I will never give-up on trying to get my wife to shoot the 38's I have. She carries a 327 MAG loaded with 32 S&W....it's almost a waste of good gun-metal to see her have to do that. I have a lightweight 38-special that is ideal for her as far as the ease of carry. Factory ammo is out of the question. I have loaded-down a 110-grain swc to 3-grains of Bullseye for my fooling-around load....but she is still not comfortable. I have to load-down 32-longs to around 1.7 grains to get close to making her happy.

I would love to take-over the 327 as my carry and load it like it was deigned to be loaded and let her pack the light 38....but I have to find a suitable load that will:

#1. Consistently get the slug clear of the barrel with the potential to do "some" damage.
#2. Come-up with a load in which she can stand the recoil in this light 38 revolver.

No...I refuse to go get her an automatic and she can't take the 22 or 22 MAG TP. Does anybody have any thoughts on a "least-load"? Maybe like 2-grains of Bullseye?

I think your wife is trying to tell you something but does not want to just come out and say it.

You're already down to the ridiculous on your handload.

__________________
Science plus Art

Forgetaboutit. Really. She's got a gun. She will use it. It will work. It may or may not be ideal. But it will work. That is miles and miles ahead of her having a gun that she will not carry and use. Whoever she points it at are not going to stand there and ask her to describe the power, bullet type, etc. of the load in her revolver. They most likely will not notice or care about the bore size. They almost certainly will want to get of out Dodge. Very cool.

__________________
<><

Maybe a can of pepper spray....

Sir,
You are trying to push a chain up a red clay hill in a thunder storm.
It ain't gonna happen and you are likely to either fall on your face in the mud or get struck by lightening.

If you want a .327mag revolver so you can carry full power rounds in it, use the lightweight .38spl that neither of you apparently want as a trade-in.
Problem solved.

__________________
Age + Treachery = JohnnieB

I like brucev's idea the best. The little lady wants to shoot and she shoots the 617 very well. BUT...it's a bit too large to stick in her purse. She does just fine with that 327 down-loaded....so maybe I just need to leave her alone. I don't have any issues with the 38 lightweight and I don't plan to get rid of it.

I have gone about as far as I can with the trigger-pull reduction on these small frames and still guarantee ignition, so we have worked past that part. I realize that anything much below what I am loading now in 38-special is mostly just making noise, but I thought I'd seek a little advice anyway.

Pepper spray is out. She would rather make the BG bleed rather than cry, but I have considered hand-grenades.

I am appreciating all the comments folks.

It sounds as though even if you can load the .38 spls. down far enough for her it wouldn't be very different from the .32s she's shooting now. She must be very recoil sensative.

If you really want her to eventually pick up a .38 spl. you will have to find something that she will accept. If there is some reason why you'd want her to do this you might try getting some .38 short colt brass and start loading some very light loads with it.

I have the same problem , My wife keeps the 327 by the bed but I loaded the 327's down a little with 4.5grs of unique. They still travel around 1000fps so thats pretty good. I got here a 357 to shot with me on the weekend and we shot 38sp out of it and she hits about as good as I do. I loaded them with 4.9 grs of unique behind a 158gr SWC and she hasnt complained about recoil and she is only 5 feet tall. I tryed loading some with 4.0 gr of unique but it was just to weak to shot all the time.

You might want to try some light loads of trail Boss behind a 158 gr. lead bullet. The starting load on the Hodgdon website is very mild.

My wife developed the problem with shooting her 38 snubbies
after carrying them for years.
My answer was to Load her some Colt Shorts with Clays &
125Gr Bullets to shoot.
The Shorts took the Sting out of her Airweight J Frames and made her Little Colts a pleasure to shoot.
Do not let me misslead.
She never had a Issue with Carrying and staying Proficient with Defence Rounds in her revolvers.
Her Complaint was when she and the other wives were messing around with some targets.
The Shorts have become a Standard Inventory Item for me
to stay out of the Dog House.
My Old 2 Cents
Hagen

__________________
Old Shootist

Be careful with very light loads of fast-burning high-density powders like Bullseye. These leave a lot of empty space inside the case, and can result in failures to ignite the charge. The force of the primer can be enough to lodge the bullet in the forcing cone without igniting the powder.

