My supremely viable SHTF weapon.

[JMcDonald]

Originally Posted by ArkansasHunter

The city I was born and raised in has a population of 23000 Of these 23000 how many are hunters ? How many own centerfire rifles and shotguns ?
How many own AR-15's, AK-47's and SKS rifles ?

If you came here the week before opening morning of Deer season you'll be shocked at how many folks Deer hunt.

Now say a SHFT situation were to occur. Are you going to go up against these several thosand folks with a 22 rim fire rifle ?

Above I mentioned Ar-15's and other assault type weapons. Did you know where I live AR-15's are selling like crazy here along with police/military shotguns ?

What I'm trying to convay is this isn't the only town in America. there's 1000 and 1000 more just like my town so I would rethink your idea of the perfect SHFT gun.
Which in your case is a 22 rim fire.

1st, of how many of this (IMO exaggerated) number of people do you think practice a decent amount? Hell, I bet half the ARs on THIS forum don't get used more than once a month, and of those that do I bet what you might describe as a disappointing number only shoot at paper from a stationary position from 30 yards away. Realistically, I bet VERY VERY few of them get more trigger time than I do, and even fewer of them get more quality trigger time at that.

Hell, here are some rules from my local range that would really inhibit the learning of "tactical" habits:

No rapid firing is allowed. Two-second rule is in effect (2 seconds between rounds) rifle calibers only... Only line of sight firing is permitted. (No drawing from the hip or holster).

, and I am sure that there are 1000 and 1000 more ranges just like this one that people must shoot at for "practice."
Do you think anyone who practices under those rules will have any useful developed habits other than shooting a paper target at a fixed distances with good lighting and hearing protection?

I practice things like:
-Starting facing away from the target, and upon some signal (like my watch alarm beeping or my GF making a signal) turning toward the target while crouching as low as possible, and shooting a 6" wide piece of wood 30 yards away.
-Shooting said target while standing or slowly strafing.
-Shooting while slowly backing up.
-Strafing or walking, and then performing one of the above manuevers.
-Shooting using simulated cover, or even shooting and backing away quickly to cover (with the idea of using supressing fire).
-Shooting in low-light conditions (only real light being the porch light or even moonlight).
-Having my GF call out which of two or three targets to shoot, which is then targeted and shot using the above techniques.
-Shooting with the stock folded (as I might have to do should I need to quickly pull the rifle out of my vehicle), as well as quickly unfolding the stock and shooting.
-Often these manuevers are done with time constraints or time goals, which allow us to practice under at least some degree of stress. Granted, we aren't getting shot at by enemies, or yelled at by drill instructors, but it is still better than calmly popping off shots at a range.

Also, she does the same things. Im sure some of you will laugh, but not only do we enjoy this, but for civilians I bet it makes us more tactically prepared than 95% of the people in this country, and I can't imagine any real soldier believing that being the most mentally and physically prepared as possible is less important than having a bigger gun.

2nd, do you really think any large number of these people buying these "tactical" weapons are buying them so they can go murder and rape and pillage the minute the balloon drops? I definately think not. Hell, most of them are probably more or less survivalists like us. Sure, some of them will be in the hands of nervous or somewhat crazy people who will shoot everyone they see out of fear, but, as stated above, it won't matter what weapons they have if they don't really know how to use them or how to stay alive while using them.

3rd, and this might be just my own opinion, but I think alot of these people, when the SHTF, will suffer from "big gun complex." Their big mean rifles will give them an undue sense of confidence, which will likely cost them their assets (from wasted ammo to lost / damaged property or necessities), their lives, or the lives of their loved ones. Im sure you've heard many sayings dealing with this topic that are applied to many subjects, but they all revolve around having all the gear but none of the practice. Its the same reason nobody is suprised when 16 year olds wreck their new sports cars. They have all of the gear but no practice to really know how to use it.

When my brother gets back from the Sand Pit and finishes his Special Forces training, Ill ask him what he thinks. Ill ask him something like this:

"Which would you be more affraid to fight against: The man with the small gun who tactfully practices several times a week, or the man with the AK who shoots a few mags through paper at the local range once a month?"

Hell, I bet I could ask anyone who can think a bit and knows a bit more about guns than what they saw in Resident Evil, and they would agree whole-heartedly that someone who practices with a "B-class" tool will perform better at the same tasks (in this case, surviving) than someone who just owns an "A-class" tool. I could think of a thousand examples of this point, from the above-mentioned "16-year-old in a Porsche" one, to that guy who know who owns every Craftsman power tool, but is always shown up by the old carpenter who still uses hand tools.

