Is a J frame enough?

[SFsc616171]

The SandW J-frame, the Colt DS frame, the Taurus '85-ish' frame, the Charter Arms frame, for example, are enough gun, disrespectful of caliber, as long as you have good shot placement, and are knowledgeable of the chosen load that you use.

Would I carry a reload? Yes. Again, of the chosen method, be knowledgeable, whether that be Dade, Bianchi, Tuff, HKS, Safariland, Jetloader, or shiny steel, or loose rounds. It may not be required, but it is better to have and not need, than to need and be SOL!

Please remember, this is NOT "bang-bang, ok, now fall down dead."

There are THUGS, THIEVES, folks who think they own what you have and cannot wait to take it from you by force, folks who take joy in physically harming other folks, and all of these will not stop, until you cannot move, or are dead.

Choose wisely, study well.

 

[GBExpat]

Please remember, this is NOT "bang-bang, ok, now fall down dead."

There are THUGS, THIEVES, folks who think they own what you have and cannot wait to take it from you by force, folks who take joy in physically harming other folks, and all of these will not stop, until you cannot move, or are dead.

Well, if I think there is a chance that I will encounter the THUG/THIEF version of The Terminator, I will be sure to carry more than a J Frame.

 

[Vonderek]

A j-frame is enough for a trip to the local supermarket if you live in a safe area. What happens though when you venture out of your neighborhood and for example end up in a broken-down car on the side of the highway, or get off at the wrong exit and find yourself lost in the wrong side of an unfamiliar town, or perhaps the victim of a home invasion which can and does happen in both good neighborhoods and bad? Now you are dealing with multiple assailants all with the advantage of both numbers and surprise and in cases like this the j-frame is far from enough.

 

[Kleanbore]

Post by Vonderek: A j-frame is enough for a trip to the local supermarket if you live in a safe area. What happens though when you venture out of your neighborhood and for example end up in a broken-down car on the side of the highway, or get off at the wrong exit and find yourself lost in the wrong side of an unfamiliar town, or perhaps the victim of a home invasion which can and does happen in both good neighborhoods and bad? Now you are dealing with multiple assailants all with the advantage of both numbers and surprise and in cases like this the j-frame is far from enough.

It is always good idea to read some of the thread before posting. That concept has been mentions several times here before. This from strambo in Post #48 addressed it very well indeed:

The odds of being in a violent situation are completely divorced from the severity of a violent situation. Should you find yourself in a violent confrontation, that the odds of it happening were 1/1 million, now have no bearing whatsoever on the best tool with which to handle it.

I will try to express it as clearly as possible:

One's defensive needs as they relate to tactics, skill set, and tools, including firearm capacity, are dependent entirely upon what happens and how it happens when it happens, and have nothing to do with the likelihood of occurrence.

That is a very basic tenet of risk management, and it is something we should all get through our heads.

 

[Gun Master]

Situations Where J Frame May "NOT" be Enough

All of us need to be constantly vigilant regarding our security. We should NEVER feel that "we have arrived," and NEVER believe "Now I feel confident and have no need to be cautious."

We need to keep learning from info and experiences of others. This thread is a perfect (well, nothing is perfect) example of that idea, and the moderator and other contributors are to be commended for the manner in which it was done.

Even though my J frame will most likely continue to be my main CCW, this thread has stimulated me to realize or remember other ways to improve my security. Only one of several is that I am able to transport additional "back up" in my vehicle (i.e., .45 Autoloader &/or 9mm double stack with extra mags, etc.). I plan to continue to "get inventive and practice unconventionality" in this respect.

Keep learning, be constantly aware of your surroundings, as well equipped as possible, realize your strengths and frailties, and in the spirit of ".......from my cold dead hands."

 

[sixgunner455]

If you carry a Jframe and want an eye-opening experience, or a laugh, take it to an IDPA-type shoot and run through it with the same round count requirements as everybody else.

