Personal Protection Ruger SR 22

[WHOMADEGOD]

Sorry, but shooting someone DOES mean you are prepared to kill them.

There is no gaurrantee that if you attempt to incapacitate the enemy
thr enemy will not also suffer a fatal wound. This is something I had to
come to terms with while serving in two armed forces, Army and Air Force.

[Unified Serenity]

Posted by WHOMADEGOD (here)
Sorry, but shooting someone DOES mean you are prepared to kill them.

There is no gaurrantee that if you attempt to incapacitate the enemy
thr enemy will not also suffer a fatal wound. This is something I had to
come to terms with while serving in two armed forces, Army and Air Force.

I agree, but I am not able to find where on the thread that it was stated otherwise. My point is, you can choose to shoot at a less likely area to cause death or choose to choose a high probability area to cause death. It's important to be familier and skilled with the firearm of your choice. Higher caliber bullets cause more recoil and it's a bit more difficult to control the weapon or re-obtain your target. Thus, choose the weapon you are most comfortable with using. This of course can change with time and skill gained on a shooting range.

Thanks for your thoughts. I would like to see more thoughts on safety and techniques.

One technique I think is very useful is to start out from the position of the weapon in the holster to make you draw it and acquire your target. The more you do this, the quicker you become. Another technique is to shoot with your off hand in case for some reason your dominant hand is injured. Learn to shoot with both hands and from various positions.

[RMorgan]

Hey folks,

Well, if some of you question about a weapon restrictive politics, just ask me and I´ll say that it doesn´t work, at least for honest people.

Here in Brazil, people can´t have guns. Well, technically we can but can´t...I´ll explain.

You can buy a gun (civilians are restricted to a maximum .40 caliper revolver or pistol) to have in your home, but it´s such a boring, very expensive and highly bureaucratic process, that most people can´t afford both the guns and the licenses and taxes.

So, generally, Brazilians, at least the honest ones, don´t have guns at home, for the above reasons. Ammo is very expensive here and really low in quality as well.

There´s a different licensing process if you want to carry a gun with you. Of course, you have to go under a few medical, psychological tests and prove that your profession offers you risks that require you to carry a gun. The whole process is very expensive an prohibitive.

However, the bad guys have guns. In fact they have BIG guns and even grenades and missile launchers are often found in favelas.

So yeah, the good guys can´t have guns, but the bad guys have easy access to all kinds of guns on the black market.

And, the police, which is supposed to protect us from the bad guys, since we don´t have guns, is completely corrupt, because their salary is so small that they have to look after other means to earn money and take care of their families.

The police is somewhat fine were I live (the 3° larger city in the country) but if you go to Rio and the police stops you, be careful. Sometimes they are worse than the official criminals.

So, to sum up, gun restrictive politics doesn´t allow honest men to have guns, but the bad guys can easily buy them, which gives them strategical advantage and leaves you completely unprotected, since most of the times you can´t even trust the police because they are the ones who supply the bad guys with the guns. Got it?

Very crazy, hum?

Cheers,

Raf.

[Unified Serenity]

There is a quote that goes something like this, "Any Government that provides everything for the people can take away anything from the people."

The socialist system is about dependency on the government for what you have. If everyone was honest and ethical it would be a great system, but as we have seen time and again, there is no such thing as an honest and ethical population or government. People do favors for some in order to get favors in return. It's all set up to create dependency and ultimate control.

The more dependent you are on the government, the less you can take care of yourself. There was a huge difference in what the population in New Orleans experienced verses those further North who suffered terrible floods. The devestation was pretty dramatic in both places, but one group pulled together, did not need or complain about the government help or lack thereof, and the media gave almost no coverage for how the community pulled together further North.

It's sort of like parenting. If you do everything for your children, they will not learn or gain independence. Sadly, that is exactly what we have a majority of today in America. Dependent children and adults who can't possibly take care of themselves, and when society finds itself in a disaster, they freak out, rob, pillage, and kill to get what they think they need because all they know is being dependent.

[GoodETxSG]

Posted by RMorgan (here)
Hey folks,

Well, if some of you question about a weapon restrictive politics, just ask me and I´ll say that it doesn´t work, at least for honest people.

Here in Brazil, people can´t have guns. Well, technically we can but can´t...I´ll explain.

You can buy a gun (civilians are restricted to a maximum .40 caliper revolver or pistol) to have in your home, but it´s such a boring, very expensive and highly bureaucratic process, that most people can´t afford both the guns and the licenses and taxes.

So, generally, Brazilians, at least the honest ones, don´t have guns at home, for the above reasons. Ammo is very expensive here and really low in quality as well.