[ArkansasHunter]

Don't take much practise to shoot a gun accurately, atleast us Arkansas country boys can shoot perty dang good.
Most of us cut our teeth on guns in these parts Bubba !

And like Hank Jr. sings A country boy will survive But we ain't gonna use a 22 to do it with !!!... A.H

[JMcDonald]

Originally Posted by ArkansasHunter

Don't take much practise to shoot a gun accurately

Accuracy when you are sitting still is entirely different than accuracy under stress or accuracy with time constraints (like shooting the enemy before he shoots you).


And, I am absolutely sure country boys will have a much better chance. Its these crazy city-folk Im worried about. Hell, that's why my plan all revolves around getting to my "good ol' boy family," and almost as importantly around staying away from country homes, haha.

[squirrelblaster]

no offence but no matter how good you are you cant chop down a tree with a screw driver..... you still have to have the right tool for the job.....i dont understand why you dont get yourself a more realistic gun and still do all the things you are doing to be prepared?

[ArkansasHunter]

Anyone in there right mind wouldn't use a screwdriver to chop down a tree !!!

Everybody knows a Beever LOL is fer chopp'in down tree's...A.H


P.S. I'd worry about the helpless city folks too.

[JMcDonald]

This is definately not like comparing a screwdriver with an axe. More like a hatchet with an axe.


I've already compared several times the .22lr and the 9mm rounds Id use. What is the big difference between a .33" hole with ~13" of penetration in gel, and .355" and too much penetration? That is what I'd get with the 9mm FMJs Id be using if I stuck with the 9mm carbine.

I am not going to explain again all the other advantages of .22lr weapons, as well as the advantages of my 10/22 over my 9mm carbine.

[billy]

eh...
it's all a matter of preference.
if i was trying to fight troops/crazed city slickers/zombies/commie feminist dance therapy instructors
a .22 is not what i would use.
if i was trying to feed myself in the woods?
a quality bolt action .22

[JMcDonald]

Originally Posted by ArkansasHunter

Don't take much practise to shoot a gun accurately

And, I have to say that this is a hilarious role reversal! It went from all the people with "combat experience" telling me I was wrong, to you basically telling me that learning how to shoot isn't important, as long as you have a big enough gun .

[billy]

Originally Posted by JMcDonald

And, I have to say that this is a hilarious role reversal! It went from all the people with "combat experience" telling me I was wrong, to you basically telling me that learning how to shoot isn't important, as long as you have a big enough gun .

well.....
i sure hope thats true........isnt it?
if it isnt what am i supposed to do with all these giant caliber guns?

[jimkim]

Originally Posted by JMcDonald

The 10/22 with folding stock (so it is more easily stored hidden in my BOV) and good 25rd mags.

Discuss .

Extremely efficient if attacked by ZOMBIE SQUIRRELS.

[JMcDonald]

Which is more important? To have experience with your weapon of choice, or to have the biggest gun you can get? They are contradictory arguments in this case, so you can only choose one.

So, should I just get an AK47, and let it sit in the gun safe with a few boxes of ammo until I have to use it to fight off the zombies? Well, I guess Id be able to practice single standing shots at 30 yards once a month or so, right? I mean, I guess I could hope that that is all Id have to do when the balloon drops? But, I happen to agree with Mike in his strong advocation for preparing for the WORST. The WORST situation would definately not involve standing still and shooting stationary targets at mild distances without any real personal danger (I.E. no stress).

That is like buying a Huyabusa, putting your way home from the dealership, and then deciding 6 months later that you are going to go racing. Yeah, it wasnt that hard to learn how to work the clutch and cruise at the speed limit, just like its not that hard to learn how to hit a paper target. But when you add in stresses, high speeds, other racers, and all other sorts of variables, the fact that you can drive your motorcycle to the grocery store hardly amounts to more than jack squat. Just the same, when you add all sorts of stresses and variables that can mean life or death, knowing how to steadily aim at a paper target at 30 yards isn't going to do jack for you (and none of the aforementioned manuevers are legal at my local range).



Hell, I googled google something like "military weapons training" and this was the first link that popped up:
Weapons training and qualification overhauled - Army News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Army Times

[squirrelblaster]

well since you are not interested in listening to the overwelming number of people trying to help you ive decided to just let this go. you will just be one of the ones that dont make it and i wont have to compete with when the shtf.

