With its stubby 1 7⁄8-inch barrel, compact five-shot cylinder and rounded butt, this little pocket pistol tips the scales right around 20 ounces. Even so, I doubt the tens of thousands of law enforcement officers and civilians who have packed this diminutive but rugged revolver would call it cute. Certainly not Jack Webb, who, as Sergeant Joe Friday, flashed his Chiefs Special with authority on the old “Dragnet” television series. Or Gene Hackman, as Detective Jimmy “Popeye” Doyle, who swapped his Colt Detective Special in “The French Connection” for a Model 36 in the “French Connection II” sequel. But it isn’t just Hollywood that has been attracted to the Model 36—in real life this little revolver is a lawman’s handgun, and rightfully so, for it was named by a room full of police chiefs.

In 1948, Smith & Wesson President C.R. Hellstrom realized there was a need for a snub-nosed revolver, similar in size to the company’s Terrier, but revamped to handle the more powerful .38 Spl. The Terrier was built on a .32-caliber frame but was chambered for the .38 S&W cartridge—a short-range, relatively anemic round that originated with Smith & Wesson’s top-breaks in 1877. The new revolver Hellstrom envisioned would have to retain the Terrier’s compactness, but be able to handle the more popular .38 Spl., a favorite with lawmen of that era. In fact, it was the rival Colt Detective Special, specifically in its .38 Spl. chambering, that was the impetus for Hellstrom’s new revolver.

Smith & Wesson’s engineers went to work, using the Terrier as a jumping-off point. They beefed up the gun by lengthening and strengthening the cylinder and frame (thus making it a true .38 size), while retaining the cylinder’s five-shot capacity. In addition, the Terrier’s flat mainspring was replaced with a sturdier coil spring. As the Terrier was built on the slightly smaller I-frame, this newer revolver became the first of the J-frame series and carried its own set of serial numbers. But, as part of a very clever marketing plan, the gun was not given a name designation.

Having created the new revolver to appeal to off-duty policemen and plainclothes detectives, it was decided to let the decision makers among these potential purchasers select a name. The first gun, completed on Oct. 24, 1950, was unveiled that same month at the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference in Colorado Springs, CO. There, Smith & Wesson invited the assembled chiefs of police to suggest a name for the new revolver. Perhaps inspired by the already well-established Colt Detective Special, the overriding choice from the attendees was to call it the Chiefs Special.

The earliest guns were blued with a case-hardened hammer and trigger, or nickeled, and came with rounded, two-piece, checkered walnut grips. The front sight was a fixed, no-snag serrated ramp that ran the length of the barrel, while the rear sight was simply a groove milled into the topstrap. After all, this was a close-range pistol meant for fast shooting. Nonetheless, due to numerous requests, by the end of the first year the factory was also producing a version with a 3-inch barrel.

For anyone with small to medium-sized hands, the Chiefs Special was easy to grasp, point and shoot. However, there were obviously enough complaints from those with beefier hands, as a slightly less concealable square-butt version was introduced in 1952, starting with serial number 21,342.

In 1957, Smith & Wesson switched to a numerical system of identification, and the Chiefs Special became the Model 36, starting with serial number 125,000. It was also around this time that Vice President Richard M. Nixon was presented with an engraved Chiefs Special by the NRA.

Numerous minor external and internal changes have been made to the Chiefs Special over the years, including eliminating the front trigger guard screw in 1953 and changing the cylinder-unlocking thumb piece from a flat to a more contoured style in 1966. Perhaps the most dramatic change occurred in 1965, when a stainless steel version of the Model 36 was introduced, becoming the world’s first stainless revolver. To differentiate it, Smith & Wesson called the stainless gun the Model 60.

Another notable variation of the Model 36 was a heavy-barreled, 3-inch version in 1967. And beginning in 1955, there were limited runs of 2- and 3-inch-barreled guns with adjustable target sights. (To make things confusing, these rarities—of which approximately 1,740 were produced—were listed as the Model 50 from 1965 through 1975.) Other versions include the Chiefs Special Airweight with an aluminum-alloy cylinder and frame (do not shoot these without having them factory-checked for safety beforehand), and the highly popular stainless steel Ladysmith. Still other offshoots of the basic Model 36 are the shrouded-hammer Model 49 Bodyguard and the hammerless Model 40 Centennial, with its famous grip safety.

