Taurus Judge ~ Home Defender

[bamaranger]

The fascination with the entire Judge family is beyond me. Too big to conceal, small payload and limited effectiveness with shot, 1 round down from a large frame revolver. All that, and yet the shop owners in my area say they sell them as fast as the things come in.

Now we have an even bigger, clunkier version, the Home Defender. Probably sell like hotcakes to the same folks who bought the other versions.

[Recycled bullet]

I want a Taurus judge for carpenter bees.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by bamaranger

The fascination with the entire Judge family is beyond me. Too big to conceal, small payload and limited effectiveness with shot, 1 round down from a large frame revolver. All that, and yet the shop owners in my area say they sell them as fast as the things come into the shop.

Now we have an even bigger, clunkier version, the Home Defender. Probably sell like hotcakes to the same folks who bought the other versions.

The smallest Judges, the Public Defenders, are not so big they cannot be concealed. If you can carry a 4" .357, you'll carry a Judge PD just fine. The only weakness I see is the lack of a .45 Colt only cylinder so people have the option of improved shooting with .45 with the option of seapping the cylinder for .410 and also .45 Colt, but with reduced velocity and accuracy.

Even with the current Judges I don't have trouble shooting man size targets out to 15 yards with the .45 and the .410 holds far more shot than .45 shotshells do.

[veprdude]

I own a S&W Governor, roughly the same thing, minus the long barrel- but everything still applies. I was excited buying it since it could shoot shotgun loads. That is, until I found out that even .410 slug loads have less muzzle energy than 45 LC loads. What about buckshot loads? Even worse. Best case scenario for hot loads is a 45 LC, which at that point you may as well just get something in 45 LC.

As I've said, I have a S&W variant and the conclusion is that it really does nothing well.

On a side note, it might be worthwhile on a post-apocalyptic scenario where you only seem to find .410 and 45 LC ammo.

[TruthTellers]

Originally Posted by veprdude

I own a S&W Governor, roughly the same thing, minus the long barrel- but everything still applies. I was excited buying it since it could shoot shotgun loads. That is, until I found out that even .410 slug loads have less muzzle energy than 45 LC loads. What about buckshot loads? Even worse. Best case scenario for hot loads is a 45 LC, which at that point you may as well just get something in 45 LC.

As I've said, I have a S&W variant and the conclusion is that it really does nothing well.

On a side note, it might be worthwhile on a post-apocalyptic scenario where you only seem to find .410 and 45 LC ammo.

And what other double action .45 Colt revolvers that are roughly the size of an L frame and have a 5 round cylinder are available besides the rare and questionable quality Charter Arms?

[Prof Young]

Gun Owners:

I used to have a Public Defender as my HD gun. Then, as I learned more about HD and considered the circumstances under which, realistically, someone might invade my home, it occurred to me that I may not want to kill the person who has invaded. Given where I live, a herd of gang bangers won't be breaking into my house anytime soon. Most likely it would be an individual with a drug problem looking for stuff easy to steal. Most likely, if force became necessary, I'd just want to wound the guy. So I switched from the Public Defender to a 9mm with a laser on it. Now a non-body mass shot may be more doable. And with a large capacity magazine, if the gang does show up. I can take care of all of them.

Life is good.
Prof Young

[jetinteriorguy]

I find it interesting that if you sawed off the barrel of a single shot shotgun and the stock in a .410 gauge you’d be in deep doo doo with the ATF but a revolver shooting the same ammunition in an even shorter more concealable form capable of shooting more rounds is all hunky dory.

[bamaranger]

Prof
I had a lengthy post worked up but condensed it to this. I am not the morals police and not a lawyer, but I'm going to respectfully suggest you reconsider your thoughts on SD/HD. I am not familiar with IL law on the use of deadly force or shooting a home intruder. I suggest you learn the particulars of your state law immediately concerning the use of deadly force and then search out and attend some sort of shoot/don't shoot class.

Shooting to wound is not taught by anyone, anywhere and the doorway to all sorts of trouble. I would think especially in IL.

[44 AMP]

"shooting to wound" is a hugely flawed concept. First, it may not stop an attack. Second, People can, and have died from what was not an obviously fatal wound.

And, third, "shooting to wound" indicates you are not convinced that deadly force is necessary, and legally, if deadly force is not necessary, you should not shoot.

[BourbonCowboy]

I really don't see the utility in a 13" barrel on a Judge, but...

