One and Only Survival Gun

[Squire Western]

This has been a very fine, thought provoking thread. Hopefully, the apocalypse scenario never comes about.

However, the OP has generated excellent ideas about the various weapons to use, if imminent doom, begins to loom.

I have been educated, which is always a delightful surprise on the internet!

 

[Llama Bob]

Several people in this thread seem to have very odd ideas about survival, and in particular where calories come from.

The fact of the matter is that if anything goes seriously wrong, you will almost certainly NOT be able to hunt for food. Game will be gone VERY quickly. For example, my state has slightly over 5 million people, and about 300 thousand big game animals. In the absence of refrigeration, they will last the population about a week. Small game will let people hold out a few days more. Then there will be no game. In contrast, there are 2.4 million cattle - more than an order of magnitude more food there than in the big game population.

The reality is that no matter how bad things get, you really only have two sources of food that last beyond the first month: whatever you've stored, and agriculture. Your survival would eventually come down to producing enough military power to lay claim to and defend those stores and agriculture, just like it has the world over for millennia. Civilization and agriculture are like a genie - once they're let out of the bottle (by increasing population to a size that requires them) they cannot be put back in. You may get a different or worse civilization, but you will get one and it's first and essential function will be to control the local agriculture. Survival consists of fitting yourself into that civilization.

The tool for producing military power is the rifle. For practical purposes in the US that means a .223, .308 or .30-06. Bolt or auto doesn't matter much. Optics would be nice. Backup irons would be nice. Since there's no conceivable reason not to have one (there's actually no 1-gun limit), a handgun would also be useful, mostly for dealing with people you mistakenly though were on your side.

 

[Ignition Override]

Hours before Katrina hit Gulfport MS, a coworker drove east to the FL Panhandle. From there he brought gasoline in huge jugs back to his brother's destroyed home.

They could see looters about four houses away, armed with a baseball bat. This guy's brother held a handgun (large or small-no idea) high in the air as the looters gazed in their direction. The looters decided to keep their distance.
Looters never asked whether it was .380 vs a 9x19 chambering, vs. .40.

 

[Ed Ames]

One reason I like the .22 WMR over the .22 LR in this scenario is that the .22 WMR has about the same energy at 100 yards as .22 LR has at the muzzle.

My experience is that WMR also tends to have lower dud rates.

My problem with the WMR is not with WMR itself, but with the guns that (I know) are chambered for it. Maybe it is just that I don't know what exists. There are a lot of cool WMR guns I wouldn't trust, and classic WMR guns that don't really fit my needs, but I don't know of any that hit my particular sweet spot.

Several people in this thread seem to have very odd ideas about survival, and in particular where calories come from.

You mean like thinking "surviving during an economic collapse" means "...producing enough military power to lay claim to and defend ... stores and agriculture...?

I have no problem with agriculture, and I know my shoulder things that go up, but I can deliver a LOT more value to any society, collapsed or not, with my knowledge than with a weapon. A gun for me is just a little extra tool to keep people honest. Well, and keep me amused.

 

[chicharrones]

My experience is that WMR also tends to have lower dud rates.

My problem with the WMR is not with WMR itself, but with the guns that (I know) are chambered for it. Maybe it is just that I don't know what exists. There are a lot of cool WMR guns I wouldn't trust, and classic WMR guns that don't really fit my needs, but I don't know of any that hit my particular sweet spot.

If I didn't already have my particular .22 WMR bolt gun, I'd be interested in three that came out not too long ago. All three have iron sights from the factory.

