CHECK YOUR GUNSAFE! We all have the same guns!!!


September 27, 2004, 08:27 PM
CHECK YOUR GUNSAFE! We all have the same guns!!!

OK, we don’t really. But I was thinking the other day about some of the topics posted on the forums. Often enough, there’s a ‘what if the SHTF or TEOTWAWKI happened’ thread. I actually read those, since sometimes they touch on interesting ideas. Not as often anymore, but sometimes.

What follows is a short story, then a question, then a big idea that involves cooperation and money…

I thought of my own twist on the subject and imagined living in a future further down the slippery slope toward socialism than we are now, with a less strong but very oppressive government- a more likely and complex SHTF world: since without OVERT conflict, no popular guerrilla movement will erupt for us all to embrace. It will just be a slow and steady erosion of our remaining rights. My imagined world is one where outright ownership and possession of firearms has YET to be outlawed, but there is no more importation, or domestic manufacture of any firearms, ammunition, or components. It’s a dead and dying trade and culture. The ‘gun lifestyle’ is all but halted.
The writing is on the wall: soon an outright ban, the BIG BAN, is going to be introduced to the House and the invited representatives from Ethiopia, Rwanda, China, Jordan etc who sit in the seats will all vote for it that’s for sure.
Yup, the BIG BAN is coming. (None of them read UC. J )
So, what that means is whatever we had at the start of ‘the halt’ is what we are stuck with for the rest of our lives, short as that may be.
So what we really suffer from is a lack of supply, to simplify greatly.
So now I’m thinking that if we pretend that this future is inevitable, we should be planning NOW to have A LOT of the stuff we will need at that time. Which brings me to the topic of the thread:
We all need to have the same guns.
Sure, you can have as many of whatever type you want. But we all (all gunowners, but I’ll settle for all 12,000 THR/TFL/ members to start with) need to have a battery not only in common with each other, but of common arms, common calibers, and of simple weapons with lots of spare parts if possible.
This way when you find yourself exiled and arrive in my town with no food and 2 rounds left in your AR-15, I can do the right thing and get you some food and ammo without endangering my own family. I’d rather say, “You need an extractor? Sure thing, buddy.” Than “Yes, you ARE the only one with a Cei-Rigotti Automatic Rifle.”

Now, the important part: which ones?
Here’s where the discussion/flames begin as I will now offer my own opinion as to what the choices should be. Errors in my judgement can arise from lack of sample size (12,000 out of the 40-80 million gun owners), lack of experience (I have only been at this a few years, not decades like some of you lucky ducks), and biased sample (people on this forum have different tastes than say those who frequent cowboy shooting forums- generally speaking of course).

Well, the caliber discussion should be easier. My caliber choices are 22LR, 357 Magnum, 9x19mm, .223, 7.62x39, 308, 30-06, and 12ga.

I suppose I will get more agreement out of the calibers than the guns themselves. It hurt to leave out certain ones. I sure love my 45ACP and there are a lot of 1911’s out there but I can’t believe that they outnumber the 9mm pistols anymore. 30-30 is pretty common, and if I am wrong that the 308 and 30-06 are more ubiquitous than it then I will change my list. But for right now I’ll stick with these. Hopefully, by the time this thread is over there will be a concensus on the calibers and platforms.
Most common is defined not as the one of which the most were manufactured, but as the one that the most people own.
In 22LR it’s the Ruger 10/22. I know, here it comes and I have my flame resistant suit on. Is this or is this not the most common 22LR, with the most available parts, and of sufficient quality to make the list?

In 357 I am at a loss. How about the S&W 686?? Another? The 357 is common and allows 38 ammo to be used. And whichever one we pick, I will need to get one as well!

9x19 has to be a Glock 17 or 19. Ugly as they are, they are reliable out of the box with a TON of parts and accessories, simple manufacture- hard to argue with thos egood points. And yes, I will need to get one as well.

It has to be an AR-variant in 223. One with lots of parts in common and interchangeability: Armalite, Bushmaster, Colt, DPMS? Help me out here.
Ammo supplies will be most available despite the introduction of the 6.8 and with foreign nations using 308 or 7.62.
You guessed it, I need one too!.

Not hard to guess that an AK-variant is the 7.62x39 of choice given my criteria. Why enter the 223 vs 7.62 argument when it is obvious that lots and lots and lots of folks have at least one if not both already. With the surplus ammo now available, stocking up for The Halt and BIG BAN is easy. Having one of each, esp w/ AK’s very reasonably priced, is the way to go to my way of thinking.

308 and 30-06? Why both? Well, for the same reasons as above really but we’re moving on to bigger rifles. The 308, while not as common as the 30-06, is more common to militaries in the world and in our own, so ammo and platforms will be available whereas in the super-popular 30-06, it’s the common gun and parts that keeps it from standing alone in this contest.
Platforms I cant decide on: Remington 700 or Winchester Model 70? I would guess the Remington, but I’ll take lessons on this one. There are a lot of 308 battle rifles out there, but my hunch ois that more sheer numbers favor the bolt action owners.

Of course 12ga: 870 or Mossberg 500, with the 87- winning out. WhoooHooo, I have one of those!
So there it is, the list.
1. Ruger 10/22
2. S&W 686 (?)
3. Glock 17/19
4. AR-15
5. AK-variant
6. Rem 700 (in 308 and 30-06) , and
7. 870 in 12ga
There, that’s only 9 guns we all have to own.
Which brings up my challenging big idea involving cooperation and money: we all, every single one of us, needs to go out and BUY them.
This only works if we all do it!
Not that these are terribly expensive guns, but its hard to get folks to agree on what to spend their money on, even harder to tell a group of freedom-loving individualists what to do, and harder still to get them to do it!

So, are these the guns we all agree on and are we doing it or not?

OK, I’m ready: let em rip!


If you enjoyed reading about "CHECK YOUR GUNSAFE! We all have the same guns!!!" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
White Horseradish
September 27, 2004, 09:54 PM
I would go for an SKS before an AK for the 7.62x39. It's a better all-around rifle and cheaper.

As to the rest of your list, I'm working on it. ;)

September 27, 2004, 10:04 PM
I'm off to a good start. 5 (or close enough) out of 7. Of course a .22 revolver wouldn't be bad to add to the collection.

September 27, 2004, 10:17 PM
cpileri, you're over complicating it.

All you need is one gun ... a handgun.

If it comes to a full on "time to refresh the tree of liberty" time then you walk up to a soldier ... make some small talk ... offer him a cigarette and ask him if he's got a light ... when he takes his eyes off you to get his lighter BANG! you shoot him in the head and take his weapon/ammo (because your UN friends aren't going to disarm their military, so someone will be making guns ... just not for sale to us serfs).

Then you give your handgun to an unarmed friend and the process repeats itself ... eventually you and your buddies work your way up to bigger and bigger guns.

If you're going to take on a government and its military you use their equipment.

That was the point of the .45 Liberator in WWII ... thats the most likely way it will go down in this dystopian future of yours.

September 27, 2004, 10:59 PM
That's a very interesting idea about commonality of parts, firearms, and ammo amongst the gunnies when the shtf. One worth putting thought into. Develop it some more and take it a little deeper. :) Ya might be on to something.

September 27, 2004, 11:41 PM
I thought the title of this thread was a fact.


I have a 10/22, a S & W Model 19, an 870, and a Mauser. Post a reply if you don't have one of these guns. Post a reply if you don't have one of these calibers (the Mauser is a .30-06, the 870 is a 12 guage).

What I'm trying to say is, we all have the same guns in the same calibers anyway. Success sells.

I'll probably buy an AK at some point, because I want one. Most people who are preparing for the SHTF/TEOTWAWKI want one, too. No need to go out and buy guns that you personally don't want or need.

Be a cold day in Maui when there's some soulless Mod. 700, Glock or AR in my arsenal, anyway! :cool: Ok, maybe a Glock.

September 27, 2004, 11:46 PM
OK, we vote with our wallets and the manufacturers see what we're up to; so we convince them of the BIG MOMMA of group buys (can you imagine 12 thousand in a group buy!) if they make up high caps for EVERYTHING. 50-rd glock mags? drums? double feed drums? polymer? no problem? how many? Oh, 12,000; sure!
Accessories (flash hiders, muzzle brakes, night sights, l;asers, sof grips, kydex holsters modular with any other gear, etc), fix-it kits (i.e a packet of all the parts most likely to break/fail first in each gun, with tools nmecessary for the repair and instructions laminated on a card, all in one kit), etc.
So that there is absolutely NO wanting for standard capacity mags, specialty devices, etc- and they all interchange with 12 thousand other folks stuff.

