Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gator1010

if shtf what would you rather have?

which one would you rather have in a fire fight?  

442 members have voted

  1. 1. gun choice

    • saiga semi
      160
    • AK-47
      197
    • AR-15
      86
    • 1


Recommended Posts

Just wonder sometimes. :unsure: Different attitudes from general population in different regions. Little panic, no matter were you are, rest depends on how the community deals with regular manmade/natural disasters. :rolleyes: Anyone here that has paid any attention to how crisis has been dealt with by general population and it's attitude in a given region. If, you live in a community with no known stability, that is government control, or mandate to keep your people civilized, be more prepared. :cryss: So, of all the black and hunting weapons owned, long term defense/offense would be AK in 7.62 or .308. If on the run, would have to stap a 12 guage also. Reason. Not a farm house in the region that wouldn't have at least 1 or 2 boxes of shells. :smoke:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll opt for an AK or a converted Saiga.

 

One thing i've thought would be a kick ass SHTF set up would be a Glock 20 or 21 because 10mm is a bitch to find coupled with one of those mech tek CCU carbines. The 10mm is a very potent round and through a rifle barrel it has the goods for a hunting, defense round. I think the 45 won't quite have the gas to reach out there but thats still a formidable setup. Mag interchangablity, small package, ease of maitainance, and reliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a little esoteric so I would use an FG42

 

 

 

:rolleyes: But seriously, I'd carry the AK, and keep the AR in the travel pack as ammo may be easier to come by here in the states.

post-18302-1245519280_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Krom,

 

Thank you for your input and clarification. It was right along my same thoughts as well. In a true SHTF situation, I would gladly take all the help that was offered without question. Any gun that you choose out of the three, you will be likely able to find ammo. But there is something to be said about using a caliber that is currently produced for our own military and LE. I think my first choice would still be the AK, but obviously in the civilian (semi) version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll second what Ruffian said. I'll take option D - a 12 gauge pump. Doesn't get much more rugged and it can hunt or defend, among countless other uses, and ammo for it is everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Police carry Shotguns for riot control so they can use "less-lethal" projectiles (bean-bags, rubber slugs, and tear gas), not so they can do some mall-ninja hollywood style street sweep. Many police still carry shotguns on the rack in their cruiser because that is all they are allowed to carry - when given the option of a rifle, they always take the rifle.

 

All of the world's militarys use the shotgun for door breaching, rebar cutting, less-lethal crowd control, and for CQB to a limited extent.

 

Also on the training issue, its much easier to train someone to use the AK than the shotty.

 

That is all. Like I said, shotty is a very specialized weapon.

 

Bullshit... police in my county carry shotguns loaded with 00-buck, in each cruiser, not bean bags or rubber bullets. I'm fairly certain that they aren't trained in mall ninja tactics, get a clue. Using your logic, stage coaches used a double barrel shotgun as a weapon of choice to scare away chickens.

 

Please read the posts before you post in ignorance of what you are saying. You alluded to police carrying a shotty for riot control and I told you why they do and the loads they use for riot control and why they make a good choice for riot control. The less-lethal loads are for riot control, not engaging threats on patrol, and I never stated otherwise.

 

You keep alluding to cops carrying shotties in their cruisers. IN YOUR COUNTY THE COPS HAVE SHOTTIES BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE! Out of all of the LE agencies that give their officers a choice between a rifle and a shotgun, I challenge you to name one where the majority choose a shotgun. You will not find one. Many LE agencies make their officers buy their own rifles if they want to carry one, and even in these agencies, most of the officers carry rifles. Have you ever trained with SWAT entry teams? Do you really think they are clearing buildings out with shotguns?

 

Instead of calling bullshit on others, make sure your not standing in your own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As part of the military (USMC and now USCG) and LE community I think you underestimate how committed most of us are to upholding freedoms like the 2nd Amendment.

 

I'd like to hope so but then wouldn't we be ignoring the troops who went door to door disarming the public in NO after Katrina? In civil unrest (a very real possibility here if the economy tanks) LE and troops may be ordered to disarm the public, leaving the newly-shorn sheep for the wolves. It would have to get really really bad before the LE community would ever get to "underestimate".

 

Whichever platform you choose don't forget to stockpile some AP rounds. Even now, last year our county had over 200 home invasions. LE predicts that half were for money/valuables (the non-drug half) and/or mistaken addresses. Some invaders are wearing armor.

Edited by VincentYGB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As part of the military (USMC and now USCG) and LE community I think you underestimate how committed most of us are to upholding freedoms like the 2nd Amendment.

 

I'd like to hope so but then wouldn't we be ignoring the troops who went door to door disarming the public in NO after Katrina? In civil unrest (a very real possibility here if the economy tanks) LE and troops may be ordered to disarm the public, leaving the newly-shorn sheep for the wolves. It would have to get really really bad before the LE community would ever get to "underestimate".

