Your shtf go to rifle

[qrprat77]

When SHTF, my main concern will be resupply. Whatever I can resupply the easiest will be what I use.

[snare]

I have and train regularly with an AK.

WASR 10-63 (tested, zeroed, works perfectly, feeds HPs, SPs and FMJs)

[thedreamers]

I guess I'm different then most. Most of you are going for the assult rifles, I'm going for a little different route. I'm going with a .357/.38 saddle rifle. Shoots both, I also carry .38 long barrel revolver. That way I only need to carry one type of ammo heavy with me. Later I plan on buying a .357 revolver to carry. I guess its the country boy in me. Also love my 30-30 for that reach out and touch you gun.

[chipinsc]

I guess I'm different then most. Most of you are going for the assult rifles, I'm going for a little different route. I'm going with a .357/.38 saddle rifle. Shoots both, I also carry .38 long barrel revolver. That way I only need to carry one type of ammo heavy with me. Later I plan on buying a .357 revolver to carry. I guess its the country boy in me. Also love my 30-30 for that reach out and touch you gun.

That is the same route I am looking at since we already have a 38 & a 357. I have been searching for a "saddle rifle" it seems the supply of the marlin 1894 & the rossi 92 has all but "dried up"

[tabwyo]

To date I have never been a big fan of "assault" stylized weapons. Had my fill of them in Afghanistan. It's also my opinion that you are what you look like. So in a post SHTF situation where I am forced to defend my home and family. I don't care if you are the local preacher. If you approach me decked out in camo, tactical gear and an "assault" rifle. I WILL shoot first and ask not bother asking questions later. Regardless of your intentions. I will automatically perceive you as a direct threat. Mind you I am 100% gearing up to keep my happy butt at home and ride it out. So I can see the merit in looking, and being able to act, the part of a guy that means deadly business. You'd definitely know that anybody who came at you aggressively were either nuts or meant business.

What I have on hand are: 4 adult sized .22lr semi-auto rifles, 2 kid size .22lr/410 combo single shots, 2 .22lr revolvers, 2 .357mag revolvers, 2 12 gauge pumps, 2 20 gauge over unders, a 30-06 bolt action w/ optics dead on at 700 yards, a .243 bolt action w/ optics dead on at 400 yards & a 30-30 lever action for them John Wayne days. I also have 4 top end target air rifles which can take down small game, birds and in a pinch sting a nosey neighbor if needs be. My wif, children and I are avid bow hunters so we are well equipped in that department as well. Include 4 decked out bowfishing rigs. So in a pinch we can walk the two miles to the lake and zap a couple carp for dinner. Right now I am working on stockpiling ammo. I probably have close to 10,000 rounds of .22. But the rest I am averaging about 500 rounds per gun. My armament right now is 100% sport/hunting. Maybe not the best to go street to street in Baghdad fighting insurgents. But if needs be I can put up a viscous defense of my home and property.

[Matt In Oklahoma]

To date I have never been a big fan of "assault" stylized weapons. Had my fill of them in Afghanistan. It's also my opinion that you are what you look like. So in a post SHTF situation where I am forced to defend my home and family. I don't care if you are the local preacher. If you approach me decked out in camo, tactical gear and an "assault" rifle. I WILL shoot first and ask not bother asking questions later. Regardless of your intentions. I will automatically perceive you as a direct threat.

huh, never thought i'd hear that here, thanks though, just keep moving in my camo and rifle that was good enough for 20+ yrs tll you made it to Afganistan

[Hawkeye]

To date I have never been a big fan of "assault" stylized weapons. Had my fill of them in Afghanistan. It's also my opinion that you are what you look like. So in a post SHTF situation where I am forced to defend my home and family. I don't care if you are the local preacher. If you approach me decked out in camo, tactical gear and an "assault" rifle. I WILL shoot first and ask not bother asking questions later. Regardless of your intentions. I will automatically perceive you as a direct threat.

Just so I am clear, you are saying that you will shoot anyone and everyone, on sight, if they are wearing camo, and have gear and a military style rifle? Correct?

[Grand58742]

It's also my opinion that you are what you look like.

And if I come in wearing blue jeans and a flannel shirt carrying grandpa's old Winchester? Does this make me any less of a danger to you or your family?

Or is anyone wearing camouflage and carrying an AR just automatically a bad guy in your world? See below for further comments.

So in a post SHTF situation where I am forced to defend my home and family. I don't care if you are the local preacher. If you approach me decked out in camo, tactical gear and an "assault" rifle. I WILL shoot first and ask not bother asking questions later. Regardless of your intentions.

Regardless if it's the local sheriff decked out in his BDU field gear because he was coming to tell you there is a fire heading towards your place? Or maybe the military attempting to restore some semblance of order and are trying to find the locations that need assistance?

I will automatically perceive you as a direct threat.

And you have automatically made yourself and your family a direct target. Maybe the aforementioned sheriff or deputy is checking the neighborhood since there is a restoration of order in the local community. He is wearing the tactical gear because it's all he has left and it provides better concealment than Sam Brown and Galls. Maybe he is carrying the so called "assault rifle" because of the threats still out there.

There is a fine line between "perception" and "prejudice." And your quotes went right over the edge there.

Perceive as defined by Dictionary.com

1. to become aware of, know, or identify by means of the senses: I perceived an object looming through the mist.

2. to recognize, discern, envision, or understand: I perceive a note of sarcasm in your voice. This is a nice idea but I perceive difficulties in putting it into practice.

Which you don't use as based on your "shoot first" attitude. You are not using your senses to identify a threat. However, you are using:

Prejudice, as defined by Dictionary.com

an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.

Which fits into your world far better than "perceive a threat by someone carrying an AK and wearing camouflage in the PAW."

"I'm prejudiced against people who carry AKs and wear camouflage in the PAW and will shoot first no matter what."

But with your "shoot first and I ain't asking questions" just made yourself the target of each and every law enforcement officer in that area post SHTF because

If you approach me decked out in camo, tactical gear and an "assault" rifle. I WILL shoot first and ask not bother asking questions later. Regardless of your intentions.

Or as a "insurgent threat" to military forces attempting to provide aid. You do that and you just made yourself an even larger target than you were before.

But let's assume for a moment the person had bad intentions. Let's assume they were a scout for a hostile gang. You just let them know your weapon strength, location and the fact you aren't to "be messed with." But instead of avoiding your place, they just decide to burn down your house in retaliation for killing one of their members. Or even if they leave you alone right then, they will know you have something of value and you are willing to kill for it. And it makes them want it more. So they wait you out. Wait until your defenses slack, wait until nightfall.

I mean, you have to sleep sometime and/or they can and will wait you out. It's going to be lonely in the PAW and I hope you have plenty of friends to cover your back. The human body can only go so long without sleep. Typically 3-4 days before you start to hallucinate and it causes physical problems.

So frankly, you'd best be a better shot than your enemies. Or even your neighbors you don't know coming by to make sure you are doing okay. But no matter what, you shoot first without any provocation and I can flat guarantee you, you have just made yourself a target.

You'd definitely know that anybody who came at you aggressively were either nuts or meant business.

Coming at a person aggressively is one thing. Neighbor Bob coming over to check to make sure you are fine or maybe do a bit of trading is another. Fine line between the two.

But your "shoot, shovel and shut up" comments mar the line between the two in a huge way. So what if someone is decked out in camo and carrying an AR? Again, does it make it any different if they are wearing camo or blue jeans or khaki cargo pants or Speedos? A threat is a threat and one has to be able to tell the difference in the two. And frankly, with your comments you haven't even given the opportunity for someone to explain themselves. Or to prove they are a threat. Or not a threat.

Me? I'd rather make darn sure I of why I was shooting before I dropped the hammer on someone. Maybe that's because it's been rammed into my head my entire career. It's a split second decision, but one I'm comfortable with myself. And one I won't hesitate to make. I know the difference in "threat" and "dude in camo carrying an AK and walking towards my house out in the wide open. Wonder what he's on about and maybe I should find out before shooting him dead."

Maybe you should do some thinking along those lines as well to make sure you aren't dropping the hammer on someone that didn't deserve it. Really because it makes you a greater threat to the surrounding community. They know "you mean business buddy" because you shoot at anything that comes across your property. Mad dogs who shoot anything and everything coming around tend to get dealt with. And you should remember the old country way of dealing with a mad dog.

In the end, no matter what, you've just made yourself a larger target and frankly someone who can't be dealt with reasonably in a SHTF situation. Or in a pre-SHTF situation where neighbors might seek you out because you share the same ideals and form up a group. Nobody wants to deal with the mad dog or have same as a part of their group. Maybe you want to be left alone in a SHTF situation, but no man is an island nor is a single family. And in order to survive a long term SHTF situation, you have to have friends and allies. And furthermore, they have to trust you.

But your shoot first attitude causes distrust. And frankly, those that are distrusted in the SHTF situations cannot stand alone for long.

And ETA, because I can...by your own words aren't you guilty of the very same things you were talking about in another thread?

I actively sought out information sources that weren't selling the "thy neighbor will be thy mortal enemy" aspect of it. I present material from information sources that excluded or minimized the political radical / militant "our country is out to get us... buy a gun... trust nobody... tinfoil hat" agenda.

So you exclude the views of "trust nobody tin foil hat agenda" when presenting material, but don't trust anyone in the PAW wearing camo and carrying an "assault rifle" because of? Because they are automatically a threat and shouldn't be trusted? Based on a tin foil hat theory/agenda that they are automatically a threat because of what they wear?

And if your neighbor is wearing a multicam uniform and carrying an FAL? Aren't you lumping him into the "mortal enemy" threat because of what he wears? Just asking.

Awfully broad strokes, assumptions and accusations you made.

And the same could be said of lumping everyone into being a "threat" for wearing tactical gear and carrying a particular style of weapon. That's a pretty broad assumption and accusation.

I'm just sayin...

[tabwyo]

I know I committed a survivalist cardinal sin by saying I dislike "assault" stylized weapons. But you are obviously ignoring where I said "So in a post SHTF situation where I am FORCED to defend my home and family." so you can pick my statement apart. That's a pretty key part of what I was driving at. You can spin as many what if's you what to color me as the one in the wrong as you want. The facts are you are deliberately excluding a key part of what I said to metaphorically kick me in the teeth. I am a big boy though and can handle it with minimal sniveling. But I guess I could have elaborated on what I consider S**t Hitting The Fan means to me. That would be a complete societal breakdown, lawlessness, rampant looting and murder... ect. Kind of like when the Japanese invaded Singapore and the British and Australian troops deserted in mass rioting, killing and looting along the way. In a highly dangerous environment such as that most anybody will, or should, see everybody as a potential threat. Looking the part of a super commando just puts you higher on the list of people I would view as threatening. Carrying a shouldered weapon and approaching my home without announcing yourself, which is well out of the way to get to, most definitely represents a direct threat to my families safety. Once again only in the situation I previously, and obviously not clearly enough, spelled out. So yes, Farmer Joe walking up to my house in a flannel with his deer rifle slung over his shoulder would not be considered as much of a threat as say three guys in tactical gear approaching my home in anything that resembles a firing line with assault weapons at the ready not announcing they are military, law enforcement or even local well prepped civies out sweeping the area looking for threats would be considered a direct threat. In heightened situation like this to err on the side of caution and safety for me and my family it seems best for me to assume that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a damned duck. At no point in my previous statement did I say I'd be roaming the countryside shooting everybody with a assault style rifle. I am more than certain I also stated that I was staying in my home or "bugging in" as yall like to say. For a group that prides themselves on being ready for anything, which could be considered overly cautious. You didn't miss a beat to tell me matter of factually that I would be so overly overly cautious to the point of being wrong in your opinion.

I do believe the OP posed the question "you shtf go to rifle" which seemed to include general firearms and the reasons for having them. In a few posts there were reasons for not having certain weapons. So my first statement was in keeping with the original topic. Those are the reasons I have the weapons I have and reasons I don't have "assault" weapons. Period.

@ Matt in OK, assault weapons and camo are just fine for fighting. I am quite familiar and proficient with military weaponry. I have been forced to defend myself and others to the point of having to take human life with military weaponry. A fact I am not proud of yet I am exceptional proud of my service to my country. The regrettable fact of war is that people kill people. My unconscious bleeding body was defended by my brothers with military weaponry. I am alive today because of military weaponry. But I prefer not have military weapons or military stylized weapons in my home.

PS. Do not twist my last comment to color me as anti military.

[Hawkeye]

Now your adding a lot of conditions in that were not present in your first post.

Backpeddling. Your doing it.

Are you just talking a lot of bravado? Or are you really and truly, that big of a hardened stone cold killer?

Personally, in a crisis situation, I will be equally concerned with the jeans and flannel shirt guy who appears unarmed. I'm not going to be shooting everyone on site though, without a specific reason. Guess that means I'm just not a stone cold killa.

[tabwyo]

@Grand, I am pretty certain I have a greater understanding on the thought process behind and the consequences of "dropping the hammer" on somebody than the average person. It was not only trained into me. But I was forced to put that training into use in combat. So I am pretty certain I am more aware of the gravity of that situation than most of your average population. You argue in circles so if I state I will defend myself you can point out how I am wrong. As well if I state I will not defend myself you can also point out how I am wrong. You comments are well thought out and articulated. But it seems to me that they are thought out to the point where you will be right regardless of what is said. So in the end my rebuttal will undoubtedly be pointless.

[tabwyo]

How am I backpedaling?? The term "FORCED to defend myself" in my original comment should have pretty well set the table for what was stated. I was my fault for assuming the my interpretation of crap hitting the perverbial propeller was way different from what around these parts is considered reasonable.

[Hawkeye]

How am I backpedaling?? The term "FORCED to defend myself" in my original comment should have pretty well set the table for what was stated. I was my fault for assuming the my interpretation of crap hitting the perverbial propeller was way different from what around these parts is considered reasonable.

Someone's visual appearance alone, IE - wearing camo, having gear, and having a military style rifle, is not forcing you to do anything. Actions force you to do something. Words force you to do something. Appearance alone, with zero previous or current knowledge and/or interaction, does not force you to do anything. Especially kill someone. Killing people is not something to be taken lightly. If you've done it before as you say, then you know that.

[tabwyo]

How about all the above mentioned.... assault rifle and tactical couple with having a weapon at the ready and approaching my home (closest neighbor being 2 miles away and I am well over 20 miles from a town of 6000, 6 hours from any major metro area and 3 hours off the interstate, not on a major highway and down 2 miles of dirt road) unannounced. Stated that point as well. Those conditions in the post SHTF situation..... Firing a weapon period is not something I take lightly. But I damned sure don't take my families safety lightly either. If you are out at my place you most likely didn't get there by accident. But if you did and your intentions are not to harm my family then you'd probably be best served to lay down your weapons when challenged.

[Grand58742]

You comments are well thought out and articulated.

I don't typically post up anything in a rash behavior and try to think through to the logical end of things. And frankly, you should have said "I don't care for military style rifles" before describing said system you do use and left it at that. We would never have questioned it nor would we have looked past the explanation. We don't question people's choices in weaponry...unless you are Gunkid that is. Special circumstances evolve in that situation. Anyway...

However, your comments of "gonna blast someone wearing camo and wearing tac gear while carrying an "assault" style system" could not go unexplained. Now you state it's conditional. Okay, if I've got four guys heading to my property with obvious evil intent on their minds, sure, absolutely. Bust a cap.

However...

Having four guys with rifles slung, wearing the same pattern camouflage coming towards my property showing no evil intent? Situation turns into a different sort of view at that point. "Who are they, what do they want and why are there here?" are questions I will ask. I will be on guard certainly, but will find out what they are on about before starting a firefight.

But you didn't specify in your post as to what...no, you really didn't. "Automatically a target" is what you implied. Doesn't matter if it's the preacher or your best friend Bob. You did not specify! Conditional factors do apply even in a post SHTF, completely lawless situation. Targets (mind you I used the word targets) bearing ill will towards my property or family? Absolutely. Others that happen to be carrying the same style of "assault" rifle (which term I hate, but anyway) wearing the same style of clothing and not posing an IMMEDIATE threat to my family or my property. I tend to try and figure out what they want before automatically shooting first.

But you did not include the conditional factors hence my reply. "Forced" to defend yourself is one thing. This implies you are forced into the position of self defense or defense of others and I can find no fault with your actions of defense and figure you are justified. However, automatically targeting those carrying military style rifles and wearing camo (which you implied) is another highly improbable course of action. Hence my "mad dog" comments.

But you corrected yourself and clarified (more or less) your original comments. And frankly, I'll leave it be. You choose other weapons for defense. Understand and I'm cool with that as is everyone else on this forum. Situations you use those weapons for defense was what I getting at.

No sense in beating a dead horse at this point and no sense debating it. You clarified your original position and I'll drop it.