daily ad

Friday, March 25, 2016

grandpappy's prepping 5 of 5


GRANDPAPPY’S PREPPING 5

Let me start this segment out by reminding you that while all different firearms are a tool that is specifically designed to do a different thing, you can’t afford to own them all.  Pure and simple.  It is much wiser to minimize the types of guns you have and maximize the ammunition for them, since in the near future there will be weapons aplenty with an ammo scarcity.  So it doesn’t matter how spectacularly a certain firearm performs its task.  Minimize gun and maximize ammo.  Improvise, adapt and overcome.  Now that that is out of the way, let’s start debunking gun needs.

*

A great place to start is the rimfire.  I wouldn’t recommend them.  The guns are at least fifty percent higher ( I don’t include WalMart Specials- don’t trust your life on their products.  Store wide the quality is crap, so why take a chance? ).  Which isn’t as important as the fact that the ammunition is ridiculous.  For the price of a 9mm reload, you get one underpowered round.  Why do you want it, under those circumstances?  When rimfire was too cheap to care about, when you could go plinking every weekend, they were fine.  You could stockpile ten thousand rounds for the price of a Rugar 10/22.  It made sense to make a rimfire your “forever gun” arsenal ( you’d still be armed while all your enemies had bows and arrows, primitively made flintlocks or just rusted chunks of rebar-even with a 100 yard gun you would have the tactical advantage in most instances ).  But the rimfire was the pinnacle of Oil Age industrialism and that age is currently in the middle of ending.  The price has been too high for too long-for 99% of us-to think of it as a viable alternative any longer.  Sure, if you could spare the extra grand for ammo, if you just bite the bullet and spent the money as it will soon be useless anyway, fine.  Better rimfire with all its problems than cash in the bank.  But who has an extra thousand they don’t need?  For most of us, it is just too little gun for too high a price.

*

Pellet guns are toys.  They are toys for boys training for bigger and bader guns.  But guns will eventually be an endangered species.  At most, we get flintlocks up and running, but black powder is not ballistically similar to smokeless and hence I see little application for pellet guns as trainers.  Not enough to stockpile and repair them.  The super deluxe multiple-shot units might be wonderful, but their range barely rivals a rimfire.  Let the boys use slingshots and small bows and rocks to hunt the rats, and train them on the actual weapons they will use.

*

Bows and crossbows are great hunting weapons and might actually be what we end up with for future weapons ( depending on the scarcity of nitrates and energy for forging when we consider the viability of black powder ).  Bows for range and volume of fire, crossbows if your troops are only afforded minimal training.  But you don’t need to buy them now unless you plan on training enough with them to be one of your primary weapons.  Buy the books on making them, instead.  A MUCH better investment for you and your heirs.  I have a couple of the PVC books and a few primitive tech ones.

*

Shotguns have a rather limited application.  They are great if you live in dense woods, as then all you need is a stockpile of primers and a decent stock of shells.  You can stay armed even without lead and with black powder.  The ammo is cheap since there is no to minimum brass used ( remember that pesky copper Peak I keep telling you about? ).  If your terrain supports it, and this is your primary weapon, great.  Good choice.  If you only have one for interior home defense, I’d have stuck with a pistol.  But if you already own one, okay.  You could do worse as they are the easiest to reload primitively.  Eventually, of course, the plastic will grow brittle and split, but even then you should hopefully still have the base to glue paper to.  You could do worse.  But if you live in other places, if the short range of the weapon will endanger you, pass on this.  It is an intimidating close range weapon, great for bushwacking, but I’d prefer distancing myself from others.

*

Carbines.  If you have ranges not too far removed from ideal shotgun use, a carbine is a great idea.  If you have hundreds of yards to reach out, why do you think you need a carbine?  Like the shotgun, it was designed for close ranges.  It doesn’t matter if an AK has a twelve inch spread at 250 yards, the thing is a carbine designed for that mythical thirty yard encounter range.  In modern combat, the Infantry are heavy weapon support troops.  They aren’t marksmen.  In the Apocalypse, you have no heavy weapons.  Your shots matter.  In close urban and dense wood and jungle, all you need are carbines.  And if you have that carbine, due to close fighting ranges, by definition you don’t need a longer distance thirty cal.  Pick one or the other.