"Hey, Zundfolge, i kaboomed my Glock 17. Can you use my 60-rd drum mags, extended barrel and night sights. Sure, cpileri, I'll trade you my..."

Startin' to see the picture!


September 28, 2004, 12:04 AM
Cmon man...everyone knows it's only the .40 Glocks that KB.:D

You've got an interesting idea man. However with so many people, I think you'll find it hard to even narrow it down to your list of calibers. There will be people that won't give up their .45ACP, .270, .300 Win Mag, .30-30's, etc. I like to keep as few calibers as possible though. Right now I've only got .357mag, 9mm, 7.62x39, and .22lr. I want to get a deer rifle in .357mag to keep the same calibers even though I would prefer something else. I would love a K31 to fill those shoes, but the ammo is already expensive and isn't widely available and it would become more so as time goes on.

Just for fun, here's my picks.

1. Marlin 25N (covered)
2. Taurus 605 (covered)
3. Glock 19 (covered x2)
4. HK M4gery
5. Yugo SKS (covered x2) or Sar 1
6. FAL
7. Winchester 1300

September 28, 2004, 12:40 AM
Man - guess i'm just suckin... <grin>

finally got a 10/22 cause i'd heard so much about em - seems everyone has one - and its not a bad lil gun if i stay away from the super cheap bricks of 22lr. The CCI stuff in the plastic cases tends to fire ok w/o jamming since i started using it. (still use the other stuff for plinking around - heheh)

Got my wheelgun - just can't beat it for reliability. Got it in a Taurus Tracker w/ a 4" ported barrel... shoots dem dere .357's and 38 specials... nice having a gun that can shoot two different kinds of ammo - and is virtually gurantee'd to fire.

Got my 12ga... el cheapo mossie from wally world. Ran the pump through 100+ rounds on the first day and nary a problem w/ it... even hit a few o' those clays.. <eg>

Got a .410 - mostly cause it was a learner shotty for the now moved out idiotic (long story) kid...

We both (me and gf) got our .40's... hers a taurus i don't much care for and mine a HK USP compact... which i do really care for. =) heheh.

.380 thrown in for good luck. 30.06 for hunting etc... altho it rarely gets fired.

then one of my favorites (don't know why i just like it a lot) my Ruger Mini-14.

Of course last but not least is my ol reliable. Old Marlin 22lr passed down from my grandfather through my dad to me. If ya miss w/ that bolt action 22... its you ... not the gun =)

There is the fun gun from my dad... don't like its reliability enough to think of it as a primary rifle... 1894 in 45LC... for some reason it doesn't cycle the rounds correctly when they are actually fired. Seems to do fine on cold rounds emptying the mag etc... just not when its fired... dunno - shame - i like the gun =)

Couple of blackpowder sixguns and a 50 cal old style muzzleloader that would scare the dogsnot outta someone... but not quite as quick as my others... hehe

over all i guess i got....

Seems good enough for now... after all - i won't be shooting "nato legal rounds" if i were in that shooting scenario. =)



September 28, 2004, 12:52 AM
In all the repressive government/rebellion "SHTF" threads people assume a battle rifle or "assault rifle". I think that is going the wrong way. Sure, it looks military, but it isn't. It doesn't have full-auto capability. Even if it did, us untrained guys will be in for a hurting slugging it out with trained military (I know, many of us were/are trained military, but we won't have the full force of the UN military behind us). Our best bet for survival is to blend in and show when conditions are favorable. In such an unfavorable environment carrying your AK, AR, FAL, whatever and wearing camo will make you stand out for harrassment (at best). With the semi-auto civilian versions of those rifles you don't get much extra utility anyway. I would think the best way to go is a nice BAR with a bunch of mags, a nice lever rifle (a trained hand with a lever rifle can shoot nearly as fast as a semi-auto) or a nice bolt rifle to avoid drawing too much attention. When/if it ever became time to re-supply ammo from the soldiers then it is time to take their full-auto military weapons as well.

As for what guns-
9mm or .45acp...I don't think it matters much since a handgun probably won't get as much use. However, if it is US troops you are looking at then maybe the Beretta 92 is the way to go simply so you can more easily scavenge. If foreign troops, use what they use. Also, for scavenging maybe 9mm is the way to go (and you could carry more ammo with you).

Revolver- I'd go snub (probably an airweight .38spl) in an ankle holster. Again, my don't draw attention philosophy (also go as light as possible). However, a nice big .357mag, .41mag, .44mag or .45LC in bear county probably wouldn't draw too much attention either (remember this scenario is the gun atmosphere isn't pleasant but they aren't outright banned yet)

I think a TC contender or the like would be useful. Again, don't draw attention. Nearly the power and range of a rifle, with the concealment of a large handgun (unlike a rifle, at least you could hide it in a backpack).

Lever- I prefer the Winchester 94 and there are a ton of them, but the Marlin may take a little more of a beating and is nearly as common. Caliber, as much as I love 30-30 I'd go with a pistol caliber in the caliber of the revolver for ammo compatibility (and with the pistol caliber you could carry a lot more of it since it is smaller and lighter).

Bolt- I think .308 or .223 for this scenario for scavenging purposes.

If you must go with military style weapons (and tactics?) then-
-Revolver- well, we need to go light so either a K-frame .357 or the auto pistol
-Pistol- again, the Beretta- scavenging.
-Rifle- AK or SKS. Cheaper than the AR and not everyone has the money for the AR. Ammo is cheap so you could have quite a bit in your bag. When/if you were scavenging parts or ammo from fallen foes, you could always scavenge their gun too when it comes to that.
-Bolt rifle- Hmm, we have our hands full already, plus we are adding a shotgun. Maybe the bolt rifle should be a TC Contender for those w/ a shotgun and "assault rifle", a .308 Remington, Winchester, Savage, whatever for those w/out either the "assault rifle" or shotgun. Then again, keep it the cheapest good enough gun since not everyone has a lot of money- Savage in .308 or a Mosin-Nagant mil-surplus for under $100 (at that price everyone can afford to add one).
-Shotgun- Either the Mossberg or Remington should work. However, if we are talking about what everyone should have, go with the cheapest that is good enough (not everyone can afford the best) and get the Mossberg (if you can afford better get the 590 instead of the 500, I think parts are interchangable).

September 28, 2004, 02:22 AM
One minor point have been left out. In a true SHTF situation and you run out of ammo or break a part, who is going to give you what you need to get back up and running? Remember that will reduce their supply and possibly place them in the same boat you currently sit in.

cracked butt
September 28, 2004, 02:27 AM
One minor point have been left out. In a true SHTF situation and you run out of ammo or break a part, who is going to give you what you need to get back up and running?

That's why I would put a mosin nagant and about 4 crates of ammo on the list.

September 28, 2004, 02:39 AM
That's why I would put a mosin nagant and about 4 crates of ammo on the list.
.....but let's say you break a firing pin or a mainspring. The rilfe is out of action unless you rob the needed parts from another rifle which in turns will render that one useless.
That's what I meant when I asked who would supply you with the needed parts to get your weapon back up and running.

cracked butt
September 28, 2004, 04:33 AM
....but let's say you break a firing pin or a mainspring. The rilfe is out of action unless you rob the needed parts from another rifle which in turns will render that one useless.

Lets jsut say I have a couple of junkers laying around as parts guns anyhow:D
At any rate, if the rifle could take a 1/2 century of being handled by peasant conscripts, I doubt that I could do anything to make it break.

September 28, 2004, 04:37 AM
To prepare for such a situation, what we really need is to set up manufacturing capabilities. Lathes, mills, dies, blueprints, lots of steel ingots, the works. We can manufacture our own sten guns for the initial push (harder to trace), and then work with captured munitions if they are better than what we have at first.

September 28, 2004, 06:45 AM
No really, even the disagreements are all points well made.
But please dont forget the scenario's salient features:
one, I made this up so suggesting alternate scenarios and not addressing the idea (see point number three below) isn't enjoying the possibilities.
Two, it is not (yet) a total shtf; more like a SGTHTFPS (S's Going To HTF Pretty Soon). KWIM? (know what I mean?)

(OK, I'll stop with the acronyms)

And three, the main point is to wring out a common equipment list for us all. Squad units do it (given a little variation here and there), the tanks and apache helicopters all have interchangeable modular units. Having common stuff if a very good idea. Not only from a resupply standpoint, but from personell standpoint: I now know that there are a bunch of guys out there who not only have the stuff but the INTENT to back me up/help me out if I need it! Gives me warm fuzzies.

Heaven forbid it should ever come to that! Plans to keep The Halt and BIG BAN from ever manifesting are by far preferable in reality. But again, i made this up. The thought was just to try to get us all with some common gear.

And I see already what i predicted in that there is a fair amount of agreement in calibers, but gun choices are varied. So here's the deal with that: maybe a taurus 357 would be preferable for its cost, nice quality, etc BUUUUUUUT are there more of them in existence than S&W's?
When i tried to pick one, I deferred to the one with that was most ubiquitous ALREADY. After finding a quality arm, the winner was the most widespread -majority rules- and too bad that I still had a few to go out and buy.
And for all who are on tight budgets, it will help that for every few of us that never have the whole list there is still a guy out there who does, or has most of it, and can STILL resupply you without seriously weakening himself, even if you can't do the same for him with every gun.

I mean, there are only so many extra shoelaces in a squad, right? But it sure helps to have a few. And hopefully, not everyone's shoelaces will snap at the same time!

While manufacturing our own STEN's is a super idea- I always did want one myself- it is nowhere right now and would start up as a cottage industry at first: not at all meeting the common-and-popular requirement.

I DO think the manufacturing idea is spot on, though, and the only for sure way to keep any resistance going in the long run (much easier than scavenging from felled enemies, too).

So back to the list of specific arms...

September 28, 2004, 08:19 AM
1. Ruger 10/22
2. S&W 686 (?)
3. Glock 17/19
4. AR-15
5. AK-variant
6. Rem 700 (in 308 and 30-06) , and
7. 870 in 12ga

I don't own amy of these . Now what.

I do own a weapon in each caliber listed except .223.

September 28, 2004, 08:28 AM
Good points - and a pretty good list cpileri. My .357 vote would go for a 4" stainless GP100, but other than that...

September 28, 2004, 08:57 AM
Amazing the responses here. I guess for the generation it happens to it would work but if this really comes to pass there will be a time when there is no more loaded ammo, no primers, and no smokeless powder. Unless the old technology of flint lock black powder firearms in re-discovered your descendents will be using all those useless pieces of metal and plastic as clubs. So what we are really looking at is a way to save the information so it can be used when needed, plus insuring that the information can be understood when it is needed. It does no good to save to CD if there are no computers, like wise in a written format if the general population is illiterate. It is very easy to think in the here and now (your lifetime). What about your grandkids?

September 28, 2004, 09:05 AM
White Horseradish

i would have to argue the fact that the SKS is better than an AK.

September 28, 2004, 10:29 AM
You can count me in!! Most all of those guns are on my list to buy.

September 28, 2004, 12:40 PM
Already have (from the list anyways):

Glock 19
Taurus Model 66 in .357
Rem 700 (.270)
Have the M4 lower on order
Rem. 870 and Moss. 500A.

So I'm pretty good to go.

Series 70
September 28, 2004, 12:49 PM
Well, I guess I'll be sitting on the Group W bench with my 1911 and .30-30 levergun. I'll have an 870, though, so maybe I'll get the time of day from y'all.

White Horseradish
September 28, 2004, 12:57 PM
i would have to argue the fact that the SKS is better than an AK.

Argue away. I would agree that there are things that an AK may be able to do better than an SKS. Mag capacity comes to mind. However, an SKS is easier to shoot prone and makes an excellent hunting rifle. It is simpler mechanically, and that is always a plus for reliability. It is useful as a blunt instrument and has a very functional bayonet for those times you might find an attacker right in front of you. It can be loaded with loose ammo much faster than an AK. Also, if you are running and drop your AK mag, you're SOL. These are things I would think valuable in a SHTF scenario.

Also, don't forget cost. With a family to feed that is a major consideration for me.

September 28, 2004, 01:05 PM
I am startin to like what i am hearing in favor of the SKS.
Now, do you think it is more widely owned than the AK?
If not, will its simplicity and ease of repair overwhelm any numbers advantage that the AK has ?

Old Dog
September 28, 2004, 01:19 PM
Boy, am I S.O.L. here ... with my:
Marlin .22,
Beretta 92,
Colt Python,
Winchester Mod. 70 (.30-06),
Mossberg 500 ...
and a buttload of 1911A1, all .45 ACP, in various guises ...
Sorry, I like mine better. Guess I'll have to provide my own parts.

White Horseradish
September 28, 2004, 01:19 PM
I am startin to like what i am hearing in favor of the SKS.
Now, do you think it is more widely owned than the AK?
If not, will its simplicity and ease of repair overwhelm any numbers advantage that the AK has ?

With the influx of the cheap Yugo SKS we are having now I would think the ownership would be quite large. The price alone (I got mine for $149) would induce many people to buy.

I don't know what the frequency of repair would be on them, but the construction looks very solid to me. As far as ease of it, the rifle comes apart without tools in under a minute. The only things I could see failing would be springs and the trigger group, and that looks unlikely.

September 28, 2004, 02:12 PM
Lets see, I've got rifles in the following caliburs,
.30-06 1ea
7.62x39 3ea
.12 ga. 2ea
.22 2ea.
.223 2ea.
.303 1ea.
.308 1ea.
7.62x54r 2ea. w/one on the way
8mm 2ea.

.44 1ea
9mm 1ea.

Thinking hard about getting that serbu .50 before the ban here in Kali.

September 28, 2004, 02:12 PM
There's more then one way to look at it.

Yes, if you only have one or two guns, it makes sense to pick a very common caliber.

But, if you have multiple guns, having multiple calibers increases the odds that whatever ammo you find is likely to fit at least one of your guns. That Glock 19 is pretty useless when you are out of 9mm and you stumble across a half-case of .45 ACP before you find any 9mm.

I'm not really a SHTF type of guy. For me, the main benefit of multiple calibers is that I can buy whatever is cheap at the time and stock up for future range trips. Right now I'm about to stock up on some 6.5X55 Swede that I've seen at a good price. While I've been out, I've been shooting my M-1 Garand more.

Highland Ranger
September 28, 2004, 03:05 PM
My caliber choices are 22LR, 357 Magnum, 9x19mm, .223, 7.62x39, 308, 30-06, and 12ga.

Too many calibers!

22lr ok for small game and practice - a keeper.

357 and 9mm? why? I'd dump both.

How about a round that would work as anti-personal and bagging game in a handgun or rifle like the 44mag?

30-06 - yes for large game from at longer distances

12ga yes for game at shorter distances and for personel defense

If you'd insist on an anti-personel only addition to the list I'd replace 357/9mm with the 45acp

September 28, 2004, 04:03 PM
I'm kinda confused as to how it was said that the SKS is simpler in function than the AK. I've got both and my AK just seems to be less complicated than the SKS. Now this is a feat to accomplish, I agree, as the SKS is one of hte simplest autoloaders out there. But the AK just seems like there's nothing to it. Please elaborate if ya could, why the sks is simpler than the Ak, i'm all ears and open minded to what you have to say.

September 28, 2004, 04:15 PM
"Standardizing" on a everyone having a few guns on the list, or at the very least a few calibers, is a good idea.
What guns you own will always be a very personal choice, but what you are trying to do is still a pretty good idea.
Keep working on it.

Also, on the SKS/AK thing, both have strengths and weaknesses.
I have never seen an AK jam but I have seen a rare few with SKS's. The SKS is a hare more accurate than an AK, at least until it heats up. The AK is quicker handling, faster to reload, and a little more durable. By the same token, if you lose all your mags with an AK, you have a single shot. You don't have to worry about that with an SKS.
I have an AK now, but am looking at supplementing it or replacing it with an SKS at some point, maybe.

I would also worry more about the rifles than anything else. IIRC, the guerilla fighters during the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising preferred rifles and machineguns whenever they could get them. Just having the handgun of your choice and a box of ammo will get you whatever the enemy is carrying if need be. Handguns see relatively small use when compared to rifles. Rifles are the priority.
I would say that we should all consider something along the lines of a scoped 308, 30'06, 7mm Mag, or 300 Mag for long range work, and an AK or SKS for up close firepower. You can get both range and firepower from an MBR, but it is never a bad idea to have more guns.
What do you guys think of the long range/short range combo?
What weapons? What calibers?

Red Tornado
September 28, 2004, 06:46 PM
Great thread cpileri.

I'm pretty understocked on the suggested items, but do have a 10/22 (and several other .22s). However,

I went with the Sig P226 in 9mm, and the Mossberg 500 in 12Ga. I just missed on both, but I think the 500 is almost as common as the 870. I could easily be wrong.:scrutiny:

My only current 30-06 is a Garand, and I know there are lots of extra parts out there. But if you come by my house for supplies, I'll only have ball ammo. None of that modern stuff for my baby, she doesn't like it that hot.;)


September 28, 2004, 07:36 PM
I too would like to know how the SKS is simpler than the AK. The only explanation Ive seen so far (unless my eye skipped a line or something) is that it needs no tools to dissasemble it, well neither does the AK. The lower price is the only advantage I see.

Im with you on the rest of the list. I hate to admit it but I guess glocks would be ideal, I dont own one but Ive heard nothing but good things about reliability and durability which would be important. And if the pistol is going to be a glock I guess it would have to be a 9mm. Ive heard bad things about the .40 s&w glocks (or maybe that was .40 USPs, whatever) and 10mm isnt common enough to be considered, and the same probably goes for .45 GAP. I hate to go with the silly europellet 9mm over 45 ACP, I feel like a traitor, but I guess Zundfolge is right I'd only be using it to aquire a rifle from a blue hat.

September 28, 2004, 07:37 PM
The commonality of parts for gunners is a great idea.
As for the ability to get parts from one another, I really do not think it would be that hard if someone has an extra part that you need, make a deal for it. Trade for some ammo or a magazine. Most gun people I have met are pretty good at bartering.

I think that the list may need to have steps. First commonality of calibers, then commonality of actual weapons.
For instance, a Glenfield Model 60 is common but the important thing is first and foremost it is a .22. On and on, SKS or AK as long as they are 7.62,
This is just so the monetary impact would not be as great on startup.

Model 60
Mossy 500
Any cheapo 9MM pistol.
Then as is possible add or upgrade.

(This is not intended to be the complete list just an example.)

September 28, 2004, 07:47 PM
10/22 and .22 caliber pistol ---- CHECK
9mm caliber handgun-- CHECK
.45 auto---CHECK
.223 evil AR---CHECK
.308bolt action---CHECK
7.62 "ak variant"---working on that

guess maybe I need a shotgun or two. ;)

White Horseradish
September 29, 2004, 12:14 AM
The key word in my phrase "mechanically simpler" is "mechanically". What I meant is that the SKS is put together of fewer separate pieces of metal, fewer screws, rivets, pins, etc.

Also, I'm not sure I'd say an AK is more durable than an SKS. Then again, I've never seen a worn out example of either...

September 29, 2004, 12:35 AM
1. Ruger 10/22- -
Check plus a Marlin 60, Rossi 62 takedown, 2 more Marlins in .22mag, Sears 70 pump and an old Savage

2. S&W 686 (?)--
Close enough Dan Wesson .357

3. Glock 17/19 --
I'm allergic to plastic so I got 3 1911s and a Beretta

4. AR-15- -
Not yet maybe next tax check

5. AK-variant- -
Check SAR1 and an SKS

6. Rem 700 (in 308 and 30-06)--
Check a NO 03A3 plus 2 lever guns in 30/30

7. 870 in 12ga
Winchester 1300 and a Savage pump gun

Out of all of it I'd probably just lean toward the .45s , the Rossi and the SAR(only because the SKS is a too long Yugo)

September 29, 2004, 12:36 AM
I am in almost full compliance: I have everything but an AK and a Remington 700 in .308.

I think you have an interesting idea. I hope the thread discusses the idea and the pros and cons of your choices rather than just use this as an opportunity to tell everyone what guns they already own or what their faviorite guns are. But, I fear it is too late for this: most of the posts are just a list of what guns they already own and not germaine to the topic.

I for one am really starved for a good thread that merits some discussion. I realize that everyone likes to brag about what guns they own, or the latest gun they bought etc. But what else can you say about that ? Great. Good for you. Have fun with it. ????

I like the idea. I don't think that many people will buy into it unfortunately. I personally think your list is far too complicated. We all can own as many guns as we like (for now), but the core guns are the ones that need to be the same. The SHTF guns if you like. We don't need to have nine different SHTF guns. We don't need to have 4-5 different rifle calibers. We need ONE rifle caliber. One handgun caliber. One shotgun caliber. And a .22.
The .22 is a given. The 12 gauge probably won't promote much argument. The rest of it, is a can of worms. For my ONE SHTF rifle, I would want a 7.62 Nato caliber rifle. I think it is the more versitile of eveyrthing you mention. It has far better range than the 7.62x39 or the 5.56 rounds, yet it will also work up close if you need it to. If you know you are going to be engaged in CQB then take the shotgun, but if you can't get it, the 7.62 Nato rifle will work. Handgun: I agree with your choice of the 9mm. I am a big huge .45 ACP fan, but if we got something like this going, I think the 9mm would be the way to go. It is a very common civilian caliber. It is a very common police and military caliber. It works well enough and seems to be a better match for the average person. I see no need to complicate things with two different handguns. So, you pick your FOUR basic weapons. Support them with spare parts, magazines, and ammo: as much as you can afford. You train and become good with them. You maintain your skills with them. The rest of your gun collection is for fun. You can own as many others as you want, but these are your go-to guns. These are the guns you would grab if you were forced to leave your home. These are the ones you buy multiple copes of to keep in your vehicle, your cabin, your RV, your boat, in a burial vault, whatever. You are not going to be GOOD with nine different guns. Most people are not going to be able to afford to be good with nine different guns. Most people are not going to be able to affford nine different guns and all the support gear that goes with it.
What does "getting good" with a gun mean ? There is no limit to how good you can get. If you are concentrating on a few guns, the sky is the limit. Good enough is never good enough. With practice any one of the four guns can substitue for the other three in a pinch. You can use the shotgun as a short range rifle. You can use the pistol as a short range rifle. You can use the .22 as a short range rifle. ETC. you get the idea, but this takes dedicated practice and not playing around with all kinds of different guns shooting beer cans.

September 29, 2004, 12:56 AM
Mossy 500 - check
I think there are enough of these that parts will be available

Rem 700 .308 - check (in a few weeks anyway, free one coming)
It's stock at the moment, but that may change. Naturally the interchangeability of parts would be affected by any customizations.

AK/SKS - check/check
SAR1, 84S, and Yugo. The SAR and Yugo are ok, but the 84S is kinda rare - dunno about parts for that one.

S&W 686 - have to settle for a 65. Parts no good, but ammo interchangeable.

AR - not yet, the STG will have to do

10/22 - not yet

Glock - never will you see one of these in my collection unless it is free (even then it won't stay around long, I hate the things)

I gotta say I'd pick up my AK before my SKS because of higher ammo capacity, lighter weight, smaller size (especially with the new folder on it). Not that it matters, because the SKS would be in my buddy's hands since he has no weapons. I'm more accurate with the SKS, but any range where the difference is noticeable is far enough away to pull out the scoped bolt gun.

I've got an AK in .223 and in 7.62, so I've got ammo interchangeability either way.

Without a couple of friends with me to haul all this stuff I'd need to get a tactical wheelbarrow or perhaps a carbon fiber Radio Flyer.

September 29, 2004, 01:01 AM
357 and 9mm? why? I'd dump both.

How about a round that would work as anti-personal and bagging game in a handgun or rifle like the 44mag?

If you'd insist on an anti-personel only addition to the list I'd replace 357/9mm with the 45acp

I'm no handgun hunter, so maybe I'm missing the boat here, but I thought the .357 was a viable deer round. Like I say, I pay no attention to handgun hunting, so maybe I'm wrong.

I'm glad to see everyone is proving my earlier post. We all have the same stuff anyway. There are about 20 firearms we all just have to have, and about the same number of calibers.

Now let's just stock up on ammo, parts, reloading supplies and gunsmithing tools. A lot of you are doing that. The rest of us need to start; it makes sense even if the S does not H the F.

September 29, 2004, 06:54 AM
Y'know, i thought about trying to settle on just one rifle (and just 4 guns: 22, pistol, rifle, and sg) but then I realized that it had been discussed to death in other p[osts as its alternate incarnation: the dreaded 223 vs 762x39 threads!

Oh the HORROR!

I realized from reading those that some will never ever be convinced, so the best option would be to have one of each so as to have a common weapon with the guy who chose one or the other.

Personally, I am a 308 man for a MBR and I'd skip the 223 and 7.62x39 altogether, IF (and its a big if) the platofrom and ammo were as affordable as the other calibers- esp the AK. The versatility in power, range, and accuracy of the 308 is better than the others I think.

But then I may fail the ubiquitousness requirement.

So again, i purposely tried to be objective and NOT simply pick the ones i already own and make this thread a poor cover for a request that "everyone be like me thread".

And yes, i expected a little straying from the topic. Glad its generating so much interest though.

Any thoughts then on my undecideds like the 357? how about that GP 100 or SP 101? Other calibers I am undecided on too???


September 29, 2004, 12:04 PM
"so the best option would be to have one of each so as to have a common weapon with the guy who chose one or the other."
Actually, this is your thread. You can say what you want. Not everyone is going to agree with it anyway, so you might as well do things they way you want to and not worrying about everyone's agreement.
I am not sure where you got this idea. I just finished reading the book: Patriots, Surviving the Coming Collapse by James Wesley, Rawles. Their little survival group tried to come up with the same plan. They felt that the 7.62 Nato battle rifle was the only way to go, however, they couldn't get everyone to agree. The women thought it was too heavy or had too much recoil or whatever: so they ended up compromising and standardizing on the HK 91, and the AR15. Personally, I wouldn't choose either one of those weapons if I could only own one rifle, but, If I was a member of a group that standardized on those two weapons, I would consider them to be more than adequate.

Remember, the idea isn't to put together a gun collection. It isn't to buy stuff that you think is cool. It is an exercise in giving serious thought to the pros and cons of each item and whether or not it is the absolute best tool for the job. IMO, you also shouldn't be basing this on what it costs. If you think about the subject and decide that the best tool for the job is X, but X costs $300 more than everything else: then you can either buy the second best stuff, or wait a month or two and get what you really feel you need and not settle for something else. Remember, there is no second place winner in a gunfight. I would have to say that if you were fighting for your life in any manner including starvation, second place is first loser.

September 29, 2004, 01:46 PM
I totally agree with the idea. I have 3 of those weapons with a 4th on the way. You might think of adding a Mosin and a Makarov to that list. Both the Mosin and Mak are cheap and very easy to use. I have one of each and believe they would make great gifts for a neady friend if the SHTF. Even a firearms novice can be tought how to use, stip, and clean a mosin or mak in 15 min (I have done it several times).

September 29, 2004, 01:59 PM
1) Ruger 10/22 ---Check, as well as 2 other .22 rifles and 2 .22 handguns

2)S&W 686 ---Check, 4"

3)Glock 17/19 ---NoGo, I'll stick to my 1911's and pray I never run out of ammo or need parts

4)AR-15 ---Check, although I'm considering getting rid of it

5)AK-47 ---Check, SAR-1 and will soon be adding others, as well as a Yugo SKS once my C&R arrives in the mail

6)Rem 700 (.308 & .30-06) ---Check, .308 Rem700PSS, as well as a Garand in .30-06 and a CETME in .308 (soon to possibly be rid of the CETME though)

7)Rem 870 in 12 ga ---Check, 2 (Police Magnum and Express) also a 20ga 870 and a Moss500

I aslo have several Mosin-Nagants, so commonality of ammo and parts won't be an issue with those either.

September 29, 2004, 02:27 PM
One that works every time you squeeze the trigger.
You are right in thinking that everybody having the same guns and helping the "Freedom Fighters" would be good.
But, I'm sorry, I'd either be there next to you asking for any spare 7.62mm ammo or I'd already be long dead...

"You can take my gun, but it'll be empty and I'll be dead."

September 29, 2004, 03:58 PM
If I might quote you to steal the thought, rather than the meaning:

"Remember, the idea isn't to put together a gun collection. It isn't to buy stuff that you think is cool. It is an exercise in giving serious thought to the pros and cons of each item..."


Not that anyone cares, but I am a 45 Colt wheelgun man myself! I love that thing! Load it with Buffalo Bore 325's and now its a versatile pistol... in and of itself anyway. But not if you figure that relatively few people are into 45 Colts. Its all just swell if ONE member of the squad has a pulsed energy weapon and a lightsabre (and can use The Force), but everyone else mas the M4 in 5.56 and cannot help out that one guy who was lucky enough to salvage an alien crash site for super weapons.

Not to imply the 45 Colt is a super weapon.

Its just that no matter how awesomely destructive, portable, self aiming, heat seeking or whatever it is; if it breaks and no one has spare parts, its junk.

So no matter what I like better, I am still thinking about sacrificing some of my personal tastes and preferences (and money) to ensure group survival.

Another idea was brought up that I like: concentrating on weapons that a beginner/novice can learn to use and field strip, etc the easiest. Do any of the weapon choice so far NOT make that grade?

Does that new criterion help us decide which 357 to go for? or which bolt action model to settle on?


September 29, 2004, 05:17 PM
I'm glad you caught my main point! I am fairly confident that the majority of us on this board will be fairly well equipped to take care of ourselves in this sort of scenario. Yes, a few might lose or break weapons or parts and need replacements or more ammo. However, the biggest need will come from those who didn't own our use firearms before whatever brought around this SHFT scenario but are now willing to stand beside us in our fight! These people well make up the majority of those who need firearms and they need to be simple to use and clean.

Just my opinion.

September 29, 2004, 10:10 PM
I am already working on collecting those weapons. Right now I have two 12 ga. and an WASR-10 (AK 7.62x39).

September 29, 2004, 11:34 PM
cpileri - keep your .45. Just add a couple others, and most important, AMMO. Learn to handload if you don't know how already and stock up some ammo for the .45. There are still guns out there from the French and Indian War that work. That alone proves that a gun will last a LONG time. Ammo is the killer. If you are out of ammo, your gun is a blunt object with a cylinder.
As for me, already got a 12 gauge, 9mm, .22LR, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51. Have others to augment the collection. I don't need to own them all.
I don't even need to own the same models as everyone else. I just need to use some of the same calibers, and stock at least enough ammo to get by.
I personally feel uncomfortable with less than 500 rounds per gun for handguns and rifles. I like more than that for .22LR because it is so cheap. I don't worry much about the shotgun because I only use it for hunting. Fifty or so rounds is fine for me.
I will agree that more can only be better though.

October 3, 2004, 05:16 PM
Firstly, let's talk about what is needed...
Pistols for close combat and personal defense.
"assault weapons" for medium through long range and generic use.
Rifles with scopes for extreme range and precision target destruction.

With any one of these weapons available to the militia, the common citizen can feasably engage an enemy force and capture enemy arms.
Regardless of what weapons are favored, types of actions are best, the point remains of what is ammo is most common and what guns you should DEFINATELY have in your arsenal...

.22 is not only cheap and widely available, it's potentially deadly when used accurately.
There are literally tons of handguns and rifles in every action configuration imaginable. Little recoil and noise allows newbie shooters to become comfortable while establishing the early fundamentals of firearms.
Use only one round at a time. It'll quickly get them used to working the action and loading the weapon safely.

.380, .38/.357, .9mm, and .45 are the most common around the world.
You'll find at least one example of each in every gunstore in America...
Given the choice, I'd opt for a high-power semi-automatic.
(Read that Colt 1911... with all the variants and knock-offs, there'll be enough ammo, parts and springs to last until the next ice age.)
Wheelguns have their place, but I find them to be too bulky to carry concealed and cumbersome to load in a hurry.

"assault weapon" which is really a misnomer.
My 1917 smle has seen more assaults than my SAR1 but you can take three guesses as to which one is banned in California...

What is needed here is a sturdy semi-automatic rifle in either .223 or 7.62X39mm with a large capacity magagzine capability until I can obtain a belt-fed machine gun...
I prefer the AK family over the M-16 variants. Ease of maintenance, level of abuse survivability, and overall fit make it my choice.

Scoped rifle:
.30-30, .30-06, .308.
Again, ammo and parts are prolific.
Also to be considered are the WW2 calibers that are still everywhere like the .303 British and 7mm Mauser.

Any gun will work, but these are just the most common...

October 3, 2004, 11:41 PM
I sure agree that ammo in common is of greater importance if common weapons cannot be had. So buy it cheap and stack it deep!

But my idea presumes that we dont have to choose one or the other. We all, at least as of now (keep in mind FineSwine, Schumer, Kennedy, and Skerry are still in office...plotting...), can acquire common equipment.

Can an effecitve resistance be equipped sporadically and dissimilarly? Sure. Look at France during WWII. But as i read more and more, and occasionally meet some of the resistance who are still living (ask me sometime, I got a great story), they always complain about lack of thisor that; lack of spare parts, lack of extra boots, lack of guns and ammo.

So sure, having lots of ammo for that 7.5 berthier rifle is going to help. But you only hear about our troops complaining about the easy availability of equipment when it all fails at once: "We would've done alot better if ALL of the M4's didn't clog with sand at the same time..."

Otherwise, a modular unit is the way to go!

Now again, one guy who is a master with his 338 Lapua Magnum will be a real headache for any enemy. But all he will ever be is a lone, long range sniper. He will be SOL if he comes to me for ammo or parts. And he will eventually be asking around for brass to reload.

I don't have any. Do you?

So like i said, there is little doubt the calibers I chose were cause for much discussion. And I am certainly not advocating getting rid of anthing you really like for this little idea. But I can't believe that having a well-and-similarly-equipped 'unit' (12,000 strong! Hoo-rah!) is not a good idea.

Which leaves me still taking advice on the choice of 357 revolver, and bolt action rifle model especially.

Any reasoned opinions on that?

Any non-reasoned opinions? :)


October 3, 2004, 11:43 PM
Another salient point was brought up that in Rawles' book, Patriots, the protagonist group preferred 2 styles of rifle s the women and lighter members of the group found the 308 MBR too heavy.

Seems like a great reason to have both! You pick your favorite, and still have one to give to the next person you find to befriend.

It could happen...

October 4, 2004, 01:30 AM
Love threads like this...

Got the Glock 17, the 870, and the 10/22, but I can't justify three rifles (5.56, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51) for just me and the wife. So, she's got the Mini-14 (AR-15 when I get outta Cali) (and 1000 rds), I've got the M1A (and 1000 rds), and for the part of the population mentioned earlier, the non-gunnies that catch on too late, I've got three SKS's, as they are easy to use, almost indestructible, and easy to maintain.

Cut the choice of calibers to four, 9mm, 5.56, 7.62x39, and 7.62x51 (ease of acquisition, all milsurp) and use the 7.62x39 to arm your unskilled (Russian conscript on the gun proficiency level) neighbors. The 12 gauge is great for hunting and CQB, but carrying an 870 or a Mossy 500 as well as your MBR would get old quick, 'specially with water, chow, ammo, and snivel gear.

Basically, one person can't use more than one gun at a time, but if you can get your buddies and neighbors into the fight with one of your (cheap) SKS/AK variants, you just doubled your firepower. Keep a couple hundred rounds for each one of those lovely old girls, and your neighborhood watch just became a neighborhood guard.

October 4, 2004, 08:45 AM
In my opinion, a S&W M19.

I have a friend who has one from the early '50's and it hasn't broken once.
They've been around awhile and they're strong.
Rossi makes a knock-off that is truly comparable for less $$$

Winchester M70
Military and civillian versions abound...
Very strong, well-built, and cheap when using surplus ammo...

Again, WW1/WW2 era bolt-actions are still prolific...
I have a .303 British from 1917 that still shoots great...

Again, just like a car, you must buy what you can afford and are willing to be attached to for a number of years...

October 4, 2004, 04:28 PM
As I mentioned previously, if I understand the goal of this exercise, I see no reason at all to have either one.
However, if I misunderstand and we are making a list for a possible gun collection or a wish list where we get to choose one firearm out of every catagory, then that is different.
I could see choosing a .357 revolver over a 9mm handgun but see no reason to have both (for purposes of this senario). I can see being able to justify have a bolt action rifle in lieu of a battle rifle, but not both (for purposes of this senario).
If it were possible to interest enough people in buying the same guns that take the same ammo, and the same magazines, and the same parts etc. to make this worthwhile, I see no reason to make this any more complicated and expensive than nessessary. Choosing different arms that perform the same funtion only with a different action is guilding the lilly.
Now I could see a discussion of accessories. For example choosing a basic weapons platform, lets just say an M1A for an example. And discussing the additon of a riflescope, night vision scope, red dot optic, suppressor etc. which could all be quickly added onto or taken off the same rifle. But have a whole pile of guns and choosing them like a set of golf clubs seems to be ridiculous in the senario I envision. Instead you make the few items you have perform all the roles you envision.

October 4, 2004, 09:59 PM
Why not the 1903 for .30-06? They seem to be common and relatively cheap.

Also, .30-30 has been around for a long time. There might be more Model 94s than .30-06s. But I don't know for certain.

I know, though, that in a SHTF situation, I'd want handguns a lot more common than the two varieties of .44 I have. :)

It seems that for what you're talking about, SKS vs: AK-47 doesn't matter. If you're running the same ammo, then you have commonality, and 6000 of each will give you spare parts for both after you have losses. (And let's be honest here, there will be losses.)

SKS might be easier to pass off as a hunting rifle, though, in the "interim".


Snake Eyes
October 5, 2004, 04:56 PM
So there it is, the list.
1. Ruger 10/22
2. S&W 686 (?)
3. Glock 17/19
4. AR-15
5. AK-variant
6. Rem 700 (in 308 and 30-06) , and
7. 870 in 12ga

2--Natch. Colt Python. 2.5, 4 or 6", whichever two I grab first.
3--NEVER. Colt 1911. Gold Cup, Government, Delta Elite or 1991A1 Compact, whichever two I grab first
6--Rem 700 PSS, 308, obtained from Ted Yost. You can't have any of my parts.:neener:
7--Winchester Defender 12ga (It's already in the safe.)

October 6, 2004, 11:03 AM
So there it is, the list.
1. Ruger 10/22
2. S&W 686 (?)
3. Glock 17/19
4. AR-15
5. AK-variant
6. Rem 700 (in 308 and 30-06) , and
7. 870 in 12ga

I think a list of calibers would go alot further than a list of firearms.
Which guns you buy is a very personal decision.
For example, I agree with the .22LR, but I would have to go with my CZ. Shot for shot, it is just plain more effective than my 10/22. I agree with the .357, but would probably go with a Ruger GP-100. I like the 9mm, but would go with a SIG. I would also add the .45 ACP and maybe the .40 S&W. One has been popular for a long time and the other has become pretty popular lately.
The ammo compatibility is way bigger than the choice of a firearm.
And you don't need to have them all. You just need a few of them. Backed into a corner, you could get by with just a rifle and the mags and 1K of ammo for it to start. That would at least give you something to get whatever the enemy is carrying, then pass your rilfe on to someone else. Having more guns is a great idea, but not really necessary.
I also personally feel that as a combat weapon, a shotgun is a poor choice compared to a semi-automatic rifle or assault rifle. The ammo is heavier and more vulnerable to moisture and the range is limited, and they don't hold as much ammunition. They are great for hunting and home defense, and they undoubtedly do have their uses, but I would prefer a rifle every time.

John Ross
October 6, 2004, 11:28 AM
No one here has mentioned one of the most important considerations:

What is the occupying government using?

If the UN troops or whatever army you're up against have M16s, M249s, and MAG-58s, anyone seen at a distance carrying an easily recognizable AK or SKS is going to get immediate and severe attention.

This "parts breakage" issue is laughable. Those of us who shoot a lot (I consider anything over 10,000 rounds a year a lot) know that good guns don't break parts very often. There are rental 9mm Glocks on ranges that have gone a HALF MILLION rounds without breakage. If you're worried about parts breakage, have spares of the breakable stuff, don't plan on cannibalizing someone else's gun.

Ammo: All the serious shooters I know have a minimum of several thousand rounds of ammo on hand right now. Many of us have a lot more than that. How much ammo do you expect any one person to consume IN A WAR before he gets killed? Where are you going to store it, so that you can resupply *yourself*, let alone all these other people using the same round? It's easy to buy 10,000 rounds of .308. It's a lot harder to carry it...

The conflict you envision is IMO unrealistic, but if it gets to the situation you describe, it will be fought with leaderless resistance in an urban guerrilla fashion.

If you are up against a superior force with full military equipment and *you* are limited to small arms, distance is your ally. If you are fighting with a handgun, you probably don't have long to live.

I would want an accurate, scoped rifle first and foremost. With such a gun, I can deny access to a circle around me with a half mile radius, and do it with a minimum of ammo.

If the opposition is expected to have M16s, build up a couple of AR15s with Williams triggers, match barrels, floating (but stock-appearing) handguards, Elcan scopes, etc. that will shoot 3/8 MOA with 70-75 grain BTHPs. If you don't want to do it yourself, buy one from someone who does this kind of thing. Load up a couple thousand match rounds or get Black Hills to do it for you.

It may be fun to come up with lists of guns we all "should" have, but the most important asset is skill. Are your guns sighted in? Can you hit plate-sized things reliably at long distances, say 300-600 yards? Are trajectory and wind drift tables burned into yorur memory, or at least taped to the stock? Do you own a laser rangefinder?

The nightmare scenario for the occupying force would be to have every resister be a skilled prairie dog shooter with his best rifle, a .50 cal. can full of match ammo, a ghillie suit, a laser rangefinder, and lots of time.


October 6, 2004, 03:11 PM
See now John Ross is saying sound to me alot like SENSE!

I'm tracking with the idea of leaderless resistance, guerilla style. In my dreary, dreamy nightmare the occupying force is our own government, state troops, national guardsmen, lawmen, etc who have either forgotten about the 'upholding the constitution' thing or never cared about it in the first place. Its the ones who identify themselves as Law Enforcement, rather than "peace officers".

When did I say it was the UN? Although, truth be said, our invited 'election-overseers' may see to it that it is indeed them...

(Let me stop RIGHT HERE with the police comments. This is not a cop-bashing thread and it wont ever be! OK! My point is just that if you think every Nazi was a ruthless, idealogically driven psycho you're wrong. Alot were just policemen, responsible to feed their kids and pay the mortgage and kept doing their job- maybe just helped get people to stand quietly in line; maybe just pushed papers- but helped the Nazi war machine just the same. They were convinced over time that the Jews really were dog-like criminals worth no respect, so arresting a criminal was not a crime nor even wrong. They were just enforcing the law, regardless of the merit of the law they were enforcing. They never thought about it that hard. They were as unlikely to quit in protest as any of our [generic] community police officers would. i.e. not very. Lets just agree for now that not every police officer will quit, and there will be plenty doing the job when the time comes. OK? If you want to discuss it further, start a new thread. thanks, C-)

You'll be allowed, with your papers or national ID card, to walk the streets (except during curfew) and go to work (need those taxes to keep it going) and as long as you cause no trouble, it'll be the day-to-day grind. You may even get a hunting permit, one time only, so the shotgun you're allowed to keep at the armory may be the one you have when the time comes. Maybe....

And walking around with a long-arm recogniseable as 'foreign' is indeed a great way to get shot. So that handgun may be the one you'll be glad to have. Maybe...

But John Ross makes an excellent point that when the fighting starts, an expert marksman with a 50BMG, a can of good ammo, ina shoulder deep foxhole half a mile up the hill is THE MAN when the fighting starts. So when John Ross starts lighting 'em up with API rounds, where will you be?

Your own hill? You'll want a 50. Or maybe that 30-06 will do depending on the range.
You on your property 50 or so acres from the 'international biosphere' and the UN quartering in the cabin on it? A higher cap battle carbine will keep a squad busy as they close the distance.
Are you in your ground floor apartment cooking dinner? BG's (ok, FINE, blue helmets) in pairs running under your window to re-group at the corner, you'd decapitate a few with that 12ga before you had to make a run for it.
Are you walking the dog? and a solitary pair of BG's having a smoke 'real quick before the action' on the bench you're walking toward? That pistol in your coat might be the ticket. Are you now saying to yourself:
"Sure glad I read cpileri's thread in 2004 and got some common equipment and a bunch of ammo hidden away. I'd have been out of ammo for my 357 SIG long ago. but i still have some 9mm!"

Or perhaps you're saying: "Aw gee willikers, I used my last round of 7mm Magnum on that nice deer last season. Sure glad I could bum some 30-06 off of Chuck up the street. Thank God he read cpileri's thread!"

Now, I REEEEEEEEAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLY like the idea of everyoen having a laser rangefinder and ballistics charts in waterproof plastic stuck on each rifle. Them's GREAT ideas! If we can agree on calibers (easy) and platforms (obviously harder to do) we can even post all the necessary info right now right here! Then we know 12,000 of us already have it!

Kofi Annan gets cold sweats at night thinking that 12,000 guys, make that 12,000 FRIENDS, across the USA have arms to share and every single one of them has the friggin' ballistics already figured out! His soldiers DON'T!

(Hey Kofi, make that AT LEAST 12 thousand!)

Yeah, I'm sensing another warm fuzzy coming on...

(there, that ought to help reinfuse some life into my current favorite thread)

October 6, 2004, 04:06 PM
"Well, gee whizz, cpileri. We're only going to need the one we'll need, or maybe our favorite, so why get them all?"

I say its because in YOUR community, all non-sporting guns were banned years ago. The only sporting gun left is the 12-ga pump.

And in YOUR community, local do-gooders have banned anything over .308 diameter. The legal and easy sources for your .311 and .45 etc bullets was gone way before now.

And YOUR community long ago made illegal any bullet capable of piercing a NIJ level II vest. That 22LR is the only semi-auto with a scope you have left.

YOUR community has 'gone from passive to active' enforcing of the ban on possession of handguns and you didn't want your kids to starve so you gave them up. But you still have that trusty 'sporting rifle'.

And YOUR community did a buy back of all 'military style' and 'assault' weapons. You didn't fall for that b.s but then they spent the rest of their budget on 'incentive based neighborhood watch proghrams' where they paid your neighbors to rat you out. So you got rid of those, too. But John Kerry had a shotgun, so they must be OK...

Is your community or state so perfect that no local ordinances like this will happen in 10 or howevermany years? I am not counting on it!

So NOW is the time, while we still can, to get them all! Better to have and not need than...


John Ross
October 6, 2004, 04:21 PM
I said a .50 cal. CAN, full of .223, for the 3/8 MOA match AR15. This is a much better gun to have in 99% of war situations than a .50 BMG rifle.
(Although for some things, a match .50 bolt gun like my Ken Johnson 1/2 MOA 16-pounder would be priceless.)

I realize you seem excited about 12,000 people all having common hardware, but I think it's much less important than each person having good, accurate hardware, plenty of the proper ammo, and considerable SKILL.

When my friends and I prairie dog hunt, we take no shots under 250 yards as measured with a laser rangefinder. Our hit percentage is over 60%. A human is a much bigger target, and a thousand aimed shots would likely translate into 800 casualties. That's a LOT of shooting with only 30 lbs of my own ammo. I don't need to fire yours, I'll probably die from mortar fire long before I run out.

If your favorite pistol is a .357 SIG, have a thousand rounds of it put away. If they ban ammo, you won't be able to practice with it any longer, so that thousand rounds will easily last you until you die.

A suppressed .22 pistol will be one of the most useful guns to have for the situations you describe, such as the guy catching a smoke on the street.
An ASP Tactical Baton is almost as good. I like the airweight version.


October 6, 2004, 05:56 PM
"I said a .50 cal. CAN, full of .223"

So you did. My mistake.

Hey man, you describe some darn good shooting on those prairie dogs!

If yuo dont mind me asking, what Laser rangefinder do you use? do you recommend that one as well?

"800 casualties. ... I'll probably die from mortar fire long before I run out."

In your case I'll believe it!

Which brings up another thought I had. I sense a little ribbing going on about my harping on the vast numbers of our potential squad here (12 thousand). So here's why (in part) i emphasize the numbers:

In a past thread, the question was asked how Pol Pot's 30,000 police could terrorize a nation of 1 million people. but the same question could be asked as written in the Gulag Archipelago where one wonders what would have happened if every security operative was beaten to death with fists/ axes/ chairs and whatever else was at hand. What if????

Well, obviously the oppression would've died with the last dead thug!

So if John Ross takes out 800 before they get him... even if its a 1-to-1 ratio, we still win! but i'd rather have alot less heroes to immortalize and eulogize than that!

October 6, 2004, 08:01 PM
Uhh. I picked up on a small math error I made. What i should have said is we win if even 1-in-100 of the estimated 40,000,000 gun owners get ticked off enough to resist.
1% of 40 million is 400,000. Using Pol Pots ratio, a resistance 400,000 strong can probably keep upwards of 10 million jbt's from being the strong arm of a corrupt govt.
Eh, OK. I am just musing.

Headless Thompson Gunner
October 14, 2004, 10:08 PM
The general concept is a good idea. Common ammunition, magazines, and spare parts would come in pretty handy.

But why go through the effort of tryiing to organize 10,000 gun owners to buy the same equipment? There's an easier way. There already exists, in the form of the military, a network that stockpiles weapons, ammo, parts, etc in the MILLIONS.

All you'd need is the same pieces as are in common use by the military of the day. Presently, that'd be an AR-15, a Beretta 92, and possibly an M1A. Even if you don't want to own one of those, at least get some practice with 'em. If you ever need to "borrow" one you'll know how to use it.

If you want other weapons, that's fine. But if you ever need to scrounge parts, magazines, etc then your best bet is going to be scrounging among the standard issue military weapons.

Or is there something I'm missing here?

October 14, 2004, 11:06 PM
...My caliber choices are 22LR, 357 Magnum, 9x19mm, .223, 7.62x39, 308, 30-06, and 12ga. ...
So there it is, the list.
1. Ruger 10/22
2. S&W 686 (?)
3. Glock 17/19
4. AR-15
5. AK-variant
6. Rem 700 (in 308 and 30-06), and
7. 870 in 12ga While I agree with the list of firearms, I would add the 1911 and .45 ACP to the lists simply because there are so many 1911's and other good .45 ACP pisyols in circulation. The only thing I don't agree with is the 7.62x39 rifle/caliber although I understand their popularity. When in the position of choosing which .357, I went with all four: S&W Mod 19, 27, 686 and the Ruger GP-100. I've got a 9mm Glock but I don't stock 9mm ammo, lots of other folks are doing that ;) The way to stock ammo and parts is to determine what ammo and firearm you shoot the most normally and then buy lots of ammo for that. It won't be wasted waiting for Armageddon if you shoot it normally.

