SHTF Rifle Poll

SHTF emergency rifle you use


  • Total voters
    607
Status
Not open for further replies.
Elmerfudd, I think you and I both agree that a good rifleman with a say a 91/30 Mosin Nagant could wreak havoc with that 7.62X54R round at quite a distance.

I just joined a club close to the house with targets out to 200 yards. With the price of ammo these days I think I will get some satisfaction shooting my Mosins and Mausers.
 
Mercop,

I think that there would be a huge difference between just trying to survive in a war torn environment or in the wake of a disaster and actually fighting as a guerrilla or insurgent.

For survival purposes, I'm of the opinion that a couple of good handguns, (one full size, one mousegun), and a good fighting long gun, be it a shotgun or a rifle is probably all you need. In that situation, you're trying to avoid combat if at all possible. Being armed would be essential, but making a big show of it would likely bring the unwanted attention of whatever authorities, (police, military, gangs, mafia, etc...), were still existent.

As far as being a guerrilla, I think the Iraqi's have demonstrated how a lot of it is done on a modern battlefield and they seem to rely on IED's, close range sniping and assassination. It seems that when these groups go head to head with professional soldiers though, they get their butts kicked.

I'm sure a Mosin Nagant would be adequate for kills out to 300 yards or so, but it would be one of my last choices in a firearm if I actually had to go into harms way in the 21st century. They're reliable and powerful, but they don't mount optics well and they're certainly not well suited to CQB.

I've got five of them in my safe however and I do like taking them out to the range.
 
Actually,

A bolt action 22 rimfire with a good supply of sub sonic ammo might be best. You can pot alot of meat and do so very quietly.....:)

Giz
 
Voted HK/FAL because of the round.

Truly guys, how many firefights do you suppose you are going to survive? As a deterrent in more or less civil times, a rifle is a good tool. In times of SHTF I think it tends to make you a target. Even those guys who practice manouver and tactics all the time, like the Army, occasionally get the hammer dropped on them by "lucky" insurgents.

One fat old white dude trundling down the street with a rifle, unable to climb fences, or run very fast, or go prone in an instant *might* be able to get off a few rounds.

A prepared fighting position is probably good for a few rounds, but then *everybody's* attention in the neighborhood focuses on where the shots are coming from, and it's off to the races...

There is a reason why war is fought by the young.
 
stubbicatt

A prepared fighting position is probably good for a few rounds, but then *everybody's* attention
in the neighborhood focuses on where the shots are coming from, and it's off to the races...

:evil:
SEI-FEI.30calcan.jpg
 
You mention SKS in you original post, but its not an option in your poll. Neither is an AK in 5.45. I won AR's, AK's and SKS's. So I guess I could use them all, but I bought a ton of 5.45 ammo due to the low price, so would grab one of my AK's in that caliber. Its flat shooting and more accurate than 7.62 while I do own a Hungarian AK in 7.62, I've kept in NIB and never shot it. It will probably get sold at some point.
 
Remington 870, with buckshot and slugs, and a 9mm sidearm. Don't need to carry too much ammunition unless it's a zombie invasion. Like someone else said, go away from the mayhem, not into it or creating it.

Picture080.gif
 
I think you've seen "Red Dawn" too many times.

If it came to that, engaging in that sort of foolishness would get you immediately killed from ten directions at once by trained people with superior equipment who operate in well-praticed squads. (and who would then laugh at you) The only way that a superior, trained paramilitary force could be impacted by non-suicidal civilians would be by single-shot longrange sniping, I think
.

Ever hear of a war called Vietnam?

Welcome to the "Concrete Jungle" baby......your go'na die.
 
I couple of weeks ago I caught two clowns trying to break into my car. They ran off and the first weapons I grabbed was my AK variant and my HK USPc .45

I own each one of the rifles on the poll. But in the heat of the moment I grabbed the AK.
 
Last edited:
Vietnam was a bit different. They had plenty of like minded friends helping out. Also, and this is pretty important, a support network amongst themselves, and from a state.
 
Silvanus, gotta ask - what camo pattern is that? I like.

It's a variant of the German "Flecktarn", called "Tropentarn". It's what the Bundeswehr wears in environments like Afghanistan.


Here's a picture of the standard Flecktarn pattern.

 
Whoa. My rifle collection has changed since I first voted and an M1 Garand was what I had.

Nowadays, either my M1 Carbine or AR15 would win.
 
I vote AK. If i had reliable hi cap mags for my mini-30 it would get grabbed over the AK....
 
if you have any sense you'll be in a rural enviorment if there is a SHTF situation.

I think that if you are seriously planning for SHTF you'll be living in a rural environment long before there is a SHTF situation, or at least have a well equipped retreat set up. There's a word for people that leave their homes with the possessions that they can carry or stuff in their cars and that's "refugees" and they invariably have a very rough time of it.

A bunch of city dwellers showing up in the woods with a couple bags full of supplies aren't going to last long. Once everyone starts taking game out of season with spotlights and snares, hunting will quickly become non-productive. People already living out in the country aren't going to welcome a bunch of armed squatters either. Much of the wilderness land where I live is in the mountains and I can't imagine hauling my family up into the Cascades and going through a winter up there with only a crude shelter and unseasoned wood to burn.

As for myself, my job is in the city and while I can envision a SHTF situation being possible, I don't think it's likely in the near term at least. Still, I have taken some precautions just in case the worst comes to pass. Even in the city, you can have food and water set aside, fruit trees and a vegetable garden, a fenced yard with a dog and a woodstove with enough seasoned firewood to make it through a couple of winters and provide a means to cook food if the power were out. I'd like to have a well and solar power too, but some things will have to wait. IMO, financial security is the one thing survivalists overlook the most and putting in a well and solar power would actually make me less secure at this point by taking too much money out of my savings. Saving money is smart even if you think SHTF is all a demented fantasy, but if you take it seriously, having the cash available to pay for food or fuel or bribes or plane tickets somewhere where life doesn't suck is a a damn good idea too. Who knows, SHTF might just turn out to be another great depression and then money would count more than all the rifles and water purifiers people have stockpiled.

The nice thing about preparing in this way is that it pays off even if there isn't a disaster. When I burn wood my electrical bill stays low. The fruit from my trees gets eaten regardless. The dog helps keep my house safe when I'm away and my savings will hopefully pay for a long retirement one day.
 
My great grandfather lost the family farm in the depression. He was a Swedish immigrant and apparently had been quite successful as a farmer in the 20's. Unfortunately for my family, he expanded the farm using loans and couldn't keep up payments when prices collapsed in the 30's. Apparently this was common at the time, (it's all about 40 years before my time however).

In any event, I'm in full agreement with you that the countryside is where you want to be when things go bad. That's where the food comes from. The vast majority of Americans however live in urban areas now and I think they're deluding themselves if they think they can just head out to the country and live off the land. As you point out, there are already people out there living off what they rightfully regard as their land and they won't willingly allow a bunch of squatters to take up residence there.

Out here in the west, (those of us near the coast kind of think of Ohio as being back east), there are millions of acres of government land, most of which are wilderness. Still, that land would be very inhospitable for someone who just showed up there with a minimum of supplies. Most of it's not good farmland and the areas in the mountains often are snowed in half the year. Add to that the fact that if any government remains after whatever disaster occurs, someone with a uniform and a gun will eventually be coming around to tell you to leave.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top