Oh but rabbit I thought you was a gun fetishist surely you should know that the 222 (which is a .22) was the fatter but shorter round than the 223 by the same manufacturer who also made another version of the 222 (which was also a .22) but it was the same width as the .223 but longer .
So if both versions of the 222 rounds are .22 calibre then the 223 is also a .22 calibre round even though it is thinner than one and shorter than the other .
If it is a .22 round then the gun is a .22 gun , simple isn't it
No, you're again wrong.

A ".22" is only a .22 caliber round - most commonly the .22LR. It does not include every cartridge that starts with .22xxx under the sun. A .22 round is not a .223 round, and so .22 is not an umbrella term that fits a .223 or a .224 caliber.

"can you see how that's different? Because it's a different number? Because it has a different number of digits? And how those different numbers mean different things? Do you understand that differently sized bullets are not the same?"
I know , I took some of it from that Dave Kopel idiot on the second amendment project site , I knew I shouldn't have relied on a gun nut for accurate information .
Don't go blaming others for your out-spoken ignorance.
go on have a little look on the net and see if you can spot the RugerII and the HDM on it both of which are .22
No. You provide the info that you are basing your posts on.

And why can't you answer this question:

How many guns in Mexico are chambered in a .22X caliber and achieve comparable results to the .223 Remington (equivalent to the cartridge used by the US) and are not used by any state forces (which would mean they can't be owned)?

The standard tribesy question: are you being ignorant or obtuse?

Well, let's move on, as its clear tribesy will argue a country that kills you on sight if you have anything but a one shot, .17 caliber derringer that took five years and 50k to acquire legally hasn't banned guns.

CR