Thread: Girl-Friendly Home Defense

Originally Posted by jojo

I do agree that the .22 is a poor man stopper, however at a simple distance of generally less than 25 feet the .223 ar-15 isn't going to do much more damage. This isn't me attempting to bash the ar-15 the good quality models are decent battle rifles for longer range shooting, but I wouldn't want to use one up close unless I had to.

You have absolutely no fucking idea what you are talking about. The common .223 ball ammo (M193 and M855) is particularly effective at close range, because as long as it's velocity is above ~2700 fps, it will fragment very effectively and inflict a brutal wound cavity. It's at longer range, once the velocity has dropped below ~2700 fps (which happens around 150-200 yds. from a 20" barrel, 50-100 yds. for a 14.5" M4 barrel), that the .223 round loses terminal effect and could maybe begin to be compared to a .22 LR in terms of wound cavity profile. Within effective fragmentation range, a .223 round is not only vastly more effective than a .22 LR round, it's more effective than most ball/FMJ .30-caliber rifle rounds (because most of them don't fragment effectively).

Please don't try to give firearms advice if you have no idea what you're talking about. There is absolutely nothing about the .223 round or the AR-15 that causes poor terminal performance within 25 feet or whatever. You just completely made that up.