Location: PedroAsani's Survival Plan - Part 3: Digging In - Personal Equipment

Discussion: i disagree on a few of these decisions

Category: Discussion Forum / General Discussion

Report thread
Watch thread
Share this

1 2 3 4 | Next

rusrsbrah?	i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 6 2010, 9:38 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 6 2010, 9:38 PM EST with a bolt action rifle every shot will count, but will also take about 7-10 seconds or more for effective shots. i suggest a semi-auto such as an ar-15. aim, fire, done. also if you get the civilian version you wont waste ammo or precious time that you will need on the battlefield. this is the exact reason the u.s. army went from full auto m-16s to triple shot m-16s. but you might want a rifle with more versitile ammunition choice. silencers are also unnecessary (IMO) and not easily obtained (in the u.s. it requires a class 3 firearms liscense which is almost impossible to obtain). 2 handguns scream dual wield and i can almost guarantee that anyone you give two handguns to will start dual weilding UNLESS one is like a .45 and one is like a snubnose .357 or .38. my suggestion is if you do the 2 hand gun thing this is the rout you take and make one a shoulder holstered weapon and one an ankle holstered weapon. those are my only problems with the supplies, and are ENTIRELY my personal opinion. your plan, your base, your choice. simply suggestions with utmost respect. :) Post reply 0 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you? Keyword tags: Personal Equipment
Survivor15	1. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 6 2010, 9:47 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 6 2010, 9:47 PM EST Good suggestions, though not entirely true. It does not take 7+ seconds to reload and aim a bolt-action. There are dozens of threads devoted to explaining everything you just posted. Suggesting a gun like an AR15 isn't a good idea. Those guns start at over a grand and usually require special licences. Capitalization is key. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
DevilNuts	2. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 6 2010, 11:45 PM EST You really don't seem to know anything about firearms. - You don't need a class 3 for suppressors. - It doesn't take 7-10 seconds to fire a bolt-action, especially if it has a magazine. - Dual-wielding handuns is not a very effective way to fight. Fire one until its dry, then fire the other. Please learn something. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Carnack	3. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 6 2010, 11:50 PM EST "You really don't seem to know anything about firearms. - You don't need a class 3 for suppressors. - It doesn't take 7-10 seconds to fire a bolt-action, especially if it has a magazine. - Dual-wielding handuns is not a very effective way to fight. Fire one until its dry, then fire the other. Please learn something. " - Just a bag of spuds or a pillow. - A bolt-action is limited like a trigger. You can train yourself to fire faster and work the bolt/slide faster. - What are you John Woo? Fact is that most of the time your accuracy is impaired with one handed-firing. Both hands keep that sight steady. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
PyroPredator	4. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 1:22 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 1:22 AM EST I understand what you are saying. But I also agree with these guys. If you train enough with a bolt action (modern or milsurp) then you can get down aimed shooting very well. The Brits did what was called the "Mad Minute" where they would fire, I believe, 30 aimed rounds in a minutes time from their Lee Enfield bolt actions. An AR-15 can be a good gun if you have the time to clean it after shooting it. An AK-47 is a better choice and for those who can't afford either milsurp bolt actions can be just as effective and possibly cheaper depending on the area. Plus with bolt actions you can't panic fire like you can with a full auto and somewhat with a semi-auto rifle. And as far as suppressors go, I'm not sure where you are from DevilNuts, but most states require you to have a Class 3 liscense for suppressors. I'm not talking about the kind you make from pop bottles or various other items, but actual manufactured ones. I know in my state its legal to own Full auto, silencers and sawed off shotguns if you have a Class 3 liscense. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
EgAce	5. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 1:33 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 1:33 AM EST Ahem: Wikipedia says: "Mad minute was a pre-World War I term used by British riflemen during training to describe firing 15 aimed bullets into a target at 300 yd within one minute using a bolt-action rifle (usually a Lee-Enfield or Lee-Metford rifle). It was not uncommon during the First World War for riflemen to beat this feat by an excessive amount. Many riflemen could average 25 shots, while others yet could make 40 shots. It was rumored that a company of assaulting German soldiers were repelled by machine gun fire, while in actuality, it was a rifle squad of ten riflemen firing at an excessive rate. Annually, a group of British owners meet for a mad minute competition." Post reply Do you find this valuable?
