Went to my first gun show today! Finally got to handle all those guns I've been reading about in my 08' Annual Gun Catalog. Firstly, I am in love with the diminutive little Walther and want to know your thoughts. Having no experience firing a .22 round at any living subject...are they effective at all as a defensive handgun? All I know is it fit my hand like a glove, is quite handsome, and doesn't break the bank. Although I would prefer a more powerful caliber...it is the only pistol there that was extremely comfortable...big in my books as I will also be using the gun to shoot at the range. I had gone there with high hopes for the the new PPS, but after holding it they were slashed as it's plastic grips quite honestly suck. IF only I had a little more money I could throw down and get myself a nice Kimber Ultra Carry and be done with it.

Secondly, my gf's father bought a Taurus Tracker in .45 colt which although very big, is going to be his carry weapon. At first glance and subsequent inspection I like it very much.

Thirdly I am quite pumped to purchase a 10/22 and begin modifying it...those things are just so neat...anyone else into the little Ruger rimfire?

Forthly, I'm glad and sad I had no money as I would have walked out of there very happy and regretful.

I have a 10/22 and 2 of my brothers have P22's. They're all very fun and reliable little guns.

As an owner of a p22, I can tell you that it is an excellent little gun. It shoots well, fits the hand well, is cheap to shoot, and is unbelievably easy to carry concealed. When I managed a connivence store, I carried mine (legal in CO as long as you are in charge of the property). As far as how well it would work on defense, I would rather have it than no gun at all, but ideally I would always have a .357 with hollow points.

If you're looking for a cheaper bigger gun, look at the Stoger Cougar 3xxx series. I have the 9mm, and absolutely love how it feels in my hand. They also sell it in .40 and 45apc. They are identical to the Barretta models.

All the P22's I've laid my hands on are very ammo dependent. Not a fan.

.22LR falls just barely in the "better than nothing category."

A great chart from http://www.thehighroad.us for small guns I'd be more comfortable trusting is:



It's hard to beat the Kel-tecs for cost and quality.

If you want really small, the NAA Blackwidow in .22 Mag would be my choice.

Guns for show, knifes for a pro.

- wrote:sTm[-HeavyHips]Guns for show, knifes for a pro.

Ever see that guy in the first Indiana Jones movie?

It's funny to hear that everyone loves that Walther. My father must have bought the only lemon out there. It would jam every three rounds or so no matter what ammo we fed it. And I can't stand decockers and all that safety crap. I was attempting to show my wife the operation and had my only other accidental discharge. Fortunately the four rules were with me that day and no one was hurt.

I will have to give it credit that it felt good in the hand and Gun Tests magazine loved it.

Scorched... you were kidding about that defense comment right? I mean it's kind of heavy, you might knock someone out if you threw it at them.

Wasn't kidding, the gun would mainly be for shooting at the range but it would also probably be on my person most of the time.

4cefed wrote:Scorched... you were kidding about that defense comment right? I mean it's kind of heavy, you might knock someone out if you threw it at them.

I know you're probably just kidding around, but there's no reason a .22LR caliber handgun wouldn't be a decent choice for self defense. This isn't a pellet gun you're talking about haha. Since he said it would be being used at the range, another consideration is ammo price. Hollow point .22 ammunition can do a considerable amount of damage. After taking a couple rounds at center mass (with any caliber, really) an attacker isn't going to be much of a threat. .22's are popular among women due to the low-recoil and light weight. To be honest, it's easier for me to get quicker, more accurate follow-up shots with a .22 than any other caliber.

Also, another factor to consider is "Do you really want to kill someone?" If you shoot someone in the chest with a .44 Mag, they're probably going to die. With a smaller caliber, you can incapacitate them and send them to face trial, without risking legal trouble for yourself or having to live with causing the death of another person.

There's a million different scenarios where one caliber, or firearm would be better than another, but whether at home or at the range, your best bet is to have a gun you're comfortable with. So find some people with different handguns that interest you, and offer to buy their ammo if you go to the range.

You don't shoot to maim?

