Author Topic: survival gun ? (Read 6832 times)

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #30 on:** March 11, 2009, 05:05:53 AM »

knee capping , right !
either he wants to eat me of vise versa and i'm going to shoot his knee with a mouse gun .
870 thank you very much and we will see who is the diner and who is the main dish !

teamnelson · « **Reply #31 on:** March 11, 2009, 10:17:01 AM »

Seriously, half the world is currently in a near starvation situation and they aren't eating each other; lot of post-apocalyptic writers like cannibalism because it sells books, but the facts aren't there to support it. Lots of evil will be going on for sure, though. But we've been talking about a grab and go, staying low, not being seen, and being on the move for 6-9 mos (1st winter? - ngh).

If you haven't done something like this, I highly recommend it. Get the pack you would want to carry for as long as you think you would need to, and put everything in it you think you absolutely need BESIDES guns an ammo. Put it on - most people have now discovered that they packed too much. Once you've got it down to where you think its okay, go camping for a week, and walk at least 10 miles every day. When you get back, you will most likely make changes. Repeat until comfortable. Weigh your pack - mine comes in near 40, but there's alot of beans in there. I'm a 40 yo 6'4 220# military guy who enjoys endurance tests like distance running, hiking, so if its not light, rugged and versatile, it doesn't go in the pack.

NOW take all the guns and ammo you think you'll need to stay alive and eat (1 shell per rat, 1 rat per day?) and weigh those. Because of the 12ga pump affinity on this thread, I took my 37 (synthetic stock, 18.5") with a full tube and weighed it - 8lbs. Add a full side saddle and a scope, and I'm guessing 9+ lbs. 10 shells mixed slugs and shot weigh roughly 1lb on my scale, 50 shells = 5lbs in the pack. Extra barrels have to go in the pack at 2lbs each. I've not used my pump enough to be able to estimate any extra gear or tools I'd need for 6-9 mos, but throw those in too. So at minimum, two barrels & 50 rds, you're talking 15-16lbs for one gun option. Take it camping for a week - don't have to shoot it, just be sure you're carrying it with you 24-7 - never more than arms reach away. Again, 10 miles a day but with the weapon at the ready, not slung, to simulate how you'd carry it in a crisis. I'm tired thinking about it, and I've humped a 60 (machine gun) for many miles and many days.

Ballistically the 12ga is a superior round to a .22; no argument here. It can drop anything at 100 yds - got it. Its a proven man-stopper - yep. That's why I have several. But my last and only gun to carry with me through whatever may befall, with all the ammo I might ever need? I have to think beyond ballistics, and think tactically ... efficiently. Is the extra carry weight worth it? Not for me.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #32 on:** March 12, 2009, 01:40:18 AM »

That is a good point BUT if in fact you need to defend ( and as many people as we share this country with you can count on it ) each and every one you meet will be a potential resupply for you . If you go out and are alone that would be good as fishing and trapping along with other food gathering would see you thru. But if only once you had to defend yourself the extra weight would have been worth it .
A good 20 ga. still makes a good choice to me along with a 22 target pistol as some weigh so little now. If btw you did go it alone the flint lock might be best as the moutian men found out . they made powder and found lead and flint . After a period of time all ammo would be exhusted if times were really that bad .

teddy12b · « **Reply #33 on:** March 12, 2009, 03:15:35 AM »

TeamNelson, hits the nail on the head. If you haven't had to carry everything you need to live with you on your back before, you need to try it out. You'll quickly see what's dead weight and what's worth carrying. I can relate to humping a 60 (actually 240B) and I didn't even do it that much. Most of my time was spent with an M16 and that's as light as it's going to get as far as a semi auto rifle with any amount of real power.
I still stick with the good ole 22LR. If I was going to be dropped off in the wilderness and had to hike it out and shoot for food & survival I'd want a 10/22 and about 2 or 3 bricks of ammo in ziplock bags. Any shortcoming of a 22LR can be made up for by a reliable 25 round mag. I bought a 10-22 and can hit out to 150 - 200 yards with it if needed. It doesn't have much if any gas left at that distance, but it'll work for small game.

pab1 · « **Reply #34 on:** March 12, 2009, 06:40:50 AM »

Quote from: TeamNelson on March 11, 2009, 10:17:01 AM

Seriously, half the world is currently in a near starvation situation and they aren't eating each other; lot of post-apocalyptic writers like cannibalism because it sells books, but the facts aren't there to support it.