PedroAsani	6. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 5:56 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 5:56 AM EST "bolt-action silencers 2 handguns" I'll tackle each one of these in order and explain why I made the decisions I did. I have veered between a bolt-action and a semi-auto, however I came down on the bolt action for precisely the reason you think it is a bad idea: Every Shot Will Count. In a long term (5+ years) outbreak ammo will be an extremely scarce resource. By forcing people to stop and think between shots, it should make them pick targets and aim more carefully. I believe that silencers will be very neccessary. Post-apocalyptic landscapes will be deathly silent. Any sound will carry a lot further than it does today because it will not be drowned out by ambient noise. Gunfire is nice and loud, and can travel for miles if conditions are right. Whilst I will always make my purchases legally, I am not tied to buying from the US. I can go to places which are more flexible. I did cover this in the text below the list, but I am violently against dual-wielding handguns. The purpose of carrying two identical guns is to cut down on different ammo types, and to allow parts from two broken guns to be interchanged to make one working gun. Also, if there is a malfunction mid-fight, it is quicker to switch to the second handgun, rather than stop and try and clear the problem. Cops routinely carry two guns, and the reason for different calibers is not to prevent dual wielding. Typically the backup gun is smaller simply to save space and/or be concealed. Were it possible to carry two huge guns, I'm sure they would. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
AlexHigginbotham	7. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 9:04 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 9:04 AM EST A class 3 license isn't all that hard to get, as long as you arent a felon or insane. You apply for it, pay a little money, fill out some papers, and wait to get it. Pretty simple. My personal opinion is money spent on a suppressor could be well spent elsewhere. Most suppressed weapons are still loud enough to carry in low noise areas. A carrying sound is very hard to follow anyways, especially a gunshot. Unless someone is shooting right in your face, and depending on the acoustics of the area you are in, its nearly impossible to pinpoint where a gun was fired. In the woods for example, there is so much stuff the sound can echo off, the gunshot sounds like it comes from every direction. I'm not worried about it. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
PedroAsani	8. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 9:35 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 9:35 AM EST "A class 3 license isn't all that hard to get, as long as you arent a felon or insane. You apply for it, pay a little money, fill out some papers, and wait to get it. Pretty simple. My personal opinion is money spent on a suppressor could be well spent elsewhere. Most suppressed weapons are still loud enough to carry in low noise areas. A carrying sound is very hard to follow anyways, especially a gunshot. Unless someone is shooting right in your face, and depending on the acoustics of the area you are in, its nearly impossible to pinpoint where a gun was fired. In the woods for example, there is so much stuff the sound can echo off, the gunshot sounds like it comes from every direction. I'm not worried about it." Trouble is that if they can discern a general direction, and they head in it, they are likely to find the base. Don't forget that zombies are relentless, and they have nothing but time. And there are going to be plenty of them. Whilst one person in a wood might have trouble working out where the shots are coming from, the nearest zombie won't. And then the others will just follow that one. I think that it is worth keeping the gunfire as quiet as possible, if not to eliminate the possibility of zombies finding the base, to minimise the probability of it. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
AlexHigginbotham	9. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 9:46 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 9:46 AM EST I understand that any time you can play it a little smarter, you should. The problem here is the money you have to put in to obtaining legally suppressed firearms is way more than I am willing to spend to reduce my risk a zombie being able to figure out where I am from a hard to detect gunshot. I condone suppressing a .22lr or something, but anything above that is still easy to hear over a long distance. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
MajorDamage	10. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 9:57 AM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 9:57 AM EST what about suppressed .45 ACP? It's a standard subsonic load (not the +p) and has a whole lot more 'oomph' than any .22 lr any day. you no like? Post reply Do you find this valuable?
cyrano222	11. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 10:06 AM EST The ease of getting a suppressor is rather relative, where I live in the sticks I could go to the local LEO and get the proper paper work filled out in an hour and be done with it. The Major on the other hand in the peoples republic of MD would either be laughed out of the office or questioned as a Kasinski type. I agree with Alex a supressor in the post apoclypse would be not necessary unless you are willing to go with a single shot weapon, the cycling of the action would make enough noise to draw attention. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
