An excellent site to learn about the basics, concerning weapons for self/home defense, different types of ammo and their characteristics. The YT vids you linked to are pretty good and quite interesting (especially, to an experienced shooter) but a tad bit tedious for someone that’s new to shooting. YMMV
IMHO, The Box-O-Truth site is much easier to navigate thru and is a little more ‘scientific’(?), in the way they go about compiling and presenting the information. Opinions vary, of course. 
The ability of a handgun bullet’s ability to damage tissue through it’s temporary cavity is greatly overblown
Am I the only one who is thinking WTF?
The only significant wounding mechanism you’re looking at with a handgun bullet is the physical hole made by the bullet.
uhhhhh WTF?
Okay say we do this…tell me how you feel after
You put on a bullet proof vest, I stand in front of you at 10 yards with a 45. I shoot you in the chest, the vest stops the bullet and you think because there is no physical hole that you will not suffer any trauma? really? I suggest you will not be in the mood for anything except to pray that next breathe you take is not as painful as the one you just took.
no msg
A temporary cavity damages tissue by stretching it beyond its elastic limit. Handgun bullets lacks the ability to do this for most tissues.
I recommend reading research done by Martin Fackler for starters. Here’s one source you can try. I heartily recommend “Wound Ballistics: A Review of Common Misconceptions.” Martin L. Fackler, MD, JAMA, 259(18): 2730-2736, 5/13/88. That one doesn’t appear to be on-line anymore that I can find, but if you can’t get a copy from your local library I’d be happy to email you a pdf next week. Drop me a PM if you’re interested.
Another article of his which you can find on line, “What’s Wrong with Wound Ballistic Literature and Why,” can be found here, though it’s focused more towards the medical field.
You might also read this article by Urey Patrick of the FBI on handgun bullets and their limitations. It’s a nice summary of several sources.(pdf)
1), that’s not a temporary cavity, and 2), I never said getting shot while wearing a vest wouldn’t cause injury. And as for yourpoint I would be incapacitated, there are plenty of videos of line of actually shootings where people who have been shot without vests remain quite effective in moving and returning fire. Here’s a recent one from Oregon. Note that suspect John Van Allen had already suffered a fatal would when he reloaded, returned to his vehicle and drove away before finally succumbing to his injuries.
There’s a lot of research out there on how bullets inflict injury, and not all of it is intuitive. I would recommend reading some of the links above.
Not sure why you’re confused; s/he’s right. Go read a text on wound ballistics if you doubt what s/he wrote. I like Dr. Martin Fackler’s stuff, but YMMV. Alternately, this video of an ER Doc’s M&M conference on gunshot wounds might convince you. (Poop; youtube is making you sign in to view it. They didn’t do that before. Still an interesting, albeit 35 min long video.)
What you’ll see if you look at those links, the box of truth (love Ol’ Painless’s writing) or brassfetcher’s studies of ballistic gel penetration, is that handgun wounds resemble wounds from penetration with a drill the width of the projectile. There usually is very little damage to surrounding tissue not directly crushed by the projectile. This is emphatically not the case with a fragmenting high-velocity centerfire rifle bullet.
What does all of this mean? It turns out that handguns are poor at killing—from the video, either 5 out of 6 (or 6 out 7, I forget) people shot with a handgun will survive. To stop an assailant with a handgun requires either disruption of the assailant’s central nervous system—i.e., shoot him in the head—or crushing enough vascular tissue that the assailant either rapidly bleeds out or his respiratory system is fatally compromised. This can take awhile. To get the requisite amount of damaged vascular tissue, we need to make a wide hole in the assailant, as well as a deep one.
The FBI, after a famously botched shootout in Miami, settled on 12 inches of penetration in ballistic gelatin as the requirement for their handguns. Isn’t that excessive though? Whose chest is 12 inches across? Sure, if you’re shooting him straight on, contacting the chest with the muzzle. Often though, stuff gets in the way. Like limbs. This was the case with one of the 9mm bullets fired by an FBI officer in the Miami shootout. He hit the bad guy in the forearm, breaking it, and the bullet continued into his chest. But not quite deep enough to hit the heart and aorta, leaving the bad guy mortally wounded, yet still able to use his rifle to kill 2 agents and cripple a few others. Killed, but not stopped. Oh, and the FBI agent, Jerry Dove, shot both of his 15 shot magazines completely dry, for those wondering why someone would “need” a high-capacity magazine. He was one of the ones killed.
