In thinking about a gun for home defense more than for concealed carry (though I guess this question applies in either case) I'm considering a 4" Model 686 as something that my wife could handle more reliably in a stressful situation. I'm also interested in a 686 SSR for myself for competition in service class. It'd be nice to cover both functions with a single gun, but if it ever came down to having to use either in a crisis would there be any more of the inevitable legal entanglements having used a more specialized gun like the SSR as opposed to a stock, plain jane 686? I'm just imagining some over zealous attorney trying to use that choice of weapon against me or my wife should the situation present itself.
Is that a realistic concern or would it really matter in the long run? It's hard to know where the line between pragmatism and paranoia lies.

great home defense gun as long as your wife can handle the recoil. If that is her first gun, start her with a .22 and have her work up to .38 and .357. A neophyte would feel intimitated by a large caliber if he or she is inexperienced. Start small and work up. That is what I tell my students regarding large caliber guns.
Nick

You raise a couple of questions:
Why are you limiting yourself to one gun?
Do you think your wife is incapable of picking out her own gun? Many of the women show up at my classes with a gun someone else picked out, and that they don't like.

A 686 SSR is an excellent IDPA revolver, and house gun. Some people carry a gun this size, but many don't. Some try to, but it gets left at home more often than not.

Suggest you take a course like the NRA defense classes, which cover legalities of self-defense and choosing a handgun. If you do a questionable shoot and get sued, you are going to get picked apart, and the model number of your gun will be the least of your worries.

I just picked up a used Model 617 6 shot for just that reason yeaterday. Well, that and I liked the gun too.
I plan to take her up through the calibers at whatever pace she's comfortable with and I'm working on getting her to take one of the women's introductory firearms classes first. I'd rather have her start out with a qualified instructor. I think she'd be more comfortable in a group of her peers with someone who knows how to teach the subject properly.

The simple answer is cost. It'd be better to have a single gun that could cover both functions if the potential for extra legal entanglements doesn't outweigh that consideration.

Eventually, yes. I doubt that she'll get into shooting as a hobby (though I'll certainly encourage it if she's interested), but I'm encouraging her (and my daughter) to take an introductory where I'm hoping she'll get some exposure to the different options in a less intimidating environment than just coming along to a public range full of experienced (and not so experienced) shooters.

That's what I'm planning on doing. I guess I'm getting a little ahead of myself in terms of gun selection for home defense, but I was checking out an SSR at a local shop yesterday and that got me thinking. I really liked the gun, but given the existing legal environment in even a justifiable shooting, I'd be concerned about some attorney looking for *any* way of putting the squeeze on and that got me wondering about how much of a factor the choice of a more specialized gun over a stock version would be.

Based on your answers, I think your plan is sound. I do "women's only" classes (both NRA and OK CHL) to reduce the stress many women feel when they are outnumbered.

I often put on a competition rig at home and travel to the range, and would not expect any special issues about the gun if I had to use it in self defense.
A fellow competitor foiled an attempted carjacking while on the way to a regional match in Houston. The sight of his .45 muzzle coming up over the window sill turned the attack into a hasty retreat, and he held fire as they jumped into a friend's car. They were caught the same day from his description. The police didn't even ask about his gun or why he was wearing it, but that was TX, not MI.

Here in Ohio, 99% of the time, a gun's a gun.

Don't want to get shot? Don't try to commit a violent crime against someone.

As long as you know and obey the law, it doesn't matter if you use a SIG P-210 or a Hi Point.

Col. Cooper referred to "Problem 1" and "Problem 2." Problem 1 is surviving the lethal encounter. Problem 2 is surviving the legal aftermath. Often, especially on internet boards filled with armchair experts, folks get the cart before the horse.

If you don't survive Problem 1, then Problem 2 will not be addressed. The message is then that you should equip yourself with whatever tool(s) best help you solve Problem 1. Those tools include mindset, training, guns, ammo and likely other items. If you have the right tools to Solve Problem 1, Problem 2 is much easier to solve. The tools for solving Problem 2 may include a good lawyer, along with a good expert witness. If a shoot is clean, depending on where you are, there may not even be a Problem 2. If there is, and the shoot is clean, then with the right tools, there is no reason why the type of gun with which you shot the scumbag is even relevant. In the cases in which the type of gun or ammunition have become issues, there has almost always been a mistake (or many) made by lawyers or the defendant, or sometimes, an expert witness, making the irrelevant, admissible.

I carry a customized gun, customized by me, loaded with very hot factory ammunition. I'm a lawyer and CHL instructor, and have been an expert witness on a few occasions. I can be my own expert witness, if need be, but I'd rather have Mas Ayoob. Will I have explaining to do if I ever have to shoot anyone? Sure; so will anyone. But I'm a lot more concerned with being able to solve Problem 1, and I carry what I believe helps me do that best.