Since I usually carry a 642, I have done this several times. I am not, surprisingly enough, at the bottom of the list when I do this, but last among those who seem to be competent with their weapons? yeah, pretty much. Most of the round counts per stage in the shoots I go to require 11-15 rounds. If you are shooting a 10+1 semiauto, you might have to reload once per stage. If you are shooting a standard 6 round service revolver, you have to reload at least once per stage. If you are shooting a 5 round concealment revolver, you have to reload 3 times per stage. If you are a good shot with your Jframe, have practiced reloading it until you are smooth with it, and confident enough in yourself to not worry about whether you're going to place at the bottom of the results list (you probably will), you will have some fun and probably learn from doing this. If you are lacking in any of those three areas, you will potentially learn a lot more.

People, including me, are going to continue to carry Jframes, because they are convenient to carry, reliable, and accurate. There are limitations, though, and it would be wise to figure them out before you need to use one in a serious situation.

 

[TestPilot]

It is enough until it isn't.

Some gun fights have more than 5~6 rounds fired.

You never know which one you may find yourself in. It is as simple as that.

 

[2ndamd]

I love that Jim now says he would opt for a G21 or G27
Walt aleays said
"We preach 45,
Shoot 9mm,
And carry a .38"

Clint Smith said "a handgun is just suppose to get you to the rifle you should not have left behind"

I love the tacticsl advantage a snubby gives you to fire through a pocket

Jerry Usher and Jim Cirillo won gandgun fights we will never know, with snubnose. 38's
They won the fight not thr gun.
A snubnose is enough
OR....maybe a mall ninja would need more or internet commando

 

[2ndamd]

Fat fingers on a cell phone spells misspelling
You get what I meant

 

[DBR]

I like to carry a J frame in my pocket and a more serious gun (Glock 23 40SW) IWB or shoulder holster. If the J is not adequate to solve the problem, at least I have another option.

If circumstances dictate only the J, I still feel adequately armed for the most likely problems - just with less options.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by 2ndamd: ...Jim Cirillo won gandgun fights we will never know, with snubnose. 38's.

This has been covered here more than once before, but one more time: Cirillo carried two Model 10 revolvers on his hip; he was limited to Model 10s or to Colt Official Police revolvers. He also carried a six-shot snub-nose revolver for backup. Plus a PPK.

The sources for that have been cited.

I do not recall his ever having mentioned the use of the Cobra in the line of duty. He did shoot a rodent with the PPK.

For concealed carry for self defense after he left the SOU, he recommended carrying two semiautomatic pistols.

 

[Kleanbore]

My copy of Ed Lovette's book has cooperated by reappearing. I will summarize the points pertinent to the J Frame shortly.

 

[camsdaddy]

Of course a lot of the modern day gun fighters have fought more battles that many will face. I thank God for that. I do however wonder what those who lost were carrying? I wonder what the greats of the 70's, 80's and 90's would carry or choose today in todays climate with the options that are available today.

 

[SDGlock23]

I used to carry a J-frame .38 Special, and I know a LOT of guys like them and think they're plenty, but I'm not so sure of that.

What bothers me the most with what I see is that quite a few believe the little 38 snub nose is perfectly suited for nearly every situation, many make very matter of fact comments about how a 5 shot 38 is plenty.

I don't believe it is. My main concern is that in reality, it's far far far easier to miss than many think it is. I don't care if you're a good shot, in a real life scenario if you've got bullets flying back at you, or even if you don't, it's much easier to miss than most think.

It's not uncommon to hear of police officers missing the majority of their shots, and even in some of the situations where a CCW holder had to use their gun, it's not uncommon to miss, a LOT, and in some instances even from just a few feet away from the bad guy.

My problem with the snubbie 38 is that you've only got 5 shots to begin with, and even if you do carry a reload, it's going to be a slow process in a situation that's likely to be over very quickly. My issue isn't the "power" of the .38 Special, it's the capacity of the J-frame and the reloads that would seem like an eternity to accomplish if your life is on the line.

The bottom line is that you or I don't know what we will encounter. Sure it's possible a 5 shot J-frame would be enough, but it's entirely possible that it won't be, so why take chances? Truth is we won't know until after it's over and by then it may be too late.

To me, some of the best pocket guns are the 9mm and .40 Kahrs, they're accurate and reliable, lay flat in the pocket, has a good set of sights, the slide locks back on the last round and a reload (single stack mags that lay perfectly flat in the opposite pocket) is very quick. You not only get more ammo, but more "power" as well. The little 380's aren't really bad, and while the 380 takes a back seat to the 38 Special in terms of ballistics, the platform of the 380 is what gives it the advantage.