There´s a different licensing process if you want to carry a gun with you. Of course, you have to go under a few medical, psychological tests and prove that your profession offers you risks that require you to carry a gun. The whole process is very expensive an prohibitive.

However, the bad guys have guns. In fact they have BIG guns and even grenades and missile launchers are often found in favelas.

So yeah, the good guys can´t have guns, but the bad guys have easy access to all kinds of guns on the black market.

And, the police, which is supposed to protect us from the bad guys, since we don´t have guns, is completely corrupt, because their salary is so small that they have to look after other means to earn money and take care of their families.

The police is somewhat fine were I live (the 3° larger city in the country) but if you go to Rio and the police stops you, be careful. Sometimes they are worse than the official criminals.

So, to sum up, gun restrictive politics doesn´t allow honest men to have guns, but the bad guys can easily buy them, which gives them strategical advantage and leaves you completely unprotected, since most of the times you can´t even trust the police because they are the ones who supply the bad guys with the guns. Got it?

Very crazy, hum?

Cheers,

Raf.

They can have my gun if they come looking for it... no big deal... all of the storm troopers who carry guns can have one liberated from them quite easily, everyone drops their guard at some point.

Then I have a new gun... maybe even a better on. Training in many offensive/defensive arts/tactics and survival methods give you all of the tools you need... YOUR BRAIN is the best tool you have.

[Unified Serenity]

While that is all true, it is not helping those who are killed daily by the criminals and dirty police looking to make a buck. An unarmed populace is simply easy pickings. Just look at the cities in America with the highest crime rates. They all outlawed gun ownership and concealed carry, and yhet they have the highest murder and crime rates: New York City and Washington D.C.. I know Chicago is abysmal, but I don't know the gun laws there. All of these have been controlled by anti-gun advocates for decades, and yet the people who suffer are the lawful citizens. They can't go grab a gun legally and protect themselves, so they are given the choice to be a target and easy victim or a criminal but alive and not a victim of some drug dealing or using thug.

[GoodETxSG]

Posted by Unified Serenity (here)
While that is all true, it is not helping those who are killed daily by the criminals and dirty police looking to make a buck. An unarmed populace is simply easy pickings. Just look at the cities in America with the highest crime rates. They all outlawed gun ownership and concealed carry, and yhet they have the highest murder and crime rates: New York City and Washington D.C.. I know Chicago is abysmal, but I don't know the gun laws there. All of these have been controlled by anti-gun advocates for decades, and yet the people who suffer are the lawful citizens. They can't go grab a gun legally and protect themselves, so they are given the choice to be a target and easy victim or a criminal but alive and not a victim of some drug dealing or using thug.

Sad but true... the only disarmed people are the ones that need protection, and you are NOT going to get it from the COPS... they just come and fill out the report and draw a chalk line around your or your loved ones... then maybe months later they accidentally catch the bad guy on a traffic stop.

[Lost N Found]

Posted by Unified Serenity (here)

Self protection is a very personal decision. Sadly, for some of you that has been made for you by your governments. I happen to live in the gun toting US of A and the sale of personal firearm protection has gone through the roof! The people sense tough times are coming. There are too many stories of people being attacked by rogue mobs, thus the choice of many is to obtain a firearm.


I was blessed with a father who encouraged his two girls to learn how to properly use a firearm. I would go to the gun range on weekends and dad would teach us all the tips and tricks of shooting. Of course, he taught us safety first and the fact that guns are very dangerous. One of the first lessons I learned was that you never point a gun at anyone unless you intend to shoot them, and there is no such thing as an unloaded weapon! My father was one of the best marksmen in the Unites States Navy, and therefore he taught us well. I have recently been thinking about various theories on pistol caliber and ammunition that would offer the most protection.


It has been my thinking for a very long time that the .44 caliber is the best take down weapon based on police statistics of one shot take down results. After that, the second best in my book was a .45, and the 1911 Colt .45 has always been one of my most favorite weapons. With that said though, those are high power pistols and no weapon will help you if you are not comfortable shooting it and learn how to control it. No weapon will help you if you don't want to carry it either. I have tended to not like the 9 mm because it tends to just go through the target and it takes more rounds to take them down while a good .380 round can do incredible damage and stop the bad guys. With all that being said, let me repeat that no weapon will be of any use to you if you are not comfortable shooting it or carrying it.