The only suggestion I have for dealing with your wife is to not try to talk her into an aluminum frame gun. Doing so defeats your goal of provideing the lowest recoiling revolver.

Suggesting a road to persue in your reloading quest is a lot more comfortable than my feeble attempt at marriage counciling. The now departed gun writer Dean Grinnell designed a button shapped or very short .38 wadcutter bullet. Hensley & Gibbs cataloged the mold. Grinnel wrote articles about useing them for very light loads and also loading 3 of them into .38 special and four into .357 mag cases. They weighed 60 gr. if I recall correctly. I thought it would be fun experimenting with one of the molds but never bought one. Unlike loading round balls, Grinnel got good accuracy. Grinnel was a prolific gun writer on reloading in the 1970s and early 80s who focused on reloading as a fun hobby rather than reloading for self defense or hunting but his four button .357 load had interesting potential as a very tight patterning "buck shot" load. One of H&G's molds would be hard to find but you could have a 148 gr. WC mold milled off then drill and tap its sprue plate hole deeper if it needed it. I wouldn't be suprised if a member has one of Grinnel's articles or can direct you to one.

Information like this is very helpful. I do reload and I can make-up any round I want, but I am not a pro at it. I was looking for some information on how low to go and maybe 3-grains in that long case using non-magnum primers is about it. That load under a 110-grain slug is no wimp and I have shot it by the butt-load.....but I do fear going any lower than that. I sort of like the idea posted above using the colt cases. I suppose I could also trim-down some 38-special cases as well and reduce the void in the case for better ignition.

See....this is how it goes...some nut like me starts a thread like this and it gives us all something else to talk about.

I think it's mostly for my selfish reasons to try and finagle the 327 away from the wife, but she really does like the reduced carry weight of the 38 and I am not necessarily going to give-up....yet. But...as K22 alludes to, giving her the aluminum frame makes the recoil that much worse.

I am no marriage-counselor either and I have been trying it with the same woman for 43-years. She will win and get what she wants to shoot no matter how this turns out.

I think the lightest practical loads that I have seen in the .38 spl are with a 148gr HBWC, while the standard load is usually 2.7grs of Bullseye, I know people who have gone down to 2.4grs for rapid fire stages, we are talking 6-1/2” K-Frame barrels here.
The soft swaged bullets expand very well even at slow speeds.

I would not doubt that you can get the bullet clear of a 2” barrel at even lower loads. With the HBWC seated flush you reduce the power space considerably and 2.5-2.7 gr loads have been very reliable.
Basically I do not like Light Wt. J-Frames, I would rather lug the heavy frame around. The shooting experience is IMO in a different world.

__________________
Ipsis Rebus Dictantitbus

You can actually go pretty low with Bullseye but you will want to do specific experimenting with your own firearms as they will make a big difference in the results. I have a handloading manual where the author went as low as .55 grs of Bullseye under a 146 gr. wadcutter out of a 2" snub, although he did set the charge at .75 grs. as a safety measure to make sure they all left the barrel.

The real danger in working with extremely light loads of BE, or other fast powders, is double charging a case. I changed my whole routine because of loading a lot of reduced loads and I liked it so much that I do it for all loading on a single stage press.

Here's a link to a group buy over at castboolits.com for a WC similar to what k22fan is talking about.

NOE .360 155Gr. WC Re-Run - Cast Boolits

I'd like to get in on this one but I'm already in line for a 160 gr. double crimp groove HP SWC with GC mold on another pending group buy and my budget is limited.

__________________
Andy

If you can find an old Lyman 358101 mould at a gun show, it casts a 75 grain .38 wadcutter that's in the same ballpark, velocity-wise, as that .32. It does offer a slightly larger permanent wound channel, though.