 

Whichever platform you choose don't forget to stockpile some AP rounds. Even now, last year our county had over 200 home invasions. LE predicts that half were for money/valuables (the non-drug half) and/or mistaken addresses. Some invaders are wearing armor.

 

 

If you're firing at point-blank range with any one of those three rifles, even if your intruder has body armor chances are it won't do him much good. Unless he has some pretty kickass modern stuff, your projectiles will penetrate his armor and he will be dead. If he does have super-kickass modern armor, chances are you grabbed your nearest gun and it wasn't loaded up with AP. Shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As part of the military (USMC and now USCG) and LE community I think you underestimate how committed most of us are to upholding freedoms like the 2nd Amendment.

 

I'd like to hope so but then wouldn't we be ignoring the troops who went door to door disarming the public in NO after Katrina? In civil unrest (a very real possibility here if the economy tanks) LE and troops may be ordered to disarm the public, leaving the newly-shorn sheep for the wolves. It would have to get really really bad before the LE community would ever get to "underestimate".

 

Whichever platform you choose don't forget to stockpile some AP rounds. Even now, last year our county had over 200 home invasions. LE predicts that half were for money/valuables (the non-drug half) and/or mistaken addresses. Some invaders are wearing armor.

 

You bring up a valid point. As a former LEO myself, I know that LE attitudes vary widely from location to location, and most police associations/unions are VERY anti-gun. My local LE are very pro 2nd, but if you travel 1 hour from my home, gun-owners / gun-stores are public enemy #1.

 

Your Katrina example is not an isolated incident, as local gun confiscations have taken place many times. I witnessed it in Los Angeles during the riots, where rather than get the gang-bangers running wild in the streets, the LAPD was ordered to target law abiding homeowners and business owners who were prepared to defend themselves, and those confiscated guns were destroyed and never returned. The military is currently going house to house overseas collecting firearms from law abiding people, they are training to do it here, and have already followed orders to do it here. When the order is given, military and LE follow (some may not, but most will). I have not seen one incident to convince me otherwise.

 

Military and LE are conditioned to fulfill the wishes of the authority structure, which is not always a bad thing except when their power is used to abuse the rights and trust of the public by some socialist political hack. A lot of the small town / rural state departments conduct themselves admirably, even when pressured by the libs to change their ways. But in the big cities, the days of "protect and serve" have become the days of using LE for revenue mining, harassing and controlling nonconformists, fulfilling quotas, us vs them mentality, and carrying out the "dirty work" to further some mayor's political agenda. Each department has its own culture, some are good for you and some will be bad for you. Officers that do not fit into that culture don't last long in those organizations.

 

If I lived in Los Angeles County, New York City, DC, Chicago, Boston, or any other large city I would not count on help from LE.

 

I am not an anarchist or cop hater, just a realist.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

INMO 5.56 may not be optimum but it works, you can carry more of it, resupply is almost guaranteed, and in general has an accuracy edge over 7.62x39. 308 has the power and accuracy but is bulky to carry. Use what you know when SHTF. Being familiar with your equipment and what it can do will keep you alive (luck may help but don't count on it).

 

Personally I like my AR magged 223 Saiga. Parts are more easy to find for an AR, but I doubt the Saiga will break anything ;), so Saiga it it is. AR mags while not as robust as AK mags are easy to come by (hopefully with MAGPUL followers :D ). Add a sidearm of some kind, caliber is not that important since the rifle is primary. Make sure you know how to use it too.

 

As too whether or not Military and LE will be friend or foe that will be left to be seen. ^_^ .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid points, like I said in big cities and in kali confiscations would probably happen.

 

Just because our military does disarm people overseas doesn't mean anything (agree or not) because they are not Americans citizens and don't have the same rights. Plus you guys mentioned that troops here in the US have participated in arms confiscation (Katrina?) I'd like more clarification on how/when this took place. And if Katrina is the only main time that this took place I don't think that we really have much to worry about (I'll explain):

 

Katrina was horrible for the people that went through it, especially gun owners. However it exposed the unconstitutional actions of the govt. Since these actions are out in the open I think it will be difficult for something like that to be repeated now that the country,the LEO community, and the military is aware of what happened and that it was blatantly unconstitutional.

 

FYI this is my 7th year of service and this year is the first year that I've had mandatory training on the constitution and govt. And this training specifically focused on the limited power of the federal govt, and the separation of powers.

 

Also I think there is another element that is being overlooked, we are talking about a sustained long term SHTF scenario, not short term civil unrest. Also I think that it is allot more likely to have LE and Military going after arms in a short term (riots, martial law etc..) SHTF scenario than a sustained long term situation. In a short term situation it's easier to justify violating rights in a temporary fashion to control the situation.

