9mm v. 45
Neither. 22LR for the win.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
September 16th, 2012 at 9:41 pm
The .22 is for Neanderthals and cavemen who bitterly cling to their ancient, heavy caliber weapons. Everybody else knows that the .17 is the self-defense caliber of choice for the modern gunner, because it’s got more velocity, and velocity is more cooler, so it’s more better, which is more cooler, so it’s the caliber to choose. Makes sense, doesn’t it?
September 16th, 2012 at 10:09 pm
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org//node/7866
This is the study cited in the video, and it basically calculates the likelihood that the shooter pulls the trigger more than once. No surprise, people who carry proper self-defense calibers are also better trained than those that don’t — they pull the trigger again after a good hit.
Once again, those that do not understand Marshall and Sanow are destined to recreate it — badly. Here’s more evidence that we need a Boy Scouts badge in Design of Experiments.
September 17th, 2012 at 1:18 am
Re: video clip
When someone says, “twenty two ell ar” instead of “twenty two long rifle” their credibility suffers.
September 17th, 2012 at 7:20 am
Unlike many who prognosticate, the author actually went through the trouble – over several years – of collecting and annotating shooting data specifically to answer his questions.
But haters will hate, because his data shows little difference in the real-world effects between calibers. Forget internet theory. In hundreds of shootings he found trends that form. Read his report and see the ones he finds. Pretty straight-forward stuff but I am sure it’ll be heresy to some.
The report suggests people carry whatever they are comfortable with (the horror). It does not suggest .22lr as the most effective. It just says that the numbers suggest it will do the job, too, especially if your definition of “stopping power” includes making people unwilling to fight (rather than unable). It turns out that getting shot with a bullet kinda-sorta makes most bad guys stop doing what they are doing, even if it won’t kill them. Remarkable, huh?
If it proves anything, it the importance of Rule #1: “Have a gun…”
September 17th, 2012 at 7:49 am
@Brad: I teach newbies the basic ins and outs of firearms. Last weekend I had a liberal city councilman from Maryland walk up to me and quietly ask, “Some weekend can you teach me how to use a gun? I’ve never even held one before…”
I will teach him on the “Twenty Two Ell Are” handgun. Why? Because it says so, right on the box.
Gunnies know this stuff, but newbies will not. I ask people new to firearms what intimidates them most about guns, and it ain’t the gun: it’s uptight gun people and semantics. It’s those of us waiting to pounce on someone for saying “clip”, or for failing to pronounce the name of a round exactly the way long-term gun-owners say it (I almost said “shooters” instead of “owners”, but we all now the two are not the same).
Have you ever stopped to really consider how hard it is to penetrate the wall of jargon surrounding guns: calibers, bullets, “auto loading” versus “auto fire”, blah, etc.?
This video is not for gunnies. It’s for the mass of people who might have questions, not those who think arcane firearm nomenclature is form of street cred. Credibility is not harmed simply because we are talking in language all can understand. The guy doing the vid teaches people, and if he is any good he will be careful to talk in terms anyone can understand.
I am not trying to be an ass, but the whole “you gotta say it just right” thing annoys the shit out of me. I exclusively take people absolutely new to guns and work to make them comfortable with firearms and our community. My track record is 100% converted in five years. I specialize in urban liberals. That city councilman? He is moving into the statehouse in two years (he has been pre-ordained, as scary as that thought is), and I have been targeting him for conversion for two years. It is hard to break down walls if our side keeps throwing up bricks.
Be nice to the natives. They make our laws.
FWIW, I am now adding a “gun store etiquette” discussion to my schtick, and it includes how to deal with anal-retentive gunnies who feel it necessary to look down on those who are semantically challenged when it comes to guns: walk out. I also send newbies to shops I know will treat them with respect.
September 17th, 2012 at 2:37 pm
First rule of a gun fight, have a gun.
.22 LR is better than nothing. If its what you have, or all you can shoot, or all you can afford.
Then carry a .22 LR.
September 18th, 2012 at 3:49 am
Patrick
My, what an epic response to a mere 19 words. One that deserves a reaction.
It seems you think I am one of those “uptight gun people” “waiting to pounce” on misuse of “jargon” and “semantics”. You jumped to a false conclusion. However, I acknowledge that the brevity of my critique may have contributed to your misperception.
I was intrigued by Uncles headline, so I followed the link and watched the whole video. Thankfully Tasso had a link to the study the video is referring to, so I also read the study before coming to any conclusions.
The short answer is the study itself is sober, limited, but informative within its limits. Wheras the video is sophomoric, and does a poor job of representing the information from the study. The video claims the .22 is superior to the .45, while the study makes no such claim.
I do not agree with your characterization of the video. The author claims authority, and also claims to be speaking to an informed audience. As such I don’t mind so much his strutting and posing. However, I do think his attitude would be a problem if his intended audience was people who are alien to American gun culture.
And I find his claim to authority hard to accept when he says something as bizarre as “twenty two ell are”. Who talks like that? Nobody I know. It’s not a question of arcane semantics or insider knowledge. The only place I am familiar seeing long rifle abbreviated to LR or lr is in the pages of gun magazines, other written articles on guns, or sometimes stamped on the side of a firearm, all cases in which using an abbreviation makes sense. So talk in such a strange way makes me suspect a mall ninja at work or an actor reading from a script, and not a true authority.
And as critical as correct ammunition is for firearms, I am used to seeing “long rifle” spelled out and not abbreviated on the sides or tops of boxes of .22 long rifle rimfire ammunition. In fact the only brand of ammo I can find which seems to use the “LR” abbreviation is CCI. So unless your theoretical novice shooter has only been exposed to CCI for his entire experience it makes no sense to say, “twenty two ell arr”, to a novice. I don’t buy that explanation for such a strange way of talking.
Spelled out like this, it sounds like I am being very harsh on the video, which was not my intention. My intention in my first post was to merely express skepticism. But when called out to defend my skepticism, I have to spell out, ‘the hard truth’.;-)
September 18th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
@Brad: No offense intended. That said, once again you seem wrapped around gun semantics…yet somehow getting upset over the pronunciation of a caliber is not “uptight”?
My larger point here is not about your post. It is that lots of folks are put off by those who won’t let a mag be a “clip” or who claim that others are not to be trusted because they don’t pronounce things the way the gun zeitgeist demands.
Let’s talk hard truth: If we want to erect barriers to new shooters and owners, one way to do it is to disrespect anyone who doesn’t speak in the agreed-upon manner.
My advice is to relax a bit and have some fun. Take some new people out to have some fun. That means letting them enjoy the shooting without worrying about making “gun people” upset because they didn’t call it the right thing the first ten times. Correct safety issues and let them call it a ‘clip’ or whatever.
Yeah…this gets to my nerves. It’s a sore spot for me to work on making people comfortable with firearms, only to find them turned away by an iron wall of gunnies who cannot relax.
I got no problem with the video. I don’t care about the subjective issues. The guy posed a lot and tried too hard to be cool. But nothing there said “be unsafe”, and a new shooter watching that might get something from it. That’s enough to cross the low bar for “free stuff on the internet”.
Again, no disrespect intended. You undeniably know your stuff and that is a good thing. I am just trying to convince you that recruiting new shooters has been the reason our community is successful, and sometimes doing that requires we talk in terms they will understand, even if those terms might not satisfy our inner gun-nerd (I apply that term to myself, as well. It’s not meant to be an insult.).