5 Shot Snubby of CCW?

[crstrode]

I think that is the only thing offensive in the post. One shouldn't assume that all cops are 'gun guys' and can offer better advice than anyone else.

Hallelujah! The police are actually the last group that should be consulted on the topic of guns - and especially armed civilians.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police is a vehement gun-control political action group.

Just google this phrase and see for yourself: "chiefs of police gun rights"

 

[fredj338]

Something you might consider is getting another 642 and carry two of them.

10 shots of 38+P without reloading is pretty formidable.

Or carry a g26, 11+1, less wt, about the same size, no reload or reaching for another gun.

 

[fredj338]

Because I know in my heart that I can put a couple in the ten ring if I have to, which is all you have to do . . .

Maybe?????

 

[fredj338]

Yikes, I would have tossed on some rubber grips for qualification day...

Defeats the purpose. Like qual with 38sp wc & carry 357mag. Practice like you play.

 

[fredj338]

Yeah I hear that. Now get this, he was already shot ran out of the store came back in and pistol whip her. I'm guessing .38 special or even less. I haven't read yet what caliber she was using and many have asked. And he didn't die.

Problem with a .357 magnum in a snubby is you only really have that first shot to get right because after that it's just to uncontrollable. I carried a Ruger LCR magnum, although loaded light magnums and could blast over 150 round a range session but never knew after the first round where they were going.

You need a minimum of a 36 oz gun to even get close to taming it fully loaded we are then talking close to 40 oz. Sounds good on paper until you starting carrying that behemoth.

What's the answer then, in my case I sold that LCR and went to a 9mm auto, however I don't trust semi-automatics.
But at last I think I got my problem solve, Ruger came out with an LCR in 9mm and if you have ever shot a Ruger LCR in any flavor you will know just how utterly fantastic the trigger is right out of the box. You cannot even get a S&W 'performance center' trigger that good.

If I make the switch it will be my 3rd LCR, the first one being the .38 special only version.
And I have complete confidence in the 9mm as it rocks the same pressure rating as a .357 magnum. And did I mention even cheaper to practice with than .38 special.

REcoil mitigation is about putting the time in to learn to roll with it. I can shoot a M66 with full loads, a sp101 less so but manageable. Put time in with a 4" 44mag, going to the 357snub is quite doable. For that reason though, a G32 or P239 even a G33 in 357sig makes a whole lot more sense than a 357mag snub. easier to shoot, more ammo, win win.

 

[Etalksalot]

From the referenced article....

"The subject was a grossly obese man with a death wish and a .357 magnum, who opened fire on the officer. In the moments that followed, Martin went through two magazines with his department issue Smith & Wesson model 59 service pistol, firing 29 shots and striking the subject 15 times in the torso and twice in the head. It was the last bullet to the head that put the gunman down as Martin's slide locked back for the second time. He reloaded his final magazine and cautiously approached to find the gunman dead. "

That incident was involving a police officer whose job it is to intentially engage and pursue. I would agree, high capacity autoloaders make the most sense for Law Enforcement as well as many home defense(why I own several Glocks) and business defense scenarios, but my likely needs when carrying concealed are very different. There have been civilian incidents involving high round counts, but nearly all of them are HD or an individual protecting a high-risk business like the Lance Thomas incidents or liquor and convenient stores. I don't nor would I work in such places. I also wouldn't intervene in situations that don't concern me directly. And pointing to rare outliers to justify a choice isn't sensible.

At the range, most people will probably perform better(shooting and reloading) with a compact auto compared with a snub revolver, but what most people do at the range has very little in common with most self-defense scenarios, which are reactive, at very close-quarters to contact distance and involve very few shots fired with the odds of needing(or having the opportunity) to reload being equivelant to being struck by lightning. I see no need to concern myself with lightning stikes all too much either since I don't intentionally put myself at undue risk for it just as I don't when it comes to personal defense i.e. the rules of stupids; don't go to stupid places with stupid people at stupid times and do stupid things.