The Ruger American Rimfire .22 WMR 18" barrel version with threaded muzzle and of course its 9-round flush fit magazines. It's lightweight at 5.5 lbs so that adding an optic won't hurt it much for a carry around gun. http://ruger.com/products/americanRimfire/specSheets/8322.html

Then there is the Henry Small Game Carbine in .22 WMR with 16.25" barrel and 7-round tube mag capacity. It comes with a receiver sight from Skinner. I have a good friend with the rifle version of that Henry and it shoots very well with ammo it likes. This Henry is only a little heavier than the Ruger at 5.75 lbs., but the Ruger is 3" longer. Sling mounts would have to be added to the Henry, IMO. https://www.henryusa.com/rifles/henry-small-game-carbine-rifle/

If an auto-loader was to be considered, I think the CZ 512 could be an interesting option. 5-round and 10-round magazines are available. http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-512-22-lr-semi-automatic5-rd-mag/

 

[Radagast]

I have CZ452s in .22lr, 22 magnum and .17 HMR. Reliable, accurate, aesthetic. Great range or hunting guns, perhaps not the low weight or rate of fire that some people look for in a 'walking out of hell' weapon.

The Winchester 9422M in .22 magum may fit that requirement: lever action, reliable, accurate, scopeable. Over here they hold their value and sell quickly on the used market.

 

[denton]

Several years ago, a fellow from Argentina posted a lengthy paper about circumstances there when their economy collapsed. One of his key points was that in the face of rampant robbery and kidnapping, a handgun was the most essential weapon. As he put it, you cannot identify people who want to do you harm at 200 yards.

I hope we never face a situation like the one there. Sanitation was terrible, there was much more disease, and it was much too risky to let a child ride a bicycle or play in the yard.

The other essential thing was a collection of good flashlights with rechargeable batteries (and solar chargers I assume). The type of light you wear on your forehead was particularly valuable, leaving both hands free for the task at hand.

I understand the value of a shotguns and rifles, and highly value both. But the word from someone who had a chance to study the situation close up and personal was that something compact and adapted for close range was the order of the day.

FWIW.

 

[Ed Ames]

I like that Henry put a peep on that lever gun. I wish more rifles came with peep sights.

On paper it is hard to imagine a long gun better than the CMR-30 for this role. Under 4lbs, 22" collapsed/30" extended, threaded barrel, 30rd magazine, and an only slightly iffy pistol available that shares magazines. But...long term? Not a basket I want all my eggs in.

The last WMR long gun I've spent any time shooting was an EAA/Tangfolio Appeal. Another handy little gun I wouldn't want to count on long term.

Unfortunately, for me a long gun is a non-starter in this scenario. There are just too many cases where I would need to leave it behind. I'd like to have the benefits of a long gun (which is why I mentioned a scope and detachable stock in my previous post) but carrying a gun in my hands/on my back isn't going to work as I go about my life.

 

[chicharrones]

Several years ago, a fellow from Argentina posted a lengthy paper about circumstances there when their economy collapsed. One of his key points was that in the face of rampant robbery and kidnapping, a handgun was the most essential weapon. As he put it, you cannot identify people who want to do you harm at 200 yards.

Not withstanding the much lesser crime where I live, it's not too much different than day to day life anywhere in that I really don't go through my daily life with a long gun at my side.

I think the fact that I take part in threads like this is that I already carry a hand gun daily, which is is not unusual and therefore not as entertaining to discuss. Writing about something that I don't normally do, like carrying long guns, can be much more interesting as it is different from my day to day reality.

 

[Radagast]

Denton, that was Ferfal:
http://ferfal.blogspot.com.au/
He left Argentina.

We have members who lived in South Africa during the fall and aftermath of Boer rule, Chile during uprisings against the Junta, served as peace keepers in Bosnia. The one thing they have in common is that when civilization collapsed they left for a new country.
I've an acquaintance with dual Papuan / Australian citizenship. Taking the daily cash to the bank, his sales girl had the money bag handcuffed to her while he carried the shotgun. She got out of the car before him and promptly had her hand and the bag hacked off with a machete. He subsequently killed a rapist and two armed robbers in separate incidents before bugging out permanently for Australia.
My BIL grew up on a mission there. His family left when they had installed razor wire fences, attack dogs and women could not leave the church compound without a man open carrying a shotgun as protection.
Another friend was drafted into the militia by the Sandinistas, effectively brain washed slave labor, they saw no meat for three months - until a panicking guard mag dumped his AK into a wandering cow in the middle of the night. She was lucky. Her ex-stepfather made it out to a refugee camp in Costa Rica, parlayed his engineering degree into Australian citizenship, then sponsored the step kids (but not his ex).