 

But in a long term SHTF scenario you will be in a community just trying to make it. Local LE (in my opinion) would be able to handle basic security and safety of the community. But without a strong federal govt in place to combat organized regional crime, local areas could be easily overwhelmed by gangs etc.. This is were LEOs and armed citizens would be fighting side be side. I could see even having a rotation of armed deputized citizens to protect against outside threats to the community. Which goes back the original point I was trying to make, having a common weapon caliber with local LE and military is advantageous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Valid points, like I said in big cities and in kali confiscations would probably happen.

 

Just because our military does disarm people overseas doesn't mean anything (agree or not) because they are not Americans citizens and don't have the same rights. Plus you guys mentioned that troops here in the US have participated in arms confiscation (Katrina?) I'd like more clarification on how/when this took place. And if Katrina is the only main time that this took place I don't think that we really have much to worry about (I'll explain):

 

Katrina was horrible for the people that went through it, especially gun owners. However it exposed the unconstitutional actions of the govt. Since these actions are out in the open I think it will be difficult for something like that to be repeated now that the country,the LEO community, and the military is aware of what happened and that it was blatantly unconstitutional.

 

FYI this is my 7th year of service and this year is the first year that I've had mandatory training on the constitution and govt. And this training specifically focused on the limited power of the federal govt, and the separation of powers.

 

Also I think there is another element that is being overlooked, we are talking about a sustained long term SHTF scenario, not short term civil unrest. Also I think that it is allot more likely to have LE and Military going after arms in a short term (riots, martial law etc..) SHTF scenario than a sustained long term situation. In a short term situation it's easier to justify violating rights in a temporary fashion to control the situation.

 

But in a long term SHTF scenario you will be in a community just trying to make it. Local LE (in my opinion) would be able to handle basic security and safety of the community. But without a strong federal govt in place to combat organized regional crime, local areas could be easily overwhelmed by gangs etc.. This is were LEOs and armed citizens would be fighting side be side. I could see even having a rotation of armed deputized citizens to protect against outside threats to the community. Which goes back the original point I was trying to make, having a common weapon caliber with local LE and military is advantageous.

 

 

Research the military involvement in post-Katrina gun confiscation, its all over the net. Video exists of the Oklahoma National guard sweeping neighborhoods / confiscating guns after Katrina. Not from bad neighborhoods or crime-ridden parts of town, but from homeowners in upscale neighborhoods - even owners of mansions. These were supposed to be pro-gun Oklahoma boys too? I disagree with you and do find this worrisome.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read...78&issue=55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

 

It is funny how many conservatives preach about the right to bear arms and defend ourselves as a GOD GIVEN right. Yet, seem to think that it doesn't apply to law abiding people in other countries. As you can imagine, I am against all gun confiscations from law abiding people and believe that self defense is a basic human right. Using the flawed argument that "confiscation makes for a safer environment" can just as easily be applied to any major city in the US.

 

I do agree that Katrina has opened some eyes and am glad to know that the military is making an effort to provide better clarification. That is great news.

 

With LE, its not just the big cities and liberal states. Even small town law enforcement agencies frequently resort to gun confiscations, the mainstream press just refuses to give these frequent incidents much coverage. I usually find out on the NRA website. Here is one example not covered by the press;

http://www.populistamerica.com/guns_confiscated_in_wisconsin

 

During a long term drastic event, who knows. History has shown us that governments tend to resort to extreme oppression and control during these times (often followed by revolution). Maybe America will be the exception, but I am not overly confident of that.

 

What is really great though, is the independent actions of some states to break from federal control if unconstitutional orders are given. Some states will tell the fed to "F" off. I think more states are establishing this position too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Valid points, like I said in big cities and in kali confiscations would probably happen.

 

Just because our military does disarm people overseas doesn't mean anything (agree or not) because they are not Americans citizens and don't have the same rights. Plus you guys mentioned that troops here in the US have participated in arms confiscation (Katrina?) I'd like more clarification on how/when this took place. And if Katrina is the only main time that this took place I don't think that we really have much to worry about (I'll explain):

 

Katrina was horrible for the people that went through it, especially gun owners. However it exposed the unconstitutional actions of the govt. Since these actions are out in the open I think it will be difficult for something like that to be repeated now that the country,the LEO community, and the military is aware of what happened and that it was blatantly unconstitutional.

 

FYI this is my 7th year of service and this year is the first year that I've had mandatory training on the constitution and govt. And this training specifically focused on the limited power of the federal govt, and the separation of powers.

