Kimber America | Rimfire Target Conversion Kit Pick the Kimber Pistol of your choice! There are many more, but it is imperative that you match the firearm to the intended zone of engagement. You can lead a horse to water.............. Y'all are entitled to your opinions, although they might not improve the chances of survival?
What about the Springfield m6,single shot,.22s,.22l,.22lr and also a 410 21/2 inch ,410 3inch. I also have the 10/22 breakdown,I keep the m6 in the bag with the 10/22.
the springfield is heavy. The pak rifle is 2.2 pounds and takes down into a 17 inch space. It would fit in my back pack. I did not see anywhere on the site about a scope mount but the picture shows it with a small lazer sight. As far as the Kimber ? pistols are not accurate enough for me. The PAK rifle is is 15.5 ounces without optics. It is by far what I would want if I carried my AR-15 AS A PRIMARY DEFENSE WEAPON. THE AMMO WOULD DOUBLE AS AMMO FOR MY SIDE ARM.
I fail to understand this concept of a little extra weight to hump? After all most of our 150# Grandpa's humped a Garand across Europe or the Pacific?
Very expensive man and that is why I dont have one. I have no plans on buying one or bugging out. I have perfectly good 200 dollar Marlin 981-T for all my .22 needs. Gator, I cant move fast enough to be effective in a fight with over 70 pounds on me. At my age 59 now May 2nd Im not humping anything but a foxhole And Ill admit that. For me to bug out? it is by quad or Jeep. Not on foot. My patrol pack is nothing but 210 rounds for the AR-15 in 7 mags. pistol with two mags. Knife, quart of water, four food bars. Medical kit. Two radios. I dont carry the back pack because I dont have to. I am doing a perimeter check not carrying everything I own . I f I was manning a fox hole looking over the choke point I would be carrying my 30-06 with 100 rounds, lunch, water , two radios. Handgun with two mags. Resupply is just a couple minutes away. I dont even get close to 70 pounds Bugged in. Logistics is so very important. Grand daddy had an ammo truck following along behind them. Air born troops had ammo dropped in. Resupply is everything in a war or a post disaster world. I simply cant carry enough supplies on my back to live more than a few weeks and if I get into a fight? Im out of ammo. get wounded? probably dead later without good medical. Food , water, shelter, A group moving together with vehicles is another matter. A group would use a van or trailer for supplies. But if there are no vehicles? then its horses or hand carts etc. Or you carry it. All of these one gun threads are nothing but debates over weight, hunting versus fighting etc. Survivalism is not war but it can be. It is not hunting but it can be.
Perhaps you have missed the thread about actual minimum Government issued gear to "Survive actual War" ? Like WWI, WWII, Korea, and Nam. Those Little Green Frogmen wouldn't turn up thier noses at the opportunity to have at least one firearm! It's okay to castoff the Historically documented experiences of others, if you can't walk in thier shoes. The odds of you ever having to brace one of those folks are less than minuscule. But it is possible that it might happen, and how does your theoretical philosophy (it's all nonsense) stand up in actual Combat?
"All of these one gun threads are nothing but debates over weight, hunting versus fighting etc. Survivalism is not war but it can be. It is not hunting but it can be." That is why I have tried to steer it back on course. I wanted everyone to name a rifle they would take if they could only have one, not how they would never have just one. One never knows when the situation will arise that for whatever reason, you have only one rifle. To continually spout that it will never happen reeks of a lack or real world thinking and preparation. Not bashing ya King, just wanted to steer the thread back to the original intent.
The original "if you were only 'allowed' one rifle' was a little vague; tv people, tsk . Mebbe you could narrow the question down some to a particular scenario... . I mean if my wife made me sell them all but one [ei. I could only be 'caught' with one] I'd keep the .303 enfield 'cause it just feels right to me. But if it's the 'end is here' then the 50 cal kentucky flitlock [fancy tools not needed]. But if it's the 'final battle approaching' then the full auto that matched the largest supply of rounds. And if it was the government that said only one, well I'd have to choose the outlaw life, or join multiple militias that each only allowed one rifle... Seriously tho, has there ever been a man with only one rifle? and satisfied with that station? methinks not
methinks not" Yep. John Lingle (RIP). Taught me a bunch about shooting, and he only owned a Rem 700 in .308 that he bought in the early '70's. His other gun was a Rossi .38 special that he got in the early '60's. Both were beat to hell and he was a crack shot with either. He used iron sights and took deer, hogs, and muskrat with the rifle out to 200 yards or so. His brother Hoover had a Garand and a lever .22 for squirrels. My Dad only owns a Rossi .22 "gallery gun" with the octagonal barrel. People in these parts didn't collect guns but rather bought one for a purpose and it was a tool like a shovel. They took reasonable care of their tools and were very proficient in their use.