When societies fail you have a choice of becoming a barbarian, organizing a new society or bugging out permanently.

Firearms for survival are a fun topic, but after every war the time comes to put away the swords and take up the plough. Planning for a permanent state of collapse leads to Gunkid, the most persistent gun board troll ever. He thought he was going to use his debarked Chihuahua guard dog, silenced AR15 in .22lr and tactical wheelbarrow to bug out to the Mississippi, where he would build a raft and float down the river, selling his assassin services to the new warlords that would take over.
IIRC he ended up in jail as a felon in possession of firearms, for stealing from the woman he was living off and threatening to poison his towns water supply if the police arrested him.

So lets keep it rational. Of course, when the zombie apocalypse comes, all bets are off.

 

[roscoe]

Several years ago, a fellow from Argentina posted a lengthy paper about circumstances there when their economy collapsed. One of his key points was that in the face of rampant robbery and kidnapping, a handgun was the most essential weapon.

Yes, exactly. One of his points was that when you have to go about your normal business, toting a Binelli or AR-15 is typically not an option, especially when disorder has justified imposition of rules against personal arms. The ability to look like anybody else, yet be (relatively) protected was a huge advantage. He argued for a full-capacity semi-auto pistol because when bandits organize, you may have several to deal with.

I have often felt that focusing on the tactical rifle is no substitute for effective handgun training, since in many scenarios a rifle makes you a target for overwhelmingly-armed authorities (legitimate or not), and the best you can hope for is to be able to have a handgun.

 

[jmorris]

The fact of the matter is that if anything goes seriously wrong, you will almost certainly NOT be able to hunt for food.

Well, now your talking about a different subject and IIRC SHTF threads don't last long here.

We have enough cattle that we don't eat them all currently and sell them off, I suppose we could live off them alone if we needed to. I have to give eggs away at least once a week because my Daughters chickens lay much more than we can consume. Then there are always the 9 tanks we have on our place and fishing poles, you could eat fish for every meal of the day until you die and still not put a dent in the population.

I suppose there is a difference between having the sources for your food and having to hunt for it.

 

[PabloJ]

I would take Beretta M59 Tanker or new Springfield Armory short barrel Scout M1A with several pre-loaded 20 cartridge magazines.

 

[denton]

Denton, that was Ferfal:
http://ferfal.blogspot.com.au/
He left Argentina.

I guess I would too. People often don't realize what a bad outcome anarchy is. And they also don't realize that keeping our civil society requires constant effort.

 

[X-Rap]

Something I try keeping in perspective is just how bad things would be globally if we here in the states were to actually have to implement any of these measures.
Comforting knowing it probably won't reach that beyond small short isolated instances but disturbing knowing if it happens there won't be anywhere else to go. We'll have to hunker down and fix things.

 

[SmokingFrye]

Though I know this takes the thread further from the OP's question, it does line up with the more recent responses: There is an excellent 7-book series by A. American (pen name) known as the "Going Home" series that touches on the sentiments of many who have responded here. The series doesn't venture far from plausible (no zombies or aliens) but illustrates well the rapid decay of society, stressing well the nature of people when they become truly desperate, and many of the efforts to slowly rebuild. If you have the time, very much worth the read.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

Though I know this takes the thread further from the OP's question, it does line up with the more recent responses: There is an excellent 7-book series by A. American (pen name) known as the "Going Home" series that touches on the sentiments of many who have responded here. The series doesn't venture far from plausible (no zombies or aliens) but illustrates well the rapid decay of society, stressing well the nature of people when they become truly desperate, and many of the efforts to slowly rebuild. If you have the time, very much worth the read.

It's still in the same vein of discussion. I'll have to give that a look.

 

[azrocks]

Specifically for your area or region, if you had to pick a single weapon to help you survive in a societal collapse situation, what would that weapon be, and why would you choose it?