I don't have a problem with J-frames, but they're not perfect. There are smaller options out there that deliver more power and faster reloads for pocket carry use. Also, I've had a J-frame jam up, and the problem with a revolver than jams up is that it's usually out of the game for good, there usually isn't a quick fix for it, unlike the semi auto.

 

[2ndamd]

Let me repeat it a third time or fourth time ...

Jim Cirillo and JERRY USHER both have won more handgun fights with a .38 (Jerry used j-frames) than anyone on this board will ever know.

What does that mean?
It means that as we sit behind our computers and discuss the merits of weapons the fact remains that, back in the day, police officers were in gunfights (more than any of us will ever know) and won the day with a .38.
These are real world examples and not hyperbole, conjecture, or hypotheticals.

Real gunfights have been won for years with a 38.

Remember Gorilla's in the mist storyline star? Diane???? Shot and killed. She had a 1911 .45 to protect herself. It was not loaded with one in the pipe. Maybe she thought she would have time to chamber a round? She did not have that time.

In a defensive incident the law abiding citizen is already behind because, they are not the aggressor. Situational Awareness buys time to react quicker...so, does a snubby.

To anyone reading this...a snubby .38 is enough and has many tactical advantages over other guns.

That is why gun writers, law enforcement, world class gun competition winners, gun instructors "all preach a .45, shoot a 9mm, and carry a .38"
These are the best at what they do and they still carry a .38.

Please never believe Hollywood when it comes to guns, or the real world shooting statistics.

 

[mgkdrgn]

As they taught us at Front Sight ... "Any gun will do so long as YOU will do."

 

[Kleanbore]

Pertinent Comments from Ed Lovette

Here's what Ed Lovette has to say about five shot snubby revolvers.

From Chapter 7:

• Reloading is necessary in about 10% of the documented gunfights involving revolvers [not substantiated].
• …if you have to reload during a gunfight, you are either missing a lot or you have the wrong weapon.
• The fastest reload is the second revolver.

From Chapter 14:

• To me, the five shot snubby is the equivalent of the riverboat gambler's derringer.
• ...the word firepower should never be used in the same sentence without including the phrase ‘lack of’.

From Chapter 21:

• Much as I love the five shot, it is at its best in a backup role to a bigger gun.
• You shouldn’t carry a five shot 2 inch as your primary sidearm.

Ed goes into quite a lot of discussion on the discontinued Colts and on snubby K-Frames, and he contrasts the grip, sights, trigger pull, and capacity with those of the J-frame. Again from Chapter 21: "The real solution is that someone needs to bring back the genuine article… a good place to start would be the Colt Magnum Carry."

Lovette provides no support for his comment about five shots being sufficient in 90% of the occasions, but if it is true it is very telling indeed: I know of no one in his right mind who would have a building designed in such a manner that its roof would be expected to collapse under the weight of snow, or to be destroyed by wind, ten percent of the time.

Today, many of us think "J-Frame" when we think "snubby revolver" because that's what is left on the shelves, but that certainly was not always true by any means.

 

[boricua9mm]

I used to carry a J-frame .38 Special, and I know a LOT of guys like them and think they're plenty, but I'm not so sure of that....

Great post and I agree with you 100%! I don't need to read a long thread about compiled shooting statistics to understand these concepts. I don't care about what certain Police officers accomplished back in the day with a 5-shot .38SPL.

What I do care about is the fact that I have actually found myself in a violent encounter where I was going to have to let bullets fly with a .38 J-frame. What I do care about is that I know how adrenaline affects me during these types of situations and what it does to my accuracy potential. What I do care about is the fact that having one or more missed shots is highly probable, especially when your body is under the influence of adrenaline. What I do care about is the reality than even in contact distances, the remaining shots may still not land where you intended and may fail to immediately neutralize an attacker. What I do care about is the difficulty in performing a speed reload after all of the above has occurred, especially when those rounds may be needed to continue to try and end the conflict.

Personally, I'm glad I was able to figure all of this out without having to had shot somebody. If somene wants to rely on a J-frame, either with or without a reload or two, then that's their choice. I just hope that they don't have to find out the hard way that it may not have been the best decision in the midst of more contemporary technology.