 

Also I think there is another element that is being overlooked, we are talking about a sustained long term SHTF scenario, not short term civil unrest. Also I think that it is allot more likely to have LE and Military going after arms in a short term (riots, martial law etc..) SHTF scenario than a sustained long term situation. In a short term situation it's easier to justify violating rights in a temporary fashion to control the situation.

 

But in a long term SHTF scenario you will be in a community just trying to make it. Local LE (in my opinion) would be able to handle basic security and safety of the community. But without a strong federal govt in place to combat organized regional crime, local areas could be easily overwhelmed by gangs etc.. This is were LEOs and armed citizens would be fighting side be side. I could see even having a rotation of armed deputized citizens to protect against outside threats to the community. Which goes back the original point I was trying to make, having a common weapon caliber with local LE and military is advantageous.

 

 

Research the military involvement in post-Katrina gun confiscation, its all over the net. Video exists of the Oklahoma National guard sweeping neighborhoods / confiscating guns after Katrina. Not from bad neighborhoods or crime-ridden parts of town, but from homeowners in upscale neighborhoods - even owners of mansions. These were supposed to be pro-gun Oklahoma boys too? I disagree with you and do find this worrisome.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read...78&issue=55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

 

It is funny how many conservatives preach about the right to bear arms and defend ourselves as a GOD GIVEN right. Yet, seem to think that it doesn't apply to law abiding people in other countries. As you can imagine, I am against all gun confiscations from law abiding people and believe that self defense is a basic human right. Using the flawed argument that "confiscation makes for a safer environment" can just as easily be applied to any major city in the US.

 

I do agree that Katrina has opened some eyes and am glad to know that the military is making an effort to provide better clarification. That is great news.

 

With LE, its not just the big cities and liberal states. Even small town law enforcement agencies frequently resort to gun confiscations, the mainstream press just refuses to give these frequent incidents much coverage. I usually find out on the NRA website. Here is one example not covered by the press;

http://www.populistamerica.com/guns_confiscated_in_wisconsin

 

During a long term drastic event, who knows. History has shown us that governments tend to resort to extreme oppression and control during these times (often followed by revolution). Maybe America will be the exception, but I am not overly confident of that.

 

What is really great though, is the independent actions of some states to break from federal control if unconstitutional orders are given. Some states will tell the fed to "F" off. I think more states are establishing this position too.

 

DD

Thanks for your thoughtful insight and learned advise.

It has been a great help to relative newcomers like myself.

This thanks goes out to many others as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to hijack the thread, but some of you live in very rural areas. If S did HTF, how would it even affect half the people here?

 

if the SHTF in a huge apocalyptic type way, resources would run out in the cities and crime will take a foothold. People will flock to rural areas to seek out new resources, escape, or find new victims. What little law exists during a SHTF scenario, will not have a presence in rural areas and scumbags know this. Big guard dogs and a decent ammo stockpile for rural folks. Even with this, prepared rural folks are still better off than city folks. Just be mindful that being away from the city does not necessarily make you totally safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just be mindful that being away from the city does not necessarily make you totally safe.

 

I remember the thread here where someone posted about most of the worst atrocities in the Argentina fiasco happening in isolated rural areas.

 

IMHO in a situation short of huge SHTF, troops will be stopping vehicles and confiscating weapons, thereby contributing to the depth of coming atrocities.

 

That so many in N.O. willingly gave up their only means of protection from predators speaks to a sad and frightening state of our republic.

Edited by VincentYGB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Valid points, like I said in big cities and in kali confiscations would probably happen.

 

Just because our military does disarm people overseas doesn't mean anything (agree or not) because they are not Americans citizens and don't have the same rights. Plus you guys mentioned that troops here in the US have participated in arms confiscation (Katrina?) I'd like more clarification on how/when this took place. And if Katrina is the only main time that this took place I don't think that we really have much to worry about (I'll explain):

 

Katrina was horrible for the people that went through it, especially gun owners. However it exposed the unconstitutional actions of the govt. Since these actions are out in the open I think it will be difficult for something like that to be repeated now that the country,the LEO community, and the military is aware of what happened and that it was blatantly unconstitutional.

 

FYI this is my 7th year of service and this year is the first year that I've had mandatory training on the constitution and govt. And this training specifically focused on the limited power of the federal govt, and the separation of powers.

 

Also I think there is another element that is being overlooked, we are talking about a sustained long term SHTF scenario, not short term civil unrest. Also I think that it is allot more likely to have LE and Military going after arms in a short term (riots, martial law etc..) SHTF scenario than a sustained long term situation. In a short term situation it's easier to justify violating rights in a temporary fashion to control the situation.

