Rimefires in Real Life?

#1
I just wanted to pick everyone's brains as to what if any application Rimefire weapons have in the real world.

I have seen arguments, both good and atrocious, made that there are certain niches that a .22 or .17hmr could fill.

As far as I can tell there hasn't been a discussion about rimefires on here other than as trainers. I'm not sure if that's because they have already been completely written off but I always heard the only stupid question was the one never asked.

Possible niches I COULD see them having (not saying they are a good option just trying to start some dialog) are: tiny BUG, handgun for weak/disabled individuals (My mother had several surgeries on her wrists prior to retiring and had issues as a result), In restricted states rimefire guns are not subject to assault weapon rules so if one wants an AR that hasn't been physically castrated they can get one in .22.

Thanks in advance for the schooling I'm sure I'm about to get.
 
#2
At one of my old departments, we had a Ruger 10/22 in the trunk for putting animals down. Even as a tiny BUG, I don't see it as useful. Most semi-auto .22 pistols I've come across have feeding issues. So, if you're looking at a revolver for reliability, you might as well get something in a duty caliber (.38, etc).

I don't even really see them to be useful as trainers. Feeding issues, bad magazines, etc., really slow things down. IMHO, you can practice every skill but recoil management dry. Make your rounds count, instead of expensive noise.
 
#3
I see it having a place for people with injuries to resort to for some kind of lethal ballistic force. (Lethal as in deadly, not incapacitating). If sound is an issue and a suppressor is not available or an option, I can see .22 used for that as well. But mainly in lethal force encounter I mainly see it in use by a person that suffers from injuries that prevents handling of a more powerful gun. I would recommend looking into the .380 Shield EZ before going all the way down to a .22 for a shooter with injuries. I am still waiting to get my hand on one to try out and add to the inventory.
 
#4
Was there a reason they had you use a 10/22 instead of just your sidearm? All the departments I have worked at policy was to use the duty sidearm.

With most .22 pistols I have seen/heard of issues with reliability. Most .22 rifles run great though which is kind of where this question came to me. I was talking with others in California and the point was made that .22 rifles are not subject to assault weapon laws and some said they would rather have a .22 with AR ergonomics and ease of use rather than a more potent caliber in a featureless platform. I thought this was kind of a silly idea at first but when I considered it for the purpose of solely a HD/ranch gun I could see it making a little more sense.

As far as a .380 goes you're basically going to be using ball ammo to get sufficient penetration so I can see a similar argument of .45vs9mm being made for .380vs.22. Lighter recoil, more rounds in a magazine and similar performance. .380 is known to be a garbage caliber in terms of lethality and it's a tad more expensive than service calibers typically. If those were my only two options I would probably take the .22 honestly. That being said I will concede that your average .380 will be more reliable than your standard .22 but if one was going to use either for actual use they should find a round that the gun likes and will eat reliably before trusting it.
 
#5
Pretty much that's what the chief wanted (for small animals like raccoons anyway). It was a small, but densely populated suburban borough.

I can see your case for a .22, in the specific context of a shooter with a physical disability that limits their ability to handle the recoil of a typical duty caliber pistol. If I were in a ban state (and trust me PGH and Philly liberals are trying), and I didn't have a limiting disability, I would consider myself better served a by a shotgun (pick your gauge flavor) and a buck shot load patterned for my determined HD distances.
 
#6
I could see a little 10/22 being a little softer of an image from a chief's perspective I suppose.

Yeah the gauge is what I personally have set up at home and train with. I was just trying to play devil's advocate a bit to see where things went.
 
#7
Civil discourse and differing opinions lead to learning occurring. Outside the box thinking, I like it. I never considered the aspect of a disabled shooter. Mostly, because that is outside my frame of reference (LE duty and off-duty CCW). So it's not bad to throw around ideas and see what shakes out.
 

ccw1911

Newbie
WARLORD
#8
No rimfire ammunition is reliable enough for me to pick it for self defense or offense. It has nothing to do with the caliber it is because of the way rimfire ammo is made. Rimmed cartridges don't feed thru magazines well because one rim gets behind another and has to jump over to feed, in a pistol where you are limited to a straight line magazine this is a big problem. So if you have to go as tiny as possible 25 auto over 22lr, 32acp is not much bigger and easy to shoot.
 
#9
For a disabled or fragile person, I would consider a 8 shot .22 revolver, not an self-loader.

Self-loaded has a stoppage (common with .22 LR), it can be difficult to remedy.

8 shot revolver doesn't fire on 1 chamber, just pull the trigger again.