Returning to the OP, the disadvantage of .22LR vs larger handgun calibers is that the hole made by the .22 is smaller. Albeit it can show greater penetration than many larger, expanding handgun bullets. Unfortunately, brassfetcher’s site hasn’t been the same since the re-design awhile ago, and the .22LR results aren’t available. Suffice to say, it makes a narrow, long hole, given enough velocity. Fackler does have a .22LR wound profile at the top of page 3 of the link I mentioned. From it, impacting at 1150 fps, it travels 36 cm in the gelatin, over the 12 inches I mentioned. But it’s a narrow hole.
The advantage of larger calibers is that they can fire wider, heavier projectiles than can expand wide, while still making that vital 12 inch of penetration. The .45 ACP round I have for my pistol will expand to over 3/4 inch in diameter while still penetrating 12 inches. As the linked chart shows, barriers can interfere with the bullet expanding as desired. Still, even un-expanded, the hole is nearly 1/2 inch across.
I will agree with the poster who mentioned that, if the .22LR pistol is the one you’re most comfortable using, and are the most accurate with, then use it in lieu of using some hand cannon you’re not familiar with. Really though, at home, my unprofessional recommendation is to use either a rifle or a shotgun. A minimum length barrel AR-pattern rifle, with adjustable stock and light, chambered in 5.56mm preferably using lighter bullets, seems better than the shotgun, but also YMMV. Proper ammunition selection can yield a bullet that penetrates barriers less than either buckshot or handgun bullets, yet has sufficient power and penetration to stop an assailant. Box of truth has some tests that lean that way, others can be easily googled.
EDIT: Well, damn it, Patch seems to have ninja’d a lot of what I had to say. I’ll just add that you can find plenty of videos of people getting shot with vests—Second Chance’s CEO was renowned for doing it at demonstrations while standing on one leg—and being perfectly fine. David Arroyo didn’t seem to be stopped by getting plunked with repeated .45 ACP rounds to center of mass either, unfortunately for Mark Wilson. Wilson, IIRC, shot his magazine dry too.
By golly I took your advise and read up…go figure a counter argument.
As more and more data becomes available, theories change. Evan Marshall wrote definitive studies in 1992, 1996 and 2000 after examining the results of thousands of actual shootings. His conclusions came as a result of actual shootings and not from firing bullets into wet newspaper, gelatin or some other artificial medium.
His data is based on “one shot stops”. This is defined as: 1. a single hit to anywhere on the body not counting the head, neck or extremity shot: 2. when a subject stops shooting or striking blows if that was what he was doing and 3. runs no more than 10 feet before collapsing. In other words, Marshall’s studies examine what happens in the first few seconds after a shooting.
In the past decade, major advances have been made in bullet design which adds to the lethality of the projectile. Every major US bullet manufacturer has their own proprietary projective which they claim is best for the job at hand. New calibers such as the 357 SIG have appeared on the scene while more data has been accumulated on relatively new bullets such as the 40 Smith & Wesson. Marshall’s newest study takes these events into consideration.
32 ACP - Most of the smaller caliber firearms such as this caliber and the .380 ACP are carried as “back-up” guns by law enforcement thus the increase in data from actual police shootings. The CorBon 62 gr. JHP round was involved in 17 shootings with 11 one shot stops which achieved a 65% rating followed closely by the Winchester 60 grain Silvertip which was fired 162 times and caused 104 stops for a 64% rating. The Federal 65 grain Hydra-Shok and the CCI 60 grain Gold Dot achieved one shot stops 63% and 60% of the time.
380 ACP - The top rounds in this category were the Federal 90 grain Hydra-Shok and the CorBon 90 grain JHP+P which both rated a 70% one shot stop rating. While Federal 90 grain FMJ ammo was used in a whopping 245 shootings, it only achieved 55% one shot stops.
38 Special - With the introduction of semi-auto pistols, this caliber was relegated to secondary status. This data is from 2 and 3 inch revolvers which limit muzzle velocity & therefore results are less than other comparable calibers. Both the Winchester and Federal 158 grain LHP+P offerings were involved in 158 shootings with the Winchester round making 121 single shot stops for a 68% rating and the Federal loading making 120 one shot stops for a 67% rating. Most all of the 16 loadings examined fell in the 60 percent range with the Federal 125 grain Nyclad LHP+P round earning a 61% rating. It’s clear than the long-used 158 grain lead hollowpoint pushed to +P pressures is the best round for this caliber.
