Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
#1
Old 03-18-2010, 10:00 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 896
Does anyone use the .22 Caliber round in wartime?

One of the few guns I ever fired was back in my childhood days was this .22 caliber long rifle, where you drop the bullets in the barrel and then putt his rod in it, and then you can fire. I also fired a semi-auto .22 pistol that looked like one of the WWII german ones.

I have heard this .22 round is very cheap, and light weight, so technically speaking, soldiers could carry this in war by the bucketful. Yet I know of no Army that has ever issued .22 caliber weapons, even pistols.

Does the .22 caliber round have any use in wartime? Wouldn't it be effective with well trained soldiers firing .22 rifles? Does or did any country use it in their military? Police? Why is it not powerful enough -- does it not hurt and kill? -- and if it isn't powerful enough, why haven't armies moved towards more .50 cal weapons? And if bigger bullets are better, why did the US army adopt that .223 m16 round, when they used .30-06 and .30 cal in the Springfield '03 and Garand rifles?

Last edited by No Wikipedia Cites; 03-18-2010 at 10:02 AM.
#2
Old 03-18-2010, 10:05 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 31,916
The .22 long rifle round lacks power and range. Typical load is a 40gr bullet at around 1000-1200fps. The 5.56mm/.223 round is 52 gr at 3000-3200fps(original m-16). The larger .30 rounds are heavier meaning a soldier can carry fewer into battle and the recoil with automatic fire is uncontrollable for most soldiers.
#3
Old 03-18-2010, 10:31 AM
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 9,815
The 22 LR is not an effective mankiller at anything beyond point blank (less than a few yards) range. By the time you've gotten close enough to an enemy to kill him with a 22LR, he's put several dozen or hundred far more effective rounds into you.

In terms of what calibers the military does use - it's all a tradeoff. 50 cal rounds are big and heavy, so a soldier can't carry very many of them. Plus the rifle used to shoot them is large, heavy, and unwieldy, so for personal use it's relegated to special purpose snipers only. The US Army first went from the .30-06 to the .308 (7.62mm) round in the 50s. They use the same bullet, but the 308 is a shorter & lighter round due to advances in propellants. Then the Army moved to the .223 round (5.56mm), because it's even smaller and lighter, meaning a soldier can carry a lot more ammo. It's not as effective at long ranges as the 7.62, but the thinking at the time was that most fighting was actually done at shorter ranges (<500 yds), where the 5.56 was just as, if not more, effective as the 7.62. This is debated endlessly on firearms forums BTW.
#4
Old 03-18-2010, 10:32 AM
Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 13,940
The silenced .22 was the favored round of the OSS for assassinations, the up-close-and-personal kind. (Cite-PDF)

Other than that, it doesn't have much utility for the military, unless you consider the 5.56 NATO round, which was based on the .223 Remington and is used in M-16 rifles, to be more or less a hot-loaded .22, in which case it's exceptionally useful.
#5
Old 03-18-2010, 10:56 AM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,675
Note that while the .22 long rifle and the .223 have approximately similar bullet size, there's a lot more gunpowder in the .223 cartridge. That's what gives it a higher speed. Also realize that the energy in a bullet is proportional to the square of its velocity, so with a slightly larger bullet and three times the velocity, the .223 is (roughly) ten times more powerful than the .22 long rifle.
#6
Old 03-18-2010, 11:35 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 17,865
We used to use a .22 with hollow-point ammo to kill porcupines at the cottage when I was a kid many years ago (reason: they were killing trees by 'topping' them; my dad owned a small tree-lot.)

Those did a lot of damage, creating horrible wounds (in this case merciful, as a hit was an almost certain kill). I can't picure anyone getting up and fighting after being hit with one.

Though I read somewhere that soldiers are not allowed to use hollow-point ammo on people, under the rules of war.
#7
Old 03-18-2010, 11:50 AM
Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 13,940
Hollow-point ammunition is banned by the Hague Convention.

Still, it wouldn't do much good in .22. It's simply not effective enough against human targets for the military. There are countless stories of people who get hit with a .22 bullet and never notice that they were hit until someone points out the blood. Of course, shot placement remedies many of those complaints, but in combat incapacitation is as good as a kill, and sometimes better because then his buddy has to drag him away (yes, I know how heartless that sounds).
#8
Old 03-18-2010, 12:01 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 17,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman Doors, USAF View Post
Hollow-point ammunition is banned by the Hague Convention.

Still, it wouldn't do much good in .22. It's simply not effective enough against human targets for the military. There are countless stories of people who get hit with a .22 bullet and never notice that they were hit until someone points out the blood. Of course, shot placement remedies many of those complaints, but in combat incapacitation is as good as a kill, and sometimes better because then his buddy has to drag him away (yes, I know how heartless that sounds).
I thought it was banned by something.

