Either do it or don't do it, but if you do, trying to save yourself a couple or few hundred bucks in the process is stupid. It's a helluva lot more important to preserve your life. I mean, are you gonna be thinking "Dammit, cleaning up this blood and patching these holes in the wall is gonna suck" when you're squeezing the trigger? If so, you're either a complete buffoon who's likely to get whacked, or you need to consider a career as an assassin.

7/25/2007 9:06:51 PM

Quote :

"357Sig is a little hotter than the 9mm...at the expense of twice as much muzzle blast and recoil. It's too much noise for too little gain over the 9mm. The 357Sig can't push heavy bullets like the 357Mag. If you like 357Sig then that's great. I wouldn't recommend it to a beginner though. Heck, I wouldn't recommend it for myself and I shoot a lot. Just doesn't seem like a practical pistol cartridge. Just mho. "

Agreed. I wouldn't walk away from a good deal on a pistol I liked chambered for it, but I'd never go looking for .357 SIG.

Quote :

"It's a misconception that you don't have to aim when shooting shot. That's horribly wrong. Lets say the shot spread on a cylinder bore is 1" every yard. Well if the longest distance in your apartment is 21 feet then your shot is going to be 7 inches wide. Odds are you'll miss unless you're aiming. "

Totally agreed, but it is certainly easier to score good hits with a 12-gauge full of buckshot than with a pistol.

Quote :

"Pretty irrelevant when your life is on the line especially considering you can expect upwards of $60,000 - $100,000 in legal costs even if the shooting is justified. Also, shotguns loaded with shot are less likely to overpenetrate. I mean, they will, but not like a bullet. "

Haha, guess you beat me to it, and more succinctly at that.

Quote :

"And if you're so damned concerned about stopping power, LOAD FUCKING HOLLOW POINTS! Do you even know that hollow points exist for .22s? I ask because you haven't acknowledged that fact once. It's irrelevant, though; I guarantee that I can stop even the largest, meanest intruder with regular .22 ammo in a Ruger pistol--even if it takes five shots. And, yes, I am confident that I can get off at least five shots before he reaches me."

dude

a .22LR with hollow points is still nothing even approximating a reasonable self-defense round.

he probably didn't acknowledge that they exist because it's common knowledge to 95% of American males over the age of 12.

and I assert that you are mistaken if you think you can stop the largest, meanest intruder with a .22, particularly before he gets to you. I say this because I've seen cop videos of men shot with larger rounds who kept coming. I mean, say you can pull it off 50% of the time...prob even 75% of the time, maybe even more. Those may be good odds to you, but not to me. I want it to be all but certain that it is absolutely OVER if I make one or two good shots...no matter how pissed, scared, tweaked-out, pumped on adrenaline, or desperate my assailant may be.

Quote :

"In the end, 'foot-pounds of energy' is misleading, 'stopping power' is a myth, and the 'one-shot drop' is a rare possibility dependent more on the statistics of hit placement than weapon and ammunition selection "

Agreed, to an extent. I think that they're really referring more to it being silly to debate, say, 9mm versus .40 S&W or .45 ACP. If you take what they're saying to the extreme, it's no longer valid. I mean, if you take a gut-shot (much less a chest-shot) of .50 BMG, I guarantee you that those things matter more than with .22 LR.

Quote :

"In other words, a well-placed .22 caliber round can be far more lethal than a poorly placed .50 caliber machine gun round"

Well no shit, but again, you're taking it out of context. They're saying that round effectiveness hinges on severely damaging a lot of vital tissue--the more of it, the more severe, and the more vital, the better (in terms of effectiveness). All your bolded statement says is that no hardware can take shot placement out of the equation...which is hardly news or a convincing argument for choosing .22LR as a self-defense round.

Quote :

"While a .22 isn't the best choice for self defense, a .22 in the hand is worth a .45 in the safe. If a .22 is something you find you can carry ALL the time, it is better than the most tacticool .45 you only carry occasionally. Still, .380 is about the smallest I'd go for a defensive caliber, and with arms the size of P3AT, carrying a .22 just doesn't make tactical sense. But again.. if its the maximum firepower you are comfortable carrying... "

Agreed.

Quote :

"Really, though, .380 seems pointless to me anymore, as far as those little automatics like the PPK and such that everybody loves, since you can get 9mm or even .45s the same size. "

There are a few things only chambered in .380 (or at least chambered in nothing larger than .380). Bersa, SIG P232, PPK, etc. If you have or particularly like one of them (or something in 9x18, like a Makarov...which is a little hotter than .380, but still less than a 9mm), I wouldn't let the fact that it's on the low end of the power spectrum (at least out of things reasonable as self-defense rounds) concern you too much--it'll still do the job. Use the right ammo and learn to shoot it well, and it'll be ok. I'd never choose a .380 for the sake of it being a .380, though.

7/25/2007 9:07:27 PM

Quote :

"I thought the calibers besides 9mm were called something else (i.e., 226=9mm)? "

Nope. They make the 226 in 9mm, 40S&W, and 357Sig. They started making the 40 and 357 versions much later than the 9mm.
The only instance where the there are two similar guns chambered in different cartridges with different model names are the 228 and 229.
The 228 is exclusively 9mm, but they do make a 229 in 9mm in addition to 40 and 357. The difference is the 229 slide is machined while the 228 is stamped steel, otherwise they are the same gun in 9mm. The 229 started off as 40 and 357 only, then they later started making them in 9mm. Demand on the 228 was higher than the supply and they had the tooling here in the states for the 229 (228 is produced in Germany). The 40 and 357 mag wells in the 229 and 226 are hollowed out more to fit the fatter mags.

