Deathwing_Kingstar
Regular Member
imported post
That's right.
That's right.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
More academic than reality
- Thread starter GaryE
- Start date
Deathwing_Kingstar
Regular Member
imported post
my friend is an EMT for San Bernadino county, and he as told me that he has seen enough people shot, no matter the caliber...a bullet in the body is easily leathal.
my friend is an EMT for San Bernadino county, and he as told me that he has seen enough people shot, no matter the caliber...a bullet in the body is easily leathal.
simmonsjoe
Regular Member
imported post
rugerdon wrote:
If you shoot one at dusk you'll understand what I mean, lots of flame.
rugerdon wrote:
It is an older design with fairly slow burning powder. A 22WMR out of a pistol is about on par velocity wise, of a 22LR out of a rifle.
If you shoot one at dusk you'll understand what I mean, lots of flame.
The Wolfhound
Regular Member
imported post
I am about to embrace the .22WMR. My main interst is rifle, but there will be at least one handgiun in the stable, likely more. As previously stated, shot placement is the most critical issue in a defensive situation. Larger and more powerful calibers just increase your margin of error and the magnitude of the wound channel. Ain't none of them I want to be on the receiving end of. I have read that the .22LR kills more people than any other caliber. If so, it is beacuse they are more common than anythingelse, are inexpensive comparatively. I seriously doubt that most of those kills are quick. Remember though, "killing" is not the sameas "stopping". I know plenty of farmers who kill large lifestock with a .22LR or .22WMR, single point blank shots to the braincase.I will still reach for my .45 if I want to stop someone.
I am about to embrace the .22WMR. My main interst is rifle, but there will be at least one handgiun in the stable, likely more. As previously stated, shot placement is the most critical issue in a defensive situation. Larger and more powerful calibers just increase your margin of error and the magnitude of the wound channel. Ain't none of them I want to be on the receiving end of. I have read that the .22LR kills more people than any other caliber. If so, it is beacuse they are more common than anythingelse, are inexpensive comparatively. I seriously doubt that most of those kills are quick. Remember though, "killing" is not the sameas "stopping". I know plenty of farmers who kill large lifestock with a .22LR or .22WMR, single point blank shots to the braincase.I will still reach for my .45 if I want to stop someone.
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
imported post
As an aside, if NAA made a better quality product (more reliable/durable), their 5-shot Mini Revolver in .22Magnum would be as potent as you can get in such a small package. You can carry something like that anywhere.
-- John D. (my personal but educated opinion: I've owned, carried and shot (a lot) 2 of them, 1 in .22LR and 1 in .22Magnum)
As an aside, if NAA made a better quality product (more reliable/durable), their 5-shot Mini Revolver in .22Magnum would be as potent as you can get in such a small package. You can carry something like that anywhere.
-- John D. (my personal but educated opinion: I've owned, carried and shot (a lot) 2 of them, 1 in .22LR and 1 in .22Magnum)
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
I'm going to consider that you are serious. I also heard 'somewhere' that more people are killed by .22's than any other caliber. Let's assume this is true. So that means the .22 round is the best for SD, right? Not to me. I'm assuming, that if this is true, that the reason for this is the large number of .22's out there. At 12 years old, I got a .22 rifle as do many boys of that age. Perhaps a large number are accidental discharges.
On the other hand, I got totally trashed in a CC type forum for having a .22 on me. The post was closed before I had a chance to explain. So, I made another post to explain and it was deleted. You see, their thinking is the .22 caliber should NEVER be mentioned as it might seem like an endorsement of the round.
What I tried to get across was that I had one errand to run. In my vehicle is a .45 with 14 rounds and two extra magazines. I was going through the drive thru at a drug store to pick up a prescription, but I decided what the heck and put a .22 magnum NAA revolver in my pocket. I got there and the drive thru was closed as the store's power was out. I had to go inside. Now instead of having no gun, at least I had a gun on even if it was a pea shooter. My post was about the female employee opened the door for me and she said: "Our power is out; You don't have a gun on you do you?" I smiled and said: Actually I do have gun on me but I have a permit that allows me to carry.". She seemed happy with the answer.
My post just said that she couldn't have made my gun as it was a .22 revolver in my pocket and it doesn't print. I will NEVER go to that forum again.
I do not believe that a .22 magnum would make a primary carry gun. As for a back up gun? I would prefer at least a .380, but I have carried a .22 as back up. So, I will not bash anyone on their choice of gun or caliber. You implied you wanted our opinion and that is mine. Hope it helps.