I find it hard to believe that a person would be hit by a .22 hollow-point and not notice. The effects on animal flesh, from what I've seen, are startling (and horriffic). The hole going in is tiny, but the hole comming out is - gross. If it did that to a porcupine, would it not do the same to a person?

That being said I'm no expert on either gunshot wounds or combat - that's just my impression.
#9
Old 03-18-2010, 12:10 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 31,916
A person is much larger than a porcupine and adrenaline can mask the effects of rather horrific injuries.
#10
Old 03-18-2010, 12:12 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 17,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by runner pat View Post
A person is much larger than a porcupine and adrenaline can mask the effects of rather horrific injuries.
Certainly a person is larger, but the wound made would be the same size, more or less.

Looking at that wound, and transferring it to a human body, it appeared to me to have a lot of 'stopping power'.
#11
Old 03-18-2010, 12:25 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 31,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malthus View Post
Certainly a person is larger, but the wound made would be the same size, more or less.

Looking at that wound, and transferring it to a human body, it appeared to me to have a lot of 'stopping power'.
There are countless incidents of people being hit by much larger/more powerful rounds and not noticing until later.
#12
Old 03-18-2010, 12:25 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malthus View Post
Certainly a person is larger, but the wound made would be the same size, more or less.

Looking at that wound, and transferring it to a human body, it appeared to me to have a lot of 'stopping power'.
But a .22 (especially a hollow point) won't have any useful penetration. It'll be stopped by the lightest body armor, or a thin wall, or the multiple layers of sheet metal in a car door.
#13
Old 03-18-2010, 12:31 PM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 896
So can police use hollow point though? And if so, why don't they have police guns in .22? They could carry far more rounds and it would have less recoil and noise. Or forgetting the police, why aren't there more .22cal self-defense guns? I don't know of anyone who has .22cal pistol for self-defense, I am told by I think wackipedia that .38special is the minimum for self-defense. Why not .22 hollow point?
#14
Old 03-18-2010, 12:40 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 2,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfras View Post
So can police use hollow point though? And if so, why don't they have police guns in .22? They could carry far more rounds and it would have less recoil and noise. Or forgetting the police, why aren't there more .22cal self-defense guns? I don't know of anyone who has .22cal pistol for self-defense, I am told by I think wackipedia that .38special is the minimum for self-defense. Why not .22 hollow point?
Yes, in general, subject to departmental rules, the police can use hollow points.

But to condense what has been said above, the round lacks stopping power compared to, say, a .357 magnum or 9 mm. Range wouldn't be too much an issue in police work since most of those shooting situations tend to be up close and personal, but the cops don't want some crazed felon who's trying to kill them or someone else to keep on doing what he's doing; even if he dies later from the wound(s), the idea isn't to do this, it's to stop him right now.
#15
Old 03-18-2010, 12:42 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 31,916
*sound of can of worms being opened*

The .22 is too small and weak to be an effective stopper i.e. put the bad guy on the ground NOW.

This is the concept of "knockdown power", delivering a shock to the system that results in an immediate collapse of the hitee. (Much disputed).


Big, slow bullets (.45ACP) or small, fast bullets(9mm) or in between (.40 S&W) results in endless debate as to which is most effective.
#16
Old 03-18-2010, 12:52 PM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Bedrock
Posts: 26,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman Doors, USAF View Post
There are countless stories of people who get hit with a .22 bullet and never notice that they were hit until someone points out the blood.
President Reagan, for one. If memory serves they had to search pretty hard to find where he'd been hit.
#17
Old 03-18-2010, 02:08 PM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: England
Posts: 2,696
Military organisations do use the .22 rimfire for training people to shoot, and have done for a century or more. Frequently this allows training on indoor facilities independent of light and weather. Sometimes the arms used are conversions of the service weapon, or they may be lookalikes that resemble it in general functioning. Collecting these is a speciality in its own right. In some cases removable .22 barrels are inserted down inside the service barrel, together with a different breechblock of some sort so that the changeover can be made very easily.

At one time Stoeger Arms marketed a .22 automatic which they called the 'Luger', although internally there was little resemblance to the German service pistol. They held the rights to this name as a trademark in the USA.

