Why NOT to Carry a .38 Snub

[hyena]

Well I and my 642 are back from my morning walk. I reflected on that article while I walked. It could just as well have been comprised of two sentences.

1. They're difficult to shoot well.
2. They're not as powerful as larger calibers.

But I guess writing two sentences wouldn't pay much.

Here's my question. Set aside the quality of the article. How much do people get paid to write an article like that? $100? $500? Does anybody know?

 

[Mule Packer]

It worked! Mission accomplished! He needed to write an article, get it published and get paid. Larry

Folks, Tops is right on the money. Even the title of the article was purposely designed to get people to read this bozo's drivel. He was purposely trying to "stir the pot."

Even his first point of argument (You're Not a Good Enough Shot) proves that he didn't think this out logically. Think about it. What is the most likely scenario where a person nowadays will need to use a handgun for personal defense? In the home? Perhaps. That would be a relatively short distance not requiring precise alignment of fully adjustable target sights.

Another likely scenario might possibly be in a fairly empty supermarket parking lot late at night when you need to make an emergency run for a gallon of milk and get approached by some doo-dah who wants your wallet.

Both scenarios aren't going to require precise accuracy. Nope. We're talking up close and personal, i.e. belly button range.

In a typical scenario (and remember, I said typical), we aren't going to be taking shots at a myriad of armed assassins at 50 yards.

Okay, that being said, and knowing the skill set of the majority of the folks on this forum, a snub-nose .38 special would not only be more than sufficient, but downright deadly for the bad guy. Just my two cents worth...and it probably isn't even worth that much.

 

[Xfuzz]

This Mo-Mo apparently never heard of a Model 10, 12, 64..
2 inch "snub".

 

[diyj98]

It worked! Mission accomplished! He needed to write an article, get it published and get paid. Larry

Exactly. By this time next year he'll write one "Why the 38 snub nose is still taking care of business" or giving a 38 snub nose a glowing review on a website or in a magazine that accepts advertising dollars from that particular manufacturer.

 

[haywood]

He wrote his article. He got paid. I don’t agree with most of his thinking.

 

[Mule Packer]

By this time next year he'll write one "Why the 38 snub nose is still taking care of business" or giving a 38 snub nose a glowing review on a website or in a magazine that accepts advertising dollars from that particular manufacturer.

True. But more than likely, he'll write something with a highly controversial title in order to get his publisher to bite and the reader's ire up. Titles like Why the Model 1911 is Obsolete, or Why Revolvers Have Gone the Way of Button Shoes, or perhaps even something like Why the .30-06 is Not An Effective Deer Cartridge.

These so-called "gun experts" know what sells. Most of 'em aren't in the business of informing the public. They're in the business of selling articles. Period.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

HAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! SO DOGGONE FUNNY!!!!

If I quoted each of the best comments above it would sound like a first rate comedian's opening monologue. This was the funniest thread I've seen in a long time.

Thank you for prompting us to read that drivel and generate our own drivel in reply.

Obi-Wan! A fine student of the Force - well put that was.....

And how much target practice do you really need for a "belly gun"? If you're practicing at 25 yards you've already exceeded your gun's capabilities unless you're Jerry Miculek or Bob Munden reincarnated. That's simply not what the J-frame is designed to be used for. Sigh......we all know that.....

"...a 2" .38 Special recoils too much, so you should get a 3" .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum..."

OMG that's so funny - a 3" L frame is fun to shoot but he's talking J frames. What a hoot!

 

[PALADIN85020]

FWIW, here are my most-often-used discreet carry guns.

1. They go bang every time.
2. Simple display will usually intimidate the threat to go elsewhere.
3. Nobody likes to be shot with anything.
4. They conceal like crazy in a Levi's front pocket with Barami HipGrips, covered by a shirt in tail-out mode.
5. While I use +P hell-for-leather loads, my wife uses target wadcutters in her 442 - easy to control for her, and they can be surprisingly effective.
6. These are not target guns. They are just-in-case get-away-from-me weapons, that are accurate enough for close range minute of bad guy.
7. And when you leave the scene of the fracas, there is no brass on the ground to tidy up. I've always believed in not littering.