*

If you DO need a battle rifle, you DON’T need a carbine.  Your one rifle will suffice for both roles.  I’ve read the justification that on long range patrols you need to conserve weight.  Sure, if Uncle Obammy’s Army issued your equipment and you are a pack mule.  A pack mule so over burdened you can’t move silently or observe what is around you.  The survivalist should be true light infantry, with only a few pounds more than the weapon and a short issue of ammo.  The militaries focus on shaving weight from ammo is stupid, as they give you an anemic round requiring two to three hits to take down the target, negating any advantage.  Then, they overburden you with all the other crap you don’t need.  Why shave off three pounds from the rifle when you carry an extra thirty?  Remember, you are NOT a soldier, you are a survivalist.  You are better off, nine times out of ten, doing not what they do but the exact opposite.  A thirty cal is a superior weapon for a fighter who wishes to survive the fight.  You needn’t ever shoot at its extreme ranges to utilize its potential.  Just being skilled at the 300 to five hundred yard range will serve you very well. 

*

You choose, bolt or semi.  But if you have one thirty cal rifle, either one, why do you need another?  If you have a bolt, and are shooting from 300 yards, why do you need a semi?  The bolt will give you a good enough rate of fire, considering you are in survival/defensive/ambush mode.  If you have a semi, why are you concerned with having a bolt?  For that extra one half inch accuracy?  Why?  Unless you are a true sniper, and if so, why do you have a semi if you are worried about that thousand yard shot? 

*

As for pistols, choose your poison, if at all.  You are either a revolver guy, or not.  Why have both?  A pistol is a last ditch weapon, if you even feel you need one ( if you have a war surplus rifle, a bayonet might be all you need for a back-up ).  I prefer the revolver for simplicity, dearth of spare parts, novice friendly, forever-load-and-forget, and cheap price.  Of course, pistols have their place.  But not necessarily are they needed in addition to a rifle.  If you only have a pistol, and your ranges are short, and if you are practiced, you don’t need a rifle to go along with it.  Pistol ammo is cheap, far better reloading as it is a straight case and capable of being reused longer and light weight.  Cops do quite well, just being armed with pistols.  Just either make it your primary, or don’t worry overly much about having one, if you can’t afford both.

*

One last word, on getting a flintlock rifle.  Prices have shot up to unaffordable levels.  You are much better off just buying as much in the way of reloading supplies for your modern firearm.  Or, if you are concerned with the longer term, go full bore Stone Age/Scavenger Age bower ( primitive tech with arrowheads scavenged metal for the best of both worlds ) and forego firearms completely.  If your terrain will allow it, and you are nomadic.  Remember, firearms only defeated the Mongols ( and/or their descendents/replacements ) from defensive positions.  If you aren’t attacking with bows, you needn’t worry so much about higher tech weapons.  The Amerindians didn’t lose to superior weapons, they lost to superior population and resources, a situation I don’t find feasible after the collapse.

*

That is more than enough.  Be cool.

END

Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page.  IF YOU DON’T SEE THE AD, DISABLE AD BLOCK ( go to the Ad Blocker while on my page and scroll down the menu to “disable this site” ). You can purchase anything, not just the linked item. Enter Amazon through my item link and then go to whatever other item you desire. As long as you don’t leave Amazon until after the order is placed, I get credit for your purchase.  For those that can’t get the ads because they are blocked by your software, just PayPal me occasionally or buy me something from my Amazon Wish List once a year.  Pay your author-no one works for free.  I’m nice enough to publish for mere Book Money, so do your part.*** 
*Contact Information*  Links To Other Blogs *  Land In Elko*  Lord Bison* my bio & biblio*   my web site is www.bisonprepper.com
*Link To All My Published Books
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there

58 comments:

  1. Personally I love the feeling of using a bow. And I found when I got my hunting license that my skill with shooting a target with a bow translated well to shooting a target with a rifle. Shooting skeet with a shotgun was a completely different story, however.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't those real birds fly in a perfect arch?

      Delete
    2. Two birds in the bush are worth 200 in the sky...

      And for PODA archery, you can't beat this in terms of availability: https://primitivetechnology.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/bow-and-arrow/

      Delete
    3. He does make it look butt simple, if hard work.