There IS a very light pistol that I feel might be a viable caliber and that is a FN Five Seven, with 20 rounds in the carry magazine and 30 magazines are also available. At least it is better than a .22.
I'm going to consider that you are serious. I also heard 'somewhere' that more people are killed by .22's than any other caliber. Let's assume this is true. So that means the .22 round is the best for SD, right? Not to me. I'm assuming, that if this is true, that the reason for this is the large number of .22's out there. At 12 years old, I got a .22 rifle as do many boys of that age. Perhaps a large number are accidental discharges.
On the other hand, I got totally trashed in a CC type forum for having a .22 on me. The post was closed before I had a chance to explain. So, I made another post to explain and it was deleted. You see, their thinking is the .22 caliber should NEVER be mentioned as it might seem like an endorsement of the round.
What I tried to get across was that I had one errand to run. In my vehicle is a .45 with 14 rounds and two extra magazines. I was going through the drive thru at a drug store to pick up a prescription, but I decided what the heck and put a .22 magnum NAA revolver in my pocket. I got there and the drive thru was closed as the store's power was out. I had to go inside. Now instead of having no gun, at least I had a gun on even if it was a pea shooter. My post was about the female employee opened the door for me and she said: "Our power is out; You don't have a gun on you do you?" I smiled and said: Actually I do have gun on me but I have a permit that allows me to carry.". She seemed happy with the answer.
My post just said that she couldn't have made my gun as it was a .22 revolver in my pocket and it doesn't print. I will NEVER go to that forum again.
I do not believe that a .22 magnum would make a primary carry gun. As for a back up gun? I would prefer at least a .380, but I have carried a .22 as back up. So, I will not bash anyone on their choice of gun or caliber. You implied you wanted our opinion and that is mine. Hope it helps.
There IS a very light pistol that I feel might be a viable caliber and that is a FN Five Seven, with 20 rounds in the carry magazine and 30 magazines are also available. At least it is better than a .22.
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
cloudcroft wrote:
I wasn't aware that NAA has a quality control problem. My .22LR/.22Mag seems very well made. I bought it a long time ago, maybe things have changed.
cloudcroft wrote:
I wasn't aware that NAA has a quality control problem. My .22LR/.22Mag seems very well made. I bought it a long time ago, maybe things have changed.
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
imported post
open4years,
Are you talking to me in your other post?
Yes, they do. You're looking at it from the outside...ever take it apart? Probably not. Outside looks nice, inside is crap (they look like someone 'machined' it with a rock). And tiny fragile parts to break, cause timing issuesor dislodge. I'veposted on this before and in other forums. NAA didn't seem to care when I told them, for example, about their mainspring issue. I can no longer recommend their guns, certainly not forself-defense carrying, but I'm not negative about the .22 Magnum caliber (or .22LR) if you can place it well (i.e., no torso shots)...just negative on a NAA being the platform.
NAA's are a nice idea but only half finished (even 'POS' AMT did better than that since they got their guns about 90% finished). Carry NAAs for serious use if you want, but as for me, no thanks.
-- John D.
open4years,
Are you talking to me in your other post?
Yes, they do. You're looking at it from the outside...ever take it apart? Probably not. Outside looks nice, inside is crap (they look like someone 'machined' it with a rock). And tiny fragile parts to break, cause timing issuesor dislodge. I'veposted on this before and in other forums. NAA didn't seem to care when I told them, for example, about their mainspring issue. I can no longer recommend their guns, certainly not forself-defense carrying, but I'm not negative about the .22 Magnum caliber (or .22LR) if you can place it well (i.e., no torso shots)...just negative on a NAA being the platform.
NAA's are a nice idea but only half finished (even 'POS' AMT did better than that since they got their guns about 90% finished). Carry NAAs for serious use if you want, but as for me, no thanks.
-- John D.
imported post
Does anyone know of a source for the new Kel_tec .22 mag pistol (PMR-30)? I do see theyare listed on Buds but showing out of stock. At least the price was showing as $287 which is pretty reasonable IMO. Can see extra mags will come in handy on target shooting days too.
Does anyone know of a source for the new Kel_tec .22 mag pistol (PMR-30)? I do see theyare listed on Buds but showing out of stock. At least the price was showing as $287 which is pretty reasonable IMO. Can see extra mags will come in handy on target shooting days too.