In terms of the armed civilian being forced(as opposed to intentionally engaging/intervening), I'm just not finding any appreciable amount of incidents where the capacity of a revolver is inadequate nor is anyone producing them. Out of the thousands of incidents reported in statistics, videos or news reports I've studied, the percentage where the capacity of a revolver is an issue is a small fraction of 1%. The vast majority of civilian cases took place at very close range. The long-range gunfight against multiple armed assailants seems to be a common fantasy of many gun owners that carry concealed, but it simply isn't reality. Violence against civilians in general occurs at extremely close distances-with fists, knives, clubs and even with guns. Most people don't carry a gun on a daily basis, so we have a relatively limited pool of incidents to learn from, so maybe also consider the types of violence as a whole and how a gun would figure into the equation had the defender been armed. The possibility is there for needing high capacity, but the need for a weapon that is quick into action and will be reliable in all circumstances is much greater.

Consider the following incident, which I don't think is at all an improbable scenario in most circumstances. Which would you rather have in that situation; an enclosed hammer snub revolver or a Glock 19/17? I would choose the snub every time. The snubby will be quicker to access, get into the fight, offer better weapon retention(they will most likely either run or try to disarm you), and the snub will run reliably in that environment. I'm not confident any auto would and I've done a lot of H2H and ECQ training over the years that most haven't. What's better...5 rounds from a gun that you retain or one or none from a gun that you lose?

The disturbing assault in Missouri outside Springfield bar on Aug 22, 2014. - YouTube

What if it's just one assailant? While this particular video is a law enforcement incident, I think it is still illustrative of the dynamics as physical assaults obviously routinely happen to civilians as well, whereas running gun battles do not.The auto malfunctioned just as we see time and again in force-on-force training.


Cop with a gun VS heavy weight - YouTube

That was all very very well written. In short, I can't agree with you more. The chances of having to fend off several assailants all armed with guns at long ranges is pretty slim. Usually, and probably most often, it's gonna be one, maybe two people in your face trying to rob you. The call for me to need 21 rounds is pretty slim. Yes it's possible, but like you said, it's possible I could get hit by lightning but it never even crosses my mind. I could win the lottery, but I don't hold my breath. I even feel confident with my 38 special Derringer as opposed to not having anything at all. A lot of times, if someone is trying to rob you and they don't have a gun, and you pull a gun, they will most likely flee or POSSIBLY try to disarm you, but most likely they'd book it. My snub 5 shot makes me feel perfectly protected. I also don't go to stupid places with stupid people and so on (at least not these days) so no worries there.

Another thing I have never seen addressed anywhere on forums, YouTube and so on, is that if you round a corner and someone has a gun already pulled pointing at your stomach, or if someone is intending on robbing you and you don't see it coming and they pull first and have a gun pointed at you, I can't speak for others, but I'm certainly not going to grab my gun because they already got the drop on me. If I reach for my wasteband instead of my pockets, if they have every intention of shooting, they will shoot me before I can get my gun drawn and pointing at them. In that case, it doesn't matter if your gun hold 1 round or 1,000 it's completely useless to you at least until the turn around or put their gun away or something of that sort. I know I would never grab my gun if someone 5 ft away already had one pointing at me. At that point I'd give up my empty wallet (as it's always empty) and the few bucks I had on me, because I never carry much money anyways. I'm not going to invite a bullet into my belly for no apparent reason. Now maybe they're gonna shoot you anyways, but if you go for your gun, they WILL shoot you for sure (if of course they are actually willing to shoot to begin with). Some people may rob others and use a gun, but have no intention of actually shooting you, but I'm not going to find out which category they fall under while that gun is still pointing at me.

 

[Etalksalot]

REcoil mitigation is about putting the time in to learn to roll with it. I can shoot a M66 with full loads, a sp101 less so but manageable. Put time in with a 4" 44mag, going to the 357snub is quite doable. For that reason though, a G32 or P239 even a G33 in 357sig makes a whole lot more sense than a 357mag snub. easier to shoot, more ammo, win win.

I won't argue the point with you about which is better, but any day of the week I'd prefer a 357 snub over any auto of any caliber. Just my personal preference, but 9 mm or even 357 Sig compared to say a Buffalo Bore 180gr LFN slug, there is quite a bit of difference. I know most people prefer autos, and more power to them. However, I love my snubs. 38 special or 357 mag in a compact revolver are great to me. I have a Taurus 605 which is a 5 shot, J frame 357 mag and it's a beast. No bigger than a Chief's Special with a round butt, but the power of those rounds are impressive. They would probably blow a hole completely through a person at close range and not even slow down. If you shot someone in the bicep with one of those, I'd be willing to bet they have to have the arm amputated, at least if you hit the bone. There would be so much damage done to muscle, tissue and bone, I don't think all the kings horses and all the kings men could put that arm back together again. A shot in the stomach, holy wow, I don't even wanna think about that one. As that lead flattened put, it's gonna take everything it comes in contact with with it on its way out. Not that the other rounds couldn't do the same, but the mag rounds are vicious.