Years ago I purchased a blued Model 36 for my wife. It easily fit her hand, and after some extended time at the range shooting Glaser self-defense loads and standard factory ammo (+P ammo should be avoided with these snubbies), she became uncannily proficient with it. In the meantime, I had fallen under the spell of that “cute little gun.” So I went out and bought a Model 60 for myself. It would make an excellent “bathrobe gun” I rationalized, something unobtrusive to slip into my pocket while walking to the curb to pick up the morning paper.

The Model 60 and its variations have remained in the Smith & Wesson line, and although the original Model 36 was discontinued in 1999, it was brought back in 2008 as part of the company’s Classics Series. It was a fitting return for a snub-nosed .38 that won the praise of law enforcement veterans from its very first day on the job.

But, perhaps none bore so noble a moniker as the Highway Patrolman. While the words Highway Patrolman may cause some to ease up on the gas and check the rearview mirror, I immediately think of a syndicated television series that ran from 1955 to 1959. 

The Smith & Wesson Highway Patrolman revolver appeared on April 15, 1954, a year before the first episode of “Highway Patrol” aired. It can’t be denied the TV show’s popularity had a positive effect on sales of Smith & Wesson’s newest N frame. But the Highway Patrolman didn’t need additional publicity to win over the law enforcement agencies ordering it. They had been attracted to the big double action because of its .357 Mag. chambering, the cartridge for which it was designed. In fact, the cartridge indirectly inspired this no-frills double action. 

The genesis of the Highway Patrolman began in 1930, when, in response to requests for a cartridge with more power than the .38 Spl. used in most service revolvers, Smith & Wesson came out with a new load, the .38/.44 S&W Spl. It was the pre-war version of today’s +P cartridges. Chambered in what was essentially a Third Model Hand Ejector, the revolver was renamed it the 38/44 Heavy Duty. Thus, you had a beefed-up .38 Spl. revolver built on a .44-caliber frame that could handle the increased velocity and pressure of the new round. 

Countersunk chambers helped speed reloads, a critical consideration when law enforcement officers were issued revolvers.

But, there was a problem; the .38 Spl. High-Velocity cartridge, as the .38/.44 S&W Spl. was often called, could also be chambered in weaker, smaller-framed .38 Spl. revolvers, something that would have caused coronaries among today’s attorneys. Nonetheless, the new .38/.44 Heavy Duty proved popular. Meanwhile, noted gun writer and ballistician Phil Sharp had been experimenting with high-velocity .38 Spl. loads, and finally convinced Smith & Wesson’s Doug Wesson, who in turn convinced the research and development folks at Winchester to develop an even more-powerful cartridge than the .38 Spl. High Velocity. This time, however, to avoid any potential accidents, the case was lengthened 1⁄8 inch so it couldn’t be chambered in a .38 Spl. revolver. They named this new elongated cartridge the .357 Mag. 

The .357 Mag. became the most-powerful handgun cartridge in the world, a title it held until 1955, when the .44 Mag. claimed the crown. Although the .357 Mag. boasted more than three times the energy of the .38 Spl., no one knew how this new, harder-recoiling cartridge would be received. So, to cautiously showcase it, Smith & Wesson planned to chamber its new cartridge only in N-frame revolvers that were individually ordered and registered to the owners. Thus, the Registered Magnum was introduced in 1935. In essence, these were custom-built revolvers, with a variety of barrel lengths ranging from 3.5 to 8 3⁄8 inches with sights, grips, triggers and finishes to satisfy purchasers. 

Needless to say, the .357 Mag. cartridge and revolver were heartily embraced by law enforcement agencies. The overwhelming success of the .357 Mag. and the complexity of producing so many variants on a single N-frame model forced Smith & Wesson to standardize the Registered Magnum in 1939, dropping the registration elements, offering only optional barrel lengths and changing the name to simply the .357 Mag. Each gun was still impeccably hand-fitted and polished. 

Both the hammer and the trigger were casehardened on the Highway Patrolman, ensuring years of reliable use.

Unfortunately, all this hand fitting of parts and high-gloss finishing came with a price tag that put the .357 Mag. out of financial reach for many lawmen and their agencies. According to the classic book, “History of Smith & Wesson,” by Roy Jinks, “…Inquiries from such agencies as the Texas Highway Patrol were directed to the possibility of manufacturing an inexpensive .357 Magnum handgun for use by law enforcement. [Smith & Wesson president] C.R. Helstrom discussed the problem with his engineers and it was determined that a revolver could be manufactured that had the smoothness of Smith & Wesson lockwork, but would do away with the cosmetic beauty of the revolver.” 

