Thoughts on lever as bad times rifle?????????

[O.S.O.K.]

Seems that this primarily comes down to "what do you define 'bad times' as being?". That, and I keep seeing "I don't plan on being in a firefight" - so what are you going to do if you find youself in one anyway - even though you didn't plan on it?

I took that as meaning that there is anarchy - caused by drastic economic times and a lot of very hungry and scared people. People that will form into gangs and take what they need and then what they want - by force. We've seen this in our country before - in the most recent times, the Watts riot comes to mind.

Defining bad times as an economic slow down, and saying that you'll just stay out of trouble, etc. allows for just about any firearm to be effective in a defensive role.

If you want a real "academic" test of the servicibility of a rifle for a defensive roll, you need to throw it (figurativley) into a worse-case scenario and judge it by that measure IMHO.

And again, the proven in-service militrary rifles (or semi auto versions thereof) are simply the best available for that role.

If you really want an "ace in the hole" for the worse-case scenario then you should have one of these along with at least 7 mags and 2000 rounds of ammo - again, IMHO.

ETA - and yes, a supressed .22 rifle would be right handy too - along with a night vision scope and some communications equipment. Plus, plus...

[Bogie35]

I like the idea of loading as I go with the tube fed mag. A detachable box mag is super fast and convenient until you realize all of them are empty. That would be a little stressful. Also, I would be more likely to conserve ammo with a lever than an auto-loader. And as far as I'm concerned, they can HAVE the urban areas, because I'm heading for the wilderness, and I won't need an urban assault rifle there!

bogie

[2X22]

And as far as I'm concerned, they can HAVE the urban areas, because I'm heading for the wilderness, and I won't need an urban assault rifle there!

I'm IN the wilderness! Run off a generator and satellite receiver!

My .44 Marlin will suffice HERE.

If the zombie horde makes it to here, I fear for everwhere else they just were 'Cause nothing else is left...

2x22

[C. Cash]

I always thought that a heavy barrel .22 with a silencer would be the cat's meow. That way you can get any weapon you want without them knowing that they are a target or where it came from.

+1

bogie

With my Mod. 39A, with certain loads, the sound of the hammer hitting the firing pin is louder than the report of the load. Accuracy is superb and I get tired of shooting it before it runs out of ammo.

I remember the pics of the guys in Afghanistan with middle eastern snap haunces, fighting and beating the Soviet Army. Where there is a will there's a way.

[336A]

Hi Folks

I hang on some forums that do the survival thing.

Most of the time the talk for a bad times rifle goes the way of the AR-15 or AK-47.

I have had both and lately I have been looking at levers for this role.

Now please understand. I have a very different view from most of what I would do in an emergency situation. I do not plan on getting in to any firefights or playing Red Dawn.

My thoughts are more of a hide and survive type of thing. Use the rifle for food and foraging first and fighting second.

I figure that a 336 in 30-30 should fill most of these needs.

Any thoughts?

Mods I am new here so if this is taboo please delete.

Take care
Kid

For the purposes that you described above yes a lever action of any kind will fill that role. The key to any survival situation is the K.I.S.S system and the lever action fills that bill very well as do revolvers. As for the semi autos, magazines can and will fail after a while. If you have a semi and are of limited means and can't afford 7 magazines and only have 2, and lose one then I hope you maintain positive control of that one. Another important item that is not mentioned here that is critical for semi auto AR types(gas impinged system) is CLP. No CLP or some form of lubricant, see how long your nice expensive AR lasts you.

So someone here has cleared rooms and lots of them too? Well so have I and lots of them as well, even instructed Advanced Rifle Marksmanship, CQM, and CQB. You will never find me going into a building by myself playing Rambo ever. Any one worth their salt knows that you never ever enter a building and clear a room by yourself. Why..? because it is an absolute way of getting ventilated with a quickness, especially when that AR malfunctions due to not having any lubricant for who knows how long. If for what ever reason you have to enter a building by yourself be sure you do a good recon prior to and even then be very very cautious. However if at all possible stay the heck away from buildings, when in a ultimate worst case senario and by your self buildings or any structures for that matter are big trouble.. The OP is about survival and survival is about self preservation not going out and attempting to be Johnny Rambo or some such. if anything anyone stuck in a worst case social melt down as some have put it would be using guerilla tactics (if common sense prevailed of course).