      Delete
  2. Of course you know, growing up in Idaho in a hunting family of Mormon's. That I've got all of the above x 2 lol. Two is one ya know.... But then too 62 years is a
    long time to gather stuff.
    I don't disagree with you for the most part on weapon choice either ! Though I tend to prefer the 30/30 Marlin in a carbine. So long as I'm here in the swamp it is adequate.
    Sure am glad that I bought ammo way before the big price jumps !! Also didn't hurt to have a brother in law, that worked at the CCI factory.... As I still consider the 10/22 to be the best, as a survival gun along with a large caliber revolver. Just in case they make it up close to you.

    Primarily, I've got two of everything because ,the wife of course. I've had her almost as long as some of my weapons ha ha. She can shoot too.

    No worries Jim, when I make it out there I'll have ya up to speed on the bow stuff in short order. You'll just have to keep those golden locks out of your eyes heh heh

    I just have nightmares thinking about transporting the ten tons of preps and guns n ammo. Clear back across the country !
    One thing is certain. I'm living proof that prepping pays off. Were it not for our preps, life would have gotten harsh these past couple years. Goes to show that you can't time SHTF. That and having tribe is very important....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm all for having all, but one must be realistic. If I hadn't pared down, myself, I'd be spending all my prep money on more ammo and accessories rather than my more diverse supplies.

      Delete
  3. Great article as usual James. As I've stated before, the Flintlock will be the last gun to be firing. As you've pointed out though, they're darn expensive now. If you wanted to acquire one, you might be able to pick up a used one at a gun show, or sometimes Track Of The Wolf has them. A musket is more versatile because it's also a shotgun. They have a big enough bore and shoot a big enough round ball that they can knock pretty much knock anything in north America on its ass. But range is limited.

    If you need better range, then get a flintlock Hawken with as long a barrel as you can find. I read an article one time in which a group of guys were reaching out to 600 yards plus with their .58 caliber Hawken's. You will need to shoot the biggest, longest, heaviest bullet that you can find, and will need a tang sight to compensate for the rainbow like trajectory of the black powder guns.

    Pellet gun article minion here James. Pellet guns might be toys, but boy I sure would like to have one as a game getter post apocalypse. I got the Crossman Fury Nitro about a year or so back, and haven't regretted it. But of course, they're dependent on modern infrastructure and manufacturing for replacement parts. That's why previously I suggested the use of the Chinese B1 and B3 models. Very simple, and easy enough to stock parts for and repair.

    Long term, bows are going to be it. Probably a good idea to get one and practice with it now. It's quite a challenge to hit small targets consistently with a traditional bow with no sighting system, and Howard Hill I'm not (You'll probably have to look him up. He was an old timey dude that took every large game animal on every continent with a bow).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd have a hard enough time hitting 300 yards w/o glass with my Enfield. 600 with a BP is pretty impressive ( actually, I'm not completely hopeless at 300, as it was unsupported, but I definitely know my limitations ).

      Delete
    2. “It is much wiser to minimize the types of guns you have and maximize the ammunition for them, since in the near future there will be weapons aplenty with an ammo scarcity.”

      1:05 here James. I also meant to add that it was for this reason that many of the old west dudes preferred to have the combo of a .44-40 pistol and rifle, and only have to buy one type of ammo. These days some manufacturers make some dandy lever action rifles that are chambered for the .357mag/.38 special, 44mag/.44 special. This enables a survivalist to have the same pistol/rifle combo, but these rounds are superior to the old .44-40. The specials, either .38 or .44, are nice for almost everything. The magnums give a lot more performance when taking down large game or shooting at a distance. Still, figure that you will probably not be able to shoot accurately with these rounds in the rifles much beyond a few hundred yards, so sniper rounds they are not.

      Delete
    3. As I said before, a lot of us would be better off staying around a hundred yards, 200 max, anyway. It is no handicap to admit your skill limitations, but it is one to pretend to have an unattainable skillset.

      Delete
    4. I'm also on the pellet gun - for vermin control and small meat acquistion, pellet guns do it quietly and for low cost. Spring pistons are accurate, but heavy and costly (the really good ones anyway), but the Chinese underbarrel model 25s are pretty good when tuned up and are surprisingly accurate. Not a bad budget air rifle.

      Otherwise - good content. Its a pity that the single shot shotgun are far less common then they use to be. Not fancy but they worked well. As expensive as .410 ammunition is, most of the game shot at will be at rest rather than running or flying, so the smaller pellet load would do less meat damage.