As far as 9mm, I had always been under the understanding that the reason police departments switch to 9mm is because the pointed roundness of the rounds was designed more to injure, not kill. Like they just pass right through without doin excessive damage. I know they make hollow points and stuff like that now that are much more deadly and effective out on the market, but I could be wrong, but I thought that's why they switched to that caliber and had guns that had more rounds in it so if you needed more you'd have them? Again, this could be completely wrong, but I had heard that somewhere before a long time ago. From what I have seen on velocity tests, the 9 mil seems to move faster than the same weight and style 38 special bullet, but the 9 mil tips are longer, more pointed and skinnier than a 38. Is any of this true? Anyone feel free to weigh in on this. And I'm not knockin peoples 9's, I'm not a fan simply because so many people are. Same with Glocks, I'll never own one because soooo many people do. If everyone hated them, I'd probably own 7 of them. I prefer to go against the grain.

 

[Etalksalot]

Another thing, most people thing that if you have a J frame, you are putting all 5 rounds on target and if you have a high capacity auto, you are spraying and praying and missing your target. Who says that if you have a lot of ammo you are missing a lot?

This is a very true statement, but I at least don't think that. I've just always felt that 17-21 rounds of ammo probably won't be necessary for your average everyday hold up or self defense situation. Since most people don't rob you from 100 yards away, and they are generally right there in front of you, the average shooter should be able to hit the person with any caliber, and gun period. I love my J frames because they are small and I know my Smiths are gonna work and if a round doesn't go off, pull again. All autos I've ever dealt with have jammed at least once. My Beretta 40 cal 9000s, if I use federal ammo, I can't get through a single magazine without at least one jam. I know how to clear them, but if I'm shooting for my life I don't wanna have to worry about that. A lot of autos CAN be (not saying all of them are) brand sensitive. I had a .380 Bersa a while back, I had Critical Defense rounds in it and almost every other shot would jam. That type of round did not work in mine. I'm sure there are rounds that would work fine, but I love that my revolver will shoot any 38 special round I put in it, +p or standard it will fire. Plus I carry speed strips too, so I usually have 5 in the gun, and I have 2 6 shot speed strips with 6 rounds a piece, so I have 17 rounds at all time. If I can't get the job done with 5, then I need to find shelter and reload. But being as realistic as possible. Chances are, I will never fire that gun, or any other gun in self defense. Yes it's always possible, that's why I carry, and I'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. But realistically, I'll never need it. Haven't needed a gun in 37 years, that's probably half my life so far, probably will never need one in the future. I used to only carry autos for the same reason, but once I realized the probability of a tally needing it and actually needing more than 5 rounds, I said screw it and got a J frame. From all statistics people have found that have studied self defense shootings, it almost never goes more than 3 rounds and a few seconds anyways. Now, anything is possible, but a rock can fall out of the sky and hit me in the head, but I don't walk around with a steel helmet on lol.

 

[Rastoff]

I want to ask a couple questions concerning this:

Consider the following incident, which I don't think is at all an improbable scenario in most circumstances. Which would you rather have in that situation; an enclosed hammer snub revolver or a Glock 19/17? I would choose the snub every time.

Keeping the discussion to just these two guns, I would pick the G19 (M&P 9 Compact 2.0) over the revolver. Here's why...

Both guns can be prevented from firing multiple shots, but only the revolver can be prevented from firing the first shot. If an assailant can grasp the cylinder, they can prevent it from turning. If they do that, the enclosed hammer doesn't help you at all. At least with the G19, as long a you can get your finger on the trigger, you get the first shot. As we see in video after video, once the first shot is fired in these situations, the bad guys usually run. You can't count on that, but it is the most likely scenario.

Along with that, I don't understand what you mean by:

The snubby will be quicker to access, get into the fight,...