Lyman 45th edition Reloading Handbook for the #358101 75gr bullet.
Powder Start/grs. FPS Max/grs. FPS
Bullseye 2.0 607 3.0 788
Unique 3.0 577 5.0 842
SR7625 3.0 469 4.0 570

If you get the muzzle velocity too low that 38 slug will wallow through the air like a BB out of a Daisy air rifle and you won't see much penentration, especially if the slug has to penetrate much clothing or bone. Your frau might be better armed with a 22 kit gun loaded with CCI Stingers than a 38 with little penetration.

Before I clicked on the link it looked like a group buy for 155 gr. WC molds but they're also making molds for two shorter length WCs, 100 gr. and 75 gr. Getting in on their group buy probably would be a lot quicker way to get a short WC mold than hunting down an old one.

Buying a mold won't be a problem. I have a neighbor that is a religious range-shooter. One a week we get together and cast bullets....I get all I want for free, but I don't shoot nearly as much, or as often as he does. I reload for around 7-8 cents a round (powder and primers). That's down in cheap 22LR territory and I do my re-loading one round at a time so I can really pay attention to detail.


FOLKS....I really appreciate the discussion we have had here on this thread. If I never receive another post.....I will be extremely happy that enough interest was generated to provide me with lots of good ideas and places to start.

I appreciate all of it!

Honestly... what does your wife want to shoot?

I think you need to let her decide what is best to carry.

Hi:
A friend went though the same type episode with his wife.
After buying/trading many firearms he ended up with a S&W Model 30 RB 2" .32 caliber. He put pearl grips on the revolver. Started his wife shooting .32 S&W ammo and worked up to .32 S&W Longs.
His wife loved the Model 30 and carried it.

Folks....we keep getting back to this thing about me "making" my wife shoot something she does not want to. Hey....I have been sleeping with this little lady for 44-years and she has a ring in my nose. There is no way I can make her do anything she don't want to, but I certainly understand all the points made on that subject. She does just fine with the 327 down-loaded and she can keep a pop-can rolling at snub-nose distances with a 32-short or a mild long, as in the commercially available wadcutters.

We have a multi-story dwelling and not all the guns are in the same place in the house all the time. When we take trips, we often take only one weapon and sometimes it's the 38. I just want her to be able to shoot anything that is handy without fear and she just does not handle the 38-special well. She likes the light-weight 38, just does not like the recoil. (I bet I am not the only husband with this problem from what I have read here.)

I am thinking the 38-Short Colt is a wonderful idea as well as some home-brewed wadcutters that have been suggested here on the thread.

Once again...thanks for the input.

I think that if she has to use that revolver for real, she will have adrenalin dripping off her fingertips, and wouldn't feel the recoil of a 500 S&W.

I like light loads for practice, it reduces flinching in me, and for 38 Special, I use the standard target load of 2.7 grs of Bullseye and a 148 gr wadcutter. If you use the same powder charge with a 110 gr bullet, the recoil will be even lighter. And I shoot an alloy frame Model 638.

I'd advise her to load her 38 revolver with +P, if it is safe for that arm, and never shoot it unless she has to. She can have plenty of fun shooting that revolver all she wants with 2.7 grs of Bullseye behind whatever bullet.

Cyrano....I agree and if you knew her like I did....you could be sure she has the guts to pull the trigger if she had to. There is probably plenty of times I needed to be shot, but she gave me a reprieve.

House burglaries have sky-rocketed around here lately. I live in a sparsely populated area a few miles out of town and the bad-guys have hit every home over the last year around here....but mine. They have not figured out when both of us are not at home and I guess we are just waiting our turn and hoping to be behind the door at the ready when they do decide to bang the door down. I have already had one piece of trash arrested and hauled-off when the wife caught him in the front yard with his hand on the door-handle of my truck. I appeared just in time to put the 686 in his face and he stood very still until the deputies arrived. They told me they knew him, knew what he was up to and they wished I had went ahead and shot him. I think if the wife had got to him first....she would have.