My Judge is my nightstand gun. I've shot it a lot, and I know it's limitations. Nevertheless, I sleep comfortably at night with it by my bed. I've often wondered if the multitude of Judge naysayers have ever owned one. I submit that if someone entered my bedroom at night (and I was awake), I would be able to defend my life and my wife's with five rounds from the Judge - or at least be able to get to a secondary gun (or the Judge speedloaders) if necessary.

My order of shot:
#1 - buckshot
#2 - Winchester PDX Defender
#3 - Winchester PDX Defender
#4 - .45 Colt
#5 - .45 Colt

And I stake my life on this...every night.

[44 AMP]

I will freely admit to not owning a Judge, and am not likely to, unless someone gives me one as a gift.

That being said, I have decades of experience with over a dozen .45 caliber revolvers and pistols including .410 pistols.

I have handled the Judge, do like the grips, they put me in mind of my old Super Rat dirt bike.

SO, I think I'm entitled to me opinions. I do see your point though, as I have several handguns that are roundly criticized and condemned by people who have never even held or shot one, let alone owned one.

I don't recall anyone saying the Judge wouldn't work adequately for self defense, only that there are better (and in my opinion, MUCH better) choices.

I don't see anyone advocating a 5 shot revolver, other than the Judge, for home defense. The 5 shot S&W Chief Special class guns are touted for their small size and usefulness as concealed carry pistols, not as ideal home defense weapons.

The .45 Colt has been reliably putting down men and horses since 1873. But the Judge is not pushed as a good choice because it shoots the .45 Colt, the hype is on the fact that it can shoot .410 shotgun shells.

I believe people are being mislead by the advertising to believe that the .410 is somehow a superior defense round, and I don't think it is.

I think there are a great many better choices for a home defense firearm, have several, so the Judge isn't on my wish list.

If you're happy with it, by all means keep it, and practice with it so it will be effective at need.

As for a 13" barrel revolver for a nightstand gun, my drawers simply aren't big enough for that.

[Mike Irwin]

How dare you have an opinion that's not 1 billion percent thumbs up Koolade quafing deification, AMP?

[Sarge]

I had to look the thing up. For that size and MSRP you could get a Shockwave type shotgun, made or modded for mini-shells, and bring more mojo to your Castle's defense. believe you can get them in 20 gauge if the 12 don't suit you.

[Forte S+W]

Originally Posted by jetinteriorguy

I find it interesting that if you sawed off the barrel of a single shot shotgun and the stock in a .410 gauge you’d be in deep doo doo with the ATF but a revolver shooting the same ammunition in an even shorter more concealable form capable of shooting more rounds is all hunky dory.

It's because it doesn't fit the ATF's description of a Shotgun, ergo it cannot be classified as such, same as the Mossberg 590 Shockwave or Remington TAC-14.

Firearms manufacturers have become pretty adept when it comes to exploiting loopholes in the ATF's overly specific descriptions of various firearms to bring firearms to market which are for all intents and purposes Short-Barrel Shotguns/Rifles, but because they have a couple little differences from the ATF's description of such things, they cannot be classified as such. Hence why we have so many AR "Pistols" which are just SBR's without a stock and Pump-Action "Firearms" which are just Short-Barrel Shotguns with bird's head pistol grips.

Fortunately, because such firearms have inherent limitations in application which effectively render them special purpose firearms, they aren't often used in crimes, and the ATF has bigger fish to fry, so they don't bother attempting to reclassifying them.

[44 AMP]

Originally Posted by jetinteriorguy
I find it interesting that if you sawed off the barrel of a single shot shotgun and the stock in a .410 gauge you’d be in deep doo doo with the ATF but a revolver shooting the same ammunition in an even shorter more concealable form capable of shooting more rounds is all hunky dory.

The revolver is hunky dory because it is RIFLED. The exact same handgun would be an NFA item if it were smoothbore.

By the definition in the law, shotguns are smooth bore (not rifled) no matter what ammo is fired through them, it is the physical characteristics of the firearm that put it into specific classification groups for legal purposes.

Put a buttstock on that .410 revolver and you're back in deep doo doo, (unless it meets federal length requirements for a rifle)

The specific wording of the laws matters. The wording may no seem sensible, and often isn't (to us, today) but it still matters, and in fact is the only things that does matter.

[5whiskey]

I really don't see the utility in a 13" barrel on a Judge, but...

