Jump to content

Are there any stats on defensive use of force with small caliber handguns?


Recommended Posts

The .25 and .32 are very 'puny' in the ballistic department and kinda pricey, and rimfire ammo WILL have more 'duds' than center-fire. Many SD situations are resolved without a shot being fired so having any gun to point at a criminal beats having nothing but a pointed stick.

 

All that said, you can find a large number of .380, 9mm AND .45ACP handguns for 'about' the same price that are all 'about' the same size so barring personal physical limitations there is little need these days to compromise larger caliber 'efficiency' for mouse gun proportions and ease of carry/concealment.

 

As always, if you choose to carry, practice sufficient to always hit near where you want the bullet to strike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who poo poo the smaller calibers never volunteer to be shot with one! Again it would depend on where on the body you hit and what body systems are disrupted. A 22 in the eye socket at point blank range will ruin anyone's day. I always advise folks to carry the largest caliber they can shoot and hit well with. Then to know what that caliber can and can not do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Those who poo poo the smaller calibers never volunteer to be shot with one!
This.With the rare exception of someone hopped up on PCP or adrenaline, taking round after round from a cop and still fighting back, the average every day thug will likely tuck tail and run at the sight of a gun, let alone one actually firing at them.I recently took a few shots with a recently acquired Colt Jr 22 short off the back deck.. my wife was amazed at how loud it was.Her: "But it's a pea shooter!"Me: "It's still a gun, babe... even small bullets aren't quiet."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This question brings to mind a few videos I've seen recently.

 

The Best Handgun Caliber - A Real World Study

Compiled from statistics, the basic conclusion is that 380 and up are equally as effective in self-defense in real-world situations. Smaller calibers (22, 25, 32, etc.) don't cut it.

 

Why the Best Snub Nose Caliber is .32

Lucky Gunner thinks 32 is an underrated self-defense option.

 

As an aside, in the early James Bond novels, Bond used a 25 caliber Beretta 418. An armorer that Fleming knew convinced him someone like Bond would use a 32 caliber Walther PPK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is most data going back to 70s and 80s lists 25, 32, 380acp and 38spcl as the highest killers.

 

But this is where correlation doesn't equal causation. There were way more gun deaths in the 70s and 80s then now and those were the popular inexpensive concealed rounds for a long time. No doubt 25 and 32 are deadly, it's just for the same size guns you can get a 380.

 

The lucky gunner study (posted above) was the best one I've seen, even if ballistic gel isn't real life they were pretty thorough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with comparing gun deaths from one decade to another is the fact that medical science traditionally improves. Everything from better and faster access, to better knowledge on how to treat the wounds. If you would take the shootings occurring in Chicago last year and have those shootings in the 1960s, you would have a higher death rate. Not because the firearm is anymore deadly, but the access and availability and technology of medical care isn't the same.

 

You will always have variables in your data and those variables will change. A kid shot in the chest with a 22 in downtown Chicago has a much higher rate of survival than a kid shot in the chest with a 22 in rural southern Illinois. Not because the 22 is more effective down south than up north, but the access to medical care is dramatically difference. In downtown Chicago you would most likely get ALS care on scene in less than 10 minutes. In parts of southern Illinois you are easily looking at 20 minutes or longer for ALS care, Then in Chicago you have multiple trauma centers. In southern Illinois you have emergency rooms that transfers you to a level 1 trauma center.

 

So, the bullet effectiveness is no different, the access to medical care greatly changes the outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there any stats on defensive use of force with small caliber handguns? I hear many gun "experts" state that 25 acp and 32 acp guns are not effective for self defense but where is the proof and it seems no one will volunteer to be shot by any of these "mouse" guns.

I wouldn't volunteer to to be poked with a sharp stick, but that doesn't make a great choice for self defense. Which handgun caliber would you feel most comfortable defending your family with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there any stats on defensive use of force with small caliber handguns? I hear many gun "experts" state that 25 acp and 32 acp guns are not effective for self defense but where is the proof and it seems no one will volunteer to be shot by any of these "mouse" guns.

Most of these 'experts' are basing their conclusions/reccomendations on the FBI standards for penetration for their agent's firearms and ammunition, and Ballistics gel tests of these calibers. 25 ACP and 32 ACP handguns don't get the minimum inches of penetration, and usually expansion to meet those standards.

 

But, does that mean they aren't effective in a SD scenario?