FWIW, I've played around with some very light loads in 38 spl for training newbe's. 125gr TCFP cast bullets over clays powder produced recoil that is .22 like but velocity is all over the place as is accuracy. Additionally, they shoot low. i.e recoil is low but they are not good loads to instill confidence in training.

__________________
Dave

Okay, physics is physics and your wife is your wife. Many have mentioned that too light of a load is dangerous because of stuck bullets. One way to get around that is to develop your own caliber, so to speak.

Take 38spl cases and cut them off by say, .110" or more. Use the lightest bullet you can, 100gr or so, and load them with 38 S&W data. Take more off and make them 380 "ish". We are not talking about rifle accuracy at 100 yards so a 9mm bullet may even be able to be used. A 380, 90gr may not be out of the question either.

Shortening the case is a must though.

If it was me, I'd get her a heavier gun, an all steel "J" frame to shoot on the range and use 125gr bullets at the lowest velocity still inside 38spl data.

For house use, maybe a baseball bat is in order.

You are making the problem worse with the light revolver. The lighter the revolver the less recoil it will soak up. It's possible your wife would be less sensitive to the recoil generated in a slightly heavier revolver like the M640, M649 or M60 at 23oz.

I shoot a M442 and a M640 and both are very different with the same ammo.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

My wife carries a model 37, but for range shooting, she prefers a model 10. I'd suggest you get her one of those, and encourage her to shoot it all she will. As she gets more comfortable shooting revolvers in general, the recoil won't be as big a deal for her. My wife doesn't mind shooting a model 29 with full house magnum loads; and shoots it well. She's had a lot of practice with K frame 22s and 38s before, however. I'm twice her size, and I can get enough lightweight j frame shooting pretty darned quick myself.

First, go here and read EVERYTHING:

Cornered Cat

I went through this exact same thing with my girl and started to think maybe she liked the idea of having a gun but didn’t really want the reality. I kept trying to get her away from my Ruger MKIII and into a revolver with .38’s.

WRONG MOVE…

Please… Read the website and all that it offers and then think about your situation. I finally decided that the MKIII full of CCI Stingers covered a “good enough” in my mind and she is now happy and will go shooting with me. She is slowly working up on her own and has even shot some of my light 105 gr reloads that I load as light as I can from the Lyman Cast Bullet book. She still doesn’t care for revolvers, but she is back on the right path that I started to derail her from. We may have the best of intentions, but sometimes we just choose the wrong path to get to the same goal. It may be money you don’t think you should have to spend for something you can teach her yourself but she may need to take a class with other women or other strangers period instead of getting it from you. At the complete risk of sounding like a sexist pig here, the shortest path between two points for a woman may not be YOUR path… But the goal isn’t to drag her along… The part that is where we fail is we don’t even know we are dragging her because she is trying so hard to be kind to us.

I know its not much of a defense load, but have you thought about shot loads.

I gave-up with her on the 38-special. It's the noise and psychological affect I took a 110-grain LSWC down to 2.8 to 3-grains of bullseye or red dot, which kicks about like a 22 MAG in this 38 lightweight. Any less powder in this long case simply won't burn.

I have her shooting 32 Long and 32 wadcutters. I will work her up to the 38-special in time.

I have faced your problem with women shooters as an instructor for years. One very important aspect of shooting a handgun is the GRIP !
I have found that soft rubber, hand filling, well designed grips are welcomed by women shooters (as well as men) to dampen the force of recoil. The best recoil dampening grips are not usually suited for concealed carry but you must make your choice. The usual stark metal and wood grip of a revolver is not friendly to a small thin hand with recoil. Fill that hand with a firm yet softer rubber grip, and the shooter feels much better. Your wife might feel differently with this approach.

OK, I know this sounds devious but since nobody else has mentioned it, here goes...........

And remember, this is for your wife's OWN GOOD should she ever really need to use the gun on a bad guy........