Cannibalism took place in Ireland during the Great Potato Famine (1845-1849, 1.5 million dead from starvation), during the "Soviet Famine" (1932-1934, 5-8 million dead from starvation), in Northern China (1958-1962 up to 30 million dead from starvation) and North Korea (1994-1998 2-3 million dead from starvation). In most of these incidents, their food supplies were depleted and the countries leaders would not allow or accept foreign aid. In China, families traded children with neighbors so they wouldn't have to eat their own child. Similar incidents happened during the Soviet Famine. Alfred Packer, the Donner Party and a stranded soccer team are other documented cases of cannibalism.

Good point on packing gear. I do a lot of backpack/bivy hunting and realized quickly what I need to carry and what I don't. I always examine my gear and leave behind the things that are not used. I tend to lean toward a .22lr as a one gun survival round. Its not a good choice for self defense or big game but it will work for both in a pinch. IMO, you can't carry enough centerfire ammo to last for a long period of time. Two bricks of .22lr take up less space and are close to the weight of a couple hundred rounds of most centerfire rounds. Choosing one gun/round would be hard and any choice would be a compromise. I would feel pretty good about a two gun survival combo though.

Bart Solo · « **Reply #35 on:** March 12, 2009, 09:38:22 AM »

The early Jamestown colonists dug up bodies to eat during one winter. Cannibalism is not unheard off. Mostly folks wait until a friend or family member dies. Only rarely do people kill friends and family for food.

teamnelson · « **Reply #36 on:** March 12, 2009, 01:21:30 PM »

How 'bout we take the topic of cannibalism to a new thread? I'll start it. Sounds like there's some knowledge out there, and if there's enough folks thinking its a possibility ... it becomes a possibility. Kinda like the economy

pab1 makes a good point about only one gun ... my personal pack out, and my family pack out plan, incorporates more than one gun per person, but a couple of them will be dropped early if we're still moving.

kevthebassman · « **Reply #37 on:** March 12, 2009, 01:35:04 PM »

In my uneducated opinion, if you're forced from your home in an "end of the world as we know it" situation, you're as good as dead. If, say, some global crisis made most of the crops fail, and the cities went apeshit and you had to hit the road because your neighborhood got too crime-ridden or your house burned down in a food riot, I flat out think that you (or I, or most anyone else) would be one of the unburied corpses on the side of the road.

teamnelson · « **Reply #38 on:** March 12, 2009, 02:50:16 PM »

Quote from: kevthebassman on March 12, 2009, 01:35:04 PM

In my uneducated opinion, if you're forced from your home in an "end of the world as we know it" situation, you're as good as dead. If, say, some global crisis made most of the crops fail, and the cities went apeshit and you had to hit the road because your neighborhood got too crime-ridden or your house burned down in a food riot, I flat out think that you (or I, or most anyone else) would be one of the unburied corpses on the side of the road.

Worst case scenario for sure, but you roll with what you're dealt and if you don't have a plan and don't think you can succeed, you won't. Survival starts in the heart/mind - my family is too important to me not to think it through seriously and preprare.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #39 on:** March 13, 2009, 03:49:35 AM »

I realize i won't carry all i want . most likely won't carry all i need .
I would plan to aquire what was needed as i went , live off the land , those attackers , or any other means aval.

351 power · « **Reply #40 on:** March 13, 2009, 06:55:08 AM »

.22mag. the best option of economy/power if we can have only 1 gun. of course how much quality of life do we have if we can only have 1 firearm

mannyrock · « **Reply #41 on:** March 15, 2009, 06:51:29 AM »

OK, I've read all of the posts, and have appointed myself King, and will announce the winner.