357 Magnum - Once the king of law enforcement handguns, this caliber has also been replaced by large capacity auto-pistols. The data collected for this caliber came from 2 and 3 inch revolvers, not the longer barreled type. The top round was the Remington 124 grain JHP followed by the same loading by Federal. Both loads achieved a 91% one hit stop rating. Most other loads ranked in the 80% area with the Federal 158 grain Hydra-Shok achieving a 78% rating.
357 SIG - This is the most current law enforcement cartridge and therefore, shooting data is limited. The top rated cartridges were the Remington and Federal 125 grain JHPs. Both were rated at 91% one shot stops. Of the 9 loads evaluated, the poorest was the Federal 158 grain Hydra-Shok which was involved in 41 shootings with 32 one shot stops for a 78% rating.
9mm - This was the first semiauto pistol to be used extensively by police agencies and replaced the 38 Special and 357 Magnum round. Early loadings of the 147 grain round caused major stopping problems however current 147 grain designs are vastly superior. Clearly the best 9mm loads are those driven to +P+ pressures. Of the 20 loadings evaluated, the top load was the Federal 115 grain JHP +P+ involved in 209 shootings with 190 one shot stops for a 91% rating. The Winchester 115 grain JHP +P+ and 127 grain Ranger SXT +P+ both had 90% one shot stops. All five loads driven to +P+ pressures ranked in the top 5 followed by all bullets loaded to +P pressures. Rounds manufactured to standard pressure ratings comprised the bottom 12 loadings in the study.
40 S&W - This caliber has become extremely popular with law enforcement agencies due to the perceived deficiencies of the 9mm round. All manufacturers have at least 2 loadings of this caliber and it has served very well. The Remington 165 grain Golden Saber was used in 311 shootings and made 292 one shot stops for a 94% rating followed closely by the CCI 165 and 155 grain loadings and the Federal 155 grain Hydra-Shok bullet. These 3 loads made 93% one shot stops. Other manufacturers loads in the 90% range were the Federal 155 grain JHP and the CorBon 135 and 150 grain JHP bullets. Thirteen other loadings were evaluated with the poorest being the Winchester 180 grain FMJ that was involved in 134 encounters and made 95 (71%) one shot stops.
45 ACP - This caliber has been around for almost 100 years and is still the top rated round. More police agencies are using this round due to its proven stopping ability. The large diameter, heavy bullet is the basis for the “momentum” theory of stopping power however actual results in shootings show a mix of “light and fast” and “slow and heavy” rounds. The Remington 185 grain Golden Saber was involved in 148 shootings and caused 142 one shot stops for a 96% rating followed closely by the Federal 230 grain Hydra-Shok which caused 200 one shot stops in 211 shootings for a 95% rating. Eight of the 16 loadings examined rated above 90% one shot stops while 5 others rated in the 80s. The poorest stoppers were the Remington, Federal and Winchester 230 grain FMJ rounds which achieved 62% one shot stops.
To the OP: a .22LR handgun is better than nothing. I would strongly advise stepping up to, at the minimum, a 9mm handgun, but everything is dictated by your comfort level. I would also advise that “better than nothing” isn’t a ringing endorsement.
:rolleyes:
The OP should get a Michigan CCW. It’s good in 40 states.
If you’re willing to spend the money you can get multiple permits and raise the number to about 44 states.
When you travel ignore the alarmists and take 5 minutes to peruse the internet to know where/when you can carry in the area of your destination. Once you start carrying regularly you get very cognizant of being armed and where/when you can be.
Also, every airline I know allows an unloaded firearm in your CHECKED bags. I’ve flown zillions of times around the entire country with a pistol in my checked bag. It’s no big deal. You just declare it when you check in and sign an orange card that sits on the gun so they can see it on X-ray.
You just have to have the ammo separate from the weapon.
As for a .22, it wouldn’t be my first choice. But if that’s the largest you can competently shoot, then by all means carry it. It’s better than being defenseless. I’m willing to bet you can’t throw rocks @ 1200 feet per second.
Regular shooting, combat courses, good instruction, actually firing your weapon in your house. Any order you like. More important than all the other stuff combined. IMO.
I have heard that a lot of house wives who have had none of the above experience are really slow to do what they should in a confrontation.
Some say it is because they don’t want to make a mess or they fire once & are so traumatized by the noise that they have a bad reaction .
5 gal bucket ½ full of sand with an old pillow case rubber banded over the top placed in a few different spots and they weapon they are likely to use, they use to make a shot into the bucket.
.357 Mag in the house hurts… A lot…
Some actually keep a bucket near the front & back door. Trouble coming at them? " I am a crazy woman & I am armed." Then put a round into the bucket.