What about sneaking some higher-powered loads into her revolver when she isn't looking? Since you reload, you can make them appear just like the reduced loads you're already making for her.

This way if she needs to use the gun in an emergency, with adrenaline pumping through her, she won't even notice it. Of course, you'll have to sneak them OUT of the gun for range practice sessions or the cat will be out of the bag.

Just a thought!

Lou

__________________
NRA Certified Instructor & RSO

I would try the lightest loads listed on the Hodgdon website using Trail Boss powder. if that does not work then the light loads youa re presently using in the 32 Long may be your only recourse.

This is an amazing thread. It seems to me that the focus should be simplified, shifted back toward a common sense resolution of the original question. Or at least what I think common sense is. Some of you were headed in that direction, emphasizing familiarization with EFFECTIVE catridges.

Carrying, or using, a firearm for defensive use has only one purpose; instantaneously stopping, and rendering harmless, a violent attacker whom you believe to be about to try to take your life, or that of a spouse or loved one.

A rational adult, making the preparations necessary to be ready to do that, must come to only one conclusion about the right type of firearm to have available. It must be reliable and minimally powerful, to conclusively stop an attacker. Conclusively. Forget all the other gun writer stuff.

Any person moaning about how the gun might make too big a bang, or how it jumps in the hand a tiny bit too much, or how it weighs an ounce or two too much or too little, or how its grip does not fit the fingers just so, or how it is too shiny or too black, ad nauseum...is temperamentally unqualified to make life or death decisions for himself, herself, or anybody else. The issue is that simple. You might get them to shoot with you on the range, under special circumstances, but you have not likely changed the Nervous Nelly, hand wringing mindset.

Trying to load a revolver down to where it barely flops a bullet downrange at airsoft velocity sets up the potential situation where an assailant is so enraged by what his intended victim has tried and failed to do that the attack will become unspeakably more violent and vindictive than otherwise.

This entire discussion has risen from a flawed judgement approach to resolving an unreasonable objection to a nonexistent problem. If any person, in this case a wife, is unwilling or unable to use the necessary effective tool, he or she should not try to use an ineffective one instead. It's about judgement.

This thread has largely drifted toward which ineffective tool is the best ineffective tool, or the least ineffective. There is no effective ineffective tool.

The job to be done is helping a wife or friend adapt herself to the minimal requirements of the task...finding an effective firearm with which she can become comfortable and proficient...or else forget about using one. And it would be wrong to cooperate with her unreasonable objections by helping her select a tool that will not work, letting her think that maybe, magically, it will.

Then there is the issue of the thought process and decisions necessary to use a firearm defensively, instantly. That is crucial.

In my opinion, it is not likely that a person who whines about the irrelevant recoil of something like standard .38 Special loads, fired in a small steel framed S&W revolver, is qualified to make quick decisions about when or whether to point it at a human being and pull the trigger, with the intent to kill.

In my opinion, a small .380 semiautomatic or a short barrelled .38 Special will do the job...hopefully, under the best of circumstances. And I've carried something less, in special cases. A Secret Service agent acquaintance carried a Beretta 950 in .22 Short from time to time, for complex reasons. So did an Israeli ambassador I knew. But don't further endanger your wife by equipping her with something which makes a potential bad situation potentially even more dangerous.

I think this last comment makes a great deal of sense. If you don't stop the attacker, you are better off trying to run away. I once had a friend who wanted to buy a cheap handgun for his wife to protect herself with. I asked him how much his wife was worth?

I had the same results trying to use some 100 grn TC and 125 TC bullets in .38 spl cases over very light charges of 231. Very low point of impact and poor ignition with lots of unburned powder everywhere.

Well, he might be a winner, if the thread was about bashing someone for not choosing a "manly" caliber.

Unfortunately it's not the same as trying to get a non-shooter interested in learning how to shoot. Even if she did pick up a .38 to save her life it won't do her any good if she has never shot it enough to be effective with it. The object is to get her to shoot an ineffective caliber at a non-threatening target enough to get her to move up to something she would actually not be afraid to use at a real threat. It may take days, it may be never, but a hit with a .32 long is better than a miss with any .38 or more effective caliber.