My Judge is my nightstand gun. I've shot it a lot, and I know it's limitations. Nevertheless, I sleep comfortably at night with it by my bed. I've often wondered if the multitude of Judge naysayers have ever owned one. I submit that if someone entered my bedroom at night (and I was awake), I would be able to defend my life and my wife's with five rounds from the Judge - or at least be able to get to a secondary gun (or the Judge speedloaders) if necessary.

My order of shot:
#1 - buckshot
#2 - Winchester PDX Defender
#3 - Winchester PDX Defender
#4 - .45 Colt
#5 - .45 Colt

And I stake my life on this...every night.

While I still think the Judge is pretty much a gimmick, I completely cede that it would make hits more likely from 10 yards (max) in the bedroom when the boogeyman breaks in your door and you're still half asleep.

The next segment of that equation is what happens when the "boogeyman" you shot when your were half asleep is your adult stepson barging in half drunk because he had a fight with your DIL.

[Forte S+W]

Well, seeing as the Judge is just a gimmick and .410 is so extremely ineffective regardless of shot size, the drunken stepson has at worst merely been sobered up by being shot by the Judge.

[5whiskey]

Well, seeing as the Judge is just a gimmick and .410 is so extremely ineffective regardless of shot size, the drunken stepson has at worst merely been sobered up by being shot by the Judge.

There's a stark difference between something that is a compromise between two wildly varying options (capable of using both .410 shell and .45 colt... those are options vary pretty wildly), and something that is non-lethal. I don't think anyone here has insisted that the Judge is non-lethal, or less than lethal, or even ineffective at incapacitating targets within a certain range. Just that that there are many tradeoffs in that compromise, and that there are likely more viable dedicated SD/HD options.

And again, I will say that it probably makes at least ONE hit on target more likely. At close ranges, that round may be an affective hit. At longer ranges, then we're discussing unintended hits on background targets.

[Mannlicher]

bearing in mind that my thoughts are just my humble opinion, the Judge concept is flawed. It's not that handy a revolver, being heavy and ungainly. The .410 is not much of a SD load, and with .45 Colt, the Judge seems to lack in the accuracy department.
There are better choices out there.

[Forte S+W]

Originally Posted by 5whiskey

I don't think anyone here has insisted that the Judge is non-lethal, or less than lethal, or even ineffective at incapacitating targets within a certain range.

As a matter of fact, someone did...

Originally Posted by stinkeypete

I would not shoot a PHEASANT with proper .410 shotgun (3" shell), let alone a raccoon.

Sorry, I stand by my statement- I would not hunt pheasant with a .410 or shoot a raccoon with it. The raccoon would not be killed.

According to him, not even a full-size .410 Shotgun can kill a Raccoon, which would obviously render it non-lethal to a man, especially out of a Judge.

[MarkCO]

TO my way of thinking, Taurus took a poor idea (the Judge) and made it worse.

Agree. I've shot them in various venues at times. If snakes and other small vermin are an issue and you need portability, then it makes a viable alternative to a shotgun. I'll just load some shotshells in my .357 Mag or .41 Mag and be better off all around.

There are some SD shootings that have occurred with the .410 buckshot and the performance was poor, less than the mouse gun handgun calibers, in general.

[44 AMP]

There are some SD shootings that have occurred with the .410 buckshot and the performance was poor, less than the mouse gun handgun calibers, in general.

It would be interesting to see that information, the good and the bad widely available, and particularly whether or not the round(s) were fired from a Judge or an actual shotgun.

There are quite a few factors important to this discussion, but they are twisted around each other (as is often the case), which can lead to confusion and misunderstandings.

One basic question is, "Is the .410 suitable for home defense?" (against humans)

This question hinges on how you define "suitable", and I define it as "most likely to do the desired job under normally envisioned conditions."
Not, "how well does it do that job", Not "this or that does the job better" those are other separate questions. Adequate is suitable, in my book. Better performing rounds would be more suitable, provided some additional factor(s) don't negate that.

One of the factors always considered is, does the round have sufficient power to do the job. Despite some people's die hard convictions the .410 is inadequate, reality indicates otherwise. However, enough to do the job and enough to do the job WELL are different matters, too.

So, what does one actually get from the .410, and specifically, from the various Judge guns??

Various .410 buckshot loads fired from a 24" shotgun gave velocities in the mid 1300fps range or a bit higher. This is consistent with larger bore shotguns, and the fact that it is the upper velocity range consistent with good patterning. Driving shot faster generally results in much worse patterns.

