Airguns For Self-Defence? Don't Even Think About It

This past year, I worked with a new fella in my office, who I found out later, owned an airgun. This, I would consider unusual in the very liberal Toronto, and especially in a white-collar industry like IT, where opinions, just like the technology are considered and even expected, to be progressive. You can imagine how much I stick out like a sore thumb, and being an Asian gun enthusiast as well, which nowadays is pretty rare. There are less than a handful of people on my whole account (and customer site) who own any type of gun, much less holds a firearms licence. So it always intrigues me to meet people who have even a passing interest in guns.

This guy I worked with happened to own a similar airgun as one of the many that I own. He owned a Walther CP Sport. I have since sold mine, but I have a review on this blog, so check it out if you are interested in this gun. But anyway, it's a CO2-powered semi-automatic .177 caliber air pistol. It's also one of more weaker airguns out there, shooting at a maximum of 360FPS, which, I will concede, is not as weak as airsoft, but don't expect it to be a pest control gun.

My colleague, keeping his voice low, shared with me that he bought the airgun with the sole purpose of using it as a self-defence weapon. When I heard him say that I was shocked. I asked him how many guns he owns, and he said just that one. He said that he thought it was pretty powerful. I asked him if he had any idea what the impact of a .177 caliber pellet at 360FPS (maximum) would be? He didn't, so I gave him some perspective. The Canadian firearms classification starts with fired projectiles travelling at 500FPS or higher AND generating more than 4.2FPE (foot pounds energy). You cannot even humanely kill or even injure a squirrel with a 450FPS airgun (a small mouse, yes, but nothing larger). So don't expect to take down a home invader.

It has been said that part of the Canadian government's classification numbers may have to do with the penetrating effect of a projectile, given a certain velocity and transfer of energy. I have never heard this officially substantiated by the Canadian Firearms Centre, but it does make some sense, in terms of how to classify something as a firearm (ie. can it cause serious or lethal injury).

I gave him some more perspective - a CO2 semi-automatic may sound cool, with rapid fire and an eight-shot magazine, but as anyone who knows anything about airguns can attest, the faster you fire a CO2 gun, the more velocity you lose on subsequent shots - it's because of the cold gas that is released by the CO2 cartridge everytime you pull the trigger. A colder environment inside the gun makes a pellet go slower (another knock against CO2 guns being used in the wintertime). So that maximum 360FPS will turn out to be in the mid-200 to 250FPS, which will cause a slight bruise for someone running around naked, but will hardly penetrate thick clothing, much less skin. If nothing else, your home invader or bad guy will simply get irritated at the fact that you're trying to shoot him and now it gives him the licence to exact maximum injury on you, now that he knows you don't have a "real gun". My friend said that the replica nature of the CP Sport may be a deterrent enough. Personally, I wouldn't put my life on the line for a possibility.

Finally, I shared with him the fact that the most powerful airgun I own is the Gamo Viper Express .22 Caliber Air Shotgun / Rifle combo. This gun requires a firearms licence, and shoots either a very limited of #9 lead shot at around 1200FPS (maximum) or with an chamber adapter, shoots .22 caliber pellets at 850FPS (maximum). Remember, a heavier pellet like a .22 will impart much more energy on impact than its smaller counterpart, at the same velocity. All that being said, despite the fact that the Viper Express is a firearms-rated airgun, I would not recommend anyone to use it for self-defence. The power is just not there. Some self-defence experts would even contend that the lower-velocity rimfire type of firearms are inadquate for self-defence, despite the fact that they will shoot a .22 caliber bullet at generally over 1000FPS. In my view, where you can maybe come close is having something like a Ruger 10/22 with a Butler Creek 25-mag, full of CCI .22 LR Stingers. Those will shoot over 1600FPS, but their accuracy suffers. But problem with using anything rimfire is that likely you will need more than one shot, and that's going to be hard to explain to the cops why you shot the bad guy full of holes.