An effective caliber is only effective in competent hands, other than that it's nothing but wasted ammo.

Jellybean, it's entirely possible that you were making some logical point when you made the accusatory comment regarding my earlier post in saying:

"...if the thread was about bashing someone for not choosing a "manly" caliber."

...but I haven't figured it out yet, since I was not "bashing" anybody, as you put it. I'm going to resist the temptation to characterize your post as "befuddled".

Just kidding.

Maybe.

Anytime somebody tosses out that term "bashing", it says something about the user that the user probably wouldn't want said.

But here you made a point that just doesn't fly, in my firm opinion:

"The object is to get her to..."

No, the object is not, or should not be to "get", or manipulate, anybody to do something they are not comfortable with, are not likely to become comfortable with, and are not temperamentally suited for, or qualified to do. Just don't do it.

If you try to manipulate the wrong person into making instant life and death decisions, you, that person, and others may come to regret it for the rest of your lives. And you would be rightly to blame.

And "a hit with a .32 Long..." is probably not often much better than nothing, and may be counterproductive, for reasons I stated. If you can't do it right, don't do it wrong, or you may wish you had not done it at all.

But your last sentence is 50% right on:

"An effective caliber is only effective in competent hands, other than that it's nothing but wasted ammo."

But that ammo could be much worse than just "wasted". It could be fatal to an innocent party.

Don't try to invent "competent hands" when there is ample reason to believe that a person does not want to be what you want him or her to become, or is probably unable to do so. We don't come in one size and type.

Most people who are primarily recreational shooters or collectors, and have civilian concealed carry permits, have romanticized ideas of what defensive or offensive shooting is all about. Gun writers, magazines, and forums like this one shape some of those mind sets. Nothing wrong with that. It's just how things go.

But please, back off, way, way off, on this missionary spirit thing, where everybody has to be converted to being a back yard gun slinger (or woman), ready to save the neighborhood or the supermarket in an instant, even if that's the last thing they would like to do, or feel comfortable doing. Yes, it would be nice if it could be prudently possible. But it won't be.

Some think they can, and know they have. Others think they can, and may do so, sometime. Most talk a good game, and have their hearts in the right place, but aren't cut out for it and hopefully won't get the chance to bungle things for those around them, perhaps fatally.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for lots of people having lots of CCW permits, but I would like to see much more training and discussion of the decision making process, what to do when, and how to be prepared. In my state, such training is close to zero, and frighteningly inadequate.

Lastly, remember that most law enforcement personnel serve an entire career without ever drawing a firearm or firing a shot. Chances are remote that a S&W Forum member, a wife, girlfriend, or child will ever do so either. But it never hurts to have a Plan "B", if it makes sense and is not manipulative of another person, as I said.

My outlook is a little bit different, as I spent many years in situations where lots of thought had to be given to some of these issues. So it was worked out in my mind decades ago. I imagine the same is true with law enforcement personnel. Be a realist.

Then have lots of fun on the shooting range, and reading all the gun magazines, and in these forums, and fantasizing at gun shows. But reality is elsewhere. It is measured in foot pounds, mental and emotional preparation, quick analytical capability, and technical competence. Set aside the missionary spirit thing.

I guess if somebody would call this "stupidity bashing", I'd plead guilty. But maybe it's not stupidity most of the time...probably more like discussing football statistics. Just remember, hypothetical discussion fun is over here, and defensive reality is way, way over there.

We all know that cemeteries have lots of people in them that have been killed plum-dead with a 32, and a 22 for that matter. Most of you likely know that Teddy Roosevelt standardized the 32 Long (New Police) in NYC when he was Mayor, but I suppose most of the bad guys were not packing much else either.

Our psyche has changed...not the ability of the bullet that will kill. I don't think the human body is anymore durable now than it was when Teddy was Mayor of New York.