The question about what if you do get into a tight spot? It is simple really evade evade and evade some more. Make like a rabbit and hit the nastiest thickest vegitation available, make the terrain and vegitation work to your advantage. And always adhere to the fifth priciple of patrolling common sense which by the way few officers have any of

[Hank Dodge]

I like my .44 leverguns just fine for an "out-the-door" rifle. I tend to carry a Colt SAA, Ruger flattop, or a Smith 696 in .44 special for a sidearm when I'm not packin' a 1911. Having my Winchester '94 Trapper in .44 mag allows me to use all the same ammunition as well as having a few true magnum loads available if I need the extra power factor. This little Trapper has gone most places with me over the years and I never feel "under-gunned". It's a handy size that balances well in the hand when on foot, and it takes up little space in the truck as well.

[MrMurphy]

In response to the other .44 comment.....I own a .44 levergun. I know what they can do. Past about 100-150 yards I wouldn't take a shot.

In my case. Yes, i have cleared rooms for a living. WITH A TEAM. I am not stupid enough to do so alone except in absolute worst case no choice scenarios. But giving up a weapon you've trained with for years for a levergun you haven't makes no sense. I don't have a problem using one if it's what's at hand, but I have more modern weaponry at hand. As well as supplies to keep them running. Nobody alone, or even a few of them, survives a giant firefight, but that doesn't mean you skip a hundred years of weapon development and intentionally handicap yourself.

As to 5.56mm performance in the antipersonnel role.....I work with guys who have killed people at 300-500m with them (recently) and I've spoken at length with high level special operations personnel. All of whom have racked up considerable time taking down bad guys in conditions none of us will ever hopefully have to be in. They all have no problem with it's terminal performance and neither do I.

If what you've got is a .30-30 and a couple boxes of ammo, you're already ahead of the game when it comes to 2/3 of the population. I'd rather have my M4, but some rifle is better than no rifle.

[Jason_W]

If things get sorta bad, I'm thinking my lever actions and shotguns will help me do everything I'm capable in a hostile situation. Since I have no training whatsoever, my tactic will likely involve a lot of dirty tricks (shooting in the back, false surrender, etc.)

If things get really bad, I'm betting there will be plenty of black rifles, along with hand grenades and mortars lying around for the taking, so why spend the money now?

[76/444]

In response to the other .44 comment.....I own a .44 levergun. I know what they can do. Past about 100-150 yards I wouldn't take a shot.

In my case. Yes, i have cleared rooms for a living. WITH A TEAM. I am not stupid enough to do so alone except in absolute worst case no choice scenarios. But giving up a weapon you've trained with for years for a levergun you haven't makes no sense. I don't have a problem using one if it's what's at hand, but I have more modern weaponry at hand. As well as supplies to keep them running. Nobody alone, or even a few of them, survives a giant firefight, but that doesn't mean you skip a hundred years of weapon development and intentionally handicap yourself.

As to 5.56mm performance in the antipersonnel role.....I work with guys who have killed people at 300-500m with them (recently) and I've spoken at length with high level special operations personnel. All of whom have racked up considerable time taking down bad guys in conditions none of us will ever hopefully have to be in. They all have no problem with it's terminal performance and neither do I.

If what you've got is a .30-30 and a couple boxes of ammo, you're already ahead of the game when it comes to 2/3 of the population. I'd rather have my M4, but some rifle is better than no rifle.

Well said,... most realistic. I really like my levers, especially my 444. I feel is an extremely useful tool when dealing with targets behind barriers that need to be penetrated.

But, I can't see myself, and won't, ever put aside my large capacity 5.56 semi-auto,... NEVER!

I guess that is why, when I read all these S-H-T-F scenarios,.... I realize my only solution will be to carry both!

[76/444]

in bad times the hordes from the citywill kill off the game in a month, poison the water, burn the plants and vegatation. you got a strong hold with supplies, you'd get burned out. shot out. don't care if your rambo/ sgt. york combined. i want a glock 33 cause i got to move from food source to food source. it ain't gonna be a romantized grizzly addams setting. i want portability, firepower above everything else. forget about humane one stop shots, your guns too small, the bear will eat you nonsense. but, then again, i'm a nutjob

I don't believe city dwellers will make it 10 miles outside of the city limits. I believe suburbanites and other city dwellers will position themselves to snipe all who try to evac.,... for their weapons, vehicles, gasoline, and supplies. I don't believe most city folk think as country folk. I think they are basically afraid of the wilderness. And don't have a clue how to survive in it!