Last edited by Mk VII; 03-18-2010 at 02:10 PM.
#18
Old 03-18-2010, 03:26 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 13,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airman Doors, USAF View Post
Other than that, it doesn't have much utility for the military, unless you consider the 5.56 NATO round, which was based on the .223 Remington and is used in M-16 rifles, to be more or less a hot-loaded .22, in which case it's exceptionally useful.
Well, it's a very hot and very heavy round. They share a common diameter only. The M-16 is a 63 grain round, .22 LR is between 32-48. So a gob more powder and 50-100% more weight than your everyday varmint round.
#19
Old 03-18-2010, 04:09 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 9,848
I'd love to have a chain gun in .22 caliber - fun and cheap!
#20
Old 03-18-2010, 05:07 PM
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 20,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazybratsche View Post
Note that while the .22 long rifle and the .223 have approximately similar bullet size, there's a lot more gunpowder in the .223 cartridge. That's what gives it a higher speed. Also realize that the energy in a bullet is proportional to the square of its velocity, so with a slightly larger bullet and three times the velocity, the .223 is (roughly) ten times more powerful than the .22 long rifle.
Yeah, what's that line Clancy used once? "A tiny bullet that travelled at Warp speed."

Get almost anything going fast enough and it's going to catch the attention of anything it hits.
#21
Old 03-18-2010, 07:27 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 4,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malthus View Post
... I find it hard to believe that a person would be hit by a .22 hollow-point and not notice. The effects on animal flesh, from what I've seen, are startling (and horriffic). The hole going in is tiny, but the hole comming out is - gross. If it did that to a porcupine, would it not do the same to a person? ...
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!

Last edited by crowmanyclouds; 03-18-2010 at 07:28 PM.
#22
Old 03-18-2010, 08:16 PM
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: N.E. Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,840
There was a .22LR gun designed for police use.

American 180 .22 submachine gun

See also...

Last edited by River Hippie; 03-18-2010 at 08:19 PM.
#23
Old 03-18-2010, 09:16 PM
Robot Mod in Beta Testing
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 19,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieu View Post
President Reagan, for one. If memory serves they had to search pretty hard to find where he'd been hit.
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.
#24
Old 03-18-2010, 10:41 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 33,771
There was a .22 Win Magnum Rimfire carbine marketed for Paramilitary use, primarily in South America. Dunno how popular it became/is/was.
#25
Old 03-19-2010, 12:11 AM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,742
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.
#26
Old 03-19-2010, 09:30 AM
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 693
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.
#27
Old 03-19-2010, 09:42 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Dammam, Saudi Arabia
Posts: 12,091
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.
#28
Old 03-19-2010, 09:44 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 17,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by crowmanyclouds View Post
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!
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:

http://ruger1022.com/docs/israeli_sniper.htm

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.

Quote:
In the recent Israeli-Palestinian clashes began in 2000, the Ruger resumes it's original role as a less lethal riot control weapon. However, it's usage in this role was rather controversial this time. After several incidents involving the death of Palestinians by the Ruger fire, the IDF conducted a field experiment in the Ruger at the IDF Sniper School in Mitkan Adam under the supervision of the IDF Judge Advocate General (JAG). The test showed that the Ruger was more lethal then thought especially in upper body injuries. Also, since it's suppressed and was considered less lethal by the troops, the soldiers were much more likely to use the Ruger loosely then intended.

As a result of this test, the JAG reclassified the Ruger as a lethal weapon. As a lethal weapon, the usage of the Ruger in riot control is much more limited today. In the IDF Center Command it was completely prohibited to use and the IDF South Command it's deployment was cut down dramatically.
The moral appears to be: do not underestimate the lethality of .22 ammo.
#29
Old 03-19-2010, 09:53 AM
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 9,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivn1188 View Post
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.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul in Qatar View Post
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.
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.
#30
Old 03-19-2010, 12:16 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by muldoonthief View Post
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://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.
#31
Old 03-19-2010, 05:29 PM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,742
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.
#32
Old 07-27-2013, 03:36 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Wikipedia Cites View Post
[much deleted]

Does the .22 caliber round have any use in wartime? Wouldn't it be effective with well trained soldiers firing .22 rifles? Does or did any country use it in their military? Police? Why is it not powerful enough -- does it not hurt and kill? -- and if it isn't powerful enough, why haven't armies moved towards more .50 cal weapons? And if bigger bullets are better, why did the US army adopt that .223 m16 round, when they used .30-06 and .30 cal in the Springfield '03 and Garand rifles?
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 people shot - 154
# of hits - 213
% 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.
#34
Old 07-27-2013, 09:08 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 6,588
Yes.

I have personally used a .22 caliber round in a suppressed auto-pistol in wartime.
#35
Old 07-27-2013, 10:39 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,363
I used one today.

What? It's wartime, isn't it?
#36
Old 07-27-2013, 11:55 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 2,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveOnAPlane View Post
Yes, in general, subject to departmental rules, the police can use hollow points.