Some people like to walk around with a howitzer in their pants knowing they may be able to shoot thru car doors and windshields, but in reality....would likely run and hide if a gun-fight broke out. As far as my wife....I think she would pull the trigger on somebody a lot sooner than I would. A jury would likely lean more in her direction if she were not wearing a tactical vest, or packing a 44-Magnum at the time of the SD shooting.

Some of you have suggested that for her safety....she needs to learn to shoot a manly caliber. Nonsense....she needs to shoot something she can hit with and is not afraid to shoot. Jellybean has the same notion that I do. I may eventually work her up to a 38-special, but for now....if an empty beer can attacks her from 25-feet on in....it is going to have a butt load of 32-Longs in it before it gets to her.

I don't know if BG will take the time to size-up the weapon, scrutinize it for barrel-length, caliber, or the number of rounds it may hold. I do think that if BG sees the potential victim has the gun and looks good and d*** ready to use it......he may reconsider. If he is actually that skilled.....nothing short of a FA AK47 would be in order and you're out of luck at that point anyway.

Back to "little and light": W.Dresser in the "Handloading" NRA book shows a load with .75 gr. of BE and a 146 gr. Hensley & Gibbs N. 50BB out of a 2 inch Chiefs Special for 12.3 ft.-lbs of ME. Not to be used in a longer barreled pistol because of bore-sticking issues. In an Airweight, the lady might start there and work up for training purposes only, of course.

You could certainly make a pound of powder last.

Regards,

Tam 3

My late wife was 5'8" & 125 lbs, with small hands, but long slender fingers. So, trigger reach & grip were not a problem. Recoil was not a problem either, her problem was the noise. She could handle my 629 6" with full power 44 mag loads, & 158 gr +P in her model 60 just fine, as long as I put ear plugs & muffs both on her. She said it didn't "kick" nearly as much when the noise was cut back. Maybe your wife is kinda' the same? Anyway, I used to load 2.4 gr Bullseye & 148 gr HBWC in 38 Spl. It's hard to imagine a softer shooting load than that, extremely accurate, too. I still wouldn't want to be shot with it, especially multiple times, in nearly the same spot!

Thanks for the brilliant input Tam. I was very interested in your suggestion.....for about as long as it took to read it. This started out as a realistic thread not a comic-book.

No Regards,

Snubbiefan

PhilOhio, snubbiefan apparantly has a grasp on reality so there is no reason to respond to your post. I've been in enough peeing matches with highly trained experts to last me a lifetime, so have a nice day.

Okay folks....I own the thread and I agree that we all need to stop throwing the bread at each other in a food fight. I officially "bury the hatchet" with anybody that I have offended and I suggest we all do the same. The moderator can't be too far away here. Lets all behave....me included.

Thanks!

Snubbiefan, neither you nor I "own" any thread here. I guess the site owner is stuck with them all. Nobody should be "offended" by the exchange of differing points of view. I'm not. That's what forums are for. And for that, moderators' intervention is not required.

But sooner or later, the anonymity of Internet forums tempts a certain type of person to not "behave", as you put it. It starts with the use of inflammatory terms or phrases directed at an individual, like "bashing", "grasp on reality", "peeing matches", etc., as above. And when the party dishing it out has been spot lighted and called on it, a common response is the righteous declaration that victory has been achieved, so nothing more needs to be said. Which is what should have happened in the first place.

So kindly do not suggest that "all" should "behave" when almost all did, and only one party did not. Forums run smoothly as long as there is zero toleration of those who initiate mud slinging contests aimed at specific participants, either subtle or heavy handed, which is what we had here.

Yes, it's going to happen, because people are people and there are always a few...

So let's see whether this one has in fact been laid to rest. That will tell us what intent was or is.

snubbiefan, Unless I read it wrong, Tam 3 gave information I posted back in #15 and I didn't see anything malicious in their post, only an earnest suggestion.

No crust here, just saying.

Any chance she'll use an all-steel J-frame?

__________________
______________________________

Ditto #46.