I have had a change of heart recently regarding carrying a weapon and what caliber to carry. I would have laughed in your face not long ago if you had suggested that I look into getting a .22 pistol. I mean, come on, a .22? Then, I watched Molotov's video and he was right. If you shoot someone they will bleed and hurt and 999 people out of a 1000 are going to stop attacking you at that point. If you shoot them and they do not stop, you have to be able to reacquire your target and shoot them some more. Now, granted if you spend a lot of time on the firing range then that is easier to do, but a .22 kickback is a whole lot less than a .45, .44, or 357. Oh, those rounds will put a football sized hole in someone, but first you have to shoot them, and second if you miss you gotta try again, while the .22 has almost zero kickback and you can put in a tight group easily and if necessary you can do a head shot if absolutely necessary because of how easy it is to control.


One of the reasons people do not shoot their weapon is the cost of the ammunition. It keeps going up, and therefore people go out once or twice a year if lucky and shoot their pistol. That does not make for a very experienced shooter and therefore reaction times are slower should you need to draw your weapon. Some people will get a .22 just to practice with, but if you are in trouble and need to shoot that weapon, then it's imperative that you are comfortable with the kickback and getting back on target!


With all that in mind, I think there are some huge benefits to buying a good quality .22 semi-automatic handgun. The ammo is very cheap, you will have fun shooting it, and will also encourage your children to learn firearm safety and get comfortable with a quality weapon. I think my favorite right now is the Ruger SR .22 and I will post some videos below to let you get an idea of how great this weapon is. I was torn between the Walther P22 and the Ruger SR.22 won out for several reasons.


1. It's 2 ounces heavier than the Walther P22 which decreases kickback
2. It's barrel is a fixed barrel and it's very thick, it will last
3. De-cocking mechanism which the Walther P22 does not have and is a hazard when de-cocking the pistol.
4. 3 dot reversible sights.
5. 2 clips
6. extra grip for those with large hands
7. few parts to breakdown and clean the weapon
8. The Ruger SR .22 appears to eat almost any ammo with zero problems
I think there is little reason to go out in public unarmed anymore. If you are going to get a CCW, then learn the tools needed to do so safely and effectively. The second video is an excellent one to understand how to do CCW and not be uncomfortable. Remember, if you are uncomfortable you won't carry, and if you won't carry then you are not protecting yourself or your family. I respect the police and worked with them for years. I did not know a single rogue cop. Every officer I knew would give their life to protect the citizens, but the sad fact is that most police show up after the crime to gather evidence and write reports. They cannot be there for you most of the time, and you are responsible for your life and the life of your family. Learn how to do it safely, skillfully, and effectively!



Ruger SR 22


Great video showing the capability of the .22

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ps_AIciGnng

Go to WND to see Molotov Mitchell explain why use a .22 or .380 (Great video)


http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/for-self-...e-22-beats-45/


Concealed Carry in the Waistband

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=7gjUknHqvGY

Well this is good, However, I do prefer my 9 mil Glock 17 and found that this weapon is superior to most other pistols. It does not stove pipe, it keeps on shooting no matter what and if using the hollow points it will stop anyone coming at you. I do agree with you on the fact that if you are not comfortable shooting anything it isn't going to do any good. I used to carry a 1911 45 auto and found it to be way to cumbersom and expensive. It is not the size of the bullet but rather how accurate you or one is with whatever they are shooting. I have seen the vids about using a 22 and that is right on. If you have to shoot and you hit someone with one of these it is going to stop them from moving forward if you hit them in the head or heart. Now as for the Nine, I happen to know alot of deputies and policeman that will carry these as backups or regular and they can be deadly with them. Yes you are right about that bullet going completely through but that has been a blessing and not so. Now the hollow point is nasty.

I remember, and still have the bullet in my leg, getting shot with a 22. It was absolutely no fun at all. I suspect if it had been anywhere else in my body, I might not be here today.

Interesting subject, I have taught both of my daughters how to handle a weapon and they both have CCW's so that is one worry I do not have with them.

Thanks for the Thread. Peace be with you

[TargeT]

Posted by 13th Warrior (here)

The Five Seven as i understand it; was designed as an light armor piercing round. The armor piercing tipped cartridges are not supposed to be on the market for non agency use.

The HN Five Seven is a great hand gun but, it also comes with a great price tag (1000+ US dollars).

You can also get the P90 weapons system chambered in the 5.7.

I carry a 5.7 everywhere & own a Ps90, but as you said, it is a very expensive weapon system (both)

the 5.7 has been shown to do more damage than a .45 on balistic gel targets and (with the right ammo) is level 2 body armor piercing, very attractive all around with an extremely managable recoil.


one problem with fire arms is the lethality of them, as I've been in combat zones a few times I've had to face this situation and its not an easy one to reconcile with.