But to condense what has been said above, the round lacks stopping power compared to, say, a .357 magnum or 9 mm. Range wouldn't be too much an issue in police work since most of those shooting situations tend to be up close and personal, but the cops don't want some crazed felon who's trying to kill them or someone else to keep on doing what he's doing; even if he dies later from the wound(s), the idea isn't to do this, it's to stop him right now.
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.
#37
Old 07-28-2013, 08:43 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somers Point, NJ
Posts: 5,770
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.
#38
Old 07-28-2013, 08:53 PM
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 9,815
You're talking about the FP-45 Liberator, which was chambered in .45 ACP.
#39
Old 07-28-2013, 08:57 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,028
AR-7 Survival Rifle
#40
Old 07-28-2013, 09:18 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 16,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by obbn View Post
ItThe 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.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enola Straight View Post
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.
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
#41
Old 07-29-2013, 09:18 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somers Point, NJ
Posts: 5,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by muldoonthief View Post
You're talking about the FP-45 Liberator, which was chambered in .45 ACP.
Huh.

I'da thunk you'd want a small round that would make as little a pop as possible so as not to bring attention to yourself.
#42
Old 07-30-2013, 11:36 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 2,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil84 View Post
I have one of these. If I had to shoot bunnies and squirrels to live, I'd starve pretty quickly. Accuracy is not its strong suit.

It is cute, though.
#43
Old 07-31-2013, 04:47 AM
Guest
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducati View Post
I have one of these. If I had to shoot bunnies and squirrels to live, I'd starve pretty quickly. Accuracy is not its strong suit.

It is cute, though.
From the Wikipedia article:

Quote:
The AR-7 was also manufactured in Argentina.[7] It came with various barrel lengths, shrouds and fixed rifle stocks as well as pistol grips with retractable stocks.
#44
Old 08-04-2013, 05:51 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Texas.
Posts: 3,140
As for why soldiers don't use .22 LR, F=MV. 5.56mm NATO/.223 isn't a much bigger bullet than .22LR, but it's trucking along at three times the speed. Conversely, the ol' .45ACP moves at about the same speed as .22LR, but it's almost six times the weight.

Taken to the full extreme, your average major-caliber pistol bullet (9mm/.40/.45) has about the same kinetic energy as a Major League fastball. The only difference is the baseball doesn't penetrate. As a corollary, having your Kevlar vest stop a bullet feels like getting beaned by Nolan Ryan -- it probably won't kill you, but it'll sure as hell ruin your day and most likely break a couple of ribs.


As has been said, it's used as an assassin's weapon by the military units that don't officially exist. Good for silently taking out sentries and the like. Shove a suppressed .22LR pistol in the little hollow behind a guy's earlobe, it sounds like a muffled sneeze, and the target drops like a sack of potatoes. Cut a guy's throat like in the movies, and you'd be surprised how loud he can gurgle while drowning in his own blood, and he'll probably manage to hold down the trigger of his AK and dump the entire magazine in his dying twitches.

Or you could end up like the Navy SEAL my dad met in Vietnam who tried to do the cover mouth/slit throat thing and missed -- dude had a scar from elbow to wrist. (My dad was Army and used the .22 to the brainstem, which is where I get this info.)
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 AM.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: whitney's auto parts amateur archive reddit lesley gore pictures refrigerator door closer the negro community latest mail pickup pulsating eyes shame sign high noon time donkey shows real gerbil insertion 4x grand strategy scanning photos walgreens anchorman introduction oblivion archery overhaul lassie saves timmy cold ears hurt how to blackmail match.com body type cf means ebay watchers teenage skateboard barbara jean reba waxing beard off sit on copier rich mans family battery memory saver horizontal electrical outlet reflective liquid 5.8 a1c level new without tag lego glue baseball stealing m99 drug ten pence 1992 lump presidents perked coffee what does airport code ewr mean negative ghostrider the pattern is full quote do military police have jurisdiction outside base fuck them if they cant take a joke black vs brown hair how to tie jogger strings threaded pvc fittings leak replace blower motor furnace trader joes orange juice native american indian beard fastest way to become an attorney pulled pork not shredding how to take a toilet seat off stool to stand on what to do if you get mail that isn't yours how to eat pigs feet sperry shoes lifetime warranty hair pores on face can you freeze urine for future drug tests numbers on my glasses where to find molasses throat hurts when i sing how to kill yourself with carbon monoxide in a car where did shave and a haircut come from is a car ac or dc leg going numb while standing 345 kv transmission line go to the bathroom in spanish how to say siobhan who makes rockwell power tools why is radioactive decay measured in half lives how much are concert t shirts working for louis vuitton exercise and bowel movements is incest porn illegal what does eeuu stand for