      Delete
  4. The 4-K post limit is annoying
    Part One

    (A pistol is a last ditch weapon) and (But not necessarily are they needed in addition to a rifle)

    Sorry James but you could not be more wrong, this is foolish advice to give people.

    If rifles were the end-all why do cops carry handguns? This is not a hard question to answer if you look at it honestly without bias and an open mind.

    Read (and understand what he said in) FerFal’s book about how it was in Argentina. Rifles were not what people walked around with day to day to protect themselves from criminals. Handguns were for a few reasons, first it’s easier to have a handgun on you then a rifle, so people had a way to thwart attacks. Second you could go armed with a handgun where doing so with a rifle would get you detained.


    I reload, have been doing it since 1985 or so. Reloading is not cheap, components are costly, as is all the reloading equipment. I worked at a gun shop part time (including reloading ammo for customers) You don’t really save that much money doing it. Yea the Lee Loader is inexpensive, but its very slow and every reloader I know (I know 50 of them at least) gets tired of it within a week.

    As far as an air rifle, you are wrong again, they are not toys. I have a Gamo that fires a pellet at over 1,000 feet per second and it will kill a rabbet at 40-yards. Rabbits, squirrels, birds are all good for food in a real SHTF situation. My Gamo was $170.00, not a lot of money today. Heck most of us make that in a day. And for hunting small game a pellet rifle (not a BB-gun) is a worthwhile investment. Pellets are $2.99 for 250 of them, again not a bad price.

    Chuck Findlay

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did say a pistol itself would suffice, just that you don't necessarily need both pistol and rifle. I only had the one pistol starting out and did not feel unarmed or at a disadvantage. My location was heavy woods. A Lee-Loader is just fine after the collapse. Time and convenience will not be considerations then. An airgun at $200 IS a lot of money for starter/poor preppers, as talked about in the first four installments. For those of us advanced, perhaps not. You and I are not the subject of this series.

      Delete
    2. "Time and convenience will not be considerations"
      I strongly disagree with this. Time spent doing one thing, like the hour to reload 10-20 rds of 30-30 say with the lee loader, is an hour you aren't working on all the things you need to get done.

      For most of us, time will be *more* of a consideration after, than before.

      Delete
    3. Once you remove commercialization and taxation out of the equation, just leaving substance, life doesn't take all that much time.

      Delete
  5. Part 2

    And as far as a 22 rifle it’s a good round and has been used for hunting since it was invented, including poaching deer. Read “Survival Poaching” by Rangar Benson.

    I have at least 60,000 22 lr rounds (haven’t bought any since the mid-1990”s) so price per round is not an issue. I worked at a gun shop and use to buy it by the 5-K case box. But even today you can find build up a respectable amount of it for future use as an OK price. No it’s not $5.99 for 500 like it was 30-years ago, but once bought it will last 100-years and it’s not likely to go down in price so NOW is the time to stock up if you don’t have enough.

    As to Wally-World 22 ammo you are again wrong. There is an unbelievable liability for ammo manufactures and to make a special second class of junk ammo just for Wally-World is not going to happen.

    In the end there is a few truths of life that you just don’t see or can’t get past.

    1:That being that quality items cost more and almost always are better in the long run.

    2: that prices go up over time on items.

    3: that guns are expensive (as is ammo) and if you want the ability to hunt for food and or protect yourself you should invest in in them if you value your life.


    I know you hate to spend money, but at times a given item or service is worth the extra money spent.

    I’m not saying to buy a tricked-out AR, but a quality rifle, handgun and shotgun are worth it. Quality in that it’s well made, and a bolt-action military rifle is just about the best made there is. After they are made to go to war with and be abused like crazy. An old Mauser would be a great rifle. I have a few of them.

    As far as revolvers being lower priced then a semi-auto, you are again wrong. A 357 Mag S&W revolver is $500.00 and up, A Hi-Point 9 mm semi-auto is $200.00.


    You need to get out of the low price only and first thing you look at as a determining factor in your buying decision. None of us want to spend more then we have to, but many times its worth buying a quality item that will last and do the job needed better then a lower priced item.

    And if you are betting your life on an item like a gun low price could put you at a big disadvantage.


