I visited an indoor shooting range recently. An affluent couple walked in right before me, and the woman said, “I was in last week and shot a .22. I need to shoot something bigger today.” I observed the interaction of the woman with her husband and with the employee who was renting her the handgun. I regret not asking the woman, “Why do you need to shoot something bigger?”

Had I asked, I suspect the woman would have said something about needing a handgun for self-defense. Neither the woman, her husband, nor the salesman ever considered whether a .22 might be the best caliber for her to use as a self-defense handgun.

Before you react to violently to that last statement, consider the following: The woman was uncomfortable with handguns and lacked confidence in her ability to control a larger caliber. She had a slender build and wore tailored clothes which means she was not going to conceal a large handgun on her person. She might have concealed a Ruger LC380 in the outfit she was wearing, but I doubt it. What options does this leave her? A Ruger LCP or similarly sized .380? Perhaps, but I have shot them and more to the point, my adult daughter has shot them, and finds the recoil uncomfortable at best. A woman who is already intimidated by handguns is not going to be effective with a small .380.

However, she might be comfortable shooting the something like a Taurus PT22 Poly and thereby shoot it enough to get relatively proficient with it. She could also conceal this handgun with few adjustments to her wardrobe. Put bluntly, the handgun fits her skills and lifestyle and… don’t start swearing yet… provides adequate protection for most situations.

How can I make that last statement with a straight face? Odds are that if this woman is attacked it will be a single attacker in close quarters. The PT22 is perfectly capable of consistent head shots at 7 to 10 yards. Further, even a relatively weak user can fire it with one hand, a distinct advantage when one is fending off an attacker with the other hand.

But the .22 is an inferior caliber! Certainly, but shots to the head, preferably, or chest or groin or either femoral artery will have a significant deterrent effect. Don’t believe me, see for yourself what a .22 can do; watch John Hinckley’s assignation attempt of President Reagan. What do you observe in the wake of his violent spree? Three guys down and the President nearly killed.

All this to get to this challenge to defensive firearm trainers: Are you  molding your clients to fit your training? That is a common temptation and a disservice to our clients. We should be tailoring our training to our clients.  As our clients’ skill levels progress, we can provide more effective methods. Until then, let us not sacrifice the good for the best.