Friend of mine killed an intruder threatening he and his wife with SBI/Death, when breaking into their house. They ensconced in the master bedroom, got on the phone with 911, gave verbal warnings to him, and upon him forcing the bedroom door to make good on his threats, Bob shot him multiple times in the chest from a .22 revolver. Aggressor expired on scene.

.22 LR is not my first choice, but it does have some niches.
 
#10
Was there a reason they had you use a 10/22 instead of just your sidearm? All the departments I have worked at policy was to use the duty sidearm.

With most .22 pistols I have seen/heard of issues with reliability. Most .22 rifles run great though which is kind of where this question came to me. I was talking with others in California and the point was made that .22 rifles are not subject to assault weapon laws and some said they would rather have a .22 with AR ergonomics and ease of use rather than a more potent caliber in a featureless platform. I thought this was kind of a silly idea at first but when I considered it for the purpose of solely a HD/ranch gun I could see it making a little more sense.
You were right the first time. Ergos are how you interact with your gun, ballistics is how the gun interacts with the world. A featureless AR with a 30-round mag shooting .223 is a real fighting rifle that feels odd to people who are familiar with something else. If you a person really puts comfort above capability, they should carry a pillow, not a rifle.

As far as a .380 goes you're basically going to be using ball ammo to get sufficient penetration so I can see a similar argument of .45vs9mm being made for .380vs.22. Lighter recoil, more rounds in a magazine and similar performance. .380 is known to be a garbage caliber in terms of lethality and it's a tad more expensive than service calibers typically. If those were my only two options I would probably take the .22 honestly. That being said I will concede that your average .380 will be more reliable than your standard .22 but if one was going to use either for actual use they should find a round that the gun likes and will eat reliably before trusting it.
If you're looking into small guns with little recoil that are on the cusp of lethality, you ought to look into a revolver in .327 Federal. It packs +1 over a same-framed .38 spl. If you're limiting yourself to 6 or 7 rounds of .22 or .380, you might as well eliminate feeding issues entirely.
 

jschulz

Newbie
Network Support I
#13
I use a highly modified 10/22 with a YHM integrally suppressed barrel for pest control in my suburban neighborhood. My neighbors have no idea I am destroying the squirrel population wrecking havoc on everything they can eat.
 

ccw1911

Newbie
WARLORD
#14
It's not that the 22lr can kill, of course it can, it's not that spooks have used it to assassinate..they have, all those commonly used excuses for the 22lr are offensive use not defense and entirely different subject. You don't pick a 22lr because the ammo is not reliable enough and the chances for immediate incapacitation are lower than other choices. Sure if it's all I have I'd use it, that should go without saying.
 
#15
You were right the first time. Ergos are how you interact with your gun, ballistics is how the gun interacts with the world. A featureless AR with a 30-round mag shooting .223 is a real fighting rifle that feels odd
While I don't at all disagree with the overall sentiment I think it's worth noting that a 30 round mag would also be prohibited, a flashhider would be prohibited and a shooter cannot access the fire selector with their dominant hand without modification. CA laws have done their best to castrate the capabilities of the modern rifle.

Alright just for fun what are thoughts on fullauto .22? like the american 180?
 
#16
While I don't at all disagree with the overall sentiment I think it's worth noting that a 30 round mag would also be prohibited, a flashhider would be prohibited and a shooter cannot access the fire selector with their dominant hand without modification. CA laws have done their best to castrate the capabilities of the modern rifle.
I went back and looked at where I got my info, and I had misinterpreted it. You seem to be correct. But, like you said, CA gun law is made for the sole purpose of castrating firearms and hamstringing their owners, and subject to change at any time without prior notice. It's a minefield out there.

I personally would pass using a rimfire and go towards a modernized lever gun like what @Buffalodiller produces, but that's outside the scope of this thread.
 
#18
Something that Modcast 153 reminded me of for use is precision practice. Around me I need to beg borrow or steal to get to a range of any significant distance for most center fire cartridges, but it's easy for me to find 100 yards to shoot. Take that and a 22lr and I have something that I can work over without incurring much cost and I can get some real value out of.
 
#19
The traditional roles of hunting,pest control and training are still very valid.

For defense .22lr in a rifle is a counter intuitive but not terrible option for someone who is weak or injured. To paraphrase Chuck Haggard “Every shooting with a .22 rifle I have responded to was a fatality.”

A real serious shooter I work with uses .22lr to train for distance shooting because it replicates long range with a shorter distance and is cheap.