    And seriously a bayonet? Try this, put it on your rifle (as you say a handgun may not be needed) and walk around with it on your rifle at work or out shopping and let us know how it works for you. That is if you survive the 47 bullets the cops send your way. Then (as you lay there bleeding to death) you may come to understand that a handgun does in fact have a use for a survival minded person as they can tuck it into a pocket, a purse, or under their coat thus avoiding becoming a target of our trigger-happy cops in this country.

    Sorry to tell you, you are full of it, I agree with a lot of what you say, but this post is so full of bad advice that lacks good judgment.


    Chuck Findlay

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, you aren't reading my advice on pistols correctly. Please read again:
      Of course, pistols have their place. But not necessarily are they needed in addition to a rifle. If you only have a pistol, and your ranges are short, and if you are practiced, you don’t need a rifle to go along with it.
      *
      I was talking about RIFLES at Wally, not ammo. Their cheap rifles are full of plastic parts, and they rust easy. And that is the problems before you even start shooting them. If you want to bet on them, fine. I bought BETTER, MORE EXPENSIVE rimfire rifles to replace my Wally hunk of crap. I don't buy the cheapest, I buy middlin grade when the cheapest won't suffice. I don't own $25 Chinese grain grinders, but $40 Columbian ones. Yes, I have a few cheap back-ups but I recommend the middlin price one. At the time I recommended the cheapest guns, they were the war surplus. It was an accidental fusion of quality and bargain. I don't mind being called on BS. I make plenty of mistakes. I learn by my mistakes. But it seems you are selectively reading and remembering to find mistakes here. I didn't say which weapon was best but why you didn't need them all. Yes, IF you can only afford one weapon, better a rifle than a pistol. IF a rifle can be used. If you stay in heavy woods or the city, or if we are in a high crime dystopia rather than a collapse, of course a pistol is better. You use a dystopia future to argue against my collapse arsenal arguments.
      *
      Again, PLEASE call me out on any mistakes. If I'm wrong, I don't want to make the same mistake again. But can we please make sure I'm wrong in the first place? I went to pains to try to be clear here, as I'm aware of the fury aroused when I diss on certain guns. Peace.

      Delete
    2. Maybe out West a rifle would be a better choice. But in the East where the population density is much higher a handgun would do the job as the most likely problem is an up close encounter with a criminal. These encounters will be in your home, going to and from your home, getting in and out of an auto, coming out of a store with a load of goods.

      In all of these (that FerFal talks about happening in his book) situations a handgun is much easier to have on you. And as it gets worst (the economy and political situation) government is going to clamp down more on guns making rifles hard to carry as it will get you shot or in jail.

      Heck even now governments are getting to the point of banning things.

      Philly PA outlawed knifes, how long before anyone with a rifle is just shot on site? I will carry a handgun to save my life if I thought I needed to (I do on occasion) and not care about the law as it’s unjust and not in my best interest to not have one if or when a criminal accost me. In said situation you shoot (to kill) and then walk away never calling the cops as it would get you thrown in jail.

      Here’s the statute on Philly’s knife issue.


      (1) Definition.
      Cutting Weapon. Any knife or other cutting instrument which can be used as a weapon that has a cutting edge similar to that of a knife. No tool or instrument commonly or ordinarily used in a trade, profession or calling shall be considered a cutting weapon while actually being used in the active exercise of that trade, profession or calling.

      (2) Prohibited Conduct. No person shall use or possess any cutting weapon upon the public streets or upon any public property at any time.

      (3) Penalty. The penalty for violation of this section shall be a fine of not less than three hundred dollars and imprisonment of not less than ninety days.”

      http://www.phila.gov/philacode/html/_data/title10/CHAPTER_10_800_SAFETY/10_820_Cutting_Weapons_in_Publ.html

      So yes I continue to see a handgun as more important for most of us.

      Chuck Findlay

      Delete
    3. Chuck,

      You can disagree but you forgot to praise the hair. ;)

      No yum yums for you.

      Idaho Homesteader

      Delete
    4. I hope Chuck keeps disagreeing-yes men only sound good until you are disposed by reality hitting you unseen. But yes, thank you for pointing out about the hair. I forgot to berate him for his lack of praise. Good crap, people, if you can't follow one simple rule anarchy will reign!