Quote :

"Totally agreed, but it is certainly easier to score good hits with a 12-gauge full of buckshot than with a pistol."

Saying it's easier to score good hits is the truth. People just don't realize it's not easier to score more hits.
If you get a 4 or 5 inch circle of lead balls flying at something then you've got a much better chance at hitting a vital with a decently placed shot. If your point of impact misses by a foot then 4 or 5 inches doesn't buy you anything.

[Edited on July 25, 2007 at 10:06 PM. Reason : i want more guns]

7/25/2007 10:00:15 PM

Anyone know anything about Baby Eagles?

7/25/2007 10:21:01 PM

man thats too many words.
Ill just stick with shooting skeet and my plans to get an over under 12 gauge. that'll be sure to hit someone if they try to break into my house!

7/25/2007 10:58:34 PM

Don't see many Baby Eagles around.
They're CZ 75 clones (like the EAA Witness) and from what I've heard on message boards they're the best CZ 75 clones on the market. Some say they've got better fit and finish than the CZs too.

It's not small unless you compare it to a Desert Eagle (and they're nothing alike in operation).

Never shot one, but if it's a CZ75 (or better) then it should be a great gun. That's a proven design.

7/25/2007 11:29:49 PM

^ I've rented a couple of Baby Eagles, and on one I had a couple of FTFs, the hammer dropped to half cock and that was it.. no bang. I couldn't explain it, and neither could the RO. Granted, it was a dirty range gun, but still.

7/26/2007 12:59:36 AM

Where do I begin, theDuke866:

Quote :

"I love .22 target pistols (I've put about a zillion rounds through a High Standard Duramatic), and I also sure as hell don't wanna get shot by a .22LR, but a .22 as a self-defense round is inadequate. Like, ridiculously inadequate."

Contradict yourself much? And most people don't want to get shot numerous times with a .22, either--that's the point.

Quote :

"Where the chips are down and my adrenaline is pouring, I want to be able to make one or two decent shots to a large vital area (chest) and stop him."

If you had bothered to read my posts, you would have noted that I indicated I would aim center mass--unless there were mitigating circumstances. The bullets-on-the-nose comment was included simply to emphasize the accuracy of a Ruger .22 pistol.

Quote :

"Could I kill someone with a .22LR pistol? Sure. Would I ever choose one as a home/self-defense round? Not in a million years, and neither would hardly anyone else."

Argumentum ad numerum ("argument or appeal to numbers"): "This fallacy is the attempt to prove something by showing how many people think that it's true. But no matter how many people believe something, that doesn't necessarily make it true or right."

Quote :

"Well no shit, but again, you're taking it out of context. They're saying that round effectiveness hinges on severely damaging a lot of vital tissue--the more of it, the more severe, and the more vital, the better (in terms of effectiveness). All your bolded statement says is that no hardware can take shot placement out of the equation...which is hardly news or a convincing argument for choosing .22LR as a self-defense round."

Again with the contradictions. What's likely to do more vital tissue damage, one or two shots from a .357 or 9mm or five to seven shots from an incredibly easy-to-control .22--probably loaded with hollow points? The answer is self-evident. And "taking it out of context"? No I fucking didn't--you're starting to sound like some of those guys in TSB.

Now, about these comments of yours:

Quote :

"If so, you're either a complete buffoon who's likely to get whacked, or you need to consider a career as an assassin."

Quote :

"he probably didn't acknowledge that they exist because it's common knowledge to 95% of American males over the age of 12."

I mean, are you trying to piss me off for some ulterior motive or something? Do joe_shithead and his merry band of left-wing moonbats want you to suspend me because they're tired of being pwnt in TSB?

In any event, you will note that I've always tried to follow the rules--don't fuck with the mods being one of them. But I don't expect a mod to arbitrarily fuck with me, either. If you can dish it out like this, then you ought to be able to take it.

7/26/2007 2:48:58 AM

as far as a semi-auto it is hard to beat a sig for reliablitiy. As far as revolvers, I lean towards S&W. I carry a SIG 229 on the job and like it better than any other gun I've used. It's got a really good weight per size ratio that allows you to recover from recoil and retarget quickly. As far as ammo, it doesn't really matter for personal use.

7/26/2007 8:21:15 AM

Quote :

"Contradict yourself much? And most people don't want to get shot numerous times with a .22, either--that's the point."

He's not contradicting himself.
It's like saying I wouldn't want a to be hit with a baseball bat and I also wouldn't want to be hit with a car.
They're on two different scales...

7/26/2007 9:17:04 AM

^ Use false analogies much? Your baseball bat-car analogy yields more differences than similarities when contrasted with an analogy of ammo calibers. GG.

7/26/2007 9:40:52 AM

Quote :

"It's like saying I wouldn't want a to be hit with a baseball bat and I also wouldn't want to be hit with a car. They're on two different scales..."

Let it go.

Most people understand there's a reason the police and military don't carry .22LR and why schools like Gunsite and Thunder Ranch don't suggest .22LR for CCW.

7/26/2007 9:47:59 AM

^ Who, me?

7/26/2007 10:46:52 AM

Yes, for the love of God, you. I've seen squirrels shot centermass with a .22 (even hollowpoint) that RAN away. Did they die? Oh, sure. But it was later, after they'd dodged more shots, and climbed a large tree. Yes, we know we'll die if shot with a .22 several times, but if we're shot once or twice in the body, it'll likely take a while, and it'll hurt, and there are plenty of badasses out there who would be very angry that you shot them with a small gun. Why are you trolling this so hard?

7/26/2007 11:40:37 AM