 

But in a long term SHTF scenario you will be in a community just trying to make it. Local LE (in my opinion) would be able to handle basic security and safety of the community. But without a strong federal govt in place to combat organized regional crime, local areas could be easily overwhelmed by gangs etc.. This is were LEOs and armed citizens would be fighting side be side. I could see even having a rotation of armed deputized citizens to protect against outside threats to the community. Which goes back the original point I was trying to make, having a common weapon caliber with local LE and military is advantageous.

 

 

Research the military involvement in post-Katrina gun confiscation, its all over the net. Video exists of the Oklahoma National guard sweeping neighborhoods / confiscating guns after Katrina. Not from bad neighborhoods or crime-ridden parts of town, but from homeowners in upscale neighborhoods - even owners of mansions. These were supposed to be pro-gun Oklahoma boys too? I disagree with you and do find this worrisome.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read...78&issue=55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

 

It is funny how many conservatives preach about the right to bear arms and defend ourselves as a GOD GIVEN right. Yet, seem to think that it doesn't apply to law abiding people in other countries. As you can imagine, I am against all gun confiscations from law abiding people and believe that self defense is a basic human right. Using the flawed argument that "confiscation makes for a safer environment" can just as easily be applied to any major city in the US.

 

I do agree that Katrina has opened some eyes and am glad to know that the military is making an effort to provide better clarification. That is great news.

 

With LE, its not just the big cities and liberal states. Even small town law enforcement agencies frequently resort to gun confiscations, the mainstream press just refuses to give these frequent incidents much coverage. I usually find out on the NRA website. Here is one example not covered by the press;

http://www.populistamerica.com/guns_confiscated_in_wisconsin

 

During a long term drastic event, who knows. History has shown us that governments tend to resort to extreme oppression and control during these times (often followed by revolution). Maybe America will be the exception, but I am not overly confident of that.

 

What is really great though, is the independent actions of some states to break from federal control if unconstitutional orders are given. Some states will tell the fed to "F" off. I think more states are establishing this position too.

 

I think that I have a little more optimistic view on things pertaining to govt, but I really appreciate your input. My opinion is constantly being re-evaluated and re-assessed as I become more and more aware of different facts and views. I personally feel that it is extremely difficult to formulate an accurate assessment of the real situation. I do however have faith in the American people, and although I don't trust the govt I have alittle more faith in the regular Americans like myself and coworkers that would not follow orders that are against our constitution. Thanks for your non-combative and genuine response, definitely given me some things to think about. Plan for the worst but remember that their are allot of us out there within the govt that share your same values (I think self defense is also a God given right as well as the right to own arms, however it's not my job nor do I care to put my life in harms way to protect some one's rights who doesn't have US citizenship or give a shit about American values or rights, people have to WANT there own freedom and rights: if a foreign citizen doesn't care to protect or invest in their God given rights then why should I?).

 

I just encourage you to remain suspicious of our govt, but give the members of our govt (like me, and others LEOs especially) the benefit of the doubt without compromising your security, you might be surprised how far being diplomatic and genuine could help all of us pull together in a SHTF situation. We are trained to protect ourselves against those that mean us harm first (basic self defense) and to protect the rights of those that mean us harm second, so don't put yourself in that position if possible. Also even if I'm totally wrong and the LE in your area is communist, there are others out there like me that are on your side trying to do right. LEOs aren't supposed to treat every one like a criminal even through most people they deal with are, so please don't assume that everyone in the LEO community is a tyrant.

 

And please keep all the info about our rights being violated or abused flowing so I can continue to become more educated and educate others around me of things to watch out for and report, and stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Valid points, like I said in big cities and in kali confiscations would probably happen.

 

Just because our military does disarm people overseas doesn't mean anything (agree or not) because they are not Americans citizens and don't have the same rights. Plus you guys mentioned that troops here in the US have participated in arms confiscation (Katrina?) I'd like more clarification on how/when this took place. And if Katrina is the only main time that this took place I don't think that we really have much to worry about (I'll explain):

 

Katrina was horrible for the people that went through it, especially gun owners. However it exposed the unconstitutional actions of the govt. Since these actions are out in the open I think it will be difficult for something like that to be repeated now that the country,the LEO community, and the military is aware of what happened and that it was blatantly unconstitutional.

 

FYI this is my 7th year of service and this year is the first year that I've had mandatory training on the constitution and govt. And this training specifically focused on the limited power of the federal govt, and the separation of powers.

 

Also I think there is another element that is being overlooked, we are talking about a sustained long term SHTF scenario, not short term civil unrest. Also I think that it is allot more likely to have LE and Military going after arms in a short term (riots, martial law etc..) SHTF scenario than a sustained long term situation. In a short term situation it's easier to justify violating rights in a temporary fashion to control the situation.