John

 

[forrestinmathews]

Well I took my J Frame out today and exceeded my capabilities and expectations. I got the target ten for ten and I didn't use the whole thing either. Five shots at 10 yards and five at 20 yards on the 8" gong. Difficult not get bored doing it.

 

[LostintheOzone]

Meh. Nothing to see here. Move along.

 

[Rule3]

​

About Jim Grant
Jim is a freelance writer, editor, and videographer for dozens of publications who loves anything and everything guns.



See, he is an expert so pay attention!

 

[roguegamma]

I'd wager that in addition to never mastering the snubnose revolver, the author breaks out in a cold sweat at the thought of driving a vehicle with a manual transmission.

 

[Fastbolt]

The young man's article was basically a gentle rehash of the long-standing common complaints about small revolvers and their users.

Well, writers need to write. That was basically a simple knock-out piece that didn't cover any new ground and probably entertained some readers who had seen snub revolvers in display cases and secretly wondered about someday buying one.

I thought it was probably aimed at the crowd of relatively younger gun owners (40's and under) who had been raised in the "modern defensive pistol era". If that's your target audience, you write to it.

Me? The older I become, the more I appreciate my J-frames. Of course, that's primarily because I invested so much trigger time using them on the range while working as a LE firearms instructor, and having started in LE during the last hurrah of service revolvers.

The article had the usual generalized complaints about the difficulties experienced by inexperienced revolver shooters. Well, it's not like that's changed any, right?

I've owned and have carried a pair of 642-1's, a pair of M&P 340's (with & without the ILS), a older 649 (.38SPL), a neat 37-2DAO and a couple of 36's (nickel 3" and blue 2").

Well, I've owned and carried some other "snubs", including a pair of original 3" CA Bulldogs (blue & stainless), 2 1/4" SP101DAO, 2 1/2" & 3" K-frames and an assortment of snub Security/Speed-Six wheelies (wish I still owned those Rugers).

Complaints about a "short sight radius" isn't an excuse not to be able to make solid hits with 2"-3" revolvers out to distances far beyond those encountered in "normal" self defensive distances. I regularly ran my J-frames out to 40-50yds on standard paper and reduced size steel silhouettes and poppers. It wasn't the "short sight radius" so much as the itty bitty targets perched atop the comparatively wider sights. (That was one instance where the thin dime-thick 649 front ramp and rear notch was actually handier than the newer wide ramp/notch of the newer snubs. )

My SA-capable 2" 649 and 3" 36 allowed me to get hits at the longer distances as easily as when using my 4" revolvers ... albeit it took a moment longer to recover from +P felt recoil if I was using +P loads in the lighter +P capable snubs. The DA & DAO snubs naturally made me work harder at it as the distances got out there.

 

[Gene L]

I didn't read the article. I do believe j-frames are difficult to shoot at distance and are not the best choice for new shooters, especially those with weaker hands. I'm always surprised when someone recommends them as a first gun for a woman.

I have two, a 36 and a 442. With tiny grips they are not fun to shoot. With bigger rubber grips, which I put on my 442, recoil is tolerable.

Fine for carry, IMO. Defense, yep. Are there better choices, oh yeah. But I tote mine without fear. I also sometimes carry a .32 APC.

Recently I saw an episode of Forgotten Weapons where Ian interviewed a well-known defense guy...can't remember who, it was late at night and I was recovering from a sickness. Anyway, this guy studied shootings, apparently, and said that almost any time a potential victim produces a gun and uses it against an attacker, he will almost certainly win. People don't want to get shot. At least I THINK I remember him saying this.Wish I'd listened more carefully and had a better memory for names.

I guess this applies in reverse as well.

 

[GypsmJim]

I read the article before I read all of the subsequent comments. I had to agree with him in some cases and was surprised to read all of the negative comments afterwards.