Mini-gun. Why? For the lulz.

 

[huntsman]

Funny the fantasy always seems to track to wild civil unrest with roving bands threatening J6P yet with what's happening with surveillance and loss of freedom nobody seems to address the other side of the coin, totalitarian control.

Then the question becomes what guns will be allowed or what will one be able to use with limited detection? Which situation seems more plausible is something to consider IMHO.

 

[<*(((><]

Though I know this takes the thread further from the OP's question, it does line up with the more recent responses: There is an excellent 7-book series by A. American (pen name) known as the "Going Home" series that touches on the sentiments of many who have responded here. The series doesn't venture far from plausible (no zombies or aliens) but illustrates well the rapid decay of society, stressing well the nature of people when they become truly desperate, and many of the efforts to slowly rebuild. If you have the time, very much worth the read.

Good series, I've read 5 of them.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

Thanks to all that have replied so far. It's funny; all the different viewpoints you get on a question like this. Originally when I posed the question, I had a semi-long-term collapse of infrastructure and finance; not an end of the world, total chaos, zombie apocalypse. I guess I always assumed that some form of government would remain, and eventually work to restore normalcy; and that surviving meant riding the storm out until society began to be restored. The truth is that we really don't know what the future holds.

I know that for most of us here, a one gun situation seems absurd, but just look at the number of people in the country that don't have a single firearm. For lots of people, having a personal arsenal is not an option; and one good all purpose gun for their environment might mean the difference between life and death. Knowing what certain weapons are good for (and not good for) might be of great benefit for a person trying to make an informed choice when buying a weapon on a limited budget.

 

[SmokingFrye]

Good series, I've read 5 of them.

Gotta read the other two and see how it ends!!

 

[adcoch1]

If i could only have one I would probably pick my 300 bo pistol. 30 rounds in a light, hard hitting, suppressable package small enough to conceal in a bag, and if society did head downhill, the upper could drop on a carbine lower pretty easy... Of course I will have an SBR lower as soon as the paperwork goes through, so this is pretty much reality in the future for me. BUT, i would never willingly leave ANY of my 44s, so maybe just the Redhawk...

 

[Llama Bob]

Well, now your talking about a different subject and IIRC SHTF threads don't last long here.

Well, the OP said and I quote "a societal collapse situation". I responded to the question he asked. It may not be the question he intended to ask, and if so that's a personal problem I guess.

But the answer to the question he acutally asked is that given population levels and our dependence on agriculture (at least in most places in the world where you could read this thread) society doesn't really collapse. It's replaced. The replacement may suck or not be to your liking, but it will happen and happen quickly because there is no alternative to agriculture. Hunting is useless at current population levels. In the short term control of stored food is valuable, but fairly quickly whoever controls the ag (and in dry environments, the water supply) in effect becomes the new boss.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

Well, the OP said and I quote "a societal collapse situation". I responded to the question he asked. It may not be the question he intended to ask, and if so that's a personal problem I guess.

But the answer to the question he acutally asked is that given population levels and our dependence on agriculture (at least in most places in the world where you could read this thread) society doesn't really collapse. It's replaced. The replacement may suck or not be to your liking, but it will happen and happen quickly because there is no alternative to agriculture. Hunting is useless at current population levels. In the short term control of stored food is valuable, but fairly quickly whoever controls the ag (and in dry environments, the water supply) in effect becomes the new boss.

It's all good Bob. You did answer the question (actually both), but you extended it to make another point as well. As I read your response, it appears that you mention two weapons. The first is a rifle to protect agriculture, but in a larger sense, the actual weapon in question is the agriculture (or water) itself; not a firearm, but a weapon nonetheless. If you control the supply of food and water, you decide who lives and dies; just like pointing a gun at them. In addition to that, control of sustainable food allows you to leverage control of the people; making you into the defacto leader (or warlord if you will), thus changing survival into conquest. i.e. "Never waste a good disaster."

For the future (if there's any life left in the thread), let's just keep to a particular firearm as the chosen weapon.