The winner is: you need two guns: A lightweight .22 carbine (such as a ruger 10/22) and a good .223 rifle (a mini-14 would do nicely).

Carry the .223 on your shoulder, and the .22 lr carbine in your left hand.

A shotgun looks very good in theory, but the extreme weight of the ammo, and the very short effective range with shot, makes it a bad long term solution. Yes they are good for shooting a running rabbit, or a flying duck, or a jumping squirrel, but in reality, it would seem wasteful to shoot at moving game in a survival situation. Shoot them when they are standing still. Instead of the weight of a single 12 gauge shell loaded with birdshot, I would rather have about 20 rounds of .22 LR.

It also seemed interesting to me that some people posted replies favoring handi-rifles or other single shot weapons. One things seems clear to me: If it is a survival situation, you are definitely going to need a repeater. A single shot weapon is fine for hunting, but in a survival situation, somebody is going to be shooting back.

If you can really only pick one: The main problem here is that in a survival situation, your firearm has to perform FOUR separate duties: self defense, large game, small game and predator control. There is only one weapon that adequately performs all four of these, and that is a .223 rifle. While the .22LR is very appealing due to the light weight and ready availability of the ammo, it simply does not perform all four duties adequately. The only duty it is good at is small game. As for the other three, it is marginal for predator control, and as a practical matter, it is simply insufficient for large game and self defense.

Having hunted deer for over 40 years, I can tell you that if a person were going to spend all of the time and energy it takes to hunt a deer during a survival situation, they would be 10 times better off with a compound bow and 3 good arrows than a scoped .22 rifle.

Just my thoughts.

Regards,

Mannyrock

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #42 on:** March 16, 2009, 02:42:12 AM »

I'll stick with the shotgun , That's why we sent the King packing back in the 1700's

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #43 on:** March 16, 2009, 02:43:43 AM »

BTW , KING if you need help call when the mouse gun is lacking .

The other king did the same .

all in fun !

pab1 · « **Reply #44 on:** March 16, 2009, 05:08:02 AM »

Would one gun with two barrels count as one gun? My Contender handgun with a 10" .22lr barrel and a 10" .44 mag barrel would be a great survival hunting rig. Both barrels wear open sights (I don't trust scopes for SHTF/survival situations). Throw a brick or two of .22lr ammo and 100 rounds of .44 mag in the pack and you are set to take most any game for quite a while. You would miss out on some opportunites by having the wrong barrel on the gun, but for the most part you could plan your hunts according to what game you are encountering. It would not be my first choice as a defense rig though.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #45 on:** March 16, 2009, 05:28:21 AM »

A survival gun for protection may not be a working gun for food getting . No gun will do both best . The shotgun is a comprise that will do most task well at ranges under 100 yards . In any survival time it is best to stay home with all the supplies , tools etc. you have accmulated . To leave you give up any advantage you may have had ie; more than one gun to use . If such happens you will need to look at why you need to leave and what to expect along with the time frame . Facing the un expected with a 22 rf would not be comfortable for me . A centerfire rifle OK but the shotgun offers more at the cost of weight . The motor skills needed to use the shotgun are less skilled and due to lack of food , health problems or injury again the shotgun seems better. I would try to avoid all trouble and stay out of the way .

pab1 · « **Reply #46 on:** March 16, 2009, 06:51:39 AM »

I agree that staying put would be the best choice. It may not always be an option though. I always try to have three levels of survival gear ready to go. 1. At home I have food and water stocked up so we can hold out here. 2. I have plastic storage bins loaded with food and supplies that can be thrown into the Jeep if we have to leave home. 3. I keep backpacks loaded with food and gear if the need ever comes to leave the vehicle and head into the hills. Things will definitly get harder as you have to move from one level to the next. I wasn't the best Boy Scout, but I always try to live by their motto!

