Two things;
Your porcupine is naked and small, humans ain’t. There’s no guarantee that that .22 will reliably expand and/or penetrate deeply enough to stop a human.
Everything you want to know here,
Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness
Special Agent Urey W. Patrick, Firearms Training Unit,
FBI Academy, Quantico (PDF!)
CMC fnord!
IIRC, the bullet that hit Reagan hit the limo first and got kinda pancaked. It left a small slit instead of a round hole. It also hit the President under his armpit. Reagan complained about chest pain. This made it a bit hard for them to figure out where the bullet went in at first.
There was a .22 Win Magnum Rimfire carbine marketed for Paramilitary use, primarily in South America. Dunno how popular it became/is/was.
Some people seem to have the impression that the .22lr isn’t very dangerous, comparatively. That’s absolutely not true. It will certainly penetrate car doors, phonebooks, clothes, 2x4’s, and meat. It will do a pretty nasty job on soft tissue, even at longer ranges like 200+ yds.
It’s not used in the military because it’s not as good as the ammo we use now, that’s true enough. But the .22lr isn’t known as “the most dangerous round” because it’s a harmless little plinking toy – it seems small, but can be plenty lethal, especially using hot loaded hollowpoints.
Stories of people not noticing a hit abound with any type of ammo except for maybe a .50bmg - the whole knocked down/fall over dead hing is more a result of hollywood than real life. “Stopping power” and all of the considerations upthread (which are mostly accurate) aside, the .22lr has more than enough power to deserve some respect. It’s just that the needs of military use are better suited with other rounds.
As mentioned above, any ammunition other than fully jacketed rounds is prohibited by the Hague convention, the original theory being that a wound that can take a soldier out of action (which frankly, is most wounds) hopefully won’t be more lethal than necessary. This basically outlaws unjacketed rounds (which may shatter, spreading lead fragments) and hollow point bullets (of which dum-dums are a homemade variety) which mushroom on impact, delivering maximum kinetic force to target.
This convention is of course exactly as naive as it sounds. It basically means that firing on enemy combatants with standard hunting rounds is a war crime, while firing with 20mm explosive rounds from a Bushmaster is not. Likewise, the .223 is known (though somewhat debated) to cause massive hydrostatic shock, also something not at all factored in by the Hague convention.
In reply to the OP: the other posters pretty much nailed it. The .22 is not so much lighter as to be worth the reduction in range, accuracy and kinetic energy of a larger bullet.
Yet oddly the modest .22LR is the deadliest round in America. A lot of people shot with them survive, but more die from little tiny holes than from great big ones.
Your cite is an interesting read; according to it, the single most significant factor is penetration. That is followed by calibre. Expansion is a bonus but you can’t rely on it.
In short, it is not that the .22 is too “small” in diameter; arguably, it is that the .22 is too “weak” to penetrate the required 12 inches of flesh. According to the criteria mentioned in your cite, a larger calibre may have greater penetration or it may not; if the smaller calibre can penetrate the required minimum, it is to be preferred to the larger calibre which cannot.
As to the lethality of .22 in military use, this makes an interesting read:
Summary: the Israeli army develops a .22 rifle for "non lethal’ sniper work (to take out rioters by shooting them in the legs) based on a lot of the same assumptions people have here - that it’s not really a lethal round because it is so small; only to discover that, in fact, it kills people all the time. Worse, because soldiers think it isn’t really very lethal, they are more likely to use it unwisely, leading to unwanted deaths.
Tests follow, and the Israelis reclassify it as a “lethal” weapon.
The moral appears to be: do not underestimate the lethality of .22 ammo.
Who calls it “the most dangerous round” ? I’d think it’s dangerous mostly because people do underestimate it, not because it causes a worse wound than a .38, or 9mm, or .223. If someone told me “I’m going to shoot you from 10 ft away, but you can pick the caliber”, I’d pick .22 every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Do you have a cite for that? A few years ago, you made a similar claim, which frankly only makes sense if you count suicides.
I’ve heard the story about 22 caliber also. I can’t find a stat for total fatalities by caliber, but I found one for police officers and it only shows 22 out of 545 for .22.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2004/table34.htm
The numbers might be skewed because a lot of police officers are shot with their own weapons, but not by that much.
The reason it’s dangerous is because (like the IDF mentioned above) it seems like a toy round. Plus, the ammo is extremely cheap, and so are the guns that shoot it. It’s by no means the most lethal round, but given the ubiquity of the .22lr, it’s involved in more shootings – accidental, semi-accidental (read dipshit on a dare), and purposeful shootings by criminals, etc.
I’m not sure if it’s backed up by solid statistics; I would take the description as being a useful reminder that the .22lr is in fact a serious, plentiful, and underestimated round.