 

Look at that first article posted by bmeyer. Actual events compiled. Author openly admits he doesn't have enough .25 and .32 data, and the 9mm is skewed because so many used ball ammo (not the best for SD). Ammo can be important. I wouldn't rely on my little S&W Bodyguard in 380 ACP with ball ammo. I load it with JHP that have been tested to get good penetration and expansion AND shoots accurately, by me from the Bodyguard. Because accuracy of shots, and number of shots make a difference when stopping an assailant. That's what that article really pointed out to me.

 

That said, that article does point out one stat, that IS germaine here. % of times the caliber failed to incapacitate an attacker. There .22, .25 and .32 were substantially worse,

 

THe other good pt was on how, many times just one shot from anything will cause an attacker to 'mentally' give up. BUT, if you want to be able to physically stop those that get past that, avoid .22, .25 and .32

 

"What I believe that my numbers show is that in the majority of shootings, the person shot merely gives up without being truly incapacitated by the bullet. In such an event, almost any bullet will perform admirably. If you want to be prepared to deal with someone who won't give up so easily, or you want to be able to have good performance even after shooting through an intermediate barrier, I would skip carrying the "mouse gun" .22s, .25s and .32s."

 

Then again, a high rate of fire in the same place, with .22 lr (specially a hp) can be devastating

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0ZjwyZ48A0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly, in a lot of those studies, one caliber you rarely see considered, that has a heck of a lot of energy, a huge MEPLAT, can be loaded to take down bears and hogs (substantially harder to stop than an unarmored human) is 45 colt. I have no problem relying on my Ruger Blackhawk at home or in the woods, for home/self defense, with my own JHP loads (Enought to expand, not too much to over penetrate). Concealed carry can be tricker, due to the size of most Handguns in 45 colt. THough the Redhawk and S&W 25/625 or Judges could be concealable. Heck, even a hardcast 250-255 gr lead round at minimal pressures, or even Cowboy Action Shooting levels (to minimize kick) is going to make as big a hole as a fully ecpanded 9mm hp or 38/357 Mag hp. Make it softer lead, and that wound will be ugly. Heck the Army went to 45 Colt back when because the rds back then, with black powder could take down an opponants horse with 1 shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with comparing gun deaths from one decade to another is the fact that medical science traditionally improves. Everything from better and faster access, to better knowledge on how to treat the wounds. If you would take the shootings occurring in Chicago last year and have those shootings in the 1960s, you would have a higher death rate. Not because the firearm is anymore deadly, but the access and availability and technology of medical care isn't the same.

 

You will always have variables in your data and those variables will change. A kid shot in the chest with a 22 in downtown Chicago has a much higher rate of survival than a kid shot in the chest with a 22 in rural southern Illinois. Not because the 22 is more effective down south than up north, but the access to medical care is dramatically difference. In downtown Chicago you would most likely get ALS care on scene in less than 10 minutes. In parts of southern Illinois you are easily looking at 20 minutes or longer for ALS care, Then in Chicago you have multiple trauma centers. In southern Illinois you have emergency rooms that transfers you to a level 1 trauma center.

 

So, the bullet effectiveness is no different, the access to medical care greatly changes the outcome.

 

This is critically important not only for self-defense shootings, but victims of violence of all sorts, in every environment from urban to suburban, to rural. I know where I'd rather be if I were unfortunate enough to be the victim of a shooting, and it wouldn't be south of I-80.

 

 

That first article is a really interesting study and I would agree with what others have said, that any gun is better than no gun to defend yourself.

 

Those who poo poo the smaller calibers never volunteer to be shot with one! Again it would depend on where on the body you hit and what body systems are disrupted. A 22 in the eye socket at point blank range will ruin anyone's day. I always advise folks to carry the largest caliber they can shoot and hit well with. Then to know what that caliber can and can not do.

