“Can a bullet be too small to save your life?” History and statistics answer “yes.” Though shot placement, as always, matters immensely, some handgun cartridges simply don’t possess enough penetration power or energy to effectively dispatch a relentless attacker. The FBI’s long-trusted ballistic gelatin standards of 12-18 inches have a purpose to deliver a round’s vital area, past clothing, past bone.
For gun enthusiasts, self-defense experts, and shooters, choosing one’s caliber can mean more than just tradition and familiarity. After all, there are other cartridges that have historical and interesting engineering merit but lack present-day acceptance for their defensive prowess. Here’s a list of seven calibers that gun experts warn one should never consider for serious self-defense.
1. .22 Short – Historic but weak
This proprietary .22 caliber short was invented in the mid-19th century, a game changer in noise reduction during non-military shootings. Now available in CCI’s CB 22 Short, it travels 710 fps in a rifle with a 29-grain cargo, while in a pistol, it goes 595 fps. Range capabilities for this gun are on par with a medium-grade pellet rifle; it can hit rodents effectively up to 25 yards away but does not comply with penetration requirements by the FBI.
In plain gelatin, it penetrates inadequately, and energy transfer is even less. Behind bone or layers of clothes, one will notice the deficiencies of the round. Although it’s a favorite in plinking range practice due to nostalgia and price, experts consider it unsuitable for ethical hunting and defense.
2. .25 ACP – Reliable Ignition, Weak Impact
The .25 ACP was introduced by John Browning in 1905, offering a centerfire cartridge to rimfire pocket pistol ammunition. The centerfire system allows for better ignition, but other performance issues prevail. The testing reveals that most rounds, even full metal jacket rounds, fall short of the FBI’s 12-inch minimum range, with expanding rounds further undermining penetrative power.
The recommended loads, for example, Hornady’s 35gr XTP HP, might be reliable in quality pistols, but the power of stopping is very low. As it has been observed in expert assessments, someFMJ bullets are barely adequate on the standards of penetration. The leeway in self-defense situations is very low.
3. .32 S&W (Original) – Outclassed by Modern Successors
While being a standard issue cartridge for police and civilian revolvers during the end of the 19th century, today the original .32 S&W is considered obsolete. Low recoil and a moderate report made it a good choice for small-size revolvers, but it has a weak ballistic profile by today’s standards. Lightweight, low-velocity bullets are inappropriate for intermediate barriers and inadequate for wound trajectories.
The original .32 S&W does not compare to its successors, such as .32 H&R Magnum and .327 Federal Magnum, in terms of speed and power. It has been largely of historical value rather than practical use in self-defense techniques.
4. .410 Bore from a Handgun – Spread Without Substance
The intimidating barrel of a .410 revolver hides the truth about its limitations. Penetration tests using flashed .000 buckshot and short barrels penetrated a distance of 14 to 16 inches in plain gelatin but are derailed by bulky clothing. The birdshot travels too shallowly to knock out a stubborn assailant.
Even slug-like defensive loads may have issues with stability and expansion when fired out of short-barreled handguns. Although having more than one projectile per trigger pull may increase chances of a hit, each pellet weighs approximately as much as a .32 Auto round. However, experts have stated that while handguns may lose penetration for spread, .410 may not be the best choice for self-defense.
5. .22 LR – Affordable But Unpredictable
.22 Long Rifle is recognized as one of the world’s most popular cartridges due to their low price, low recoil, and versatility. When used within rifles, these cartridges have the capability to eliminate small game effectively. However, when utilized within handguns, the rimfire system and lightweight bullets impair their defensive capabilities.
High-quality ammo from name-brand companies provides the best opportunity for acceptable results, but under pressure from stress factors, pinpoint accuracy sufficient for rapid incapacitation becomes much less probable. It remains an option for those who cannot manage larger calibers not a preference.
6. .380 ACP – Borderline Performer
.380 ACP rounds have been suggested as the minimum for defensive shooting-caliber. FMJ rounds might have sufficient penetration but could have over-penetration and/or low wound tracks. JHP rounds are meant for equalization between expansion and penetration and would fail the FBI requirement for a 12-inch wound track.
While expert opinion favors high-quality JHPs such as Federal Hydra-Shok or Cor-Bon for maximum terminal effectiveness, these rounds remain vulnerable to clothing obstacles. In micro Pistols, recoil can be snappy despite low energy, while magazine size remains low.
7. .45 GAP – A Solution Without a Problem
Designed in 2003 to have the same ballistics as the .45 ACP in a smaller case size, the .45 Glock Automatic Pistol was designed for use in smaller grip frames. Essentially, it provided no benefit in terms of recoil or killing power but had the same shortages in available ammunition and the same price. Head-to-head comparisons indicate very similar ballistics to .45 ACP, but it has been paired with fewer weapons, of which just Glocks are produced.
Since .45 ACP has been widely accepted and proven in combat, .45 GAP has now largely been relegated to a redundant role. The selection of caliber, in part, is about what you are trying to avoid in addition to what you are getting. Though both rounds have significance in terms of gun history or certain applications, the fact that none can live up to certain ballistic standards makes them questionable for self-protection or hunting. In situations that don’t allow for errors, picking one that adheres to standard ballistic guidelines is both practical and imperative.