 

But in a long term SHTF scenario you will be in a community just trying to make it. Local LE (in my opinion) would be able to handle basic security and safety of the community. But without a strong federal govt in place to combat organized regional crime, local areas could be easily overwhelmed by gangs etc.. This is were LEOs and armed citizens would be fighting side be side. I could see even having a rotation of armed deputized citizens to protect against outside threats to the community. Which goes back the original point I was trying to make, having a common weapon caliber with local LE and military is advantageous.

 

 

Research the military involvement in post-Katrina gun confiscation, its all over the net. Video exists of the Oklahoma National guard sweeping neighborhoods / confiscating guns after Katrina. Not from bad neighborhoods or crime-ridden parts of town, but from homeowners in upscale neighborhoods - even owners of mansions. These were supposed to be pro-gun Oklahoma boys too? I disagree with you and do find this worrisome.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read...78&issue=55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

 

It is funny how many conservatives preach about the right to bear arms and defend ourselves as a GOD GIVEN right. Yet, seem to think that it doesn't apply to law abiding people in other countries. As you can imagine, I am against all gun confiscations from law abiding people and believe that self defense is a basic human right. Using the flawed argument that "confiscation makes for a safer environment" can just as easily be applied to any major city in the US.

 

I do agree that Katrina has opened some eyes and am glad to know that the military is making an effort to provide better clarification. That is great news.

 

With LE, its not just the big cities and liberal states. Even small town law enforcement agencies frequently resort to gun confiscations, the mainstream press just refuses to give these frequent incidents much coverage. I usually find out on the NRA website. Here is one example not covered by the press;

http://www.populistamerica.com/guns_confiscated_in_wisconsin

 

During a long term drastic event, who knows. History has shown us that governments tend to resort to extreme oppression and control during these times (often followed by revolution). Maybe America will be the exception, but I am not overly confident of that.

 

What is really great though, is the independent actions of some states to break from federal control if unconstitutional orders are given. Some states will tell the fed to "F" off. I think more states are establishing this position too.

 

I think that I have a little more optimistic view on things pertaining to govt, but I really appreciate your input. My opinion is constantly being re-evaluated and re-assessed as I become more and more aware of different facts and views. I personally feel that it is extremely difficult to formulate an accurate assessment of the real situation. I do however have faith in the American people, and although I don't trust the govt I have alittle more faith in the regular Americans like myself and coworkers that would not follow orders that are against our constitution. Thanks for your non-combative and genuine response, definitely given me some things to think about. Plan for the worst but remember that their are allot of us out there within the govt that share your same values (I think self defense is also a God given right as well as the right to own arms, however it's not my job nor do I care to put my life in harms way to protect some one's rights who doesn't have US citizenship or give a shit about American values or rights, people have to WANT there own freedom and rights: if a foreign citizen doesn't care to protect or invest in their God given rights then why should I?).

 

I just encourage you to remain suspicious of our govt, but give the members of our govt (like me, and others LEOs especially) the benefit of the doubt without compromising your security, you might be surprised how far being diplomatic and genuine could help all of us pull together in a SHTF situation. We are trained to protect ourselves against those that mean us harm first (basic self defense) and to protect the rights of those that mean us harm second, so don't put yourself in that position if possible. Also even if I'm totally wrong and the LE in your area is communist, there are others out there like me that are on your side trying to do right. LEOs aren't supposed to treat every one like a criminal even through most people they deal with are, so please don't assume that everyone in the LEO community is a tyrant.

 

And please keep all the info about our rights being violated or abused flowing so I can continue to become more educated and educate others around me of things to watch out for and report, and stop.

 

 

Oklahoma National Guard troops in New Orleans were pointing M4s and M249s at civilians and demanding their weapons because that is what they were ordered to do not because they were "tyrants" and I would bet there isn't a more pro 2nd amendment group of human beings in the USA than Okies in the National Guard.

 

you guys are chosen for your willingness to do a dirty job that nobody else wants (or dares) to do and the result it that your functional morality is dictated to you by people you never meet in person and their justifications for "whatever" always seems pretty good when compared to the alternative of insubordination and possible disciplinary action.

 

So tell us Krom,you will let yourself get fired or even locked up in jail for the rights of us puny taxpayers? You are going to let your house be forclosed on rather than try to take my (up until then) lawful armaments away?

 

Try to be honest(at least with yourself)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be as honest as I can,

 

I would not under any circumstance take a civilian's(American Citizen) weapons if no criminal law has been violated (IE the CG does enforce federal law) period.

 

I hope that my limited understanding of the constitution would prevent me from being a part of other actions that could be in violation of a Citizen's rights. As I am a LEO there is allot of 'grey' areas and procedure of how law is enforced. I am human so to say I would never make a mistake would be dishonest. I will however to do my job to the best ability I can always in keeping in mind it's our job to protect the innocent citizen from threats, not deprive them of their God given right to arm and defend themselves.

