gear queer 2 of 2

GEAR QUEERS 2

*
note: free books.  If you like Ron Foster https://amzn.to/2tuDZij .  Zombies https://amzn.to/2tBx5ao .
*

Every time you used to read about a survival arsenal ( now, mostly, you watch about on the computer ), it was the same old crap.  Probably advice pilfered from Tappon or Clayton.  Battle rifle, assault rifle, shotgun, pistol and rimfire.  Now, you all know my views of this.  I stick with battle rifle, pistol and rimfire, and the pistol wasn’t obligatory.  What I would question today is why all the extra?  Why do you think you need a half dozen different types of weapon?  Yes, you need extras of each weapon ( One Is None ), because only a damn fool goes into the apocalypse with one single solitary wiz bang wunder weapon.  But you don’t need so many damn different kinds of weapons.

*

The biggest issue I have is the perceived need to have both a battle rifle and an assault carbine ( that was my takeaway from the generic HK91 video.  “My primary weapon is the AK-47 but I love my C308” or very similar words ).  Why do you need both?  Well, you indignantly gasp at my obtuseness, obviously I need a close in Spray And Pray and a quasi-sniper for long distance.  Which is usually the excuse folks give for the AR.  “Oh, well, you know it is like super effective out to five hundred yards”.  Okay, so you have the equipment you need to hit further than you can shoot effectively.  Why do you need that thirty caliber? 

*

And if you do have that thirty cal, why again did you need the assault carbine?  Since you are a Semi Simian, you don’t just have a bolt action 308 but rather a full on battle rifle.  You already have the means to rapid fire at short or long distances.  Why do you need the carbine?  Well, since carbines allow better handling from less recoil and I can carry more ammo, I need a carbine.  But I need a battle rifle because I need extra punch.  Okay, so how are you going to carry both?  Well, see, you explain, if I’m on patrol I have a carbine and if I’m hunting or sniping I’ll bring my thirty cal.  And if I’m ambushed I have my nifty semi feature.

*

So why not just use the battle rifle, period?  Oh, silly, it’s because ammunition is twice as expensive.  Well, okay, how about firing slower, to compensate for the extra recoil and the extra cost?  Oh, Jim, you magnificently coffered moron, I need suppressive and cover fire, and I can only get that with twice the mags and a much faster mag swap time than any of those poorly designed battle rifles can achieve.  Okay, how about having a designated marksman on the team with the battle rifle and others carry the carbines?  Well, of COURSE, then you don’t have magazine and ammunition compatibility!

*

But you won’t have that compatibility when it is battle rifle day, will you?  So you might as well all just stick with the carbine.  So why have a battle rifle?  Well, it is for hunting.  Yeh, that’s it!  Hunting.  You need a semi for hunting?  Well, in case I get ambushed, right?  So, why not all just have battle rifles?  Right, suppressive fire.  But then I have to wonder, why can’t you just shoot that unicorn that magically survives the woods being hunted out by day three with a 5.56?  By this point you could give a crap about harvesting meat humanely, right?  Wound it and run it to ground.

*

Don’t get me wrong, I think a carbine is crap compared to a battle rifle.  But those are my preferences.  If your preference is a carbine, by all means go for it.  I just have a hard time understanding why you think you need both.  If your terrain is friendly to carbines, why do you need a battle rifle?  And if your terrain calls for longer range, why handicap yourself with a carbine?  Pick ONE.  Having both only delivers a marginal gain, at a very dear cost.  It really falls into Gear Queer territory.  You are just owning a gun to own one.  Don’t you think you should question your ability to master both, when mastering just one is problematic enough? 

*

Now, why do you have a shotgun and a pistol, or a shotgun and a carbine, or a carbine and a pistol?  Or all three?  No, one does not do the job of another, but having all three is also not necessary.  If you have a shotgun for heavy forest or an urban environment, why do you need a carbine?  If you are inside the home with a pistol, why do you need the shotgun?  Oh, for better stopping power?  So, why include the pistol?  For backup rounds.  So, why doesn’t a pistol with extra mags not make more sense than a shotgun?  You certainly don’t need a carbine inside, do you?  Oh, that is for firepower.  But, in what house do you have rooms that are longer than your pistols effective range? 

*

I’m not arguing a pistol can competently do the job of a shotgun.  I’m asking why you need both when one can do one task really good and the other task adequately.  Isn’t accepting adequate and not carrying extra weight, not worrying about the cost ( mainly in the practice, not the gun purchase itself ) nor the training a good trade-off?  Now, if you did accept all of that, then you just pull out the Sunk Cost theory.  Oh, I already bought it, I might as well keep it and ammo it up and train with it and stockpile for it.  Right?  Well, perhaps.  But wouldn’t it be better to choose your best ones and sell the rest and buy a butt ton of ammo? 

*

I know, I’m just like you.  I bought a revolver thinking I needed it and I haven’t sold it.  Mainly because an ex stepbrother in law ( is that a thing? ) Christmas gifted me 800 rounds of 38 and I already owned two hundred of 357, so I figured the gun was ammo-upped and it just didn’t seem worth getting rid of.  I won’t be wearing it on patrol, however.  Mainly it is just a bedside gun ( which, realistically, can almost be handled with a knife and dog ). 

*

I’m sure you have similar stories on guns and why you don’t get rid of them.  And as long as you have sufficient ammo for all, I guess it doesn’t matter.  But if I didn’t have thousands of rounds for every firearm I would get rid of that gun unless it is a back-up duplicate ( everyone varies but I‘d stipulate that a thousand per revolver, 3k per semi auto pistol or bolt gun and 6 to 9k per carbine are minimums ).  As I said, I’m marginal on the AR at much distance, so the accuracy is lost on me.  I can’t shoot shotguns for crap ( mainly due to lack of rifle sites ) so I got rid of that.  I got bottom of the barrel SKS’s so those were no loss ( can‘t hit dingus ).

*

It is painful to get rid of a gun ( strangely, I didn’t weep over dropping the 45 from my arsenal, but that got me here in a much better location so it was a exponential gain ).  It will be more painful to not have enough ammunition for the guns you do have.  Nut up, make the sacrifice and trade excess guns for more ammunition.  Stop buying extra guns and buy extra ammo.  Ammo is your Weakest Link.  Plan accordingly.

END ( today's related link https://amzn.to/2MFIRsY )

 

Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page ( or from www.bisonbulk.blogspot.com ).

*** Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the above donation methods or mail me some cash or buy a book. If you don't do Kindle books, send me the money and I'll e-mail it to you in a PDF file.  If you donated, you may request books no charge.   My e-mail is: jimd303@reagan.com  My address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184

*** Pay your author-no one works for free.  I’m nice enough to publish for barely above Mere Book Money, so do your part.*** junk land under a grand *  Lord Bison* my bio & biblio*   my web site is www.bisonprepper.com *** Wal-Mart wheat***Amazon Author Page
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there