Not sure even a crazed meth head would keep trying to get into that house.
YMMV
Gonna stop you right there and recommend you further your reading list. Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow have well known problems with their one-shot stop data and methodology. They also went off on a strong anti- 9mm subsonic kick, which caused a lot of credibility problems for the pair which, frankly, extends into the one-shot-stop nonsense.
Book Review, Handgun Stopping Power: The Definitive Study
Discrepancies in the Marshall & Sanow “Data Base”: An Evaluation Over Time
Book Review, Street Stoppers: The Latest Handgun Stopping Power Street Results
The Marshall & Sanow “Data” - Statistical Analysis Tells the Ugly Story
There’s also an article of which I have a copy, but cannot cite (“The 9mm 147 sub-Sonic is Alive and Well!”, by S/T Steve Campebell and Sgt Mike Dunlap, in response to an article in Law and Order v40#9 by Ed Sanow, “The Rise and Fall of the 9mm Subsonic Hollowpoint”), as the copy didn’t reproduce where it came from. :smack: In the article they point out five cases where Sanow was completely, horribly wrong, which calls into question their level of research. For example:
Oops.
Follow-up letters in v40#11 of Law and Order also call some of the same claims into question.
I also again recommend reading the article by Urey Patrick I linked to earlier, as well as visiting the M4Carbine.net’s forum on Terminal Ballistics.
I did a bit of anecdotal research as I watched the assassination attempt on Reagan by Hinckley using a 22 long rifle hand gun. The video evidence speaks for itself. Four were shot one time, three went down immediately and one did not know he was shot until later. At close range the secret service agent shot in the mid section was lifted off his feet and collapsed to the ground. Brady shot in the head collapsed to the ground followed by Officer Thomas Delahanty who collapsed next to Brady after being shot in the neck.
By the bullet? Was the bullet made from a neutron star?
maybe
You need to stop watching those made-for-TV movies.
Several years ago, Mythbusters fired a .50 BMG into Buster. Went through a steel plate and lodged in the steel spine of the dummy, thus all the energy was absorbed by Buster. He was knocked back all of 2 inches.
Alexander Jason being shot at point blank range by a 7.62mm NATO bullet at point blank range. He repeats it while standing on one foot. If he’s not moving, what do you seriously think a snub-nose .22LR will do?
Barring a central nervous system hit or the destruction of supporting bone structure, a bullet doesn’t knock you down. Your reaction is what knocks you down.
Oooh… here’s another one. Point-blank range with a .40S&W.
Anyway, we’re way off topic now, but I think the OP has the info he/she is looking for?
See, that’s the problem. MSG adds the “yummy” factor that Cantonese food needs, because otherwise it’s totally bland.
A neutron star bullet to impress a superstar, by an expansive definition of “superstar!”
Fun video, How far will a .22 LR Kill? The fun part is the first two minutes where they show the ability of a .22 Short to penetrate a 1/2" pine board. But I’m a sucker for small calibers.
If your goal is protection, you seldom need a powerful handgun; you never want a handgun you can’t manage. If you do own a handgun, you want to know how to use it.
For firearms practices, you want a .22, because the rounds are cheap.
For home defense, you want a shot gun, because aiming at 3:00 am in the dark is not easy, and a large dog, because a) you don’t have to out-run the bear …, and 2) licensing is easier.
For traveling, you want a tire iron, air horn, and cell phone.
(Lots of people say a .22 round won’t stop someone; I wouldn’t know, but no-one who has said that has shown me a bullet wound …)
Damn it, this meme really needs to die. You need to aim a shotgun. The pattern spreads at most a foot across at typical home engagement distances. It is horribly effective should you hit the assailant with most of the pattern, and s/he’s unarmored, but you still need to aim the thing. Again, the box of truth goes into this in detail. Further, a shotgun is going to kick a lot more than any 5.56 rifle will. This might be a concern if you’re recoil sensitive. Follow up shots are going to take a lot longer with the shotgun.
Read the stuff Patch linked to. It’s really informative and helped fight my ignorance.
Even less than that. 1 inch per yard. So 21 feet is only 7 inches.
Also, most shotguns only hold a few shells and you reload one at a time.
Consider the OP’s goal - to protect the family in the event of home invasion. Scaring a person away is as effective as shooting them in many instances.
Shotguns are very good for scaring people, and have a larger target radius. They may not be a perfect home defense tool, but they are better than a poorly aimed 38/44.