 

I would outright refuse to follow a confiscation order as it is blatantly an illegal order. If the 2nd Amd is abolished I would quit my responsibilities as a LEO.

 

The point I'm trying to make is my allegiance is to the constitution not my job security or the whims of politicians, and although I don't trust the govt some of us are trying to make it the best it can be. That's why I try to keep up and learn as much as I can about the law, and when the govt violates the rights of its Citizens so I won't find myself in position were I may have already helped violate some one's rights. So keep the information flowing so we(govt) can be held accountable to the people as per the constitution. And thanks for the replies.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll be as honest as I can,

 

I would not under any circumstance take a civilian's(American Citizen) weapons if no criminal law has been violated (IE the CG does enforce federal law) period.

 

I hope that my limited understanding of the constitution would prevent me from being a part of other actions that could be in violation of a Citizen's rights. As I am a LEO there is allot of 'grey' areas and procedure of how law is enforced. I am human so to say I would never make a mistake would be dishonest. I will however to do my job to the best ability I can always in keeping in mind it's our job to protect the innocent citizen from threats, not deprive them of their God given right to arm and defend themselves.

 

I would outright refuse to follow a confiscation order as it is blatantly an illegal order. If the 2nd Amd is abolished I would quit my responsibilities as a LEO.

 

The point I'm trying to make is my allegiance is to the constitution not my job security or the whims of politicians, and although I don't trust the govt some of us are trying to make it the best it can be. That's why I try to keep up and learn as much as I can about the law, and when the govt violates the rights of its Citizens so I won't find myself in position were I may have already helped violate some one's rights. So keep the information flowing so we(govt) can be held accountable to the people as per the constitution. And thanks for the replies.

 

 

That's a pretty good answer..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saiga 12 for in close, AK folder out to medium range, and my Mauser K98 if I need to reach out and touch someone....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll be as honest as I can,

 

I would not under any circumstance take a civilian's(American Citizen) weapons if no criminal law has been violated (IE the CG does enforce federal law) period.

 

I hope that my limited understanding of the constitution would prevent me from being a part of other actions that could be in violation of a Citizen's rights. As I am a LEO there is allot of 'grey' areas and procedure of how law is enforced. I am human so to say I would never make a mistake would be dishonest. I will however to do my job to the best ability I can always in keeping in mind it's our job to protect the innocent citizen from threats, not deprive them of their God given right to arm and defend themselves.

 

I would outright refuse to follow a confiscation order as it is blatantly an illegal order. If the 2nd Amd is abolished I would quit my responsibilities as a LEO.

 

The point I'm trying to make is my allegiance is to the constitution not my job security or the whims of politicians, and although I don't trust the govt some of us are trying to make it the best it can be. That's why I try to keep up and learn as much as I can about the law, and when the govt violates the rights of its Citizens so I won't find myself in position were I may have already helped violate some one's rights. So keep the information flowing so we(govt) can be held accountable to the people as per the constitution. And thanks for the replies.

 

 

That's a pretty good answer..

 

I agree, and i thank you for both what you are attempting to do, and your willingness to say so.

 

But,

 

What if something like the new Lautenberg proposal, or Peter Kings bill are passed and made federal law, and the whole lot of this rightwing extremist forum are placed on a "terrorist watch list" and labeled Prohibited Possessors? Is confiscation from those people fair game then? Not picking on you, i do very much appreciate the tone and content of your statement, but The supreme court states that the 2a is subject to "reasonable restrictions" and certain members of fedgov are only too happy to expand reasonable into anything they want. Federal law is a funny thing to enforce, even with good intentions, if the scales of justice begin to tip towards tyrany. What was once an "unlawful order" can be transformed into business as usual with naught but the stroke of a pen. Its hard to consider all the hypotheticals, but i think its important that everyone think what exactly constitutes there own personal line in the sand. Find that exact line, and tell yourself I might let it go this far, but no further.

 

Say the NFA is amended to include all cartridge firearms, and like the machineguns that were once protected by the second amendment, they are not illegal, persay, but they are now subject to "reasonable restriction" and must be registered, and no new arms may be produced for civilian sale. Then, if a weapon is observed at any time, without its tax stamp, or after a certain date of manufacture, it should be confiscated, as that person is a criminal, and any clandestine arms production that aims to supply the people with arms is a criminal enterprise that should be raided?

 

Even if that doesnt sound that likely, (though incrementally, it is exactly what happened in most countries that instituted total gun control) is there anyone who doesnt think that is almost exactly what is likely to happen in Montana if their nullification of federal firearms laws doesnt get tossed out in october? BATFE is going to pick out some poor manufacturer who is producing weapons without a Federal Firearms License, in violation of federal law, and is going to try and nail him to the wall, no matter what the state of Montana has to say. The rest will be cleared up in court, but the action of seizing (gun confiscation) the inventory of that manufacturer will already have been done.

