This past weekend I had the unfortune of having to dispatch a ground hog who found its way under my deck but couldnt find its way out. Not wanting a ground hogs den under my deck or house, I took the aggresive approach.
Living in a subdivision and not wanting to unleash the big guns for fear of a richochet or overpenetration into my house or someone elses, I crawled under the deck with my Ruger Mark II 22-45 with 4" barrel that happened to be loaded with Federal Automatch ammo.
I pumped a shot into the groundhog from 8 feet away and he hardly flinched. Then another and another with the same reaction as if to say "is that the best you got?" After four shots (all hits) and a still fully alert but bloody groundhog, I decided to finish him off with a shovel which still took quite an effort.
I know groundhogs are tough and the ammo I had readily available wasnt the best suited for the task at hand. But I guess I expected a better result being so close to the animal.
I know its probably comparing apples to oranges, but Ive been a proponent in the past (with plenty of opposition) of saying that a .22LR for self defense isnt that bad a choice and much better than nothing.
Am I wrong in this incident causing me to being slightly red-faced now in admitting that those who have sneered in the past at the .22LR being used for self- defense, saying its simply too weak for self-defense are probably correct?
If the .22 gets a ho-hum reaction from a groundhog after 4 hits from eight feet away, what kind of reaction will it get from a 200+ pound thug jacked up on adrenaline, drugs, or both? Caused me to ponder my previous school of thought.
Living in a subdivision and not wanting to unleash the big guns for fear of a richochet or overpenetration into my house or someone elses, I crawled under the deck with my Ruger Mark II 22-45 with 4" barrel that happened to be loaded with Federal Automatch ammo.
I pumped a shot into the groundhog from 8 feet away and he hardly flinched. Then another and another with the same reaction as if to say "is that the best you got?" After four shots (all hits) and a still fully alert but bloody groundhog, I decided to finish him off with a shovel which still took quite an effort.
I know groundhogs are tough and the ammo I had readily available wasnt the best suited for the task at hand. But I guess I expected a better result being so close to the animal.
I know its probably comparing apples to oranges, but Ive been a proponent in the past (with plenty of opposition) of saying that a .22LR for self defense isnt that bad a choice and much better than nothing.
Am I wrong in this incident causing me to being slightly red-faced now in admitting that those who have sneered in the past at the .22LR being used for self- defense, saying its simply too weak for self-defense are probably correct?
If the .22 gets a ho-hum reaction from a groundhog after 4 hits from eight feet away, what kind of reaction will it get from a 200+ pound thug jacked up on adrenaline, drugs, or both? Caused me to ponder my previous school of thought.