... yes many that I grew up around. Many of us view firearms as gadgets/toys/weapons and have clear defined roles for each type and style of firearm. The men (and one old lady) I knew saw them as tools and means to an end. That was food or a means to destroy vermin or stock as required. I often said you should have a XX for this or a YY for that and the stock response was always along the lines of "why this one works". The rest of us greatly over think this I suspect. As to hunting, I knew a wealth and well respected hunter here, he travelled the world and used the same 7mm Mauser for over 40yrs exclusively.
Good on him, it seems his prison term had come to an end. I am guessing that they don't have gun shows in your country, or you would not talk like you had fallen out of hillary clinton's behind... I truly apologize for being rude but I can only take your statements as being 'pro-gun-control-monologue'... and thence-fore prefer to dissuade others from it's lechery
........ ummmmmmm what the hell no WTF are you talking about ??? What in my statement was "anti-gun" by your definition ? And what in my statement said that we/I - spawn of a felon (didn't need to commit an offence that was regarded as a felony to get transported but I digress) or not- were in anyway limited to owning only one firearm. That is not the case by any simplistic stretch of the imagination or lack of education. The people to whom I refer are those who have chosen or only found the need for a single firearm, generally hard working farmers or stockmen (what we call a "cowboy" here). They could own all the want in reality but they see or saw their needs very differently to those of us who may take a different view. The gentleman I referred to CHOSE to hunt with one rifle/calibre, it was part of the enjoyment and challenge to him, I highlighted this only as an example of what can be accomplished by a man and his chosen tool. When I say we overthink it, I don't mean that we should be in anyway limited to our choices but that simply a straightforward and minimalist approach can work. And yes, we do certainly have gunshows, and gunshops, good lord who would have thought such a thing was possible, it can't be true as I am the spawn of a convict therefore I must be lying !!!!! Sadly I missed the last local show, it was but a couple of weeks ago but I was up in the mountains hunting deer and hogs, I only took one rifle with me, my favourite but not at all my only one (I look at my gun safes like some look at their bag of golf clubs and pick the right one for the "shot"). This morning was spent doing some routine maintenance on my handguns, just a wipe down and oil, but it takes a while. So mate, pull your head out of your arse (that the is convict spelling) and don't put words in my mouth, if you were not sure what I was saying, don't assume, you could have always asked and not made a fool of yourself.
IMO 1.Hunting is nothing like warfare. a. animals are hiding and running, b. rarely attacking c. not shooting back. d.eventually anything left eatable won't take much of a weapon. Warfare. a. The enemy is hunting you. b. greater in volumes of participants c. better armed than your self. d. more practiced than your self. e. age with out limit , f. some ,participating under duress . g. likely shooting from as great a distance their fire arm will allow. h. also likely ambush. Paint your self clothing that looks like a deer and wear a hat with antlers and try running through the woods, and not get shot. The passive survivalist is just such a target, for those that refuse to properly prepare. If I am forced to leave all my reserves and take all that I can carry on foot and may be my hand cart, My several thousand rounds of .17 HMR will serve me better, having no other reserve to rely on, than a few hundred shot shells, and almost 5X what I can carry in volume than .223 . .22 is smaller still, but it has 1/2 the velocity and accuracy of .17 HMR The only side arm worth taking is the .357 mag revolver, cylinder chambers loaded with ; shot shell, specials, and mag , jacketed, and hollow point. Can't do that with a semiauto. Gun weight was discussed , and post SHTF all excessive bulk in a gun can be removed. skeletonize the rear stock and remove most of the front stock. Or, repurpose the front and rear stock area to be a multiple magazine holder. Remove the features that are comfort, and retain those that are necessary function.