 

While I agree that the highest caliber you can effectively shoot with is a generally good idea, you also have to consider capacity, which you are giving up in 45acp/10mm, etc... I can shoot 45acp with no problem, but I don't carry it regularly, because I'd rather have the higher capacity of 9mm with 147grs, and I'm not loosing much from a 230gr 45acp in terms of stopping power, but I am gaining 40% capacity in my carry gun, OR benefiting from a much smaller package (or both).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Ruger LC9s is my everyday carry, and with 8 rounds of 9mm+p I am comfortable that I will be able to defend myself. I've owned 380's and 22's that are not effectively smaller in total size and ease of carry so i see no advantage in going smaller than 9mm. Many years ago I did own a Browning 25acp and that was truly a tiny gun! Back before legal concealed carry I would throw that little Baby Browning in my pocket when going on camping trips. Then one night I heard the howling of a wolf, and looked down at my 25acp and thought "this does not seem enough". Right after that I bought a S&W Model 19, loaded it with 357mag rounds, and slept in my tent a lot more comfortably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Ruger LC9s is my everyday carry, and with 8 rounds of 9mm+p I am comfortable that I will be able to defend myself. I've owned 380's and 22's that are not effectively smaller in total size and ease of carry so i see no advantage in going smaller than 9mm. Many years ago I did own a Browning 25acp and that was truly a tiny gun! Back before legal concealed carry I would throw that little Baby Browning in my pocket when going on camping trips. Then one night I heard the howling of a wolf, and looked down at my 25acp and thought "this does not seem enough". Right after that I bought a S&W Model 19, loaded it with 357mag rounds, and slept in my tent a lot more comfortably.

Although I prefer to carry my Walther PPS, there are times I just can't, shorts and T shirt, sweatpants and shirt, etc. That's when I carry my 380 acp Bodyguard. Sub COmpact 9s are great. But, let's be real, " I've owned 380's and 22's that are not effectively smaller in total size" is hyperbolic at best. None of the sub compact 9s can fit within the confines of my palm side of my hand. But the LCP and Bodyguard can. And my Bodyguard is almost a 1/4 inch thinner than the PPS and LC9. Makes it much easier to carry in a belly belt.

 

Here you can see a big difference in size between the LC9 (2nd down) and LCP(top)

 

55386d1325334511-lcp-vs-lc9-why-ruger-1-

 

LCP and Bodyguard essentially the same size

maxresdefault.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the gun is small enough to comfortably pocket carry, or OWP carry under a simple t-shirt, then that is small enough for any need that I have. I had an LCP and it was extremely easy to carry, but I hated shooting the thing and could not shoot it well at all. I so disliked shooting it that I knew I would never practice with it. And since the LC9s can be carried almost as easily, it has become my favorite carry gun. although when wearing a jacket or a heavy outer shirt in the winter sometimes I carry my sr40c with the extended mag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the gun is small enough to comfortably pocket carry, or OWP carry under a simple t-shirt, then that is small enough for any need that I have. I had an LCP and it was extremely easy to carry, but I hated shooting the thing and could not shoot it well at all. I so disliked shooting it that I knew I would never practice with it. And since the LC9s can be carried almost as easily, it has become my favorite carry gun. although when wearing a jacket or a heavy outer shirt in the winter sometimes I carry my sr40c with the extended mag.

That's the way I am with my Kel Tec P3AT. After a few mags, my hand is ready to call it a day. I have a couple of .25s but the ammo is too expensive and there's no stopping power. If I were to carry a mouse gun for anything other than a backup, it would have to be a .22. Cheap to shoot and loads of fun.

 

My carry gun lately has been a Beretta 9000s in 9mm. That sucker is 1 1/2 inch thick across the safety. But, when I can't fully conceal it I can always partially conceal it, no matter what I'm wearing. According to the law, that's good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

 

I remembered this from a few years ago

 

DEFENSIVE CARRY: CALIBER AND INCAPACITATION

 

 

Greg Ellifritz is the only person I can find who's done a study on the topic of caliber that isn't based on anecdotal or obsolete evidence. I'm surprised no one has expanded on his research.

 

However, I did find one hole (no pun intended) in his methodology... there was no control for the level of training each of the persons discharging their weapon had received. I have a hypothesis (untested) that the 9mm numbers skew downward because your "garden variety" would-be-criminal - i.e. no formal firearm training - has a tendency to gravitate to that caliber, and therefore, is more likely to miss; likewise, I believe the .380 may skew upwards because those gravitating to that caliber many times are women or people carrying a BUG, both being from a demographic who spend more time at the range and would be less likely to miss.

 

But even if my hypothesis was true, it would merely emphasize that training and practice are more important than caliber. If you could consistently put a bullet on a dime at 7 yards, a .22 might be all you need. But in a real-world situation, that's not realistic... larger caliber simply increases your margin for error, but according to the Ellifritz study, the difference between the margin for a 380 and a 45 is immaterial when it comes to stopping power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...