Some have said that having something is better than nothing, but I disagree. Having nothing at least poses no resistance to the perp, and unless he's hellbent on killing or raping you, it may be in your best interest to simply let him take whatever he wants. Now, I know home invasions don't always work that way, but imagine this - you are stumbling in the dark, reaching for your airgun, hoping that the CO2 still will carry at least 8 shots. Even if you get your shot off, you are looking at reduced stopping power for subsequent CO2 shots. That is the nature of a CO2 gun. You will need a lot more than one shot to stop the intruder, and so a CO2 airgun is a really poor choice, even a CO2 repeating air rifle that requires a firearms licence. In essence, with airguns you are stuck with several problems: 1) multiple shots are needed, but the effect of subsequent shots make it useless on a CO2 gun, 2) there is no no-CO2 repeating airgun, and 3) you definitely don't want to rely on something that is single-shot, spring-action or break-barrel.

Now, the one caveat here - an airgun can be used IF you are such a good shot that you can hit the bad guy in the eye every time. Most airguns will rupture an eyeball without much difficulty, but getting to the point where you can take out an eye is a pretty gruesome thought, and given the fact that the conditions in which you may actually have to do this are less than ideal (low light conditions, time of night and exhaustion issues, movement and space issues, not to mention the fact that you're likely crapping your pants at the time), it's probably more pie-in-the-sky thinking than anything else.

Have airguns ever been used successfully to ward off an attacker? Probably. In fact, I know of a case in South America where a guy was able to chase away a bad guy by shooting him with a relatively low-powered airgun. But remember, if you put all your eggs in one basket with exceptional-case scenarios such as this, you are not looking at the possibility that there are many criminals who aren't so easily chased away. Remember, the criminal mind does not think long-term. Some criminals will kill you for looking at them the wrong way. Don't assume that you'll be able to scare off or chase off most criminals. If they are indeed packing heat, then you pulling out an airgun has just authorized them to shoot you with a real gun in supposed self-defence. Do you want to take this chance?

I have heard of people who still believe airguns are worth using as self-defence and will alter their airguns so that they are multiple times more powerful. Personally, I think these people are playing with fire, since doing this is not only illegal, but can likely get your arrested, since if you alter an air pistol to shoot over 500FPS, you are now looking at a restricted or even a prohibited weapon, according to Canada's fiearms classifications. Very likely the gun will not even be classifiable, since it wasn't manufactured that way and registered with the Canadian government. But let's hypothesize that it was legal to do this (which it definitely is not, I want to emphasize). I still don't believe an airgun shooting a .22 CAL pellet at around 16.2 grains, at a velocity of 500-1000FPS is suitable. Remember, rimfire .22 bullets are around 32 or 40 grain, go at least 1000FPS in general, and I (and others) do not consider them to be viable for self-defence.

Then there are the obvious legal issues. Now, I have previously said that if you are planning to have anything for self-defence, that you had better be prepared to use it to STOP the bad guy, only in situations where you fear for your life or the life of a loved one. Never shoot to kill - your intention should not be pre-meditated killing. Shooting someone for stealing your TV is not excuseable. That being said, the ability to stop the bad guy is not so much determined by your skill level or shooting ability than by what you choose as your self-defence weapon. As I already mentioned, I do not believe airguns to be sufficient. In my humble opinion, the best home defence weapon (for reasons beyond the scope of this blog entry, though I write about this elsewhere on this blog) is a 12 or 20-gauge pump action shotgun, that you can quickly load with something like #3 buckshot, or lower. Be forewarned though - this is a very lethal combination and if you plan to use this, be prepared to accept responsibility for your actions.

In Canada, specifically, buying arms for self-defence is frowned upon, and discouraged. Reason is, unlike the U.S., there are stringent safe-storage laws in Canada. So a person who has any type of firearm in Canada is legally required to keep them unloaded, and locked up in a suitable gun cabinet or safe. The ammo also needs to be locked up separately. Now, think about this - given these legal requirements, how likely is it that you can have a fully functional ready-to-go self-defence arm? If you happen to be very fast and can get to all these individual components, unlocking / relocking and loading your arm all within the span of a couple of minutes, the Canadian government can charge you with unsafe storage, no matter what you say otherwise (their argument is that the laws make it virtually impossible to get to your gun for self-defence, so there's no way you should have been able to do it unless you weren't following safe storage laws). Moreover, if you end up shooting someone, even in a justified self-defence response, and they somehow manage to live, be prepared to be tried as a criminal and having your firearms confiscated as a result, even though you're the one who was violated. Sad, isn't it. Welcome to Canada.