I love revolvers; a .357 S&W is my ideal hiking gun. When I'm worried about defending myself against sub-humans, a higher capacity 9mm semi-auto stocked with PDX-1s and a spare magazine leaves me much better prepared for the task.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by 2ndamd: Jim Cirillo and JERRY USHER both have won more handgun fights with a .38 (Jerry used j-frames) than anyone on this board will ever know.

What they may have done and what others can do are two different things.

...the fact remains that, back in the day, police officers were in gunfights (more than any of us will ever know) and won the day with a .38....Real gunfights have been won for years with a 38.

Well, that's what they had to carry back in the day, but they do not carry them any more.

And the question was about the J-Frame, not the .38 Special.

To anyone reading this...a snubby .38 is enough and has many tactical advantages over other guns.

Sure, at least for backup, and particularly if it holds six rounds.

That is why gun writers, law enforcement, world class gun competition winners, gun instructors "all preach a .45, shoot a 9mm, and carry a .38"
These are the best at what they do and they still carry a .38.

The question was about whether a five shot revolver is "enough" for primary carry.

I know no instructor who believes that it is.

I bought a seven shot revolver last year. I commented to the salesman that it seemed strange to me; his comment was that seven are better than six, and eight are better than seven. He than uncovered the old Detective Special under his shirt. He carried it when he was a policeman, as a backup for his service revolver.

He still qualifies once a year with it.

 

[David E]

As they taught us at Front Sight ... "Any gun will do so long as YOU will do."

Cute statement, but it's mostly BS

 

[Old Fuff]

If I were expecting that I might be going into a high threat environment where trouble might be expected - or even probable - I wouldn't be carrying a small-frame .38 snubby as a primary weapon.

On the other hand, in my usual environment - that doesn't meet the above description - my small 5-shot revolver is a reasonable precaution.

There, I depend more on situational awareness and evade and escape, as I have no obligation to pursue and apprehend.

So far, over a long lifetime I have only been involved in two instances where shooting might have happened, but didn’t. In one the matter was resolved with a Colt .32 Pocket Pistol, and a .38 Special Detective Special in the other.

Others, for various reasons might face different environments and situations, but I am more then comfortable on depending a pocket revolver most of the time.

I have the feeling that some go loaded for bear, when it’s highly unlikely they’ll ever encounter one, especially if they are wise enough to avoid them.

 

[fastbolt]

Lovette provides no support for his comment about five shots being sufficient in 90% of the occasions, but if it is true it is very telling indeed: I know of no one in his right mind who would have a building designed in such a manner that its roof would be expected to collapse under the weight of snow, or to be destroyed by wind, ten percent of the time.

Well, obviously nobody would intentionally build a roof that would only stand up to the normal weight of snow or winds only 90% of the time.

However, what your statement brought to mind is how people have always routinely built (and rebuilt) homes in parts of the country where tornadoes and hurricanes are historically known to be risks. A calculated risk that doesn't change where they want to live, work & play.

Like Old Fuff, I wouldn't carry one of my J-frames (or LCP) into a known or reasonably suspected high threat environment as my sole weapon.

Also, one of the things that probably needs repeated emphasis is the increased difficulty of shooting the little 5-shot revolvers, even for accomplished shooters of "full-size" DA revolvers. The very attributes that make the diminutive snubs so attractive and useful also makes them harder to shoot.

Considering that a lot of folks nowadays learn their foundation handgunning skills on pistols, the art of mastering a long and heavy DA trigger pull to achieve consistent accuracy doesn't seem as prevalent as it used to be when revolvers were the common handgun of the day.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by fastbolt: Also, one of the things that probably needs repeated emphasis is the increased difficulty of shooting the little 5-shot revolvers, even for accomplished shooters of "full-size" DA revolvers. The very attributes that make the diminutive snubs so attractive and useful also make them harder to shoot.

Absolutely. For one thing, the trigger of a J-Frame leaves a lot to be desired, particularly for me with my arthritis and tendonitis.

I haven't fired one, but the Ruger LCR seems a lot better to me in that regard.

And then there are what they try to pass of as the sights on the pocket models. The sights on my 3 inch Model 60 are much better.

