Snub Relevance?

[Australian410hunter]

With my aging back I’m finding more and more a lighter gun is just about all I can comfortably carry day in and day out when concealing inside the waistband. One gun I am interested in is the Ruger LCP. I greatly appreciate the reliability of a snub nosed revolver but are these guns capable enough to serve as a primary weapon? I live in a low crime neighborhood.

Does anyone here carry a snub nose 5 shot as a primary weapon, not just as a backup gun?

I carried one as a work gun, for quite a while. As you will have noticed during your life, the number of times you have to produce a firearm, let alone the number of times you have to fire one, is REALLY a small amount, especially if you're not required to run towards the trouble, because of your job!
Having a firearm in .38 special (I prefer 125gn +P hollow point), with a good round selected, and 5 shots, is really more than adequate, unless you are expecting to be fighting WWIII! A stripper clip of another 6 should give you more confidence.
The stats tell you that a .380 semi-auto (with the right ammunition) is an adequate self defence firearm (look at the stats on one shot stops, and death/incapacity), and anything below that simply doesn't cut it, so anything above that is adequate. As you get older the lighter recoil, and size, becomes more appreciated, and may contribute to more accurate shooting (and you are less excitable, I think).
An aimed shot that hits is far better than numerous shots that miss.

 

[Australian410hunter]

1. Does low crime mean that you have only low intensity gun fights in your area? Are your criminals more vulnerable that high crime area criminals?
2. This has been discussed into the dirt. Snubs and LCPs (and similar guns) are basically one opponent guns.
3. J frames are carried by many as primary due to dress circumstances and/or accepting that they take the risk of a one opponent, harder to shoot gun. Not the low crime mantra which is silly. Is a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado a high crime area?
4. Many who carry those smaller guns don't practice with them. Have you shot the gun in an intensive FOF training session or in a competition such as IDPA or USPSA (never seen the latter - folks do try in the former). Try that and make your evaluation. Shooting paper at the range at 7 yards is fine but not much of a test.

So, I know plenty of experts who will go out with J frame or smaller pocket auto but are well aware of its limitations, not the low crime silliness, and train with them.

An area with a low crime rate is valid assessment consideration, when calculating risk. If you lived in some of the scenario's on violent TV shows, then nothing short of a rack full of GPMG's, and truckload of ammo would be considered "the minnimum'. In the real world carrying a massive firearm, and multiple back-ups, when going to the corner shop to get milk, or sitting in the kitchen having a coffee, may be overkill.
If you live in a place where 'gunfights' are something seen on the news, then address your risk, not someone else's.
And having said that, training/practice is always required, in any discipline, if you want to be good at it.

 

[trackskippy]

I respectfully disagree w using a glock as a concealed carry. I have sparred w several persons that went the glock route (I have 2 glocks, they are the perfect belt gun) and can demonstrate a glock is easily discharge by the assailant in a wrestling match before you have an opportunity to draw. Is a great gun in a specific type of holster. Not so much in conceiled carry. A single poke w a fingertip in the right place & a glock goes bang. Not so w a revolver.

Sounds like you've never really carried a Glock, especially one in a proper holster.

Maybe you can post up a video of you getting a Glock to "easily discharge" in a wrestling match. Id really like to see that.

I used to work in heavy construction and carried a 26 in a "soft" holster while doing so, and every day was basically a wrestling match of some sort. People, material, and equipment, etc. Never once had the gun discharge or feel uncomfortable carrying it.

I vet any holster I use, and soft or hard, have never been able to come close to "poking" a finger into the trigger guard and dropping the trigger with one I use. Not sure what holsters youre using, but if you can do that, then you need to buy better holsters. Even without one, unless youre really careless, it takes a bit of work to get that trigger to drop unintentionally.

No doubt. Until you get in a fight. An auto pistol assumes standoff distance. You generally dont have that in self defense. When you are in a scuffle (when you need it most) & it goes bang w the slide pushed against his (or your) body, it will surely fail. Hopefully the magazine stays in & he gives you an opportunity to clear the resulting jam. You will be hard pressed to prove self defense @ a distance greater then that, I think.

You get what you get in any situation, and you probably wont get to make the choice. A revolver has its own issues with up close fighting, so its not the perfect tool either. Just getting a hand on it and controlling the weapon at that distance basically takes it out of action.

Knowing what to do to deal with things with either is the important thing, not so much the gun.

And self defense is self defense, no matter the distance.

 

[Kleanbore]

Again, if you can't get the job done w 5 shots, you can't shoot.

Poppycock!

An auto pistol assumes standoff distance.