^^Well I guess you've got me there. More what I was trying to point to was the idea of overkill. Oh well.

Jyon9689 wrote:Hollow point .22 ammunition can do a considerable amount of damage

No. Hollow point .22 ammo does not expand appreciably more than regular .22.

Jyon9689 wrote:Also, another factor to consider is "Do you really want to kill someone?" If you shoot someone in the chest with a .44 Mag, they're probably going to die. With a smaller caliber, you can incapacitate them and send them to face trial, without risking legal trouble for yourself or having to live with causing the death of another person.

HAHAHAHA! That's rich, dude.

ALWAYS shoot to kill/stop (aka kill). Incapacitated would-be criminals shot in self defense have a nasty, nasty tendency to sue. You actually risk more legal trouble wounding, if you're in a situation where the use of force is legally justified. Shooting to maim is a feel-good idea that gets you killed. No defense course of any kind would teach such utter nonsense. Two chest, one head.......Like I've said before, .22LR is too small for reliable baddy-stopping self defense and should be chosen only when deep concealment take priority over stopping power.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm please note that .22LR has historically had 29% success in one-shot stops. Only the dismal .25ACP has worse. I simply don't want to gamble on 29%.

Easy there Charlieo, I'm not preaching that a .22 is the end-all self defense caliber. Just playing the devil's advocate and making the point that a .22LR handgun isn't absolutely useless in a defense situation as some would like think.

This guy seems like he's just getting into handguns, and is going to be spending a fair amount of time at the range. It's a personal preference, but most people like to start small, get used to that, then progress to another step.

A Colt Huntsman was my first handgun, a gift at age 14. Now I "own" several others. Carrying isn't really an issue for me yet though since I'm not technically old enough to own a handgun, being 19.

Jyon9689 wrote:Easy there Charlieo, I'm not preaching that a .22 is the end-all self defense caliber. Just playing the devil's advocate and making the point that a .22LR handgun isn't absolutely useless in a defense situation as some would like think.

This guy seems like he's just getting into handguns, and is going to be spending a fair amount of time at the range. It's a personal preference, but most people like to start small, get used to that, then progress to another step.

A Colt Huntsman was my first handgun, a gift at age 14. Now I "own" several others. Carrying isn't really an issue for me yet though since I'm not technically old enough to own a handgun, being 19.

You're spreading terrible legal advice about a very, very serious subject.

.22s are fine for getting into handguns. They're pretty-piss poor for self-defense.

Jyon9689 wrote:
Also, another factor to consider is "Do you really want to kill someone?" If you shoot someone in the chest with a .44 Mag, they're probably going to die. With a smaller caliber, you can incapacitate them and send them to face trial, without risking legal trouble for yourself or having to live with causing the death of another person.

This is the first time ever that I have heard a pro gun person say that you are trying to maim and NOT kill them.

Wow.

You never attempt to maim with your self defense gun, you always attempt to stop the attacker which means shooting them dead center in the chest with as big of a caliber pistol that you can safely carry. You don't want a maimed person, a maimed person can sue you and make your legal life a living hell.

Killing an attacking bad guy is the purpose of a self defense weapon. Its why I don't like the idea of a knife.

charlieo wrote:
You're spreading terrible legal advice about a very, very serious subject.

.22s are fine for getting into handguns. They're pretty-piss poor for self-defense.

yup.

.22's are excellent for learning fundamentals and wasting a day shooting cans and stuff for less than 20 bucks.

for self defense, unless the assailant has a gun, I'd rather use a brick.

knives are tools.

pistols are used to get to your rifle/shotgun

as for the 10/22, I own one and love it.

I've not done any mods to mine however. it's a stainless target model.

I've moved on twas just a phase :PAnd I know full well that one does not shoot to wound.

The sub-compact XD's and glocks have my attention now. preferably in 357sig or higher.

I love shooting .22, i have a 10/22 and a P22 and the new GSG5 is bad ***, lots of fun to shoot

the GSG-5 is neat..I kinda want one, but I'm not gonna drop that money on a finicky 22 at the moment.