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
cloudcroft wrote:
cloudcroft wrote:
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
imported post
No problem (and I didn't think you were being disrespectful), I just wasn't sure you were talkingto me or the OP. I include names of people I am speaking to in particular (for clarity if necesary) especially if my post is NOTdirectly after the one I am responding to.
As for the NAA, I used to think highly of it, too (some old posts of mine years ago will verify that)...until mine malfunctioned. Twice. That just won't do for carrying, nor practicing with it on a regular basis (durability is highly suspect).
And yes, no matter what gun you mention, SOMEONE really likes it, even the NAA Mini-Revolvers, and even though some people will say 'they've shot a million rounds' and it's still working. Not so IME, so I can't in good conscience recommend it (people's lives are at risk so one should not recommend 'suspect' guns). One's gun MUST have proven itself to be (currently) 100% reliable. If it does not, it's not suitable for carry, just collecting, plinking sessions, conversation pieces, or as a last resort. Still, there are better choices -- small guns in .22 caliber -- even though definitely larger. Like Beretta small autos, for examples, the old 'obsolete' models and the current models (and even though some people will say THEY are not reliable).So it depends on one's personal experience...IME, they ARE reliable, all 3 of my small Berettas are.
Now, ifNAA ever addresses the Mini-Revolver problems, I MIGHT get another one (maybe 2 of them: one in .22LR and one in .22Magnum)but not now.
Happy carrying, whatever it is,
-- John D.
No problem (and I didn't think you were being disrespectful), I just wasn't sure you were talkingto me or the OP. I include names of people I am speaking to in particular (for clarity if necesary) especially if my post is NOTdirectly after the one I am responding to.
As for the NAA, I used to think highly of it, too (some old posts of mine years ago will verify that)...until mine malfunctioned. Twice. That just won't do for carrying, nor practicing with it on a regular basis (durability is highly suspect).
And yes, no matter what gun you mention, SOMEONE really likes it, even the NAA Mini-Revolvers, and even though some people will say 'they've shot a million rounds' and it's still working. Not so IME, so I can't in good conscience recommend it (people's lives are at risk so one should not recommend 'suspect' guns). One's gun MUST have proven itself to be (currently) 100% reliable. If it does not, it's not suitable for carry, just collecting, plinking sessions, conversation pieces, or as a last resort. Still, there are better choices -- small guns in .22 caliber -- even though definitely larger. Like Beretta small autos, for examples, the old 'obsolete' models and the current models (and even though some people will say THEY are not reliable).So it depends on one's personal experience...IME, they ARE reliable, all 3 of my small Berettas are.
Now, ifNAA ever addresses the Mini-Revolver problems, I MIGHT get another one (maybe 2 of them: one in .22LR and one in .22Magnum)but not now.
Happy carrying, whatever it is,
-- John D.
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
cloudcroft wrote:
cloudcroft wrote:
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Inever useany Forum's'quote' feature, I take excerpts of someone's postto cite (and their name at the end) as I need them...gives me more control and makes my responses more clear/organized as to who said what and to whom I am responding. And, I can still cite/address multiple people in the same post. Works better for meto 'quote' my own way.
Yes, I meant INSIDE the gun -- taking the side plate off and all the parts out--not just taking the cylinder out. And I was talking about reliability/durability, not safety ('safety'is highly overrated anyway, IMO).What? I never said'the shooter would get hurt' (unless by an assailant if the gun breaks on you)...at the range (i.e., non-emergency/serious use) the gun will be JUST FINE.
But I don't want to say more as I've already statedmy opinionre: these guns.
:arrow: "...and that's all I have to say about that." -- Forrest Gump
-- John D.
Inever useany Forum's'quote' feature, I take excerpts of someone's postto cite (and their name at the end) as I need them...gives me more control and makes my responses more clear/organized as to who said what and to whom I am responding. And, I can still cite/address multiple people in the same post. Works better for meto 'quote' my own way.
Yes, I meant INSIDE the gun -- taking the side plate off and all the parts out--not just taking the cylinder out. And I was talking about reliability/durability, not safety ('safety'is highly overrated anyway, IMO).What? I never said'the shooter would get hurt' (unless by an assailant if the gun breaks on you)...at the range (i.e., non-emergency/serious use) the gun will be JUST FINE.
But I don't want to say more as I've already statedmy opinionre: these guns.
:arrow: "...and that's all I have to say about that." -- Forrest Gump
-- John D.