How is the snubby quicker to get into the fight? Both pistols must be drawn from wherever they are. Sounds like they'd be the same. Maybe you can explain how the snubby is quicker?

Also, you said:

...offer better weapon retention(they will most likely either run or try to disarm you),...

Why does the snubby offer better retention? Once out, they are both equally easy (or not) to retain. I don't understand why you think the snubby offers better retention.


I'm just looking for clarification here. I completely agree that 5 shots should be enough for a civilian to the 6 sigma level.

 

[Rastoff]

Another thing, most people thing that if you have a J frame, you are putting all 5 rounds on target and if you have a high capacity auto, you are spraying and praying and missing your target.

My experience is the complete opposite.

I've seen/see a lot of people shoot. The long, heavy pull of a double action revolver tends to have people shooting low/left or low/right when put under pressure. Typically, I see a lot better accuracy from the semi-autos than revolvers.

 

[wrkerr]

It gets worst, in the Newhall incident some think they one was killed because of the practice they had learn at the academy of picking up their brass before a reload.

The Newhall incident was made into a training film when I was in the Academy in 1977. The last officer to die was trying to reload when he was shot. At the time, speed loaders were not authorized, so he was reloading from belt loops. Also, evident was the "You fight like you train" reaction. He had actually dumped his empty cases into his hand and they were found in his pocket.

Lots of things changed after that.

 

[Mister X]

I want to ask a couple questions concerning this:Keeping the discussion to just these two guns, I would pick the G19 (M&P 9 Compact 2.0) over the revolver. Here's why...

Both guns can be prevented from firing multiple shots, but only the revolver can be prevented from firing the first shot. If an assailant can grasp the cylinder, they can prevent it from turning. If they do that, the enclosed hammer doesn't help you at all. At least with the G19, as long a you can get your finger on the trigger, you get the first shot. As we see in video after video, once the first shot is fired in these situations, the bad guys usually run. You can't count on that, but it is the most likely scenario.

Along with that, I don't understand what you mean by: How is the snubby quicker to get into the fight? Both pistols must be drawn from wherever they are. Sounds like they'd be the same. Maybe you can explain how the snubby is quicker?

Also, you said:Why does the snubby offer better retention? Once out, they are both equally easy (or not) to retain. I don't understand why you think the snubby offers better retention.


I'm just looking for clarification here. I completely agree that 5 shots should be enough for a civilian to the 6 sigma level.

The auto can be forced out of battery, preventing firing that first shot. Grabbing the cylinder seems like a viable option and I know is often taught in many martial arts and self-defense programs and has been for a long time, but it is just extremely difficult to retain a grip on a snubnose revolver. It just doesn't hold up very well in force-on-force. You usually have to overwhelm the wielder and get two hands on it. In terms of simply redirecting the gun off-line, that's easier to do to someone with a Glock 19 compared to a snub. These are all momentary and transitional considerations in a dynamic environment. When you start getting hands on and body contact, autos frequently run into reliability problems. Craig Douglas and many students who have attended his courses have posted numerous vids of his ECQC class on YouTube showing this problem surface with sim guns. They are pretty easy to find if interested.

It just doesn't take much contact(intentional or inadvertent) to stop an auto from cycling as Tom Givens demonstrates.
[ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=re8oMnGbnh4[/ame]

In terms of quickness into action, the short muzzle, the overall roundness and the cylinder of a snub providing a slight amount of clearance from the body in many instances makes clearing the holster or waistband a little quicker. Plus there's the pocket carry option. A lot of folks view firing from inside the pocket a novelty, but I see it as a viable tactic. Michael de Bethencourt recently posted(May 17th) a real world example of it being used to the ImWithROSCOE Facebook page. It's an assassination attempt and not a self-defense scenario, but it illustrates the viability of the technique. No draw being the fastest draw as it were. Pants pocket carry does come with several disadvantages, but having your hand on the weapon without alerting anyone to your intent does allow for an extremely quick draw. If you go on YouTube and search "Stephon Carter kills officer in Aiken SC, you'll find a demonstration of it's speed and effectiveness albeit for criminal purposes. I'd post the links, but they may not be considered suitable for the forum.

The snub offers better weapon retention because it's more difficult to get ahold of and retain a grip on. There's just not anything there to utilize leverage against. This is simply due to it's short muzzle and overall rounded contours. Plus being able to find or better customize grips to your individual hand helps out some as well.