I like that you are thinking of PDW's but perhaps a less than lethal option would be ideal, I have recently purchased two of these:

http://www.knuckleblaster.com/
950,000 volts is quite useful for putting someone on the ground.

aside from that I'll say one thing on personal defense:

you can go to the range all you want, you can be the best aim there and think you are prepared but once it comes time for a "panic shot" you'll find out how prepared you are.. I highly suggest a shot gun, a Remmington 870 pump shotgun is inexpensive and highly effective, plus the sound of racking a shell will be almost more effective than the shot itself.

I also am one that think's 9m is useless, the Alaska State Troopers quit carrying 9mil when they found it wouldn't even penitrate layered carharts (comonly worn here in the winter) & has almost no stopping power.

[JohnBlues]

There's a company called MagPul Dynamics that hold tactical/defensive shooting courses for handgun, carbine, shotgun. They have a DVD series, i've watched all of them, and there's lots of valuable info in there

Art of Dynamic Handgun
===

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_rWKWwdo_qw

Art of Dynamic Carbine
===

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ye30b3TL5wI

Art of Dynamic Shotgun
===

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=1XCv0X6SqUg

Personally, i live in Oz with restrictive gun laws, but i own a 7.62 rifle, 5.56 rifle and a 12g shotgun for sport and hunting, and even though it's not legal to use firearms for self defense here, in a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI (The End of the world as we know it) scenario I don't think that would really matter anymore.. I know thats the same for friends who also own firearms for "sport and hunting" purposes only.

Just got my pistol license, so i'm looking at buying a pistol too, was thinking something with Strikerfire system and not single action/double action as they are not as simple and idiot-proof to use in a stress situation, my mate has an SW M&P 9mm (which is what Chris Costa uses in the Magpul courses above) and I'm looking at that, also a fan of the 1911's.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=if7cwqHcaTY

I'll be doing IPSC too, likely standard division, in Oz pistols are officially only meant for sport, can't be used in hunting.. again in a collapse of society, i think a lot of pistol owners wouldnt take that into much consideration

[Unified Serenity]

The information speaks for itself, and though some of you hate AJ, the facts of the story seem pretty clear. Just because you have not suffered extreme totalitarian boot on the neck government in the UK does not mean it is not headed your way, and what are you going to do to protect yourselves? You used to depend on American to keep the peace in Europe, but as you all hate us now, and we are being overrun by communist traitors just as you were, we shall all soon know what a government that has zero fear of the poeple can really do. This is why we American's are not going to give up our guns:

UK Bans Self-Defense Expert From Entering Country

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, May 9, 2012

The UK government has banned self-defense expert and former US Navy Seal Tim Larkin from entering the country after Larkin planned to hold seminars instructing people how to protect themselves against rioters and criminals.

“Tim Larkin tried to board a plane from his home in Las Vegas on Tuesday, but was given a UK Border Agency letter saying “his presence here was not conducive to the public good,” reports BBC News.

The banning order reflects how the coalition government is continuing the previous Labour Party’s policy of discouraging British citizens from using any kind of self-defense whatsoever given the fact that private ownership of firearms is all but completely outlawed.

Larkin was scheduled to be the keynote speaker at The Martial Arts Show conference in Birmingham and to hold a seminar in Tottenham, two areas hit by violence during last year’s riots. Unlike many methods of so-called “self-defense,” Larkin’s program actually teaches (shock, horror), methods on how to incapacitate an attacker.

Larkin told BBC Radio 4 that the banning order was a “gross over-reaction” and said the real reason behind it was because he had publicly criticized the country’s laws on self-defense, which are ambiguous at best and leave victims completely vulnerable to criminals.

The notion that Larkin may have been banned from entering Britain primarily because he has been critical of the country’s laws on self-defense is plausible given the fact that others like radio talk show host Michael Savage have also been banned for holding controversial political opinions.
People in the UK who have used force to protect their property against home invasions by criminals have themselves been on the receiving end of legal retribution, despite the fact that both common law and the Criminal Law Act 1967 both allow citizens to act in ways which would otherwise be illegal to prevent injury to oneself or others.

A landmark case occurred in 1999 when farmer Tony Martin shot at two burglars who had broken into his remote farmhouse, killing one and injuring the other. Despite the fact that Martin had been the victim of burglaries numerous times before with little help from the police, in addition to the lengthy criminal record of the burglars, Martin was convicted for murder because a jury found that he had gone beyond using “reasonable force”. The conviction was later reduced to manslaughter on appeal.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/uk-bans-...g-country.html