What is "standoff distance?.

When you are in a scuffle (when you need it most) ...You will be hard pressed to prove self defense @ a distance greater then that, I think.

Not if the evidence supports your claim.

 

[Kleanbore]

An area with a low crime rate is valid assessment consideration, when calculating risk.

It is a valid consideration when evaluating the likelihood of occurrence, but it is not relevant to the design of mitigation.

 

[webrx]

One gun I am interested in is the Ruger LCP. I greatly appreciate the reliability of a snub nosed revolver but are these guns capable enough to serve as a primary weapon?

OP's original question - the Ruger LCP is easy to carry and easy to forget it is on you. It should not aggravate your back.
As stated before, I carry one occasionally in a pocket holster as a church gun. I added a hogue handall grip, stainless steel guide rod and 13 lb spring to mine and it helps tame the recoil, but it is still a little snappy.

Snub - Depending on the time of year, and how heavy a coat I am wearing, I will sometimes carry a snub revolver in a pocket or a coat, and it would be my primary in this situation.

In general though, I mostly carry a bottom feeder, because it is faster for me to reload, and as much as I like revolvers, I honestly shoot my LC9S better.

Up until the peaceful protests of 2020, while I did have spare mag holders I used at the range, I didn't frequently carry one. I am changing that now and training myself to carry a spare on me, as well as the one in the truck. I am also considering a security 9 compact, or sig 365 to replace my LC9S.

Dave

 

[mavracer]

It is a valid consideration when evaluating the likelihood of occurrence, but it is not relevant to the design of mitigation.

Sure I guess I better start carrying a big double rifle to mitigate charging elephants in Kansas.
I mean if the odds of that kind of occourance aren't relevant.

 

[Kleanbore]

Sure I guess I better start carrying a big double rifle to mitigate charging elephants in Kansas.
I mean if the odds of that kind of occourance aren't relevant.

Funny. Quite obviously, the poster was speaking of a self-defense use of force encounter when he mentioned "crime rate".

 

[mavracer]

Note that the context is NOT extra rounds, but improved hit rate.

You can't speed up and not shoot more rounds in a given time frame.

 

[mavracer]

Funny. Quite obviously, the poster was speaking of a self-defense use of force encounter when he mentioned "crime rate".

Do you honestly believe that the odds of multiple attackers is 50/50 regardless of location?

 

[mavracer]

I have and have carried both 642's and Glock 26's. Carried them in the same places on my body, using the same type of holster for both. Once I figured out I could just as easily carry the 26 as I could the 642, it was a no-brainer as to what I was going to carry.

The size difference between them is basically nil. The 642 might be a bit thinner here and there, but the overall size is basically the same and they take up the same real estate on your body.

The big difference between them is how they shoot, how long you can shoot with them, and how fast you can reload them, should you need to.

The Glock has better sights and is just more shootable (and much more pleasant to shoot too, so you're more apt to practice with it) than the 642. It shoots like one of my 17's, and at about the same distances, so Im not limited to just "close range". Good hits at 25, or even 50 yards, is really not a big deal for the Glock.

It can also actually basically be a 17, with a simple mag change, and can go from 10 to 33 rounds as fast as you can swap mags. Even with its 10 round mag in the gun, its starting out with twice the capacity of the 642. Im really just not understanding why there is even a question as to which is the better choice here.

Better to have 8 or 9 left out of 10, than to need 6 and only have 5.

For myself it's the weight not the size so much.
Also just my opinion the G26 size is a tweener really too big/heavy for pocket and for belt carry I don't see the advantage of not going with a 19's length slide.

 

[Kleanbore]

Do you honestly believe that the odds of multiple attackers is 50/50 regardless of location?

The question of "multiple attackers" doesn't enter into my decision process at all.

But to answer your question, I see no reason why the odds of having two people, rather than one, jump from a car to attack me, vs only one, would be any different on my peaceful little street than on a street downtown, should an attack occur. It's just thatit is less likely that anything will happen.

In either case, the attackers are mobil, and it stands to reason that persons who do that kind of thing would prefer to work i pairs, or maybe in pairs with drivers, if they can.

That gives them an all-important extra pair of eyes, and it increases their odds of success against a victim who resists.

 

[mavracer]

But to answer your question, I see no reason why the odds of having two people, rather than one, jump from a car to attack me, vs only one, would be any different on my peaceful little street than on a street downtown, should an attack occur.

I'd actually argue that in that one very specific type of encounter it's more likely to be more. But is that the specific type of encounter most likely to happen?

 

[Kleanbore]

I'd actually argue that in that one very specific type of encounter it's more likely to be more.

