That’s a .223 not a .22.
There’s a dramatic difference between the two.
Bullet construction and velocity.
Without the velocity of the .223, the damage is more like an icepick drilling through. The difference in terminal effect from an M16A2 to the M4 is noticeable even with the same ammo.
Terminal effect comes from bullet mass (size) and velocity.
Increase either and you increase effect, increase both, even better.
I’ve seen several deer with .22 bullets lodged under their hide. One I skinned had two bullets that had passed through ribs and lungs to stop under the far side hide. I can’t say how long the animal had lived after being shot, but it was long enough for the wounds to scar over, the lungs to heal and the ribs to not show more than a hole.
My bet, at least a year.
I would use a .22 in an emergency, but the targets you are considering are the size of ping pong balls. Eyes, temples, solar plexus, etc. The .22 is an experts gun in this instance.
With the 9mm, you are depending on both velocity and bullet construction for effect. Ball ammo reeks at best.
High end jhps, 1250fps or so, highly expansive, you can shatter bones, but not the same way that even the lowly .30 Carbine with jhps will do.
If you’re going to use a rifle, use a rifle.
There is a reason, actually a number of them that most SWAT teams and other cutting edge groups have largely dropped the 9mm funs for .223, but the biggest is terminal effect.