Thus, in 1954, the aptly named Highway Patrolman was introduced. It can best be described as a field grade of the more cosmetically enhanced .357 Mag. Its finish was a military-style matte blue, and a sandblasted brush texture replaced the more costly serrated topstrap and barrel rib. Actually, these non-reflective features made the Highway Patrolman a more practical law enforcement handgun. Only two barrel lengths were offered—4 and 6 inches. Shooting was aided by a grooved trigger and serrated backstrap and surprisingly, Smith & Wesson retained the adjustable micrometer rear sight, pairing it with a Baughman Quick Draw front ramp. The only options were standard or oversized walnut grips. 

None of the cost-cutting external features detracted from the gun, for internally, it still possessed the fit and function of the more expensive .357 Mag. Consequently, the Highway Patrolman became one of the company’s most popular revolvers, and remained in the line until 1986. Some rare variations include approximately five brushed-nickel salesman’s samples and 25 nickeled guns with 5-inch barrels for the Florida Highway Patrol. 

Despite marketing the Highway Patrolman for duty use, the pistol contained a micrometer-style rear sight adjustable for windage and elevation.

A few years ago, inspired by its rugged good looks and reputation for reliability, I obtained a used Highway Patrolman with a 6-inch barrel. I don’t know how many rounds it digested before I got it, but with Winchester’s 158-grain Jacketed Soft Points, it prints 2.5-inch groups at 25 yards—not a tack-driver, but good for close-range work, its intended purpose. 

Ironically, throughout the “Highway Patrol” TV series, the star—Broderick Crawford—carried a Smith & Wesson Model 10 snubby. 

In 1957 the revolver was renamed the Model 28. But for many of us, it will always be the Highway Patrolman. And that, as Crawford would say, is “10-4” by me.

Full-Size Semi-Auto Pistol

Smith & Wesson M&P: I like the M&Ps in both full-sized and compact models. They’re simple, ergonomic and come with three different, easily changeable backstraps to customize fit to your hand.

In the full-sized versions, they’re excellent for training, but a tad big for concealment. They offer excellent ammunition capacity, and with the built-in rail for attaching a dedicated light, make great house or car guns.

These are extremely “soft” shooting pistols, and felt recoil across all three chamberings I’ve tried (9 mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP) is insignificant.

Compact Semi-Auto

Springfield Armory EMP, Colt Defender or Smith & Wesson M&P Compacts: There is more variety among these choices, as they are offered in different calibers and each feels different in the hand.

The biggest difference is found in their triggers. This includes trigger pull weight—the actual feel and movement of the trigger as it is pressed and the consistency of both. A trigger is not just a matter of personal preference, it can affect your shooting significantly.

External safeties also vary, so make sure you know where they are and can reach them well enough to disengage them easily. Each of these pistols will hold more ammo than small, five-shot revolvers, in some cases more than doubling the capacity. They will, however, be heavier and bulkier, so consider how and where you’re going to be carrying.

Medium-Sized Revolvers

Smith & Wesson K-frame revolvers, Ruger SP101 (non-snub nose) or GP100: These small- to medium-framed revolvers are available in configurations that allow firing .38 Spl. as well as .357 Mag.

They are great, all-around revolvers—which in themselves are great all-around handguns. Simple to fire and easy to load and unload, they are a good size for shooting multiple rounds at the range or in training as well as for carrying. They also make good car or house guns. In this medium-frame configuration, even .357 Mag. loads are comfortable to shoot.

Like most revolvers, they can be fitted with a wide variety of grips, allowing modification to fit a wide range of hand and finger sizes. Revolvers also generally don’t have sharp edges or rub points that can wear on inexperienced hands.

Snub-Nose Revolvers

Ruger LCR and Smith & Wesson J-frames: These are compact, five-shot revolvers and in their various models can handle anything from a .38 Spl. to .357 Mag. cartridges.

Ruger LCR

Light enough to always carry, they are also small enough to easily conceal. I carry mine whenever possible, and with an internal hammer, I can fire it through a pocket or purse. The downside is they hold only five rounds—so always have at least one full reload on you, and know how to use it.

These true pocket guns are a handful to shoot, but they aren’t unpleasant. I routinely fire 30 to 50 rounds in practice. That said, I wouldn’t want to fire many more in a single session.

Surprisingly, both asked me to help them choose a pistol for personal defense. First, I advised them to get professional training on not only how, but also when, to use their new guns. Then I recommended the same handgun for concealed carry that I have been recommending to first-time gun buyers for as long as they have been asking.