[Laufer]

JMcDonald and fellow rifle enthusasts:
One number seldom seen in these discussions is the furthest distance where you could typically identify/notice an attacker and needed self-defense in your car etc.
In a city/suburb/'ruburb' I doubt that it is much further than 50 yards. I have no actual idea. Outside one's home or away from it, could it be much less?

I doubt that an AR-15, M-1 Garand, M-14 or FN FAL is needed for that (as suggested in these debates on other sites). My handy Mini 14 or SKS would do fine as with short-distance plinking, and some people only shoot with ironsights (as with mine, also an ancient Savage .22, newer Mini 30 and MN 44).
Being middle-aged and sort of a novice, having seldom plinked (with the .22) when I was young.

The widespread access to .223 and 7.62x39 ammo appealed to me, plus the military-style, reliable guns which use these. Many x39 (Wolf) prices are some of the least-expensive, and one x39 jhp stopped a large feral pig. I saw the nasty wound in a graphic color photo on another gun website: this convinced me of the potential of this oft-maligned intermediate round.
The combination of this plus relatively-low ammo prices and ammo/rifle interchangeability plus dependability attracted me to acquire 'my tribe'.
People might consider a so-called SKS "Paratrooper" with the shorter barrel, or a Saiga, which has a sporterized, less-aggressive look than the classic AK. Most guns which use this round are considered quite dependable. economical and effective for short-distance combat. Longer distances for which these guns are not effective would probably be considered offensive shooting, except out in open land, would they not?

Anybody is welcome to contradict and educate me, if I can learn something. No kidding-being fairly new to these topics anyway.

[billy]

i dont think in the history of the internet has bitching at each other changed a mind .

[jimkim]

The 10/22 with folding stock (so it is more easily stored hidden in my BOV) and good 25rd mags.

Discuss .


What exactly were you expecting? It looks like you got exactly what you asked for.

[tommy]

anyone interested in some good survival knives these are hand made out of pipe cutting saw blades they have regular saw blade teeth on one side and i am buffing down an ede on the other so that way you can chop/cut/saw with the same knife . they are about 18"long and 2"wide i think the bldes are made out of carbon steel but i'm not certain they was made to cut iron pipe up to 6"in diameter so if you can saw through pipe with them i'm sure they would hold up really good sawing a tree or chopping on something. i don't have any handles made because i'm not a wood worker i work with metals. i was gonna put them on ebay for 15.00 is anyone interested in one let me know i'll post some pictures of the one i did. i only have like 10/15 more blades so after these go there won't be anymore being the new blades sell for over 100.00 bucks depending on the maker.

[JMcDonald]

I was looking for people to give me real data to contradict everything Ive said. As I expected, nobody has provided any, other than they wouldn't personally feel comfortable with it. And, as expected, no opposition has even acknowledged all the listed advantages of the .22lr. It has all been "you should use something bigger." Hell, no opposition has even acknowledged the similarity in the wound that would be caused by a 9mm FMJ and a good .22lrHP. In fact, half of the statements putting down the .22lr have been completely contradictory and have just shown that people simply don't like the .22lr round as a weapon, even though they don't understand, or are actually choosing to ignore, the facts they are stepping over.

So yeah, as expected, nobody could prove my otherwise. Call me arrogant, but as I explained to Mike, I go by more than "what I heard, what saw in a movie, or some guy on the internet doesn't like the .22lr."

Listen, Im really not stupid. In reading my posts noone should believe that (maybe naive, but Im not ceding to that either). But, my point is is that I know the .22lr is not a powerful round by any means. It is only comparable to a .32acp in damage. However, it is damaging enough to at LEAST deter an attacker from 25-150 yards, which is what the primary goal is.






BTW, I am really curious. This is especially directed to mike,

[tommy]

you won't here any arguments from me i think the .22 is just about the best survival gun there is . ammo is small enough to carry a few thousand rounds and it has a nice killing range of 100 +yards depending on the game . and if needed for self defense you can kill soneone really fast with a shotto the head.plus it doesn't go 1BOOM! it has a nice quiet pop.

[jimkim]

I think the .22lr is a wonderful round. It does exactly what it is designed to do. It is a really good squirrel and rabbit round. As far as comparing it to a 9mm that sounds ok to me I'm not impressed with it either. Why did the FBI switch to the 10mm? Bottom line is it is your rear on the line use what you want.