herrteufelhund	12. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 10:35 AM EST Actually as long as the suppresor, SBR or whatever is legal to have in your state and you meet all of the eligablity requirments to own said item your local Sheriff or police chief can't say no to you having one. Had a sheriff locally that tried that and was sued sucessfully as well as the BATFE was involved. There are several case law examples you can print off the internet to hand to your local senior LEO if they have any questions. The turn around time for the paperwork is about 3 months here lately. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
PedroAsani	13. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 11:57 AM EST Alex, if you have read the rest of the plan, you should know that the cost is not my main concern :) But considering cost for a second, I had budgeted $1,000 per rifle including silencer, and $500 per handgun including silencer. Do you think that is enough? Remember I will be buying wholesale, so take about 10-15% off the retail price. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Carnack	14. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 2:24 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 2:24 PM EST "Cops routinely carry two guns, and the reason for different calibers is not to prevent dual wielding. Typically the backup gun is smaller simply to save space and/or be concealed. Were it possible to carry two huge guns, I'm sure they would." From what I know of cops they generally carry a revolver as backup due to its reliability. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
rusrsbrah?	15. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 5:03 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 5:03 PM EST im going to quote and reply to every post personally. so bear with me it might take a while. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
rusrsbrah?	16. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 5:06 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 5:06 PM EST "Good suggestions, though not entirely true. It does not take 7+ seconds to reload and aim a bolt-action. There are dozens of threads devoted to explaining everything you just posted. Suggesting a gun like an AR15 isn't a good idea. Those guns start at over a grand and usually require special licences. Capitalization is key." the 7+ seconds remark is my personal experience. i forgot to add that to the post. (my bad :X) and i wasnt suggesting the ar-15 i was simply naming the first semi i could think of off the top of my head. they are expensive but do not require a special liscense. they are semi and are completely legal (for now. i heard obama is thinking about taking away all assault rifles. i hope to god he fails) Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Survivor15	17. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 5:07 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 5:07 PM EST "the 7+ seconds remark is my personal experience. i forgot to add that to the post. (my bad :X) and i wasnt suggesting the ar-15 i was simply naming the first semi i could think of off the top of my head. they are expensive but do not require a special liscense. they are semi and are completely legal (for now. i heard obama is thinking about taking away all assault rifles. i hope to god he fails)" Not in California. Post reply 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?
rusrsbrah?	18. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 5:08 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 5:08 PM EST "You really don't seem to know anything about firearms. - You don't need a class 3 for suppressors. - It doesn't take 7-10 seconds to fire a bolt-action, especially if it has a magazine. - Dual-wielding handuns is not a very effective way to fight. Fire one until its dry, then fire the other. Please learn something. " apparently you dont either. 1)yes you do (in texas at least). maybe you should research a little more. 2)i was saying from personal experience. ive only fired bolt action a few times. 3)i was saying it was a bad idea to dual weild. if i thought it was a good idea why would i make one shoulder holstered and one ankle? i dont understand your logic. Post reply 0 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?
rusrsbrah?	19. RE: i disagree on a few of these decisions Mar 7 2010, 5:10 PM EST \| Post edited: Mar 7 2010, 5:10 PM EST "- Just a bag of spuds or a pillow. - A bolt-action is limited like a trigger. You can train yourself to fire faster and work the bolt/slide faster. - What are you John Woo? Fact is that most of the time your accuracy is impaired with one handed-firing. Both hands keep that sight steady. " refer to the reply to devilnuts. and also if you are going to insult me, try coming up with something original instead of taking something from mr. asani's post. :) (referring to the john woo comment) Post reply Do you find this valuable?

1 2 3 4 | Next

ok as far as weapons.	PedroAsani's Survival Plan - Part 3: Digging In - Personal Equipment	Disagreement
Suggestions:

Location: PedroAsani's Survival Plan - Part 3: Digging In - Personal Equipment

Discussion: i disagree on a few of these decisions

Related Content