      Delete
    5. As for living in Philly, I would liken that with my escape from California almost 25 years ago. It took a couple of tries and I hated going out into the rest of the country outside my culture, but it was worth it in the end. I've never come close to living anywhere that was anywhere near as bad as Cali ( of course, I didn't go up into Yankeeland ). It was worth escaping. If you live in a festering craphole that won't allow you to defend yourself, I would do all I could to move. You can't survive the collapse in jail.

      Delete
    6. The last gun I'll ever get rid of is my 9mm Beretta and the 2,000 rds. I've had enough experience with it that I'm good for taking small game out to 200 ft or so. It's easily concealable and I can have it and 200+ rds on me without much notice.

      For the person that said reloading is slow, so what?
      Is it any slower than earning the money to buy store bought? I punched out 400rds of .308 last night in 2 hours while listening to some specialized mp3's and drinking some hot joe. I may do the same again tonight, cept .223. Sure beats sitting in front of the idiot box.

      Delete
    7. To be fair, I think the comment on reloaders moving away from the Lee-Loader was referring to the high cost of reloading if done the way most prefer. I thought that such concerns cease after the collapse. It was just a comparison between conventional preppimng vs. redneck prepping. A common mistake as it is hard to relearn almost everything survivalist-wise after decades of misinformation.

      Delete
    8. I've posted before on reloading on the cheap if you recall James? The Lee Loader costs around $40 now which is still a bargain as far as I'm concerned. I had determined that with a 1lb can of powder, that I could load over 900 rounds of .45 Long Colt. Now in order to load on the cheap like this, low velocity cowboy loads (In this example 7.6 grains of HP-38) and cast lead bullets are a given. If you look around, the lead can be acquired for free. The cost of the can of powder is around $25.00. Haven't priced primers lately, but they're still reasonable. The shell cases, particularly when shooting low velocity rounds have a long reload life.

      Look at how fast Richard Lee, the developer of the Lee Loader can crank out a round:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeEl9wZyabc

      Delete
    9. So, at three cents for powder, hell, call it four, and I imagine about a nickel a primer ( low bulk purchase, hazardous shipping fee ), and even a few cents per bullet ( energy cost and recycle center lead ), and lets call it five cents per shot for the brass case cost, hmmmm. Let's see. That's just a smidge over what they want for a rimfire round ( not on sale ). So, why are we still trying to push .22's?

      Delete
    10. James, I make 9MM rounds for about .105 cents. I do have some nice reloading equipment, I can roll out 100 9MM in 7 min. I'll never recoup the cost of the equipment I have, it was all bought to maximize range time and minimize reloading time not to save money. Range brass is nearly free and I purchase bulk components at shows (no hazmat) or with shipping deals. I have been reloading since 1977 so a lot of the equipment/tools were bought before the latest panic buying shortages at much less cost. So long story shorter, you are right, its at least as cheap to shoot reloaded centerfire ammo for what rimfire costs.
      Great Hair!

      Delete
    11. One critical area to watch with the Lee hand loaders is achieving a proper grip. I found, back when I used them a lot ,that sometimes a loose crimp wound pop out. Causing in a revolver, bullets to set back from recoil. Something to watch for ! Extreme pressures can result !
      Warning...great hair ! Your assumption of more leisure time being available is faulty thinking. Pioneers had little free time, due to just scratching a living out of the soil and the multitude of other tasks which will need doing by hand.
      Still, reloading equipment is a good investment. Especially for revolvers and shotguns. High velocity rifles, not so much. Unless one also stocks jacketed bullets too. Velocity being too much for cast bullets.
      I think most commentors forget, that you are speaking to the neophytes, who are just starting out. Not us grey hairs to the game...
      It's all good brother, still I must beat my chest occasionally lol

      Delete
    12. Always nice to hear from one whose only prepping fault is lack of enough coffee. :)

      Delete
    13. 6:19-believe it or not, I just got done writing an article on the reload v the rimfire. Can't believe I stretched it to 1k words. In my calculations I included a lee loader and bullet mold in the cost, so the equipment isn't an issue. Be out next week.

      Delete
    14. Oh, believe me I've made plenty of mistakes ha ha.
      After all, prepping is a journey for which there is never a destination.

      Delete
    15. But I think we can admit that your most egregious mistake was the coffee! :)

      Delete
    16. Perhaps, yes I should maybe drink more of the vital fluid...

