Small Caliber, Rimfire Ammo for Self-Defense?

What philosophy is right? Should .22's be avoided like a pawn-shop Highpoint? Or is there a case to be made for small caliber, rimfire ammo in a self-defense context?

Let's face it, our ultimate goal, if we use our firearm in a self-defense incident, is to stop the threat.

I am sure you have heard that:

“the .22 round should never be carried for self-defense ever, under any circumstances.”

or

‘better to have a .22 when you need it than not have anything?'

How do our bullets stop the threat?

Change of heart: 

A large number of incidents end without firing a shot. When the threat sees that the target is armed, they stop. So here, the caliber would be irrelevant.

Loss of blood/shock:

Wounds to specific organs or the circulatory system cause blood loss. When the attacker loses enough blood, they will go into shock and be unable to continue the attack. Depending on the location of the wound, this could take 20-30 seconds or a few minutes. All things being equal, larger calibers will produce larger wound channels.

However, when it comes to stopping a threat, shot placement is more important than the size of the hole.

We can compare the difference in penetration between smaller/larger calibers or faster/slower calibers to cause fatal injuries. But even a .22LR can penetrate deep enough to create a wound where shock/death from blood loss could result.

The biggest issue with .22LR as a pistol round is that it doesn't consistently penetrate deep enough to reach vital organs. This is why it's not ideal for self-defense.

Skeletal/Structural Damage:

Projectiles can stop a threat by destroying the skeletal support that allows motion or the ability to continue the attack. For example, damage to bones in the pelvic girdle, critical to locomotion, can ultimately make it impossible for the attacker to advance. An injury to the arm or hand that would hold a weapon would make retaining the gun all but impossible. In this case, caliber is more critical, as small-caliber projectiles fired from handguns don't carry enough energy to destroy the thick bone.

Physical pain:

Maybe the most obvious would be just the pain of being shot. These injuries don't have to be in vital areas or even cause fatal or severe injuries. The attacker stops because they don't like the pain caused when chunks of lead are blasted into their body. We can point out that motivated/crazed/drugged attackers may not be affected by this pain stimulus. In these incidents, they would have to be stopped by one of the other methods. However, cases where attackers are deterred by pain, a .22LR would likely produce enough pain to stop them.

Central Nervous System Damage:

The medulla oblongata controls automated systems of our bodies like our cardiac (heartbeat) and respiratory (breathing). The medulla oblongate is a structure located at the base of the brain. Damage to this part of the brain often immediately stops the attacker, no matter how motivated they are.

The skull is quite good at protecting the brain, so targeting this area is usually through the soft tissue areas between the eyes, covering the nose down to the top of the mouth. You often see this triangle on the faces of range targets.

Check out this podcast episode where Riley and Jacob discuss .22LR for self-defense:

Don't we Want to use the Caliber That Will Give us the Best Chance of Killing the Attacker?

No!

Notice that nowhere did I mention the propensity to cause death as a factor. That's because the threat's survival is not a direct concern for our use of force.

Our concern is that we stop the threat.

In other words, if our force leads to the attacker's death or not is irrelevant. That does not preclude us from targeting areas of the body that are more likely to result in death. But our reasoning for targeting these areas is not to ensure the threat dies. It is to stop the threat as quickly as possible. Often this means targeting the central nervous system.

When would this be important? How about an attacker who refuses to stop after being shot several times in the chest and closing the distance. At a certain point, you may decide that you are losing options as your ammunition is depleted or your ability to create space or escape disappears. Would targeting the brain stem to more efficiently and quickly stop the threat be reasonable? I would say yes.

How do small caliber rimfire options perform?

If everything is equal, ammunition produces faster speeds, kinetic energy, and penetration when fired through a gun with a longer barrel. So it is essential to look at how these rounds perform in guns like revolvers which typically have very short barrels.

When it comes to rimfire options, your viable options are .22LR and .22WMR ammunition. Both rounds come in a hollow point variety. I only mention this because regardless of the caliber, (HP) hollow points should be used exclusively for home/self-defense as opposed to full metal jacketed (FMJ) rounds. A few years back, Hunter Elliot from RangeHot.com did a thorough ballistics test on the .22WMR, and here you can see what the results were. Here you can see precisely how the .22WMR faired when compared to a popular .380 self-defense round. When comparing the .22LR to .22WMR head-to-head, all tests point out that the .22WMR is a better choice for personal self-defense.

Suprising Ballistics?

Some people don't care much for ballistics tests like these. Nevertheless, the .22WMR's performance is rather impressive. Not only does the .22WMR perform well compared to the .22LR but even when compared to other more popular self-defense calibers like .38 special and .380. Do the results merit consideration for self-defense? It is a highly personal choice, but many people use .380's for self-defense, and so based on the findings, the .22WMR may be a consideration.

To say .22LR semi-autos like the Ruger SR22's are finicky would be an absurd understatement. When using your run-of-the-mill .22LR plinking ammo, you are lucky to get through a magazine without a malfunction. Luckily companies like Federal, Hornady, Magnum, etc., make reliable, high-velicity ammunition in .22WMR. So the issue with ammunition-induced malfunctions is reduced substantially.

Another thing to consider is the capacity and controllability of the gun with a specific cartridge. Comparatively, a smaller round will give you a higher capacity, and this is always welcome. Additionally, the .22LR and .22WMR cartridges produce such light recoil that even the most recoil-sensitive shooters would easily be able to control the gun and hammer follow-up shots accurately.

What Options Are There?

Many think that the only guns chambered in .22WMR are minuscule, single-shot revolvers. If that were the case, I wouldn't even bother writing this article because these guns are a terrible self-defense option. But there are many viable options if you choose to use the .22WMR for self-defense. Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Charter Arms, and Taurus all make 1.8″ barrel, J-frame type revolvers chambered in .22WMR. AMT (not around anymore) Kel-Tec and Armscor produce semi-autos chambered in .22WMR. If you open your options to the .22LR variety, there are even more gun models to choose from. But again, because the .22WMR is a more viable option for self-defense when compared to.22LR I focus more on these guns.

 

What is the Verdict on Small Caliber, Rim Fired Ammo?

In my opinion, you are still unlikely to get me to switch from 9mm to a .22WMR for my self-defense gun. And I am not suggesting that the .22WMR is even close to being considered the best self-defense round. In doing some research, I was surprised at the performance of the .22WMR even out of the snubby revolvers. I do occasionally toss a 5-shot Ruger LCR .38spcl in my cargo pocket from time to time.

Being that the round performs similarly to the .38 Special, and using a .22WMR gives me one more round, it makes me wonder if it makes sense seriously to consider the LCR chambered in .22WMR. I can tell you that while I may not switch to one for self-defense, if you carry one of the guns mentioned above don't feel outgunned entirely, you could probably do much worse.

What are your thoughts? Would you ever consider carrying a small-caliber rim-fire gun for self-defense? Let us know in the comments below.