Possibly.

But is that the specific type of encounter most likely to happen?

I try to be as prepared as I reasonably can be to defend myself against an attack by one or two, or perhaps three violent criminal actors.

They may jump from a car as I am walking, they may come around a gas pump, or they may come at me from two sides as I am entering or walking from my car in a parking lot.

They may approach across my yard as I am opening the door to the house to take in groceries.

None of those is likely to happen at all, but if I am attacked, those are likely possibilities.

I will strive to avoid the encounter, as I have in the past, but I may fail.

Wen I say "reasonably", I include my personal preference for a firearm I can shoot well and carry comfortably all day. That, of course, does impose some compromises.

 

[trackskippy]

For myself it's the weight not the size so much.
Also just my opinion the G26 size is a tweener really too big/heavy for pocket and for belt carry I don't see the advantage of not going with a 19's length slide.

I always saw the 19 as the "tweener", and never really got the point to them.

The 26 is small enough I can carry it in places I cant normally carry the 19, and the 17 is just as easy to carry as the 19, and just offers that little bit more. These days, I normally carry a 17, and use the 26 as a back up if I feel the need.


Personally, if I could only have one handgun, a Glock 26 would be it. Its one of the most versatile handguns out there when you get down to it. Dont let its smaller size fool you.

 

[Jack Flash]

From the way I've interpreted this thread.

Only a fool carries a revolver, and God forbid it's a 5 shot J frame. I can't help but wonder why so many police departments carried revolvers even after hi cap bottom feeders were available. I saw a Ocala cop carrying a S&W 686 about 6 years ago. He was far from a rooky, and I'm sure he's been gunned down by now because of his foolish judgment.

It seems this is the only acceptable way to leave ones house safely.

 

[Boarhunter]

^^^^^^
That one made me smile!

BOARHUNTER

 

[Sistema1927]

I smile when I see revolvers disparaged.

It means less competition for me in my attempts to build my collection, and tends to keep the prices down. (Even though that has not been the case during this recent panic.)

 

[GEM]

I don't know anyone with significant training that advocates spray and pray. How many of those discussing it as a weakness of semi guns have significant training or competition histories? The issue of police shooting what seems too many rounds is more complex than the civilian issue.

If you are untrained and don't aim, you will be an incompetent with 5 or 15.

 

[GEM]

Jack Flash, you are simply being ridiculous. As I have discussed repeatedly and told you that if you actually know the modern training world, a semi and an extra mag or two is the standard EDC for folks who actually know that they are talking about.

 

[DR505]

I always saw the 19 as the "tweener", and never really got the point to them.

The 26 is small enough I can carry it in places I cant normally carry the 19, and the 17 is just as easy to carry as the 19, and just offers that little bit more. These days, I normally carry a 17, and use the 26 as a back up if I feel the need.
Its one of the most versatile handguns out there when you get down to it. Dont let its smaller size fool you.

I agree, but will use my G27 rather than 26.

 

[mavracer]

try to be as prepared as I reasonably can be to defend myself against an attack by one or two, or perhaps three violent criminal actors.

So let me get this straight you question whether 5 is enough for 1 assailant yet think 8 might be enough for 3 and still refuse to admit you're dancing on the head of a pin?

 

[GEM]

This thread is circling the drain. We are getting too much noise and close to a shut down.

 

[Kleanbore]

So let me get this straight you question whether 5 is enough for 1 assailant

It may not be, but I have not said that.

The other day someone stopped an attacker on the twelfth shot.

...yet think 8 might be enough for 3

Yes, it might be--or not. I have accepted compromises

[QUOTE="mavracer, post: 11935296, member: 41371"...]and still refuse to admit you're dancing on the head of a pin?[/QUOTE]Whatever that is intended to mean....

 

[Old_Grouch]

From the way I've interpreted this thread.

Only a fool carries a revolver, and God forbid it's a 5 shot J frame. I can't help but wonder why so many police departments carried revolvers even after hi cap bottom feeders were available. I saw a Ocala cop carrying a S&W 686 about 6 years ago. He was far from a rooky, and I'm sure he's been gunned down by now because of his foolish judgment.

It seems this is the only acceptable way to leave ones house safely.

View attachment 999030

That's the way I interpret it as well.

Jack Flash, you are simply being ridiculous. As I have discussed repeatedly and told you that if you actually know the modern training world, a semi and an extra mag or two is the standard EDC for folks who actually know that they are talking about.

So anyone who doesn't carry that, or something similar, doesn't know what they're talking about. What an odd thing for someone to say.