.22 IOF Revolver - Good option

[dbsc28]

An excellent, light accurate and concealable weapon which has wrongly been given a lot of negative publicity. My advice go for it if sole aim is not to showoff but self defence. Similar to Smith & Wesson model 317




Sent from my SM-T705 using Tapatalk

[sks76239]

If the purpose is self defense, .22 is the worst calibre. Last thing you want to do is shoot and fail to kill. It is relatively cheap and can provide protection from minor stuff though.
I would personally choose extended barrel .32 S&W L Webley revolver copy by IOF.

Calibre restrictions need to be removed from the firearms classification rules. I once compared the news Arms rules published and I found that some of the restrictions (regarding public carry) were exact words directly copied from South African rules. Babus don't understand both Policy and Plagiarism.

People need to lobby within both parties: BJP and Congress.

Anyway, that's my rant for the day.

[Maroon_d3vil]

I have met some .22 revolver owners. And none of them had any complaints. Had met a person sometime back who had .22 IOF revolver. He had modified the revolver and it was looking similar to this :

revolver-de-fogueo-zoraki-en-2-25-3-envios-gratis-D_NQ_NP_672515-MCO25249345969_122016-F.jpg

This make over gave a classy look to the .22 revolver! Couldn't interact much with him. Would like to know from fellow IFGians whether this kind of modification is allowed. What I came to know from some posts in the forum is that body modifications can be done leaving caliber apart. Had already seen lot of post and pics of modified IOF ashani pistol.

Regards,
Maroon_d3vil

[dbsc28]

If the purpose is self defense, .22 is the worst calibre. Last thing you want to do is shoot and fail to kill. It is relatively cheap and can provide protection from minor stuff though.
I would personally choose extended barrel .32 S&W L Webley revolver copy by IOF.

Calibre restrictions need to be removed from the firearms classification rules. I once compared the news Arms rules published and I found that some of the restrictions (regarding public carry) were exact words directly copied from South African rules. Babus don't understand both Policy and Plagiarism.

People need to lobby within both parties: BJP and Congress.

Anyway, that's my rant for the day.

Would you always want shoot to kill or rather you would prefer to incapacitate. Think about it. You would be able to react faster, shoot more accurate with a .22 and if in 2 well placed rounds at short range you cannot put a man out of action then maybe more training is called for. Remember Indian Army is using .22 (5.56) rifle as main weapon for its troops.

Sent from my SM-T705 using Tapatalk

[Prabhath]

"Remember Indian Army is using .22 (5.56) rifle as main weapon for its troops."...........What?

[Chengy]

0.223 to be precise. Its a much larger round with a higher muzzle velocity and energy. A 0.22LR round used in the revolver has a much lower energy than the 5.56 mm IA round and hence stopping power is less.

[Prabhath]

I am nowhere close in terms of the knowledge quite a few of our fellow members possess. IMHO, the .22 IOF revolver is nowhere close to the S&Ws in terms of quality. I am a licensed handgun owner and own a S&W revolver in .32 which again IMHO is something I am comfortable with and it is something I carry daily for the sole purpose of self defence and not to show off.

[dbsc28]

I am nowhere close in terms of the knowledge quite a few of our fellow members possess. IMHO, the .22 IOF revolver is nowhere close to the S&Ws in terms of quality. I am a licensed handgun owner and own a S&W revolver in .32 which again IMHO is something I am comfortable with and it is something I carry daily for the sole purpose of self defence and not to show off.

Comparison being made is between iof handguns, ie .32 revolver/pistol and .22 revolver. Obviously foreign guns are better but there is no point in comparing them if they are not available in brand new condition at a reasonable price.

Sent from my SM-T705 using Tapatalk

[dheeraj_1772]

My wife is also having an IOF .22 Revolver since 2010. It had problem of ejecting EFCs initially. But after firing 50~60 rounds that issue was over and since then it is working perfectly fine. Very easy to carry, conceal and fire... No need to compare with S&W or others as you can’t get a new one here in India and most of knowledgeable members know about the reliability of MINT CONDITIONED old stuff available in the Indian Weapon Market. Best value for money...

[goodboy_mentor]

Would you always want shoot to kill or rather you would prefer to incapacitate. Think about it.

Please read Sections 96 to 106 of Indian Penal Code. Section 100 of Indian Penal Code provides answer to your question that why one would shoot to kill and prefer not shoot to incapacitate.

[dbsc28]

Would you always want shoot to kill or rather you would prefer to incapacitate. Think about it.

Please read Sections 96 to 106 of Indian Penal Code. Section 100 of Indian Penal Code provides answer to your question that why one would shoot to kill and prefer not shoot to incapacitate.

Sec 99 IPC
"Extent to which the right may be exercised. - The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence."

Sent from my SM-T705 using Tapatalk

[goodboy_mentor]

Sec 99 IPC "Extent to which the right may be exercised. - The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence."

The question is why one would shoot to kill and prefer not shoot to incapacitate. Answer is one would shoot to kill and prefer not shoot to incapacitate when any of the conditions mentioned in Section 100 I.P.C. is satisfied. Also the Sections 99 and 100 of IPC are fully in agreement with each other.

[dbsc28]

Sec 99 IPC "Extent to which the right may be exercised. - The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence."

The question is why one would shoot to kill and prefer not shoot to incapacitate. Answer is one would shoot to kill and prefer not shoot to incapacitate when any of the conditions mentioned in Section 100 I.P.C. is satisfied. Also the Sections 99 and 100 of IPC are fully in agreement with each other.

The point which i am trying to make is that your chances of getting legal benefit of right to self defence go up substantially if you have only injured the person and not killed him. If you kill and the judge feels that the situation did not warrant deadly force than you are surely going to spend time in jail.

Sent from my SM-T705 using Tapatalk

[goodboy_mentor]

The point which i am trying to make is that your chances of getting legal benefit of right to self defence go up substantially if you have only injured the person and not killed him. If you kill and the judge feels that the situation did not warrant deadly force than you are surely going to spend time in jail.

Since there are so many factors involved, it would be hazardous to expect some accurate conclusion based on merely some discussion, conjectures and opinions. For example, you are attacked and the attack satisfies Section 100 of I.P.C. But because of your personal moral convictions, you do not kill but injure the assailant. Instead of thanking you for showing mercy to him, the attacker bribes the police, files various false cases against you, or the assailant again attacks you later on, with greater ferocity and precision? What then?

You may ask what is the point I am trying to convey? My point is, make your best efforts to avoid all these type of situations, by having some foresight and wisdom. For example avoid going to places that may have potential for trouble. Secure your home with strong doors, iron grills, high walls etc. But if some unfortunate situation does happen, instead of following personal moral convictions, follow the law.

[dbsc28]

.22 iof revolver

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk