[James T Thomas]

I have been debating in my mind for years now, whether to go ahead and buy an M14 for what the younger men are calling "SHTF" defensive use, or simply to rely on what I know as my reliable -sporting use bolt action rifles.

I see the gung ho young men at the range wowing over their assault rifles, but having had the sobering reality of seeing them in action, I realize (first hand experience) that all the noise, while impressive, is deceptive to actual combat with them, and that the semi auto fire available in these assault rifles is just for that -assaulting a dug in enemy. I did much of that in training, and the grumbling amoung the infantrymen at that time was "you will never catch me doing that!" The enemy is below ground, behind sandbags, and you are on foot, above ground, and expecting your blazing fire to keep his head down so you can close in on him? Oh yea?
My experience in the reality of that tactic in Vietnam was that "suppressive" fire I see mentioned often, did not work! Think about it. If you were in a foxhole, and the enemy was before you advancing on your position, pouring on the fire. Would you duck your head down (ostrich with his head in the sand), or would you take bead on that soldier and end his advance? Having been in both situations, I knew that the semi auto fire was just a deception for the grunt to get him to believe he could attempt such a feat!
The men in my charge were required to use single shot, well aimed fire, and it worked. And yes it required dicipline. Self control. Courage.

So now, I can operate my bolt action fast enough; it too is rugged, reliable, but of course, requires frequent reloading. Dicipline and self control again.
The only consideration I have at all is the distinct possibility of sustaining a disabling hand or arm wound where I would have to unshoulder the rifle and operate the bolt buy the uninjured arm, while with a semi auto, that would not be necessary.

The hunting rifles will not sustain the heat output of prolonged fire either, but I just do not forsee engaging in day long battles such as I had experienced in war, in any civilian chaos happening.

Should I save up for the military rifle, or does my sensible side have things correct?

[f4t9r]

Should I save up for the military rifle, or does my sensible side have things correct?

Everyone needs a military rifle and they are so much fun

[pauli]

the best defensive weapon is the one that you practice with the most. typically, that means the one you enjoy shooting the most.

if you're happy with your bolt guns, stick to your bolt guns.

if it's a matter of practicality - just stick with what you know. if it's a matter of fun, the more the merrier.

[SpookyPistolero]

If you don't think you'll shoot and practice with a semi-auto, then I'd stick with the bolt gun. Not a bad thing at all, as practice allows for pretty darn quick cycling. If you're worried about capacity issues, ever think of trying the enfields? Ten rounds in a very fast cycling action, and it's stripper fed. If you've got cash to spare, the steyr scout sounds right up your alley. It also has a ten round mag adapter, and lots of other fun features.

This shows it: http://www.steyrscout.org/general.htm

[Roudy]

My money goes for the semi-auto M-14 using the tactics that you would with a bolt action. The M-14 has a 20 magazine and can be reloaded as fast or faster than a 5 round clip. Most of my long arms are bolt action military arms from the first half of the last century and one can be very proficient with them, however if I were defending my life I would want that extra 1/2 second between rounds to line up my next target.

That being said, I doubt if there are any (or very very few) circumstances outside of a war zone where this level of long range firepower is needed or even practical. If in home defense a shotgun or handgun would be more desirable.:D

[Balog]

I'd say that for most situations a bolt would be more than enough, esp if it could be stripper fed. I'd recommend practicing reloading while displacing. Since you'll only want to fire 2-3 shots from one position, if you can reload while running to the next pos it renders the extra capacity rather moot.

One advantage a military semi has over most bolts is sturdy peep sights. If your optics get messed up, I'd hate to be using fragile partridge-style sights on targets that are moving and hard to see. Even worse, many commercial bolts offer no iron sights at all, nor any means of mounting them. Optics only is for snipers only, IMHO. And snipers usually work in teams with a spotter carrying a semi to defend them.

The only time I'd truly feel undergunned without the extra speed and capacity of a semi would be in an urban riot/looting scenario. That's a target rich environment where you could easily find yourself defending a static position against large numbers. If they are hungry/angry/organized enough, it's very possible you might need to eliminate 10-20 villains to stop the groups aggression. And if the group is trying to get within Molotov range of your house, stopping them really fast would probably be a good thing.

Just a few thoughts, hope they are some help.

[chopinbloc]

some people aren't concerned about shtf at all. that's just fine. if you are, you should consider what threats you are likely to encounter and what rules (hint: none) the enemy will play by. what will you do if there are more than five armed men determined to get to the supplies that you thought ahead enough to provide? which brings me to the point that water, food, clothes, medical supplies, etc. should come before a new rifle. assuming that is taken care of i'd like to offer a little advice on the subject. first off, you don't necessarily need an m1a/m14 for shtf. i own an m1a but my rainy day rifle is an ar. you don't need to spend $1000+ either. any self loading rifle with a capacity of at least 20 rounds in detachable magazines and chambered in an intermediate or full power rifle cartridge will aquit itself quite well at defensive ranges i.e. <100m. you don't have to spray and pray just because you have a rifle that could. just as you ordered your troops to use effective, aimed shots then you could do so some dark day in the future. it is not unreasonable for you to hold of hundreds or even thousands of untrained looters with accurate fire from a self loading rifle and lots of ammo. this is unlikely with a turn bolt. one minor consideration is that ar-15s and aks are scarier looking and may keep you from having to fire at all. lastly, it is far more likely you will encounter rabid watermelons or bad tempered cardboard tagets that need to be dispatched and self loaders are just plain fun.

if you only plan on using it for purely utilitarian uses, save yourself the cash and just get an ak and a couple cases of the sealed yugo ammo from ammoman. if you plan on shooting it alot and want to enjoy it as much as your bolt actions, get an m1a/m14. you might surprise yourself; my loaded model will outshoot quite a few bolt actions.

[Too Many Choices!?]

Get the M14. You could do a lot worse, and as one poster already stated, every American needs atleast one military type rifle, specifically a semi-auto. Hell, you may find out that those youngsters are onto something with this semi-auto thing :) . If not, you can always sell the M14 and get some of your investment money back. Most times(read as: 7 out of 10) a bolt action rifle will do, but when you need a higher ROF, accept no substitutes.;)

[DunedinDragon]

Personally I own three military rifles. My primary reason for buying them was not SHTF or self-defense. Being ex-military I understand them, can shoot them, can work on them, can build them. I understand the ballistics involved and like the fact that they are all about business, nothing extra, nothing fancy, all function.

If, and that's a HUGE if, I were ever faced with a situation in which I really needed to protect myself and my property (read riots, and other SHTF situations) there's no doubt which weapons I would grab. But that wasn't my main criteria for buying them.

The reality is, I love to shoot. The fact I can use any of my weapons for self-defense is just icing on the cake. IMHO if you like to shoot, there is nothing more fun than shooting a military rifle.

[buzz meeks]

How dare you inject a note of pragmatism. This is the internet after all. Seriously... you're the combat vet. While the rest of us argue and pontificate about what we need and don't need in a rifle when the SHTF, you know what's needed. You also seem confident with you choice of a bolt action. Why change now?

Speaking personally, I've been down the autoloader road and won't go back. I bought a FrankenFAL from Century and actually got one of the good ones. But after the honeymoon, I just never shot it very much. I owned better rifles for hunting and rifles that were far handier to have along "just in case". Not too long ago I sold off that FAL and I've never felt better. I have gone to Mauser-patterned bolt action sporters and Marlin levers exclusively. They are not nearly as efficient as fighting tools but that is also the function for which I am least likely to use them. Instead I have tools that bring me great pleasure in the hunting fields and on the range. And if the SHTF I would feel at no disadvantage whatsoever.

So I'll go against the general trend at THR these days and say stick with the turnbolt. And if you simply must be tactically correct, go find a shooter-grade Springfield or Enfield, load up on stripper clips and fix bayonets.

[Rupestris]

the best defensive weapon is the one that you practice with the most. typically, that means the one you enjoy shooting the most.

if you're happy with your bolt guns, stick to your bolt guns.

if it's a matter of practicality - just stick with what you know. if it's a matter of fun, the more the merrier.

Makes sense to me.
Then again, my choice is lever guns.;)

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I'd consider whether your potential uses more carefully and decide whether you have a need or want for a self-loading rifle. When you consider the close range involved in the defensive use of firearms in most circumstances, a few things stand out to me:

1) Distances are likely to be short, less than 50yds almost certainly
2) Long guns have a tremendous advantage over pistols
3) Multiple threats are a good possibility

To me it seems a semi-auto rifle will have a distinct advantage over a bolt-action rifle in a scenario like the one described above.

The enemy is below ground, behind sandbags, and you are on foot, above ground, and expecting your blazing fire to keep his head down so you can close in on him?

I don't know too many people who buy self-loading rifles because they plan on assaulting a dug-in opponent over open ground and will be providing their own cover fire. If this is the scenario you envision needing a firearm for, there are probably superior solutions you can plan for, inclduing many that don't involve firearms at all.

[wayne in boca]

For assaulting an underground sandbagged enemy,perhaps a 155 mm howitzer is a better choice than an M1A.For repelling drunken and drug-addicted looters,an M1A would shine brightly.If you buy one,it will soon be one of your favorite rifles,trust me.They are sweet shooters,firepower aside.

[Too Many Choices!?]

If this is the scenario you envision needing a firearm for, there are probably superior solutions you can plan for, inclduing many that don't involve firearms at all.

{MR. ROGERS VOICE} Can you kids say,"ar-til-lery"? I knew you could
:)

[James T Thomas]

The concept I tried to describe is that the sole purpose for the rapid semi automatic fire available with the M1, M14, M16,AK47 and others is to assault the enemy across a field where he is dug in! Or in a bunker; Normandyt.
They are "assault" rifles.

The repeating rifle like the Springfield and Enfield were thought capable of enough fire power to handle multiple enemies on a battlefield.

I agree with that, having seen firsthand such fire. It is more devastaing than the young men raised on volumous automatic / semi -auto fire that is the rage today realize.
The pernicious influence of Hollywood movies just amazes me.

Thanks for all the input, however, I still remain undecided on the sole criteria of having an arm or hand disabled by fire and remaining in the fight attempting to cycle my bolt action with just one good arm available.
I've seen such wounds and know you may completely loose the use of the wounded arm, etc. But I have known men who continued on in the battle, refusing to die without a fight.

So, I suppose I will rely on my sporting purpose, bolt action rifles to see me through any SHTF situation.
Yes, the military semi's are fun to shoot, all that blasting and such, but remembering the cries for more ammo, more ammo, I'm going to trust in my experience and go with what I've learned the hard way.

Now, providing a weapon to a family member who is without that experience is another matter, and another consideration.

[Shane333]

This is an interesting question.

Let's take a look at the battlefield for another viewpoint. In WWII it was the M1 Garand verses the Mauser. Both were capable of accurate, long range fire.

However, the Garand's superior firepower gave it a distinct advantage over the Mauser. Not "spray and pray" fire, but accurate superior firepower.

Then it was discovered that the vast majority of combat took place at under 200 yards. The advantage of superior firepower together with shorter combat ranges led to the development of "assault rifles" in intermediate cartridges.

You can still fire accurate, well aimed shots with an assault rifle at most combat ranges. Sure, long range combat is where a bolt action shines, but long range combat isn't always possible (or desired).

[goon]

If you stumble across a semi auto military type rifle that you like, I say buy it. I doubt that any of us really need the firepower that a FAL or M1A provides, but I still don't see how it would be a bad thing to have it.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The concept I tried to describe is that the sole purpose for the rapid semi automatic fire available with the M1, M14, M16,AK47 and others is to assault the enemy across a field where he is dug in!

If that is the sole purpose for such weapons, then why are they being used in roles such as law enforcement today?

[DMK]

Want a very rugged, ultra reliable, powerful and handy rifle with great sights?

The ten round mag, reloadable with stripper clips gives it a slight advantage over your typical sporting rifle.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=32343&stc=1&d=1134003999

[cracked butt]

The repeating rifle like the Springfield and Enfield were thought capable of enough fire power to handle multiple enemies on a battlefield.


The Marine Corps thought pretty much the same at the onset of WWII. Amazingly enough, though they feared the 'spray and pray' mentality that they were sure would come with the M1, in the end they found the M1 far superior to the springfield.

Don't think of it as a semiauto, think of it as a bolt action where you don't have to work the action between shots.

I get the feeling that the author of this thread is finding or airing out his own reasons as to why he dislikes semiautos versus actually looking at the practicality of such rifles.

One thing to think about- the guys who compete in high power competition use semiautos almost exclusively. Shooting a semiauot doesn't mean a person is going to expend ammo any more frivolously than with a bolt gun.

[goon]

It depends on the semiauto for me. With something like an AK I figure that I am not going to hit anything anyway (never have been any good past 100 yards with one). With a FAL or an SKS aiming works for me. I have found that I can shoot a FAL better than anything else I have ever shot, even my esteemed M39. I shot M-16's pretty well on semi auto too so I can't see how an AR would be any different. I think it is like any other gun though - the shooter matters more than the rifle.

[chopinbloc]

cracked, i heartily agree.

while suppressive fire may be useful in some few, very limited circumstances, accurate, aimed fire is what wins fights. it is what dropped nazis in '44 and it's what is dropping jihadists today.

an m1a - especially a loaded or NM model will outshoot many turnbolts out of the box as will decent quality ar type rifles.

i know that when i pick up my m1a or one of my ars i don't suddenly cackle in glee and blast off rounds until the weapon runs dry.

remember that a self loading rifle can contribute to the practical accuracy of a shooter in several ways. one is repeatability - one maintains their cheek to stock weld from shot to shot. another is reduced recoil which leads to less flinching.

for purely defensive purposes, even an ak is accurate enough. all you have to do is hit a human target at a maximum rang of 150m. an ak is perfectly capable of doing so. you still will not suddenly start spraying. you will carefully aim 30 shots, witnesses 30 attackers rapidly assume ambient temperatures and reload. more likely you will carefully aim one or two shots and even the drug crazed horde will turn and leave but you can't guarantee that.


let me put it this way:
worst case scenario - terrible storm season has knocked out the power over much of the eastern seaboard. many bridges have washed away. you have wisely stored up supplies for protracted self sufficiency. roving gangs are searching for anything potable or edible - including you. you find yourself on your roof trying to repel determined, starving people who KNOW you have food because they smelled your cook fire. many are armed. all are determined to eat. how much distance do you think that punk with the 9mm or machete can cover while you reload? how likely is it that some slip through when you find yourself reloading every 5 rounds? is your family as proficient as you are?

a turnbolt is better than nothing and may, in fact scare off the other aggressors after you drop one or two, but what happens if they don't follow your preconceived notions? what happens if they aren't impressed?

you can rationalize it all you want. if you like turnbolts and you don't like semis, that's fine. we are still - mostly - a free country. if you are actually considering the practical side of it, there is no argument. a good semi does everything a turnbolt does but it can keep doing it longer and with a shorter pause between shots plus a shorter pause when reloading. there is no disputing the tactical advantage that allows.

[1911user]

I guess all of the US WW2 vets just sprayed and prayed their way to victory in Europe 60+ years ago. :banghead:
I suggest buying an British Enfield and leaving the semi-autos to those with some trigger control (and self control).

[GunnySkox]

I guess all of the US WW2 vets just sprayed and prayed their way to victory in Europe 60+ years ago. :banghead:
I suggest buying an British Enfield and leaving the semi-autos to those with some trigger control (and self control).

Man, is that necessary at all? You could offer some (more) reasons that YOU prefer semiautos over bolties, or some methods/training/whatever to maintain fire discipline in stressful situations with a semiautomatic rifle, or ANYTHING constructive, but all that's quoted above is just asinine.

~GnSx
"Wow, buddy, way to be a dick."

[cracked butt]

Originally Posted by 1911user
I guess all of the US WW2 vets just sprayed and prayed their way to victory in Europe 60+ years ago.
I suggest buying an British Enfield and leaving the semi-autos to those with some trigger control (and self control).

Man, is that necessary at all? You could offer some (more) reasons that YOU prefer semiautos over bolties, or some methods/training/whatever to maintain fire discipline in stressful situations with a semiautomatic rifle, or ANYTHING constructive, but all that's quoted above is just asinine.


The suggestion he had about buying an enfield is pretty good. If a guy decides to stay inside the bolt action box, he could do much worse than an enfield. ;)

[Andrew S]

I think you are pretty much set on a bolt action so I wouldnt try and convince you otherwise.


However, if you are interested in a semi-auto I wouldnt make the jump into an expensive rifle like the M1A. A cheap SKS will give you an idea of what to expect and give you a feel for what its like so you can make your own decision. You wont be out much money if you dont like it and its cheap to shoot while you make your decision. I also like the idea of an M1 Garand. Again, its less of an investment than an AR or M1A and you end up with a piece of American history. Its also a darn good rifle.

[Sulaco]

I am no expert, probably not even a good amateur, never served in the military and never played a soldier on TV, but I do have some common sense.

Given those qualifications, I choose a leveraction. My main concern with a true SHTF scenario would be ammo. I can't carry the 5k rounds I have stockpiled (not really but I thought it sounded good) and I know everybody and their brother has a 30-30. So I can get ammo just about anywhere.

Then, the leveraction is such a great design, faster than a bolt, accurate enough and a real thumper in 30-30. Whats not to like?

With a decent scope and the stock sights, it makes a great all-around rifle.

I also understand the desire for semi-automatic fire and larger capacities, but I don't want them. I like to keep things simple.

It sounds like you feel the same way more or less, only about a bolt gun. I say keep the bolt gun and spend the money on ammo.

:)

[EVIL5LITER]

Allow me to put forth my own opinion and paranoia into the discussion.

You have to consider what will define "SHTF" to determine your rifle.

I'll try and outline it in seperate situations here:

1)Scenario #1: Rioters - In the case of this, you are going to be faced with multiple targets at close ranges. Some will be armed, but mostly (hopefully) with clubs, bats, etc. Your firearm of choice should be whatever you have in your hand at the time. Accurate fire is nice, but not necessary, as the very site of the firearm should be enough to deter the situation into non-confrontation. A shotgun would work well, but don't overlook a good turnbolt like the Enfield.

2)Scenario #2: World Government/UN/Homeland War - In this scenario, guerilla warfare will be the tactic of all. That means single shots from long distances, and disappearing back into the darkness. A bolt rifle, or very accurate semi auto will work, but you must remember that ammo could become scarce, meaning you'd have to use what is readily available: The enemy's. .223 and .308 are standard NATO cartridges, and that's what I'd count on. If it were me, I'd make sure I had a rifle for each caliber.

[AZgunstudent]

I think Evil5Liter is on the money. For a short-term urban survival situation like New Orleans, a semiauto carbine might be just the ticket, since you're more likely to bump into multiple (though probably poorly armed) opponents at relatively short range. An AR or an AK would shine here, though you'd hardly be unarmed with a bolt gun and a good pistol.

If your definition of "SHTF" is to head to the hills for long-term survival, a good modern sporter might be best for an individual who is not part of a military-type fire team. Out in the hills, evasion is an option preferable to confrontation. A good sporter is lighter and handier than a heavier, clumsier military rifle. In the hills and on your own, you should have an easier time controlling the circumstances of a fight, and so you can fight from greater distance using precision fire. A scoped sporter is pretty much designed for this, though with the intent of shooting game animals rather than bipeds.

Jeff Cooper goes into this in some detail in "To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth." I recommend it!

[James T Thomas]

Some of the responders apparently do not read the full thread, or I'll admit, my composition is not always clear.

Shane333: I had experienced short combat range, and longer, in the jungles of Vietnam and yes, the infantryman can "still fire accurate, well aimed shots with an AR, however. Here is what I encountered.
Under the stress of someone sighting on you and trying to kill you, many; I would just estimate, half of us humans will be so frightened that the urge to "make loud noise and scare that enemy, or fire off quick 'flash sight' response fire" is just overwhelming! The result of such stress is misses and wasted ammo. It is so, so tempting to return fire in that manner, that I had to vigorously enforce the single shot dicipline over and over with the men I was responsible for. And they were incredibly brave men I assure you. Having a manually operated rifle to depend on precludes that response.
We carried weapons that could fire full auto and empty a magazine in almost a "burst" of fire. Even at close range; doing that would produce misses!
I know that is incredible, and counter to what you have experienced at the range, but I assure you it is so.
I just passed my "anniversary" of 3 Dec '68 when my company; D 2/7 Cavalry (Custer's Unit ironically), First (Air) Cavalry was annihilated. A few survived and I correspond with them today. Ret. Gen. McAfferty -then Capt. was our B company back up, but was prevented from joining us and had to listen in on the radio while we were slaughtered. Anyway, I know about what is called today as "firepower" and it is over rated.

Bart Roberts: I cannot answer your question as to why the law enf. organizations are using semi's instead of manual operated rifles. Other than conjecture that holding such an awsome weapon in your hands will inspire the young and naieve recruit to engage criminals with a agression he probably would not do if he were armed with a firearm that requires a more deliberate approach.

Cracked Butt: Perhaps you are right about the WWII Marine Corps, however, I have seen first hand the phenomenon of ~1:5 soldiers not engaging the enemy and simply discharging their weapons in the air; as don't shoot me and I will not shoot you mentality. It sounds very similar to the recent CCW -Tacoma mall encounter. My suspicion is that is why the US went to the Garand more than any other reason.
I don't dislike semi -autos, but I do believe they present a firefight dynamic that I have been struggling to describe that is detrimental.
Perhaps the knowing that you have another shot available at the instant press of the trigger does influence some men to expend ammo and a good shot frivolously. That is, take a quik one, because another is available. After all, you're frightened, your heart is pounding, your mouth is dry, your hands tremble, your chest heaves, etc.

chopinbloc: Thanks, you have given me food for thought. Particularly the practical accuracy aspect of reduced recoil and maintaining the cheek to stock "weld." I attempt to keep it with my bolt gun, but the s.a. is more condusive. Roving gangs and the consideration of someone slipping through my defense is realistic.

Evil5Liter: Your rioters and UN/World Gov't scenarios were good. (I would like to see the US evict the UN and not fund one more dollar to them, but that is another forum). The scarce ammo aspect makes me think more of the bolt action values than most others.

1911user: Your remark is uncalled for. If you have read my previous posts, this reply, and believe that I am truthfull, then, please do not judge me as one who has no trigger and self control. You might be suprized how much I have. I have left the semi -autos behind, but want to consider the tactic of it before I make up my mind.

Sulaco: I like the lever actions almost as well as the b.a. and have placed the 30-30 close to the top of my get one list. Thanks.

[Blackhawk 6]

I don't dislike semi -autos, but I do believe they present a firefight dynamic that I have been struggling to describe that is detrimental.

The manner in which any weapon is employed is determined by the operator, not the weapon system.

Consider the circumstances under which you see yourself employing a rifle and select the best tool for the job.

[jeremywills]

Wow, what an interesting read


Peoples opinions of SHTF and what to do sometimes amazes me. Quite entertaining too.

Ok, not to get too off topic here, I used to be the kind of guy that thought spray and pray was the way to go. As a kid, any type of video or computer game and I was usually using something full auto. If it was a semi auto, I was shooting as fast as I could click the mouse or buttons :D

As I have gotten older, I have reverted to more of a One Shot, One Kill mentaility. I still think a double tap, center mass is the way to go, definately only available on a semi auto. For my handgun this will work just fine and I have practiced and practiced this so that if the so called SHTF happens, if the handgun happens to be in my hands then this is what I will employ. As for rifles, its funny, you play Call of Duty and suddenly bolt action rifles like the Enfield, and the Nagant, Garand even the Masuer are appealing because you are forced to start out with one. Even though its only a computer game, you do a 180 and appreciate the turnbolt, go figure. Honestly this is what made me want an old WWII era rifle. I was having more fun trying to ensure my first shot was the only shot fired to drop someone. That game really did a number with my mentality towards firearms.

So for the one shot one kill thinking, recently picked up a .22 bolt and a Mosin Nagant. My mentality is shot placement over making a bunch of noise. Its very tempting to just start popping off shots with a Semi Auto, its loads of fun, if your having a good time at the range and not too worried about accuracy, but I have decided against owning one. Sure I would love an AR and an AK etc... if the deal of the century drops into my lap, but I decided well placed one shot one kill is probably the best option if it all goes south, thus the recent Mosin purchase. Same thing with the .22 bolt, a 10/22 or equiv would have been most likely what I would have bought years ago, I never thought I would buy a single shot bolt ever. Things change.

I would rather know each shot counts and I would feel badly if I miss and hit someone else in the process. A semi auto can increase that chance. Then again, many decent arguements were made about multiple targets etc.... each side has a valid point.

Going back to the beginning of this posting, it sounded like you were leaning towards the bolt as a practical tool. I would say so.

Then what do I know, this is just my 2 cents and take it for what its worth. I think you already knew the answer to your question right off the bat. :)

BTW, thanks for serving our country all those years ago, so sad that conflict I appreciate anyone who had to put up with that crap. History has and will always repeat itself and Im sad to see the same thing happening today.

Ok, Im done now. Sorry to ramble so much.

[Shane333]

James T Thomas,

I'm amazed at your personal experience. I'd love to read more details if your time allows you to type them up. Not having fought in combat, my thoughts are mere speculation, so I appreciate your experience in the matter.

Overall, I see two significant factors in choosing one kind of rifle over another: Range of engagement and the numbers opposing you.

These two things have already been addressed here, so I don't think I could really add anymore than what's been said.

For me, depending on the situation, I could easily see myself grabbing either my K31 for very accurate mid - long range shots. For close range out to 150 yards, I would probably prefer my .223 AK.

[1911user]

1911user: Your remark is uncalled for. If you have read my previous posts, this reply, and believe that I am truthfull, then, please do not judge me as one who has no trigger and self control. You might be suprized how much I have. I have left the semi -autos behind, but want to consider the tactic of it before I make up my mind.

I tire of the shooter being judged by the rifle they choose. From what I read of your postings (and I did read them, twice), you seem to believe that semi-auto rifles are somehow detrimental to good shooting and no knowledgable shooter would use one. The rifle is just a tool, the shooter is the weapon. Being a die-hard bolt-gun shooter, I would imagine you have good trigger control. You'd have that same trigger control with a Garand, M-14, AK-47, AR-15, or any other semi-auto. You'd also have more options if a fast second shot is needed; sometimes bad guys work as a group. My semi's are more accurate than many bolt-guns and they are reliable with a military history.

I expected you, a seasoned combat vet, to understand and appreciate the possible need for a few quick shots yet you jump on semi-auto rifles (and denigrate the people that choose them) and just don't ever let up. Bolt-guns are for mighty warriors who aim and kill entire groups of people with one well-placed shot while semi-auto users just fire mag after mag and don't even bother to aim because they only know suppressive fire. Is that what you really intended to say????

So, I suggested the British Enfield with its 10 round mag and quick-firing bolt action. Use it up close and something else with a scope for distance.

[James T Thomas]

Shane333: If the moderator permits. The anniversary battle I mentioned can be read about on .military.com >Vietnam >Veteran's Articles > "No DEROS Delta" by Steve Banko III. Steve has been awarded three Silver Stars, was terribly wounded in the legs, and is alive and well. Some soldiers consider having two S.S. to be more indicitive of heroism than The Congr. Medal of Honor, since they indicate an ongoing or continuence of bravery and valor.
I'm not sure of the correctness of the path at the web site I have given, so if you have difficulty, please send me a personal here.
The First Air Cavalry used "steel steeds" i.e. helicopters to go into combat, and that is what we did. Ride into battle after battle after battle.

Much of my viewpoint can be assessed by going to my public profile and posts.
I was the weapons platoon leader in Co.D. I had been in country for over six months and was the most experienced officer at the time of that battle.
-Six months! I had gone through three Capt. and many Lt. because; I was to find out -the officers were the first to go. Before the radio men, before the machine gunners, etc.
(All the men who have not been in combat: the officers are resented for their arrogance, ignorance, authority, and all that. But, when the bullets fly, it's "Sir, what should we do?")

Regarding the fright and "spraying" phenomena -spraying denotes haphazzard blasting, and that is not really what I'm describing, but rather, snapping or shooting before all the nuances of aimed fire have been taken; I guess -in the hope that you will get a "hit" and that will be good enough to effect the immediate outcome of your fight for life.

There were two good examples right here in Pgh, one just yesterday.
Pgh. Police stopped a car for vehicle violation, the driver exited, pulled a pistol and engaged at close range ~15 yds or less. One officer struck in the hand and the shooter was shot, but is alive. Thirtyeight rounds were fired by the police. That is the fight dynamic.
Several months ago two patrollmen inside their vehicle were suddenly brought under fire by a criminal who suddenly appeared in front of them at thirty feet away and began to rapidly fire his semi -auto at them. They both managed to exit the vehicle unhit, and return fire. I believe 78 rounds were fired by the two officers, who managed to take the shooter into custody.
NO One was hit.

By the way, here goes, I carry a "retro" revolver for my personal protection, just because I will take control of my urges and will use well aimed fire.
You had mentioned the ethics as well as the legal responsibility for all the bullets you discharge.
So...my lean towards the manually operated rifles for the SHTF occurence.

[cracked butt]

Perhaps the knowing that you have another shot available at the instant press of the trigger does influence some men to expend ammo and a good shot frivolously. That is, take a quik one, because another is available. After all, you're frightened, your heart is pounding, your mouth is dry, your hands tremble, your chest heaves, etc.


I think that is a very reasonable analysis. I've seen deer hunters in the woods do roughly the same thing youdescribed with semiautos, and I've seen (and more often heard) this occur very often. On the other hand, this has been known for a long time to happen. Paul Mauser designed his rifles with panicky shooters in mind- controlled round feed to prevent double loading jams, and a bolt stop on the back of the magazine follower to prevent a soldier from trying to fire the rifle over and over again after its empty. 1903 Springfield rifles were designed with a magazine cutoff with the notion that rounds would be single loaded with 5 rounds held in reserve to prevent soldiers from frivolously burning through ammo.


chopinbloc: Thanks, you have given me food for thought. Particularly the practical accuracy aspect of reduced recoil and maintaining the cheek to stock "weld." I attempt to keep it with my bolt gun, but the s.a. is more condusive. Roving gangs and the consideration of someone slipping through my defense is realistic

He had an outstanding point. I've shot High Power Rifle using both the 1903 springfield and M1 garand, I own and shoot both regularly. The Springfield is a much more accurate rifle than the M1, yet I shoot better scores with the M1.

Rapid fire is the bane of the '03 for me. With every shot, I have to scootch my head out of the way so that the bolt doesn't punch me in the face when I cycle it. I can shoot the rifle plenty fast enough, but I have to break my cheek weld between each shot which hurts consistancy. I have a short action remington 700 that I don't need to break my cheek weld to cycle, but it has the disadvantage of not having a stripper guide for quick reloads.

[James T Thomas]

1911user: Now I know. You can insult a man's wife, kick his dog, and owe him money, but do not -do not say a thing about his choice of arms!
If I owe you money sir, please send the bill, and I will promptly pay up.

I'm supposing then you chose a semi -auto of some sort.
I believe they are developmental to good shooting -if they have a quality trigger mechanism.

I believe they also, can be, but not always....tempting to rely on fire power in place of marksmanship. Sorry!

I've not reached the "die -hard" stage yet. I have two semi -auto pistols that keep me open minded so far.

To all who own semi -auto rifles: I will never denegrate you for your choice.
Never!

As far as what I intend to say. I've said. No implications period.
And 1911, I don't feel like a mighty warrior, really. The M16 my men and I used in Vietnam was semi or full auto, and the suppressive fire you mentioned did not work at all. The semi -auto fire we both like and admire, was effective, only when well aimed, deliberate shots were taken.

Sir, don't be offended at me. Correct me. Argue with me.
This is the THR.

[chopinbloc]

...because I will take control of my urges and will use well aimed fire.

mr. thomas, i am confident that you would be able to do so with an accurate self loader. that said, i beleive the reasonable approach would be for you to get yourself an ak lots of mags and lots of ammo. play with it, have fun and keep it in reserve. you started this thread with shtf in mind. with that premise, you would probably be best served by your turnbolt and if/when things get close and ugly you should be able to transition to a slung ak pretty easily. you can pick one up pretty cheaply, the ammo and mags are cheap as well and the cartridge is certainly adequate for human targets. hopefully you will never again need to fire a shot at a human but with the combination of scoped turnbolt and iron sighted ak you should have the near and far threats covered pretty well without having to drop another two thousand dollars on a new rifle.

[goon]

If you like bolt actions I would suggest trying a Jungle Carbine. Enfields are fast to work but a full power military rifle doesn't handle real fast. A Jungle carbine may fill the gap if you don't want to go to a semi auto.

[EVIL5LITER]

Someone has mentioned the K-31 here. While I think it would be the best of both worlds, in that it delivers accuracy and amazingly quick follow up shot potential, the ammo is impossible to find in stores or from other people, and is quite expensive for surplus ammo, so it is not an option I would look at.

[Trebor]

May I make a suggestion? Take a "Urban Rifle" or "Practical Rifle" course or similiar rifle course with your prefered bolt gun. See how the gun, and you, perform an environment that requires making hits on multiple targets and on making hits on targets at various ranges. That should answer any questions on the suitability of your choice, one way or the other.

[Shane333]

Someone has mentioned the K-31 here. While I think it would be the best of both worlds, in that it delivers accuracy and amazingly quick follow up shot potential, the ammo is impossible to find in stores or from other people, and is quite expensive for surplus ammo, so it is not an option I would look at.

I mentioned the K31. Yes, very accurate. Yes, very quick action since it's a straight pull bolt action.

The ammo is somewhat expensive, but the military surplus stuff is near match grade, so I would expect it to cost a little more. Wolf recently started importing new ammunition for it, so now you should start seeing it on store shelves. Also, the Wolf brass is reloadable, and since the cartridge uses a .308 bullet it is a good option for reloaders.

Also, there's a clamp-on scope mount for the K31 that is offset to the right. This allows you to switch from the optics to the irons in just a moment's time, depending on the range of the shot.

Not the ideal rifle for close-quarters-combat, but more than adequate for everything else. In rural areas this rifle would excel.

[Ian]

I think Trebor has the best idea yet. Take that bolt rifle to a good training class and see how you do with it. That'll do more to show you what's practical and what isn't than a whole lot of forum threads...

[SpookyPistolero]

A big +2 to Trebor's idea. Either way, you'll come out ahead. It would be a good way to test your own notions. I'd make sure you use a stripper or mag fed rifle, though.

[1911user]

A big +2 to Trebor's idea. Either way, you'll come out ahead. It would be a good way to test your own notions. I'd make sure you use a stripper or mag fed rifle, though.
+3 on the excellent suggestion. Take the class as a test and see how well your hardware and ideas hold up to some stress testing.

[chopinbloc]

another vote for trebor's idea. that'll tell you alot more than any jackass with a keyboard ( myself included ) can.

[Rob1035]

For the record, are there many (if any) modern bolt guns that come with decent irons? Excluding milsurps and high buck bullseye comp type guns...

[cslinger]

What kind of SHTF are we talking about again.

I really don't think a bolt gun will do you wrong if that is what you choose. I really don't think any gun will do you wrong as long as you are proficient and comfortable in it's use in 99% of the situations you are likely to face.

If you are facing a determined, well armed, military threat.............well you are pretty much screwed. Tough to deal with combined arms and air support with any rifle.

Do I think a nice high capacity semi automatic makes a better SD gun? YES. Do I think somebody would likely be prey in most any likely situation if they only had a bolt gun....NO.

Now all that aside, get yourself a semi auto just to have something different and to have fun with. I say this because God willing and the creek don't rise the greatest SHTF that requires a firearm the majority of us will ever face is a soda can uprising. Yes it can happen. Yes it pays to be prepared. But all in all chances are fun will be your primary use for your arm.

My uneducated two cents.

[James T Thomas]

"Trebor" and others:

Thank you all for the comments and suggestions.
The "Practical Rifle" course seems especially usefull. I'll wait for Spring and remove the scope from my M77 and have a good aperature sight installed.
I'll post the results so that there may be mutual benefit.

[SpookyPistolero]

Sounds like a plan, results would be most appreciated.

[benEzra]

My main concern with a true SHTF scenario would be ammo. I can't carry the 5k rounds I have stockpiled (not really but I thought it sounded good) and I know everybody and their brother has a 30-30. So I can get ammo just about anywhere.
Lever actions are neat (I may have to get one someday), but around here, .223 and 7.62x39mm are a lot more common. I actually don't know anyone personally who has a .30-30, but can count several coworkers and acquaintances who own self-loading carbines in 7.62x39mm and .223.

[jeremywills]

My dad has an old sears model 54, essentially a winchester 30-30 lever action equivalent, it was even made by winchester for sears, i guess the only difference was the rollstamp for sears

it makes quite the handy lil deer rifle actually, Im a carbine kind of guy so I appreciate the smallish types of rifles :D

It would get the job done.

[Lebben-B]

Mr. Thomas,

First, let me thank you for your service. I understand you reluctance to use semi-automatic rifles and disdain for supressive fire, based on your wartime experiences. I'm not going to try to talk you out of your stated position, but to tell you a bit about my war and hopefully provide you with a bit of take-away from it.

Here in Baghdad, an IED is sometimes used as a trigger for a more coordinated attack, similar to initiating an ambush with the most casualty producing weapon. In an enclosed area with fire coming from multiple points, with many other potential points of fire (some with the advantage of height), the vicinity around the patrol must be cleared. Windows, doorways, alley entrances, roof lines, et al that have been ID'd as having active shooters are fired upon or supressed in order to allow an assaulting element to get into a positively ID'd building. It is not the "mad minute" that you know. Supressive fire is less precise fire, I grant you. But in an urban environment, this fire is not indiscriminant. The fire focuses on small areas within a Soldier's individual sector of fire (as dictated by METT-T). Automatic and semi-automatic weapons allow an adequate volume of fire to cover the movement of an assault element to an objective building. Once that assault element is in place and ready for it's final move into the building, the fire stops and shooters only engage targets of opportunity that should appear.

Which leads me to my next point. Exposure times are fleeting, sometimes measured in the barest of seconds. The snap shot that you just took will require an immediate better-aimed shot just afterward. A bolt-action rifle precludes this shot. With a '50's vintage semi rifle (FAL/M14) the shot comes too late because of the slower action. The current family of M16/M4 rifles because of their in-line design and lack of a gas piston allows for a faster follow-up shot.

Mr. Thomas, in one of your earlier posts in this thread you reference an incident in Pittsburgh. I am guessing that you live near there if not in an urban area, a suburban one. An area with many structures both personal and commerical, no doubt. Most SHTF scenarios are based on incidents happening in an urban/suburban setting. A semi-automatic rifle firing a middle-weight cartridge of sufficient length should fit the requirements of home defense/SHTF/target-proficiency shooting.

AATW,

Mike

[Sgt. York]

SHTF scenarios are just that-scenarios. I say just enjoy rifle shooting and quit worrying about scenarios. Me, I plan to pop all the would-bees in the eyes from my rooftop using any one of several .22s (semis and bolts). (Would-bees are just overfed squirrels anyway) Mr. Thomas, I'll bet you probably trained with an M14 (M1A) and are quite familiar and comfortable with it's characteristics, so this is indeed, all academic. If you really want an M1A bad enough, maybe you better worry about that real SHTF scenario.......when your wife finds out! P.S. I'm surprised that no one has suggested a pump action rifle in a mild caliber like .243 (or a .30-30 like I have)

[dacat]

My 2 cents.......if you are sure you can keep your enemy further away than say 50 or 100yards, the bolt gun would do fine.

The problem is if you cannot keep them from closing with you. The closer you get to them the more important your rate of fire becomes. Full auto would be desireable inside 20 yards or so, not many of us have that tho.:(