It is a lethal round up to 200 yards from a rifle and a round that can pass through a half inch of wood, of which there are very few. Some rounds are able to produce 200 foot/pounds of energy.A 5.25 ounce baseball pitched at 90mph or 132 fps generates 89 foot pounds of of energy.An overhead swing with a four pound dead blow hammer is about 200 foot pounds.
An Aquila 30 grain at 1740 fps produces over 200 foot pounds.
A CCI Velocitor penetrates 10% gel at 13.5 inches.
From a .22 handgun the CCI Stinger, 32 gr copper-plated hollow point gets over 13 inches of penetration because it is subsonic and the hollow point does not expand.
This is the performance in firefights:
.22 (short, long and long rifle)
% of hits that were fatal - 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation - 1.38
% of people who were not incapacitated - 31%
One-shot-stop % - 31%
Accuracy (head and torso hits) - 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit) - 60%
Because you are not numbed by a .22, the pain is felt quicker and incapacitate begins earlier.
**I have heard of students of a French military academy using .22s to pin down Germans in WW2, but I have not been able to confirm it. **
Israel uses the 10/22:
http://isayeret.com/updates/2007.shtml
http://feraljundi.com/223/weapons-the-israeli-ruger-1022-suppressed-sniper-rifle/
Yes.
I have personally used a .22 caliber round in a suppressed auto-pistol in wartime.
I used one today.
What? It’s wartime, isn’t it?
It’s worth noting that most police issued ammunition is hollow point, regardless of caliber, not only for the stopping power of the round. The other very important reason the police use hollow point rounds is to limit collateral damage. If an officer fires at a target and misses (which seems to be the majority of the rounds they fire judging from several news reports over the years. IE: cops fire 50 rounds at a suspect, but only hit him 9 times) a hollow point will break apart if it contacts a solid object vs. a jacketed round which will pass through and pose a threat to innocent bystanders.
During WW2 the US army Parachuted/smuggled in a single-shot pistol (made by General Motors, btw) to the underground in Nazi occupied Europe; idea was to hide this tiny gun on your person, quickly pop a jerry at point blank range, and relieve him of his more substantial ordnance. .22 round, I believe.
You’re talking about the FP-45 Liberator, which was chambered in .45 ACP.
This is sort-of-but-not-quite right. The reason law enforcement agencies almost universally issue or require the use of hollowpoint ammunition in duty sidearms is twofold; hollowpoint rounds generally require fewer hits to disable a threat thereby reducing the number of shots fired; and provided that they expand hollowpoint bullets tend to control overpenetration, so that a bullet that hits the target in the torso area tends to remain in the torso. Hollowpoint rounds also have less tendency to be deflected by hard surfaces like glass or skull, as they tend to deform plastically rather than bounce elastically. The 147 grain “subsonic” 9mmP has gotten a fairly poor reputation for law enforcement use not because it is an ineffectual round but because it has a tendency to get plugged and not expand, which has led to a number of different designs to promote expansion. The .40 S&W and .45 ACP, which still provide adequate penetration while offering lower sectional density and correspondingly greater propensity to fully expand, have become preferred, albeit to some extent due to marketing by ammunition and firearms manufacturers.
People are often quick to criticize peace officers for firing what seems to be an obscene number of rounds, and it is certainly the case for many departments that weapon training does not receive the focus and rigor that it should for a profession in which officers may be required to use a weapon in defense, but the difficulty in accurately firing a handgun under real world defensive conditions (against a moving and hostile target, in variable lighting, under enormous stress and adrenal response) is not appreciated by most people who do not have direct experience in these conditions. Developing the kind of “coolness under fire” to maintain adequate (much less marksmanship) grade accuracy requires several hundred hours of the kind of stress training that most patrol officers experience in only a handful of range sessions, if at all.
As for the question of the o.p. the .22 LR simply doesn’t have the range or penetration through armor to be effective as a round for general infantry use, so except for suppressed weapons used by special forces units it has not been adopted. The AR-7 “survival rifle” was adopted by the US Air Force as a survival tool for downed pilots but was not primarily intended for defensive use and had a very poor reputation for reliability (setting aside the fact that attempting to survive by hunting small game with a rifle is something of a fool’s errand) and was discontinued as an issued weapon.
If you are referring to the FP-45 ‘Liberator’, it was chambered in .45 ACP, and I don’t know of a single documented instance of it actually being used. It would take a lot of guts and no small amount of luck to be able to get up close enough to an armed soldier to make use of it; the short, smooth-bore barrel and single shot capacity (requiring partial disassembly to extract the spent case and reload) makes it functionally equivalent to a percussion cap fired black powder pistol, which I would frankly have more confidence in firing without blowing one’s hand off.
Stranger