      Delete
    17. See the issue here? You don't drink enough coffee, so you don't think clearly, which would then be obvious to stock more coffee!

      Delete
    18. Jeez, at a pot a day I've got like three years ahead now....yeah, you're right, I need to start stocking bulk beans too.

      Delete
    19. Albertsons is supposedly having a case sale on coffee right now. Brand name at generic price.

      Delete
  6. I read a Civil War diary where the troops showed up with a lot of stuff and ended up throwing away pistols boots etc. that were too heavy for constant marching (keeping their rifles of course). Not exactly the perfect example for the end of times but perhaps an example of just the right tool for the job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How can our uneducated peasants know anything. Our wise leaders and their appointed military officers have figured out what our troops should carry. Even if it equals their body weight. If the load slows them down it is due to malingerers and unpatriotic sabatuers.

      Delete
  7. Military load-outs for solders is not applicable to most of us. Military has a support network that keeps them fed food, ammo, clothes and everything else needed to go out and see the world and kill people.

    But a prepper has himself (and maybe a small group or family) to carry all he needs. He's going to be very limited in what he can have with him, In the military this in not an issue as they have planes, trucks, ships, jeeps and lots of other people who's job it is to keep him going. I don't see the comparison as very good. Even in the Civil War times there was a support network that a prepper post SHTF may be lacking. So yea Civil War troops could throw away things and still get by. But a prepper with a limited amount of stuff and probably no resupply won't be throwing away pistols or boots as they are too useful.

    And I don't buy into The Golden Horde as Rawles does. People will wait in place for daddy government to come save them and all the while consuming stuff like food and, fuel. They will then have lost the ability to go out very far looking for food or supplies. It will never occur to them (till it's too late) that daddy government would never come to save them.

    Chuck Findlay

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To me at least, and I might be all alone here, the carrying load of soldiers IS applicable as it teaches me that since young men in top shape can't function with too much crap, then preppers can carry even less. Not more. I understand the thought process of carrying all but the kitchen sink ( we'll need it and can't resupply it ) which applies mostly to preppers but can carry over to soldiers ( resupply is infamously unreliable in time frames important in combat ), but this is still an attempt to try to repeal the laws of physics. Weight is important, irregardless of need.

      Delete
    2. Oh, and I agree with you on the Golden Horde. Alas, just because most will stay doesn't make the few less dangerous, just given today's population levels. A very few is still a lot in total numbers even if the percentage is low.

      Delete
    3. Based on recent experiences with hurricanes and the not-so-recent example of the invasion of Germany in World War II, I expect the Golden Horde, but not as most picture. People will bug out, but they jump in their cars and head for the superhighways, which turn into giant parking lots. As people break down and run out of gas, then they start wandering off in a desperate, unplanned search. So, everything within about 10 miles of the Interstates gets stripped, and the rest is relatively untouched.

      At least for the initial round, until the warlords get organized.

      Delete
    4. I agree with this as well James, and was always skeptical of the claims made in the Brazilian dudes book. I can't speak for their culture, so who knows? But here in the U.S. I do not see bands of roving marauders roaming the countryside in a SHTF scenario, burning up precious fuel (after the pumps have stopped no less) in hopes of finding potential supplies to loot? This might be true if they already know what you have, but if that's the case, you get what you deserve. Again, I can't speak for Brazilian culture, but here most country folks are armed to the teeth and are not going to be easy victims.

      I never read the book to be honest, and am only going from what others have stated at the various online venues, but it was said that he also claims that the cities are safer places to be in this scenario?

      The leftist that I used to work for made some outrageously laughable claim one day that in a collapse scenario, all the good leftists would band together in full cooperation and strip all of the survivalists of their weapons and supplies, redistribute them, and reform the city government.

      I can't tell you how amusing I would find it to witness any such attempts (from a safe distance of course) as the first one advances on the heavily armed “right wingers” retreat and takes a bullet to the temple, as the other pussy leftists run like scared little rabbits into the wilderness where they promptly starve to death. Now there's your Kodak moment! ;)

      Delete
    5. I think he's Argentinian. I never read the book, either, as it is very expensive and I do believe the differences in culture would make many points moot. I've read a few of his articles based on ideas in the book and while I see his point, again, cultural differences, and an economic collapse is not the same as a civilization collapse. Yes, we get one running into the other but really, did they have an economic collapse? Or just an economic depression? And as far as his argument that isolated country estates are attacked successfully, just remember how long its been that our pioneers had experience with that kind of threat. Different cultures.

