Rimfires and Self Defense

The .22 Long Rifle cartridge has a long and rich heritage, and it is superb for target shooting and small-game hunting. As a self-defense loading, it has several major shortcomings. There are very few realistic situations where it can be considered viable.

To its credit, the .22 LR produces only slight recoil, facilitaing easier follow-up shots. The size of the cartridge allows it to be chambered in smaller pistols. Ammunition is cheap and widely available, and in countries that ban civilian use of service calibers, it may be the only alternative available.

Balancing out its meager virtues, one must consider the fact that rimfire ignition can be unreliable. Quite simply, you’re going to have duds. This is patently unacceptable for a platform that should be expected to perform under unpredictable and dire circumstances. A gun that fails in the face of violence is the most dangerous thing you could possibly hold in your hand.

Most loadings tend to generate a great deal of fouling, and smaller designs must be kept absolutely clean to ensure regular function.

Ballistic performance is disappointing to say the least. From a pistol, you’re sending a small bullet weighing ~30-40gr at subsonic velocities. Even the well-regarded CCI Stinger load fails to achieve 12″ of penetration in gelating, long considered to be the minimum acceptable standard (pdf).

If you must carry a small gun, there are plenty of small handguns in production in proven calibers such as .38 Special or 9mm.

I’d like to address some of the rationalizations I’ve seen in support of carrying the .22 LR in self-defense.

“It’s better than nothing!”

So is a knife, a pool cue, or a broken Johnny Walker bottle. When confronted with the prospect of being maimed or killed by a sociopathic junkie, “better than nothing” is scant consolation at best.

“Well, if it’s so anemic, why don’t you stand over there and let me shoot you with it? C’mon!”

I get this one a lot, and the sentiment is usually delivered with an equally sophomoric tone. Frankly, I don’t want fire ants dumped down my pants, either. That doesn’t mean that fire ants are a valid means of self-defense.

“Statistics say it kills more people than any other load.”

Absolutely true, but the point isn’t to kill. It’s to neutralize a clear and present threat, and do so as quickly as possible. A .22 can do serious damage, and it might strike and compromise vital organs. Then again, it might lodge in a bone, causing pain but failing to incapacitate. It does you no good if your adversary manages to finish what he started, only to die of blood loss or infection several hours later.

The literature is rife with officer-involved shootings with more powerful calibers in which the adversary was struck but did not realize it. Even the most highly-regarded handgun calibers can fail to stop a determined attacker motivated by adrenaline, rage or drugs. Given the large number of variables in any self-defense shooting and the questionable effectiveness of any handgun caliber, using something as feeble as the .22 isn’t something I’d recommend.

“Heck, just the sight of a gun in your hand is enough to deter a bad guy!”

Let’s hope we don’t have to put that to the test, shall we? It’s true that most self-defense scenarios with firearms result in no shots being fired, but what if you find yourself in a different situation? I can testify from personal experience that an attacker may not even notice the gun until he’s closed to an unacceptable distance. Shootings happen fast, under strenuous circumstances, and almost always in low-light situations. You simply cannot depend on visual deterrence.

“Hey Mr. Smarty Britches, everyone knows that the Mossad/Navy SEAL/CTU guys use .22’s!”

Sure, but you have to consider the situation. I’ve been able to verify that suppressed Ruger pistols are in use by the SEALS, and there appears to be some credibility to Jonas’ accounts that the Mossad used Beretta 87’s while hunting down Black September. But their missions, situations and uses for the gun are different than those of a civilian.

“Well, I just carry it as a backup. My primary is a [insert whatever gun is on the cover of Guns & Ammo this month].”

Again, we’re back to reliability and effectiveness. If you’re falling back to a secondary weapon, things have gotten pretty darned hairy. Either your primary weapon is not powerful enough, or it has suffered a failure of some sort. In either case, your backup better be 100% reliable and at least as powerful. The .22 doesn’t fit either criteria.

Lastly, “well, I carry a .454 Casull, but my wife/girlfriend/mother doesn’t need that. She just needs a .22.”

Wow, pat yourself on the back; you’re a first-class blockhead. You don’t feel comfortable going out loaded for anything short of bear, but your female companion, who is more likely to be the victim of violence than you, only justifies a caliber capable of killing groundhogs? Tell you what: I’ll dump some fire ants down your pants, and you can extricate them while she gets competent instruction. C’mon!

And don’t complain when it turns out she can outshoot you.

In closing, I’m not a fan of the .22 for the deterrence or cessation of violence. It’s a marvelous caliber within its limits, but most anyone carrying a firearm for self-defense would be served by something more potent.

//

Afterthought: some people will be limited to something this small. Those with chronic arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome or low hand strength may not be able to handle the recoil of a larger caliber. If you find yourself in this situation, consider a .25. While still quite iffy in the ballistics department, it’s a centerfire cartridge, so it will be more reliable.

Stick with ball ammunition, as hollowpoints will not expand enough to be effective. As with the milder .32 calibers, you get either penetration or expansion, but you don’t get both. A friend in Florida was once shot twice with .25 hollowpoints. One was stopped almost completely by his clothing, and while the second did penetrate enough to cause injury, the would was shallow, and the only hospitalization needed was a tetanus shot. A conical bullet has the best chance to do serious damage.

If you’re set on the .22, give serious consideration to a revolver rather than an automatic. Should a round fail to ingite, you can cycle to the next with only a trigger pull. If an automatic jams, you will need to rely on fine motor skills to clear it, something you will not have in a confrontation.

In any case, find the best loads you can, and make sure your gun feeds them well. Practice as much as possible!