 

[Etalksalot]

I'm going down fighting if I see it coming.

In all honesty, any gun that works will probably be sufficient for most scenarios. The reason I quoted just this text is because THAT is the most important factor of them all. No matter how prepared someone is, if you don't see it coming you're pretty much out of luck. If I were a criminal I would walk past my intended target and not make eye contact or look at them. As soon as they past I'd pull my gun from my pocket, turn around and tell them to stop and then cock the hammer so they can hear the gun. Once they stopped, I'd hit them in the back of the head and knock them out. At this point, they could have a 50 caliber machine gun and it'll do them no good. Most people won't pull out a gun and stare you in the eyes as they walk down the block letting you know well in advance what's going to happen. Now, they can show signs that something isn't quite right, but if you don't see it coming, no gun in the world is gonna help. If someone was walking past me, not paying attention to me and at the last second they pulled a gun and pointed it at my stomach or head, whatever, if I go for my wasteband, I'm gonna get shot so whether I have a gun that holds 1 round or 1,000 it's not going to matter. Now, once they get my stuff and run off I could grab my gun, but I'm definitely NOT shooting someone in the back. That could get me prison time. I think awareness of your surroundings is far more important than what type of gun you carry or what caliber it is. Most people won't ever even need to shoot in self defense, but if I have any gun, even my J frame, if I can get the drop on whoever is trying to get the drop on me, I can at least possibly get out of the situation I'm in. It's pretty hard to imagine a scenario before it happens, and when it does, it's gonna happen fast so who knows what I would or would not do. A few bullets to me, is better than nothing and I love revolvers. A lot of people love autos. Everyone should carry whatever they like and feel comfortable with, but be aware of what is going on around you. I see so many people, especially walking down the street in downtown Chicago that are completely oblivious to any and everything going on around them. I think that's more important than gun style or caliber any day because if you don't see it coming, who cares what gun you have, it's irrelevant at that point.

 

[wrkerr]

Grabbing the cylinder seems like a viable option and I know is often taught in many martial arts and self-defense programs and has been for a long time, but it is just extremely difficult to retain a grip on a snubnose revolver. It just doesn't hold up very well in force-on-force. You usually have to overwhelm the wielder and get two hands on it.

Extremely difficult? Maybe. Impossible? No.

In 1979 we had an officer shot point-blank with a .38 snub. Bullet lodged in his spine (still there to this day). As he fell, he was able to grab the revolver with his left hand and take the perp to the ground with him. He held tight enough to prevent the cylinder from rotating (he said he could feel it moving), drew his 1911 and killed the *** with three rounds.

 

[ContinentalOp]

If an assailant can grasp the cylinder, they can prevent it from turning. If they do that, the enclosed hammer doesn't help you at all.

Rotating the gun in the opposite direction of cylinder rotation while pulling the trigger defeats this type of attack.

 

[Rastoff]

[see post #120 because there's too much to quote.]

Thank you for that lucid explanation. You've made a very good case for the snubby. I don't think it will change my opinion on what I carry, but I do see the validity in what you said.

Rotating the gun in the opposite direction of cylinder rotation while pulling the trigger defeats this type of attack.

No, it won't. The person holding the cylinder will just rotate with the gun and still have a grasp on it. Not a bad idea, I just don't think it will work.

However, this does call to light the value of a non fluted cylinder.

 

[hostler]

Why a snubby?
Close-in, bad breath reliability.
I'm not talking about "range reliability" where you are standing in a nice tight Weaver or isosceles stance, firing strong hand on a nice day with a freshly cleaned gun. I'm talking about "defensive reliability" where you may be firing off handed with a poor grip, the gun pushed against an assailant, rolling around in the dirt with a grabby bad guy punching you, etc.
While it's true any handgun can be defeated if the assailant gets his mitts on it, IMO semi-autos are particularly vulnerable to this. It doesn't take much force to push a slide out of battery, it doesn't take much pushing, pulling or twisting to drop a mag. Even if the bad guy can't manage to push the slide out of battery, you may get one shot off but if he has a hold of the slide at all it's improbable you will get a second shot without having to rack another round. If the bad guy manages to hit the mag release you are seriously screwed. If you don't think bad guys practice pushing the slide out of battery you may be surprised. I remember back in the 80s when the Beretta 92 became popular, bad guys practiced flipping the takedown lever, it became a real concern for LE.
I suppose it's possible to stop a revolver cylinder from rotating but in the end, the revolver still has second, third, fourth and fifth strike capability without having to stop and clear a malfunction, you just keep pulling the trigger.
Advantage Semi-auto for capacity.
Advantage revolver for close-in bad breath reliability.
Thats why snubbys are still around