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #47 on:** March 16, 2009, 07:04:24 AM »

that's all anyone can do . the best boy scout ever could get hurt and be more problem than help . many think as if they will always be 100% . but to plan for the worst we need to prepare as if we aren't up to par and those we have with us can use what we have to help us .

mannyrock · « **Reply #48 on:** March 18, 2009, 03:36:44 AM »

Dear Subjects, :-)

For the record, I (the King) don't particularly like the .223 mouse gun. But, it is beyond dispute that it will handle the four duties (large game, small game, varmint control, and self defense) far better than the .22 LR and any shotgun. :-) And, it does this at TRIPLE the range of the .22LR or shotgun (with the sole exception of a 12 gauge slug used on large game. But, yea, that's loud too. )

When you are allowed to choose only one round, that will do it all, then you are always talking about a compromise. And, the .223 is the best compromise. (Kinda like picking out your second wife!)

Stepping down from that, the .22 magnum would be my second choice, but you would have to have lots of rounds, because it isn't easy to find in many areas. And, due to the failure (yank off the market) of the Ruger 10/22 mag, I think you would be limited to a bolt action or lever action in this small caliber, which may not be a durable enough rig for the long term.

Just my opinions (Decrees) :-)

Regards,

Mannyrock

992 · « **Reply #49 on:** March 18, 2009, 07:05:39 AM »

A good .22 conversion unit for the AR15 would be easier than packing another complete weapon.

tc

sachel.45 · « **Reply #50 on:** March 18, 2009, 08:53:35 AM »

i think that a .22 mag rifle and a good 9mm handgun would work pretty well

teamnelson · « **Reply #51 on:** March 18, 2009, 10:00:22 AM »

And a .22 chamber adapter for a single-shot .223 would take generations of abuse with nearly no maintenance, and you can scrounge ammo and not worry about whether or not your action will function. Get another adapter in .22mag while you're at it; won't be a whole lot of that lying around, but heck they only weigh <1oz. I may shoot up my .22mag first and keep .22 and .223 in reserve. They'll be more valuable in a barter, and there will be lots of it laying around.

kitchawan kid · « **Reply #52 on:** March 18, 2009, 10:14:05 AM »

Where I am if you take away their cell phones and bottled water they walk in circles till they fall down.The .22 and 12ga.rule.

teamnelson · « **Reply #53 on:** March 18, 2009, 10:27:33 AM »

kid, that's hilarious!

mannyrock · « **Reply #54 on:** March 18, 2009, 12:12:14 PM »

Yes, that is funny!

Well, the 12 gauge and .22 will rule in your area in any catastrophe, . . . until someone shows up with a .223 rifle. :-) He would not have to step inside your 100 yard effective defense perimeter. He could control the entire game from 200 yards away!

All in good fun.

Mannyrock

kitchawan kid · « **Reply #55 on:** March 18, 2009, 01:15:14 PM »

Didn't you hear they came and took all those evil "assault weapons"

pab1 · « **Reply #56 on:** March 18, 2009, 07:52:26 PM »

Quote from: mannyrock on March 18, 2009, 12:12:14 PM

He would not have to step inside your 100 yard effective defense perimeter. He could control the entire game from 200 yards away!

Not with this guy shooting! Probably not much energy left at 200 yds, but I wouldn't want to be hit by it!

[yt=425,350]IzX-hOFURuI&feature[/yt]

teamnelson · « **Reply #57 on:** March 18, 2009, 08:23:38 PM »

Might not be much energy but good luck digging 5 of them out of your body with a Leatherman. And no medical care.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #58 on:** March 19, 2009, 02:04:38 AM »

mannyrock , that depends on people standing out in the open with no one on guard . if your 223 toting attacker happens pass a hidden guard with a shotgun well its a whole different game .
Remember your tatics are dependent on your tools .

mannyrock · « **Reply #59 on:** March 19, 2009, 04:59:47 AM »

Yes, . . . I totally agree.

Manny