October 15, 2004, 12:24 AM
The ruger gp100 is suppossed to be simpler to dismantle than the smith and wesson guns. I own a 686 and a gp100 but have not dismantled the 686 very far. The ruger is simple and I am ordering some common spare parts for it because I know I can keep it up and running by myself.

On the 22, I like a bolt action because it fires shorts, longs, and long rifle rounds. It is also virtually silent with cb rounds, either short or long, and I got rid of my bb gun after playing with some cb longs made by cci.

Overall, I am not about to have the largest percentage of my guns be for this list just because folks on this site think it is a good idea. I am keeping a few simple guns around. I am getting parts, books, tools, ammo, reloading components, and accessories for them.

If I am without a gun one day I suspect the black market will have something for sale. Just like it did yesterday, and today, and most likely will have tomorrow.

It is an interesting concept, one many militia groups have taken to a simple and smaller conclusion.

October 17, 2004, 02:08 AM
Or is there something I'm missing here?
I don't agree with cplieri on this thread, but I've already explained that. However, what you might be missing is that the Grand Militia of the Free Republic of Gun Nuts would rather have it's own stockpiles than have to get them from American military, which may be hostile in this hypothetical situation. Like, you know, it might be, like, easier?

October 17, 2004, 09:11 AM
The List:

3. Glock 17/19 -- NO AND MY 9x19 WOULD BE A HiPOWER
4. AR-15 -- OK, GOT ME THERE
7. 870 in 12ga -- USED TO HAVE AN 870, FINE SHOTGUN.

Here's what I do have

• Para Ordnance P14.45 LDA Limited .45 ACP
• Bulgarian Makarov 9x18mm
• Tanfoglio Witness Tactical II .45 ACP
• Ruger Vaquero .45 Colt
• Ruger Vaquero .45 Colt
• Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt
• Auto Ordnance 1911A1 .45 ACP
• Ruger MkII Target .22LR
• Pietta 1851 Navy .36 cal

• Lanber 2097 12 ga
• Mossberg 500 Persuader 12 ga
• Remington 1100 12 ga
• Winchester 1897 12 ga

• CZ V22 AR upper 22 LR
• Tikka T3 .300 WSM
• BSA Lee-Enfield No 4 Mk 1, .303 British
• Springfield (Remington) 1903A3, .30-06
• DPMS CAR-15A3 5.56x45mm
• Swiss K31, 7.5x55 Swiss
• Pedersoli Sharps 1874 Billy Dixon .45-70 Gov't
• Mosin-Nagant 91/30 7.62x54R
• Springfield Armory M1 Garand .30-06
• Mosin-Nagant M44 7.62x54R
• Yugo SKS 59/66A1 7.62x39mm
• DSA STG58A Type 1, 7.62x51mm
• Rossi M92 .45 Colt
• Mauser 98K Israeli/Czech .308 Win
• Mossberg 46(a) .22 LR
• Mannlicher-Berthier M.1892 8mm Lebel
• Springfield 1873 Trapdoor .45-70 Gov't
• 1864 E Robinson .58 cal

Yes you listed the most common weapons...guess I'm not common.

October 17, 2004, 08:58 PM
My choices would be:
Bolt Action Rifle in 30-06: Why? Bolt Actions are less prone to break, and 30-06 is a very common cartridge
Lever Action Rifle in 30-30: Why? it is very Common.
357 Magnum Revolver: Ruger GP-100. Why? 357 is very common and also can shoot a 38 special. Rugers are almost indestructable.
A pocket gun. (caliber: your choice.) Why? for situations where concealment is necessary.
Rifle in 22LR. Your Choice of Make & Manufacturer: Why? 22LR is Dirt Cheap, Common, and you can carry a lot of ammo which will cost you very little money.
A Rifle in 223 or 7.62x39mm.
A 12 Gauge Shotgun.

October 17, 2004, 09:23 PM
I took an hour to look at the comments and I see much commanality. Most of us have both a 9mm and a 45ACP in a semi of some kind. Most have a .357. Everyone has 22s. In rifles most have either a 7.62X39 or a 5.56 in some configuration. A substantial number have M-1 Garands. I will argue that a fairly substantial fighting platoon can be made of those with 30:06 weapons which will include both M-1s and bolt guns.

Another platoon could be made of 7.62X54 weapons, whether M-1As or bolt guns. Bunches of these folks have optical sights.

Another platoon would have those with 5.56 weapons.

A fourth platoon with 7.62X39.

Those with military experience would fall into shape rather quickly.

Personally I worry that without the draft there are so few with real military training that we would spend months trying to train a viable force.

With the draft every one would have commonality of training if not weapons.

October 18, 2004, 12:10 AM
With the draft every one would have commonality of training if not weapons. Our forefathers used the militia to accomplish this purpose. Can we do the same? Can we overcome the changing times and establish respectable militia units? "The Second Amendment; America's Original Homeland Security

Hijack Alert!

October 18, 2004, 02:22 AM
As we’ve seen in this thread most gun owners own at least one or two weapons that shoot the “standard” rounds listed. Those rounds, by virtue of being on this list, are also the most popular and plentiful. It actually doesn’t matter if we can agree on a weapon platform, (like 9mm Glocks or AR15 style rifles).

What matters is that 1) you are well trained in your weapon of choice, 2) you have sufficient ammunition to train with and provide for your defense and 3) you are at least familiar with the other common civilian and military weapons out there.

I agree 100% with standardized calibers - I have been sticking with NATO calibers myself because of the cost, effectiveness and abundant supply.

But I think what is even more important is that you choose a “set” of guns (I like the idea of four guns: Handgun, Shotgun, Rifle and .22) – and you train with them until you are as good as you can be. Training is WAY more important than weapon choice or even caliber choice.

If you have an oddball round but can shoot it better then 98% of your gun owning peers... well lets just say you won't have a problem getting supplied with whatever the "enemy" is using at the time. You'd just better know how to use it!

The IDEAL situation is standardized calibers, standardized weapon platforms and standardized training… but you know what you call that? An Army.

If we can get 1 out of 3 (standard calibers) plus ABOVE AVERAGE SKILL – we won’t have anything to worry about…

October 18, 2004, 02:36 AM
Fear the man with one gun that he knows how to use well...

..not the guy with 15 that he thinks are "really neat"... ;)

October 18, 2004, 07:24 PM
The answer to standardized training is not as obvious to those who have never benn to basic and hard to grasp to those who never saw combat. In 24 years as a 11B and then 19D I saw much difference between those who were adaquately trained and those who weren't. The lie most of us like is that Militia waon the revolution. I think the bes depiction of this is The Patriot. Even Marion realized that his Militia would stand up for a maximum of 2 rounds in a real fight. Militia is at best a pain in the ass, take Iraq today. This isn't Normandy, The Chosin, or Khe Sanh. If it wasn't for the press we wouldn't be paying that much attention.

The most those without training could do is be a royal pain while a tough standing army is trained, ala Valley Forge. Like then we could tie down units, kill leaders, pillage, and raise general hell while enticing the 82nd to come over to us.

October 18, 2004, 10:08 PM
I couldn't agree more. I think a lot of gun owners (present company excluded of course ;) ) have 15 or 25 guns of various calibers and actions but they don't know how to use a single one of them well.

More guns aren't better - you can only shoot one at a time and you can only carry a couple (plus ammo). Better to have a handful that you are an "expert" with than a whole closet full of ones that look cool that you don't know how to use effectively...

October 18, 2004, 11:54 PM
Good perspective, parados, and thanks for putting in so much time for us. But if you were making some point about training or weapons, I'm afraid I didn't understand. What did you mean?

October 19, 2004, 12:13 AM
Sorry I got a little off topic here, but to summarize:

It's important to have formal training and then practice regularly. Formal training doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg - but it does take effort.

Buying/shooting guns is great fun and we all look forward to our next purchase, but if its at the expense of seeking out training then our next "purchase" really should be formal training and not another gun.

To steer back on topic:

Your first few gun purchases should be in the standard calibers that everyone has: (9mm, .45, .223, .308 .22 etc). But if you already have those guns/calibers then investing in more skill is always a good "purchase". Because - the skill level you maintain WTSHTF will mean more then the guns you own.

If you enjoyed reading about "CHECK YOUR GUNSAFE! We all have the same guns!!!" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!