 

There are thousands of scenarios you can play out in your head, where the letter of law can still go past the realm of decency, into tyrany. If its hard to conceive, just read european history, or how "political change" came to east asia. Its important to remember that, and think about what you might do, and what you are unwilling to do, for any reason, because when the government has a monopoly on declaring anyone a "criminal" its not as reasuring, as im sure it is intended, to hear a public servant state they would never victimize "the law abiding."

 

The fact is, there are some laws that no one should abide, and any law that violates the rights of an individual are unjust laws, as americans, we see examples of this, but we abide it, and we carry on in our adherence to the law for many reasons, with various ideas of what is right and what is not, but each one of us has a line drawn in the sand somewhere, a point at which we will not abide it any longer, and know that justice would best be served without any concern whatsoever for the law, or the consequences of breaking it, surivival, justice, freedom, liberty, by any means necessary. We should know both where that point is, and what we will do if we ever reach it.

 

"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means." --Thomas Jefferson to John Colvin, 1810.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the case of the OP, or many thereafter, I would carry the s-12 and a .22lr single shot rifle. any rifle is a distant memory for me.....

 

I didnt vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been an interesting and informative thread. I particularly appreciate the calm insightful posts from desert dog and the posts from Krom.

 

I didn't vote because when the shtf, I would grab something of what I have...and I don't have a select-fire AK or an AR. So it'd probably be either a .223 or 7.62x39 Saiga and, if I could manage it, a second scope sighted bolt or pump rifle in either .30-06 (got 4 to choose from) or .308 along with 40 or 50 rounds to feed the "heavy".

 

If something was needed for long range sniping or shooting through cover, I'd have it. For primary defensive purposes at medium to short range, the Saiga would do. Long range sniping would allow time for a carefully aimed shot and I assuming a bolt-action .30-06 would be no limitation in that event.

 

Of course the weight of the additional rifle would be a hindrance as would the fragility of the optical sight. The big question in my mind is whether the second firearm should be a handgun instead of another rifle.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit to remove a mispost. Had two reply windows open at the same time and mixed them up. Forgot what I was going to say here, mods feel free to delete this post.

Edited by Shandlanos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A simple 22lr may be the best choice...if you really wish to survive long term

Jim

 

I completely agree. that 22lr is your food.

 

the s12 with 100 rounds would default to my "large biped" tool. I wouldnt worry about game laws with a .22 if it came down to it. You gotta eat. the .22 is the best and most discrete weapon out there that can reach out and touch something, and bring food to the table.....pack 500 rounds of 22 (about a year of food if you can find and shoot it), then pack 500 rounds of 223 or x39.....nevermind the whole town will hear when you shoot something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also thought that a rifle pistol combo that uses the same ammo would be good. I know it's not a voting option, but I am very comfortable and accurate with my lever action.44 magnum. I can shoot relatively fast with good grouping.It can be constantly "topped off" in a defense situation. I seem to have a lot more hits on target by slowing down that little bit instead of the " spray and pray " method that can get the best of somebody in a firefight. This compliments my Dan Wesson .44 mag pistol that will never jam, has no mag springs to fatigue so it is ready to rock at all times. Maintenance wise, none of the choices can touch a combo like this if it is what you shoot well. I don't think this choice of bullet would be a problem. 300 grains of pain at 1375fps. Just MHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

everyone always says the 22lr...but for me when the SHTF I will not be firing a firearm except in self defense(me dumping a mag then running till my lungs ooze battery acid )....I can trap game and fish for food....if they dont know your there they cant get you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22LR is great for post apocalyptic self sufficiency, but when society breaks down its 7.62x39 all the way for me if I could only have one rifle.

 

For holding down the fort or bugging out on roads or out of population centers, only having a 22 is a death sentence. Ill worry about fighting off looters, car-jackers, and roadside ambushes first - then worry about killing bunnies for food later. The sagging pants crowd will try to do me in far before starvation will. A thirty cal thumping out the back window of my suburban will end a car chase real fast.

 

Where I live, taking care of the 2-legged animals comes first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Tromix - Lead Delivery Systems
Dinzag Arms
CHAOS, Inc
Mississippi Auto Arms, Inc
Cobra's Custom
Carolina Shooters Supply
R & R Targets
LONE STAR ARMS
SGM Tactical
Mach 1 Arsenal
K-VAR
C&S Metall-Werkes
American Specialty Ammo
Csspecs Magazines
Phoenix Technology
Evlutionz LLC


  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×