[JMcDonald]

Originally Posted by jimkim

As far as comparing it to a 9mm that sounds ok to me I'm not impressed with it either.

However, nobody would give me any crap for using a 9m carbine with FMJ rounds. I am just saying that most of the disdain for the .22lr comes from the fact that, well, its just the way people "feel" about it. Ive presented the numbers (the same ones the FBI uses - penetration vs the size of the hole), and good .22lr rounds are actually pretty close to 9mm FMJs as far as the wound tract goes, and people just don't "feel" good about it. As I said, I was looking for sound data showing why I shouldnt use it, other than what I already know, and am not going to change my plans for "common beliefs." Hell, sifting through all the common beliefs is what put me where I'm at now.

Originally Posted by jimkim

Why did the FBI switch to the 10mm?

Why do people keep asking me questions like this as if I don't know its due to a larger hole with the same penetration? I never said the 9mm was the best round either or that they shouldn't have switched to the .40, just that most would consider the 9mm adequate for what I am trying to do, even FMJ rounds, and I am just proving that good .22lr rounds are comparable to those in damage.

Originally Posted by jimkim

Bottom line is it is your rear on the line use what you want.

Exactly. I know all you military buffs have apparently changed your mind and decided that a big gun will beat out quality training every time, but I still feel the same. And, apparently the U.S. military also CURRENTLY believes that the same ideas are what is going to keep each soldier alive:

Here are a few quotes from that article I posted:

"the new qualification course moves away from the one-shot-per-target mentality and forces trainees to shoot certain targets as many as three times before they fall." This is intended to teach soldiers a crucial lesson learned from the battlefield that it often takes more than one shot to “kill a target,”

The soft-spoken veteran wears the expression of a proud teacher when he describes how this new approach to training is forging a more capable breed of soldiers. “It’s working like you wouldn’t believe,” he said. “In the end, with this methodology, they will be more lethal.”

“We were still training in very defensive manner and we hadn’t stepped to train in a more offensive or reactionary manner that is required of soldiers in both Iraq and Afghanistan,” Marshburn said.

The new test requires trainees to shoot from three firing positions — kneeling unsupported, kneeling supported and prone unsupported. They also would use available cover, change magazines, clear weapon stoppages and shoot until the targets are “dead.” Throughout the test, shooters would be required to perform these tasks on their own rather than waiting for commands from their drill sergeants.

I don't know what else to say, to be honest. The U.S. military apparently now agrees with everything Ive said was important in an emergency fighting situation.

Laufer, you are exactly right about the realistic distances at which one civilian would need to shoot another from far away. I do realize and have imaged scenarios where an attacker from long range might need to be dealt with (like if you are driving and come up on a hostile group a ways down the road, who then opens fire on you from several hundred yards away), though in those situations it would likely be easier and MUCH safer to simply send a few rounds their way and sprint to the nearest cover. You must know that hitting a running person at 300 yards is extremely difficult, and in almost any scenario like that Id prefer to simply run away than to try to stay and fight.

BTW, to whoever it was who said I was going to die quickly due to my beliefs, I have to disagree. How quickly I will actually die, I of course can't say. However, I believe that, overall, it will be the "heroes" with the big guns but little practice who will be the ones to get themselves killed. They won't be used to firing 3 shots into a single target quickly, and thus won't have that capability when under stress. They won't be used to quickly aiming and firing from a rested position and will likely fire more wildly when forced to do so (as they will be rushed beyond what they have mentally prepared for), further lessening their chances of survival. Finally, few of them will have experienced firing without hearing protection or at night. If the crack of those first shots doesn't further shake them up, the temporary loss of hearing will lower their survivability. As far as shooting at night, most of them won't be very good at it, and when they finally do focus enough to shoot, they will lose some of their night-vision due to the muzzle flash, lessening their accuracy and spotting ability.

Oh, and I cut myself off earlier on my question to Mike. If using "ninja tactics," or otherwise simply avoiding conflicts and and staying away from people in general is a stupid idea, what is a better one? Should I go find myself an M60 and march down the middle of the street, blasting everyone who gets in my way? While this was in response to some of Mike's statements, anyone else feel free to step in if you have a worthwhile answer.

You guys can call me stupid all you want, but until you can actually deny my logic I'll maintain that I have a good plan and good equipment.