Some pistols are more easier to fight with than others.
Situational & user context still required.
I've seen not-so-skilled folks who were the proud owners of one or another of the gee-whiz, hi-tech wonder pistols not be able to use them any better than the bone-stock, everyday common pistols they claim are inferior. The
felt they were doing better when using them, but their confidence was a bit misplaced when it came down to results. This can be addressed with training & recurrent practice, of course, as long as the owner/user recognizes that perceived
comfort & confidence don't replace actual ease of manipulation, handling & proper usage under less-than-ideal conditions.
Then again, I've seen above average skilled shooters run anything they picked up and perform as well as anyone could hope for in whatever demanding set of circumstances they were given.
Any of us could point out any range of handguns and identify them as unsuitable for serious dedicated defensive application, justifying our choices due to our own likes, dislikes & experiences. Those are personal choices which require no outside justification or validation, but ought not to be used to judge the choices of others.
Obviously, most of us who have carried, used and trained with various firearms professionally (as both students and teachers) would probably agree upon a general area of common ground.
For example, probably not a lot of trainers are routinely recommending the use of .22's, .25's or even .32's for serious application as secondary/back-up weapons, although even the still-popular "minimum" calibers of .380 ACP & .38 S&W Spl can create some interesting discussions and potential for disagreement, as this thread topic has demonstrated.
The use of even the best quality .380's & .38's as lawful concealed weapons
routinely carried as primary weapons is often a bit contentious. Many folks find a more acceptable level of comfort in justifying their use only as secondary & back-up weapons, and that's fine.
It arguably doesn't lessen the real world importance of being able to quickly, properly & effectively use that little
"not a real fighting handgun" .38 or .380 when the situation may suddenly make that gun your
now-primary fighting handgun.
The little 5-shot snubs have long filled this secondary role, but then, as much as some folks may dislike it, they've also continued to serve many folks ... even skilled, experienced and knowledgeable folks ... as off-duty, retirement & CCW-type weapons when anticipated situations and circumstances may not allow (or compel) someone to carry a "full-sized fighting handgun".
In other words, they still have a valuable place within the grater scheme of things, for whatever reason(s) someone may feel it prudent to include them in their equipment selection.
Lives have been saved by their presence and effective usage when full-size duty weapons have been rendered inoperative, inaccessible or simply not available for continued use. Lives have also been saved by their usage as "primary" off-duty weapons.
Sure, lives have also been lost when they were being used as "primary" weapons, but the same can be said when full-size handguns have been involved.
Risk assessment. Informed decision-making when selecting a handgun to employ as a dedicated defensive weapon.
FWIW, if the diminutive J-frame weren't still considered an effective option for some users, so many LE agencies wouldn't still be both approving personal purchase of them and even issuing them. Consider why Speer developed their first
short-barrel load, the 135gr GDHP +P, at the request of NYPD for approved .38 Spl snubs.
While this thread topic has been more enjoyable (and polite) than others that have been created to discuss it, it's not like we're going to arrive at a definitive one-size-fits-all answer that pleases everyone, or is even "right" for everyone, for all circumstances.
That's why I try to shy away from shilling specific guns/caliber/ammunition choices for the folks with whom I still work in classroom & range settings. I may help guide them in understanding and prioritizing what
they might ought to consider when making choices for
their needs ... but I'm much more interested in how well
they can learn to safely & effectively employ
their choices.