While the belt holster was certainly a favorite of shooters, the inside-the-waistband holster rides closer to the body to enhance concealability while minimizing printing. What's more, the IWB holster allowed for faster draw times with both exposed-hammer and hammerless revolvers and did not cause any snagging.

The revolver is about as idiot-proof as a repeating handgun can be, powerful enough with most cartridges to stop bad guys quickly and, at least in one configuration, small and light enough to appeal to anybody making the decision to carry concealed. I told these ladies to buy a Smith & Wesson J-frame revolver. Which one they should choose, I explained, would be determined by their personal needs and budgets.

There are plenty of options, but one of the first decisions any citizen who plans to carry a small-frame revolver is the most important—do you go with a double-action model having an exposed hammer or a double-action-only gun that has a fully enclosed, internal hammer?

When I was attending the IDPA Indoor Championship match at Smith & Wesson last winter, I spent some time checking out the company’s retail shop and looking over the options for a replacement for my Model 36. It didn’t take long to decide I wanted the M&P360 with an exposed hammer, a scandium-alloy frame and an XS Sight Systems 24/7 Big Dot Tritium front-sight bead. Or so I thought.

I usually prefer a J-frame with an external hammer. The M&P360 would be more than just an urban defensive handgun for me, as I would also carry the gun in the field while hunting, fishing and hiking. For this type of use, I really like the exposed hammer so I can access the single-action trigger pull for more precise shooting at extended distances. But, conventional wisdom has always been the hammerless double-action-only J-frame is a better carry gun because there is no exposed hammer to snag during the draw.

Although the author anticipated problems when drawing from a pocket holster, the fastest draw times were attained by shooters starting with their hand gripping the pistol. Surprisingly, the M&P360 proved faster than the M&P340—despite its exposed hammer.

I was at an impasse, especially since Smith & Wesson makes an M&P340 that has the same features as the M&P360, only with an internal hammer. This led to an idea for a test, so I ordered both guns. My plan was to run timed drills with both designs to see if the hammer would be an issue during presentation.

There was one thing I was sure of: No matter which gun I decided to keep for carry, it would have a set of Crimson Trace Lasergrips. That’s one piece of advice I have added to the recommendations I give to first-time gun buyers concerned about self-defense.

Having a laser sight on a small-frame revolver changes the shootability of the gun. The short sight radius of a 2-inch-barreled revolver doesn’t make it easy for anybody to shoot. But, a laser makes the gun essentially no more difficult to shoot—or at least to aim accurately—than any other revolver. Beyond that, a laser sight allows you to keep your eyes on the bad guy and lasers work in the dark, where you can’t see your sights.

Smith & Wesson offers the double-action-only M&P340 as a “CT” model, meaning the gun comes with Lasergrips installed. The M&P360 is not available from the factory with Lasergrips, so I added them after the gun arrived. Both guns were tested with.38 Spl. ammo, although they are chambered for .357 Mag.

I contacted Blackhawk and ordered left- and right-handed models of four common styles of carry holsters: belt-mounted, inside-the-waistband (IWB), pocket and ankle. Then I went looking for some volunteers to help with the test. I found them at the Nenameseck Sportsmen’s Club in Palmer, MA.

I have attended a couple of the club’s matches recently and made some new friends. Chris Klassanos, Eric Phinney, John Schrijn, Matthew Nash and Brian Chisholm are all excellent shooters with experience in competition. They agreed to help conduct the test.

Each shooter was instructed to draw and fire one double-action shot at an IDPA target placed at 7 yards. Only hits counted for time. We repeated this at least five times with each gun in each holster. Not everyone shot using every combination, but I made sure each shooter used both revolvers with the same holster. I requested each shooter wear a concealment garment, usually a vest, with the appropriate holsters, as they would on the street. The data was combined with the results I conducted on my home range, following the same parameters.

The exposed-hammer M&P360 actually averaged 0.12 second faster than the hammerless M&P340 when drawing from the Blackhawk belt holster, and nobody reported any problems related to the external hammer. The belt holster was, of course, everybody’s favorite design, and it’s one of the most-popular holster types for concealed carry. Nonetheless, it came in second for speed, with an average of 1.65 seconds required to draw and shoot either gun. However, most of the shooters started the test with this holster, so I suspect the slightly slower times were partly due to becoming more proficient as our experiment progressed.