      Delete
    6. John-but the thing to keep in mind will be that the highways back up quickly, gas stations back up quickly, etc, and I'd imagine the parking lots will be close to the source of initial departure. Close to the Interstate isn't automatically bad, if you are far away ( of course, I'd have to say that, wouldn't I? ).

      Delete
    7. I still have the ALICE pack I carried in the army in the 70's, loaded with the required TA-50 for european winter field exercises. It's amazing how much weight that thing has gained over the past 40 years.

      Delete
  8. Make arrowheads out of glass bottles (some assembly required)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfMN3BVISmQ

    ReplyDelete
  9. oh,one of the hairy butt...I know you prefer to foo foo your hair,but never foo foo the ability of a pellet gun.1000 fps is about the same as a .22,no black powder or reloading crap,and easy to make pellets,or even use a bb! Yes,it takes a bit more skill to shoot a rabbit or a squirrel than a 12 gauge,but it is a bit more fun than just a "point and shoot" thing.Sure,its a break action,a reload time takes 10 seconds or so,but very little noise,light weight,and dirt cheap.My Crosman cost me 129 bucks,1000 fps,and a 6x scope.Sure,its not a main battle rifle,but I will promise,a tap on the back of your leg,it won't matter what hit you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, not foo-fooing the pellet gun but rather the ability to spare the $139 for it. On a rather tight budget you can have either 800,000 calories of wheat OR one pellet gun which MIGHT bring in SOME calories if no one else hunts out the area. A bird in hand or two in the bush. Will you ever get almost a million calories with that gun? That is the question before you buy it.

      Delete
    2. How about the ability to take out a bird / squirrel or rabbit that is raiding or damaging your crop or building right now, vs. setting out a trap and hoping you kill it before too much damage occurs.

      Delete
    3. Never considered the sling shot - that could work. At least scare off the beastie.

      Delete
    4. Around $10 for the wrist rocket and around $5 for replacement bands.

      Delete
  10. I like firearms and I'm a somewhat collector. There was a time when I had my own personal shtf (#2 robbing and leaving me at the same time) and the ability to turn some of the gun collection into cash kept me out of the rain and under roof until I could recover. Worked out much better than any savings that I lost to the witch. So I look at the collection like some look at PM's.
    Nice hair!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not a bad view of things. I used to only buy used, then I rethought it as the savings were marginal in compensating for the shortened life. But most folks will buy used and hence your strategy is sound.

      Delete
    2. Ammo of common calibers may soon be as precious as the guns.
      The whole 2 is one thing applies to firearms of course, but they are like precious metals when you get more than a couple - an investment that hopefully you will never have to tap as such.
      Since the article is about prepping from the poorest level possible - aka no precious metals, it rightfully recommends getting only (at least at first) the one firearm that will most suitably deal with your environment's security needs, and stocking plenty of ammo for it (and skills with it) ahead of more diversity.

      Delete
    3. No one wants to think time is short

      Delete
  11. We loves us our gun articles.

    I'm glad of having my supply of factory packaged rimfire ammo but I see it more as currency than anything else. Unless you have an exceptional reputation in the area then trading hand-loaded ammunition is not going to happen.

    The stupid laws over here make a lot of these choices quite simple, but I will admit there are a few guns I've bought that with the benefit of hindsight I should never have bothered with.

    In any case, once the paychecks for the feds dry up a gun and a small quantity of ammunition will still fetch a massively higher rate than a bin full of empty beer bottles so it's not a complete loss.

    For me it's a big long-gun variably scoped with iron backups and a quiet little pistol to compliment. I'd never want to find myself at even 200 yards needing to reliably punch a hole in something with a rimfire rifle or a centrefire pistol.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 100 yards is bad enough, 200 a miracle?

      Delete

I must moderate-trust me. You don't want to see what happens otherwise. Sometimes it takes awhile to respond as I only check two or three times a day. No N-Bombs, nothing to get me libeled. Otherwise, have at it. If you criticize me, make sure to praise my hair first.