Ed Lovette speaks of the advantages of the K-10 and the D-Frame over the J-Frame in terms of grip, sights, and trigger, as well as capacity.
Two of them would surely solve the capacity issue.

But shooting fifty rounds in an Airweight .38 Special leaves me wanting to soak my hand in warm water afterward.

The solution for me last year was the Ruger SR 9c. I can shoot it a whole lot better than the J-Frame. With a good grip, good sights, and a reasonable trigger, it fits the bill for me.

For more reliability, I could add a revolver. I have been thinking about Colt D-Frames, but not very seriously.

Ed laments the demise of the D Frame, saying that Colt quit making them just when they got it right with the Magnum Carry. Those bring very high prices now.

Colt's move was a business decision. It is too bad, in my option, that that move left us with only five shot snubby revolvers.

But then the issue was how to meet the needs of the marketplace, which has shifted significantly to semi autos.

I do not like the little ones with small grips, poor sights, six shot capacity, and poor triggers.

Give me a still better trigger, a slide that is easy to operate, and perhaps a lower bore axis, and I'll be even happier. Looks Like Remington may have unlocked the secret.

But as many have pointed out, a revolver in the jacket pocket could prove invaluable. Just not for primary carry, as I see it.

 

[Green Lantern]

I haven't fired one, but the Ruger LCR seems a lot better to me in that regard.

I've limited trigger time on a J-Frame, but lots of it on an LCR. The trigger on the LCR is great, IMO. Also rather mild recoil (even with the tiny boot grips).

I'm pretty well limited to pocket carry (at work), though I don't spend a lot of time lamenting that fact. And I could manage something a little bigger like a G26, but the reliability factor of the revolver makes it mighty hard to swap out.

One of the best replies, IMO:

It is enough until it isn't.

Some gun fights have more than 5~6 rounds fired.

You never know which one you may find yourself in. It is as simple as that.

Hopefully life will continue apace, and pocket lint will be "enough." Otherwise, for now at least, I takes my chances with my faithful Ruger.

As they taught us at Front Sight ... "Any gun will do so long as YOU will do."

Cute statement, but it's mostly BS

Well, to a point. Situational awareness and willingness to fight will only carry you so far if you're badly out-gunned. I think it's more saying that fancy "hardware" (guns) will not make up for lacking "software" (mindset & attitude).

 

[Kleanbore]

More on Risk Management

Some time back in this thread, one of the posters asked for a very simple explanation of some of the concepts we have been discussing. I promised to sleep on it. I apologize for the delay.

I have been using terms such as "conditional probability" to explain the analysis. But if one is not rather conversant in statistical theory, that is likely not very helpful. Let me try a different approach.

Perhaps if we stop trying to think about crime and handguns we can explain the appropriate analysis process better.

For the sake of illustration, suppose that you have two barns on your property. Their construction is largely identical, and the combustible contents are usually about the same. Therefore, what it would take to extinguish a fire would be abut the same for each barn.

Also the same: the locations are such that in each case, the water with which to fight a fire would have to be kept in a tank on site.

The livestock kept in each of the barns at night are usually comparable.

Thus, the means for mitigating the risk of catastrophic loss by fire are probably going to be roughly the same, and the consequences of a loss, should the risk occur, the same.

Let us now introduce some differences. Let’s say that the first barn is located in a low lying area and that it is not surrounded by flammable vegetation. The second barn is on very high exposed ground, and it is surrounded by grass used for the production of hay. Thus, the likelihood that the first barn would be set on fire by lightning that could not reliably be arrested is much lower than in the cause of the second barn.

But since what it would take to save the barn and its contents would be the same for each, one would not reasonably decide to store less water at one location than at the other just because the likelihood of occurrence is thought to be different.

The same thing applies whether one expects it to be more likely to have to defend against an attacker or one thinks it less likely. What would be required in the event, should it occur, may not differ at all, depending, of course, on what actually transpires.

When someone pointed that out to me in one of these discussions some months ago, I realized the truth in what was said by strambo in Post #48:

The odds of being in a violent situation are completely divorced from the severity of a violent situation. Should you find yourself in a violent confrontation, that the odds of it happening were 1/1 million, now have no bearing whatsoever on the best tool with which to handle it.

I hope this proves helpful.