It was a similar story with the IWB holster. The shooters had slightly faster times with the M&P360. Once again, no one reported any problems related to the exposed hammer, which was a surprise. The only issue a few shooters experienced was, with the gun being tucked so tight to their bodies, their shirts sometimes got in the way and they grabbed fabric with the gun. But, that happened with both revolvers. The shooters had faster average times with both guns when using the IWB holster compared to the belt holster, which came as another surprise. Sweeping the vest back and drawing from a holster is something they all do in every IDPA match, but I expected to see higher times with the IWB holster simply because the gun is not as easy to access due to its position. Given the times we recorded, I don’t see a tactical disadvantage to this holster.

The idea of this test was to see if an exposed hammer causes a problem during presentation, and I figured the pocket holster is where the issue would rear its ugly head. I was correct in my assessment.

We tested the guns in the pocket holster two ways: with the shooters’ hands hanging by their sides and with their strong-side hands inside the pocket gripping the gun. I also added a Galco pocket holster that one of the shooters used for his personal carry gun. There was no appreciable difference between the two brands of holster in terms of times.

Loose-fitting trousers with shallow pockets were instrumental in promoting a smooth draw when using a pocket holster. The M&P360's exposed hammer caused minimial snagging.

It was pretty amazing to see how fast you can draw from a holster in your front pants pocket when you start with your hand in the pocket and on the gun. The average time for all the shooters using this method with the M&P360 was .85 seconds from buzzer to shot. The fastest shooter averaged .66 seconds. Remember, only shots that hit the target counted. The average time when the shooters started with their hands outside of the pocket was 2.62 seconds—a big difference. Times for this part of the test were all over the place, depending on the gun and type of pants. The slowest was 4.32 seconds versus the fastest (mine) of 1.6 seconds.

I found the pocket holster shrouded the external hammer during part of the draw and kept it from snagging. The only consistent problem was with the deep front pockets on a popular brand of tactical pants worn by one of the shooters. In that situation, the holster and revolver sat very low, and the gun had to travel several inches inside the pocket after leaving the protection of the holster. More often than not, the M&P360’s hammer snagged on the pocket and delayed the draw. In most blue jeans and other brands of tactical pants, this was not a problem. The key is loose-fitting pants with shallow pockets. The hammerless M&P340, of course, had no issues with snagging when drawn from the pocket holster.

The average ankle holster draw time while wearing long pants and starting from a standing position came in at 2.54 seconds—not bad considering how difficult it is to get to the holster. I must note the ankle holster’s retention system did not play well with the hammerless gun, as it was designed for an exposed hammer. To make it fair, we removed the retention system so both guns had an even playing field. But, I would never carry a revolver in an ankle holster without retention, so the times are a bit skewed from what they would be on the street.

When the guns were drawn from the pocket without a holster, the hammer again became a problem. It snagged on the pocket fabric half the time. I think this would be an issue regardless of whether the gun was in a pants or a jacket pocket. But carrying a gun in your pocket without a holster isn’t a particularly good approach anyway, as the revolver will not stay correctly oriented for the draw. When you have to draw quickly, it will never be in the right place. During the test, getting the gun turned around and into action sometimes took a very long time.

So which of these revolvers will I keep for carry? The choice comes down to versatility. I’ll still pick the exposed-hammer M&P360 because of field use—I like the ability to choose a single-action trigger pull for the reasons stated earlier. But I’ll certainly avoid carrying it in a pocket holster.

The test proved an external hammer can—and does—snag on your clothing during the draw. Even once is too often if you are fighting for your life. Were I buying a revolver purely as a defensive handgun and not considering sporting use, I would go with the DAO M&P340.

While we run ballistic gelatin test results on handgun ammunition every Tuesday—and these generally show most factory ammunition can get the job done for self-defense—on Fat Tuesday we couldn’t help but remind readers of the case of aptly nicknamed mob informant Peter “Fat Pete” Chiodo.

In 1991, Chiodo, then a capo in the Lucchese crime family, was charged with violating the RICO Act. He chose to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence, which unsurprisingly upset his business associates. Acting on the orders of Vittorio “Vic” Amuso and Anthony “Gaspipe” Casso, two hitmen ambushed Chiodo at a gas station on Staten Island in May 1991.

Our confidential sources indicate that while no known photos exist of "Fat Pete" Chiodo's special transportation, it looked something like this.

Despite being shot 12 times in the torso with 9 mm and .38 Spl. ammunition, Chiodo survived, thanks in large part to his nearly 500-pound bulk. He was well enough to turn state’s evidence and testify against Amuso and Casso, helping secure their eventual convictions. He testified in several additional trials as well, though he had to be flown from a secure location in a special plane because of his weight. When asked why he became a government witness, Chiodo replied, “I was shot 12 times.” Chiodo remains in the witness protection program today.