 

[Mainsail]

I'm talking about "defensive reliability" where you may be firing off handed with a poor grip, the gun pushed against an assailant, rolling around in the dirt with a grabby bad guy punching you, etc.

Do you see this scenario as being the most likely situation in which you would need to defend yourself with deadly force? If so, then you are right in your thinking.

Not all of us see it that way. I do see it that way when I'm out running in my residential neighborhood, but not for day-to-day carry.

This incident just occurred at a grocery store. SHORT VERSION: Couple in a grocery store, three malcontents follow them outside. The trio then followed the couple out of the store into the parking lot, where there was an exchange of "a large amount of gunfire."

I see this sort of defensive situation as far more likely than what you describe above. The self-defense events I read about in various sources support that belief as well. I would not want to be in that situation with a five or six shot revolver, even with a speed-loader or two as spares. Nine shots from my 1911 and one or two spare 8-round mags would make me a lot more comfortable, as would 14 rounds of .357 with another 12 in a spare magazine.

Being equipped is a critical step in self-defense, but I think you would agree that it is impossible to be equipped for every scenario. Thus it is foolish to be better equipped for a less likely scenario at the expense of one more likely. Now, if you genuinely believe that grappling with robbers is more likely than defense from a few feet out or more, then you are wise to pattern your equipment for that scenario. For me, where I live, and the types of crime that occur, a snubby would be foolish.

 

[Walkingwolf]

IIRC, in that specific case, only having 5 shots probably saved the mom's life. Didn't the BG take the revolver away in the wrestling match, point it at the mom over the counter, pulled the trigger a couple times, and it just went 'click' because the mom had shot all 5.

Not being argumentative. I'm not sure if 5 is better or worse than 15, but in that specific case, it seems like the mom was lucky she only had 5.

In that case both girls were armed, the mother a revolver, the daughter a semi auto. The problem with that shooting is location/shot placement. The mother fired 5 rounds, BUT only connected with one in the leg.

Let's consider statistics, the chances of being a victim of a violent crime are extremely slim, the chances of needing more than 5 rounds are also slim. Practice, practice, practice in case you win the criminal lottery, and are picked. But with good common sense, and situational awareness your odds of being picked are way down.

I know not everybody can have multiple dogs in a fenced yard, but it has kept our home safe for over 20 years. My first line is my dogs, my second is a 50 pound bow, like to keep my hearing. After that it is a 22lr Ruger Mark III, again like to keep my hearing.

Bows have been proven successful in home defense many times, and their capacity is as many arrows as you can hold in your hand with your bow. With regular practice I can get off an arrow every 2 seconds easily hitting a pie plate at ten yards without aiming(instinct shooting).

The 22lr has also been proven successful in home invasion situations. One case in Smithville years ago the elderly home owner stopped the attacker with a NAA 22lr revolver. Another case in SC a female stopped a rapist in a motel with a 22lr semi auto. ONE shot to the chest was all it took.

But IMO the best home defense weapon is a 12 gauge shotgun. If you don't mind the ringing ears, or the loss of some hearing permanently.

 

[Flyingfool]

What or where is a source for real and credible data that would indicate the statistics of where or in what kind of proximity that most SELF DEFENSE incidents happen?

The facts are the facts. If the facts show most SD to civilians occurs within say 3 feet and/or grappling with a single assailant. Then it would seem that revolver would be more appropriate. If more than 5 tp 10 feet, or more than one bad guy, then the semi auto might be a better choice.

One training course I was in taught by a Sheriff police chief said this “remember, most predators travel in packs. And a criminal is a predator.”

His point was twofold. First do not look like the weakest gazzel in the herd, as a predator always chooses the weakest to prey upon. Secondly always be aware of situational awareness and if one bad guy makes himself known, be extremely vigilent and expect and look around for #2 and # 3 bad guy!