Now, figure how much less velocity you will have fired from a 6", or 3" revolver barrel. OR, in the case of the Home Defender, a 13" revolver barrel.

Clearly one would expect the highest velocity from the longest barrel, but, in this case, IS that difference in velocity enough to overcome the handling characteristics of the Home Defender model in use for home defense??

Personal judgement call, for me, its not worth it.

Winchester has a 3" 1/4oz slug load (call it 110gr for ease of comparison) which they advertise as doing 1800fps. One tester I read clocked it from a 24" Mossberg and found it actually faster than advertised, getting 1955fps from their gun. This is nothing to sneeze at, but not what you're going to get from that round fired from a handgun.

Another point is the pattern size & spread. At across the room distances, the pattern may only be the size of the palm of your hand, or even less. And just as one can miss with a single bullet, one can also miss with a pattern that size (especially if its only 3 balls of buckshot). The idea that because it is a shotgun one doesn't need to aim is widely believed by the ignorant and under informed public, but its not true, and neve has been true. You DO need to aim, or you can't count on the results.

These factors, along with others are why I feel that advertising the .410 as a good defensive round are misleading marketing hype.

[Forte S+W]

It's not too hard to believe, honestly...

After all, when it comes to Federal Premium .410 Handgun 000 Buckshot — one of the best defensive loads for the Taurus Judge — each pellet weighs 70grs and travels at a velocity of 850fps out of a standard 3" Barrel Judge, which is going to give you similar performance to .32 ACP.

Granted, it's like getting shot 4-5 times with .32 ACP per trigger pull, but still, that's like what? 150ft-lbs of energy per pellet?

It's on the high-end of what folks typically consider Mouse Gun performance, but it checks out with claims that terminal performance is similar.

So it stands to reason that if someone used a Judge to defend themselves that was loaded with .410 ammo that wasn't designed with short barrels in mind, then it's most likely exiting the muzzle at even lower velocity, and therefore striking with less energy, thus begetting performance beneath that of .32 ACP.

As someone who actually uses the Judge for Home Defense, I've conducted thorough research on the subject, so I'm abundantly aware of its capabilities. Ammo selection is paramount because obviously ordinary .410 ammo is designed to be fired from shotguns with barrels no shorter than 18", ergo such ammo performs poorly out of a 3" barrel with lots of unburnt powder, low velocity, and poor performance. Sure, it will still wound someone quite badly as close range, likely even kill them unless they seek immediate medical attention, but it's sketchy. Too many variables to rely upon.
However, the average person — regardless of whether they own one or not, like it or hate it — doesn't know this, so they base their expectations on either the best or the worst ammo choice available. The best is an absolute fight-stopper, the worst...I dunno, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that it performs similarly to .25 ACP.

[stinkeypete]

I love you guys, but...

As for shooting pheasants, the per pellet energy is the same for all the pellets in the swarm, true. You need about 3 pellets to bring down a bird. True.

But I use 1 (16/16) to 1.25 (20/16) ounces and still have cripples the dog brings back.

in .410, you sort of top out at 11/16 ounce for a 3" magnum shell and 9/16 for 2 1/2" shells.

Basically, my 20 gauge has twice the payload and I still get cripples. True, the expert shooter can do it.

It might say 110 g 1800 fps on the box, but out of a 13" barrel? Hmmm....
About $9.00 for 5 shells. .45 is cheaper.

I used to have the T/C Contender, and I think all of us played with the rifled .410 barrel at some time. I think we all traded them after a box or two of shells, too.

The most fortunate thing about these Taurus .45/.410 pistols is the consumer is very unlikely to even need to use them. Perhaps it's that Taurus can make money selling them.

Now, if you said you had a pump .410 with Tungsten loads in it, there would be a discussion.

Like you guys, I like firearms. But I would rather have a Hi-Point than a Judge. (and I have owned hi-points)

[Forte S+W]

Pheasants aren't humans. Birdshot is not Buckshot. As previously stated, ammo selection is paramount. A proper 000 buckshot load is absolutely devastating within realistic home defense distances, regardless of whether it is delivered by a Shotgun or a Revolver.

You might be able to get away with #4 Turkey Shot with a 12 Gauge Shotgun, but not a .410 Revolver, and regardless you really shouldn't be using birdshot against humans.

There's nothing wrong with Hi-Points, they work just fine, but I'm going to guess that you wouldn't use a Hi-Point for Pheasant Hunting either, would you? Different tools for different purposes.