Great story with a happy ending. Congratulations on being prepared to do what you had to do. Also, impressive performance for a .22.
I've often wondered, does anyone know of a source for .22 and .22 magnum performance in real life or death situations? There are several places to see how well they do in ballistic jell-o, but not so much for real life threatening self defense use.
You can't go by "one shot stop" statistics because they throw out a whole lot of data, don't account for shot placement, and only "analyze" instances involving one shot. When you do that, you make a "self fulfilling prophecy" as more than one shot wasn't needed so of course it worked. It's logically invalid. You can't even infer that with most handgun rounds that 55%-89% of the time you won't have to hit more than once because of how Marshall and Sanow handled the data.
Unfortunately, Marshall and Sanow are mostly what's out there, even though many are highly critical (in a bad way) of their methodology. There are also the controversial and perhaps bogus/fabricated "Strasburg Goat Tests."
Here's a pretty scathing evaluation of Marshall and Sanow.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htmBe advised to take any "stopping statistics" with a grain of salt and use your mind; devise a testing methodology of your own. The M&S data is nice to keep handy so you can identify when someone is quoting them. Yes, their study had problems.
One set of non-M&S stats I read gave .22 short a nearly identical rating compared to .22 lr hyper velocity. The author then explained that it was likely due to the psychological effect of "wanting to quit" as a result from getting hit and not really anything to do with the nature of the round at all.
One thing I read pointed out that "9mm takes far more hits because when 9mm is used, more rounds tend to be fired when compared to a 5 shot .38." I think that speaks to the controllability and capacity of most 9mm platforms and says ZERO about the capabilities of the round.
The primary problem of compiling and posting "stopping statistics" is that I guarantee 100% that someone, somewhere will accuse you of being completely wrong.
Summary: Mark Twain said that "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Check this out:
http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/HandgunStandards1.pdfI think training, practice, and shot placement are FAR more important than caliber or ammo type. It sounds far more logical to me.
If you want to know what the FBI minimums are for ballistic properties, check this out:
http://greent.com/40Page/general/fbitest.htm12 or more inches under all those conditions? It is no WONDER they went with full-house 10mm at one point. If I needed a minimum to do all that stuff, I'd just get a rifle instead.