That, 38-44HD45, is a keeper right there!

I think either version of the 686 sounds fine.

Peace,

Brother 38-44HD45 does a fine job of laying it out. I've been a prosecutor and have long been a criminal defense lawyer: based on my experience, I don't see that there would be any especial problem arising from the use of the 686 SSR in a home defense situation.

And Erich even carries reloads!

Thanks for the kind words, gentlemen.

When someone is trying to kill me, there are no rules!

If things get so bad for me "legal wise" that I can't stand it any more, then I can always hang myself in my cell. But at least I won't be dying at the hands of the "bad guy."

And while we're on this subject...I've gotta say something to the people who have concerns about using handloads in their CCW. How the heck is anyone going to know whether they were handloads or factory loads? Have you ever picked up a once-fired brass off the ground and looked at it and said "oh, yeah...this was somebody's handload"?

I think we're getting a little ridiculous with all this.

Well said.

Your best bet is to know the laws in your state, always stay within them, and to know your rights AND ASSERT THEM, if/when you are ever involved in a SD shooting. In a shoot that is "questionable", you should expect EVERYTHING to be scrutinized. On the other hand, in a shoot that is clear cut, in most jurisdictions, you can usually expect less microscopes to be pointed into every orifice of your body.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

You don't think a forensic scientist will be able to analyze the projectile, the primer, the powder residue, and the once re-sized cartridge case and figure out that your "Winchester" brass wasn't loaded with Winchester factory components? I don't believe you are giving these folks enough credit.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

Not to mention the fact that the question would almost certainly come up in a deposition, if the prosecutor is worth his or her salt. Would you lie under oath about using handloads?

Back on topic, I think the legend of the overly-aggressive prosecutor is overblown. There should never be a question of whether the shooting is justified. If your shooting is justified, it will not matter what gun you used. Or ammo, for that matter.

Since you said your wife's a novice at all of this, you might encourage her to take a look at the cornered cat web site. It's geared for women by a women and is a good place to start the education.

Cornered Cat

__________________
Pete.

Been both and prosecutor and defense lawyer myself and assuming no other issues, I don't think there should b e a problem. At lot of the scarey stories we hear were "what ifs" created back when defensive shooting was still in its infancy. Over the years the constant repetition has given the stories credence until they are accepted as fact. Some of the old race guns really created a sensation because they were new and nobody was familiar with them outside the shooting community. Bottomline: The real question is whether the shooting meets the legal requirements of selfdefense. If not, you've got problems and anything a lawyer can throw at you is fair game, such as using reloads for defense. Know the law, keep it legal and just answer the questions you are asked by authorities simply and factually and you should come out okay.

My point exactly.... If I shoot & kill an armed person who breaks into my home, then the shooting will be justified.
The responding officer will have no reason to question the ammo I was using. There won't be any deposition.

Don't assume that just because a shooting appears justified, you won't have to complete a deposition. It has nothing to do with whether or not the responding officer(s) ask you about your ammo.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

Let's just say that as long as it is a good shooting and I didn't use an illegal firearm everything will be ok, and leave it at that....

This is my home we're talking about...and if an armed assailant breaks in it won't make any difference whether I dispatch him with a thirty-eight or with the toaster oven.

686 is a good gun, but make sure your wife can comfortably reach the trigger if you expect her to use it. My wife has small hands and has trouble reaching some triggers, and her friend could just barely get the tip of her finger on the trigger of my Model 10. Talk about petite mitts!

The legal issue is more civil than criminal. Chances are, you would not have any problems in the criminal phase of your experience but the civil phase, if there is one, could be very different.

__________________
Centennial Every Day

Not in our state.

And thus the clause, "if there is one."

__________________
Centennial Every Day

Understood. I wasn't correcting you, but merely expressing my joy that it's not an issue here. That's what the smiley was for. Hopefully it's the same in your jurisdiction.

38-44HD45 makes a very convincing case, and I agree with it in practically every detail. However, I feel obligated to point out that there may actually be an advantage to handicapping yourself with what you may consider second-rate equipment: if you actually lose, you won't have to worry about the legal aspects at all, either civil or criminal.

If your wife needs to defend herself inside the home, the best thing for her would be a DB shotgun.
I don't think it would be wise to rely on a handgun that her finger has a hard time reaching the trigger. If you're going to purchase a revolver for her to use I would suggest a J-frame. She'll be able to reach the trigger better than with the L-frame.

If there is ever a home invasion at my home, you can bet that the first thing the bad guys will see in my hands is a 12-gauge.

520, I thought I made that point, but I like the way you said it!