A friend's wife bought the very gun that was used in the article. She's of small stature with small hands. She just can't master the trigger pull of a DAO. Her mistake was listening to the hype of the gun dealer about how professionals use the gun. The end result is that now she does not carry at all. Considering her profession, she is the one person that SHOULD carry.

I personally don't like DAOs because I like the ability to cock the hammer if I want to. If I don't want to the double action works anyway. But that's just me.

I carry a 3" model 36, or a LCPII, depending on the clothes I wear.

 

[Ingramite]

Click-Bait
I didn't fall for it though.

 

[bigggbbruce]

Folks, Tops is right on the money. Even the title of the article was purposely designed to get people to read this bozo's drivel. He was purposely trying to "stir the pot."

The title caused me to avoid even opening the article. No interest in some couch commando's opinion.

Just looking through the posts to see who's fur he rubbed the wrong way.

Mostly I carry a LW 45 commander.. but I'm not afraid when I only have my Mdl 60 in my back pocket..

You just have to remember that when it's time to play, you 'aint playin'...

 

[delcrossv]

Ah, another "if you don't have the latest and greatest fantastic plastic 47+1 super-elastic mini-super-micro bottom feeder YOU GONNA DIE!!!" article.

(yawn)

(zzzzzz)

Bet he gets some payola from Glock etc.

 

[Fastbolt]

Admittedly, perhaps my perspective is a bit skewed on the subject of snub .38's.

However, I tend to look at it this way ...

Once I was able to demonstrate to myself that my own ability to run a J-frame could let me produce a "cold" 1-handed "close combat" 5-shot group that clustered in an approx clenched fist-size group, fired from 3-5yds, in approx 3 secs or less ... and then a 2-handed group, fired flash/front-sight, at 5yds, producing a similarly-sized clenched fist group, in 2 secs ... I stopped worrying about the inherent accuracy of the venerable snub revolver.

It's not the limitations of the actual revolver, but the limitations of the revolver user, that's probably going to make the most difference.

Yes, many folks find it more difficult to shoot a revolver, let alone a diminutive J-frame, compared to some of the modern pistols available. Fine. That's a shooter's choice, based upon a shooter's realization of his/her own skill limitations.

"Terminal ballistics"? Well, when we talking about what's essentially a "threshold" centerfire defensive caliber, if a particular shooter and their revolver are able to take advantage of the newest advances in defensive ammunition for the .38SPL, that's not a bad thing. (I'd still rather have a 5-shot .38 snub loaded with low-powered target wadcutters, or even 158gr LSWC, instead of a .25 or .32, when it comes right down to it.)

So, what's a "threshold defensive caliber"?

Kinda depends on the user's perspective, I'd think. I'd roughly opine that category of calibers to consist of .380ACP, .38SPL and 9mm, in about that ascending order. The emphasis on ammunition development for the 9mm as a service round, and the prevalence of the modern 9mm pistol in "duty" circles, with the .38SPL snubs usually relegated to Secondary/Backup, off-duty and personal defensive chores, understandably offers an advantage to the 9mm over the .38SPL.

Now, I own some .38/.357 snubs and some 9mm pistols of compact & subcompact size. The pistols offer me an advantage of magazine capacity ranging from 7-10rds, with larger grip frames and slides running on recoil springs to help soften felt recoil. However, I can't slip any of my 9mm pistols into my jeans front pockets ... like I can my J-frames and pair of LCP pistols.

Handguns are a COMPROMISE when it comes to defensive carry use.

Consider your anticipated task(s), your carry circumstances and lifestyle activities, and your level of skillset development and abilities ... and then choose where, on the great range of the handgun COMPROMISE spectrum, you wish to be if your life is on the line.

It's not a talisman. It's a tool. The tool-user is going to shoulder the significant amount of how "effective" the tool might be in any given situation.

 

[hkcavalier]

As a writer, I can appreciate what he did --- you all read the article and are discussing it.

Sometimes writers play the heel to do this very thing.

But I'll continue to carry a Glock 26 (or 34) when I can and a 442PC when I can't. For the wilderness I'm all S&W: 686+ or 629 most of the time, but that's not really the focus of the article.