Just one man's opinion.

[PaulB]

In situations with large mobs attacking, you have already made a big mistake being around to be attacked. Such situations certainly call for both AR-15's and similar, and even scoped bolt guns to pick them off from a distance.

But I've been reading that guy's blog, the fellow in Argentina who has actually lived through a lot of this stuff. He does not have to deal with armies of flesh-eating zombies. His problem, the result of a long depression, is serious levels of crime. He says the most dangerous place is your own front door, where criminals will wait to kidnap you or rob you, or strongarm you into your house. The survival gun there is a good high capacity pistol.

I can also see a .357 trapper gun possiblyworking there; you can place your shots a lot better than a pistol-armed assailant. .357 and .38 are also very common calibers, and the ammo is reasonably light, and hits (humans) very hard. Such a rifle is so handy you might think about either eliminating a pistol altogether, or downgrading it to something like a Keltec P32.

[MrMurphy]

In the cases of severe unrest (LA Riots, etc)....if the area supports it and there's more than one of you, forting up with friends can work.

In other cases, if you're alone or just a few of you....to borrow a line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail "Run away! Run away!"

[donw]

there's nothing wrong with a lever rifle for "bad times".

i happen to have an EBR..the Ruger P9, 9mm carbine that is companion to my P95DC and i have a 38/357 lever with a companion Taurus 38/357 revolver all are quite capable in a SD/HD scenario against what we will more than likely face in this country...an internal melt down.

but for what goes "thump in the nite", i prefer my 870 Remington stoked with 7 or 8 shot for close confines...

i suspect we'll have a societal breakdown or political upheaval long before an "invasion" from an outside army...we're beginning to see signs of it now; if you watch and listen, you can see them. there is also the idea/notion/belief there may be martial law coming, too. if that's the case, the average person would not be able stand up under a military/police assault...

[Hank Dodge]

I live in a suburban area. That said, I have no grand vision of being able to "head for the hills" without quite a bit of forewarning. Even then, I might decide to make the stand in my own home if it the situation looked like it would come to pass (LA riots, earthquake disaster, etc.). The prospect of being able to reliably flee an urban uprising is a fanciful one for most working class folks. My home is well supplied and reasonably defensible, I believe that the bad guys would choose a softer target (much as they did in LA).

Now, as for arms...I'm in California. My family has roots here for over a hundred years. It sickens me to see the direction that this state has taken. While there are family members here that need my help and attention, this is where I'll stay. This limits my choice of arms considerably. I can not legally own an AR style carbine in this state (I know-neutered versions aside). I don't feel under-gunned with my .44 leverguns (they hold more rounds than a legal autoloader here). I like the fact that the magazine on a lever can be topped-off on the run easily and that the leverguns are generally lighter and less bulky. I'm not entirely saying that if I could own an M-4 with a reflex sight and a few 20-round mags I wouldn't, but I'm confident with my levers as the situation demands. I can think of very few situations that a .44 levergun would not suffice.....that's where the 'ol Garand comes into play.

[336A]

In response to the other .44 comment.....I own a .44 levergun. I know what they can do. Past about 100-150 yards I wouldn't take a shot.

In my case. Yes, i have cleared rooms for a living. WITH A TEAM. I am not stupid enough to do so alone except in absolute worst case no choice scenarios. But giving up a weapon you've trained with for years for a levergun you haven't makes no sense. I don't have a problem using one if it's what's at hand, but I have more modern weaponry at hand. As well as supplies to keep them running. Nobody alone, or even a few of them, survives a giant firefight, but that doesn't mean you skip a hundred years of weapon development and intentionally handicap yourself.

As to 5.56mm performance in the antipersonnel role.....I work with guys who have killed people at 300-500m with them (recently) and I've spoken at length with high level special operations personnel. All of whom have racked up considerable time taking down bad guys in conditions none of us will ever hopefully have to be in. They all have no problem with it's terminal performance and neither do I.

If what you've got is a .30-30 and a couple boxes of ammo, you're already ahead of the game when it comes to 2/3 of the population. I'd rather have my M4, but some rifle is better than no rifle.

Lets not church up the 5.56 NATO here, it is what it is. Will it work at room clearing distances...? most certainly it will, and it does do a good job in that role. In this day and age it is not all that uncommon for conventional forces to work along side SPEC OPS. I have just recently done so and talked with them at great length as well. Will the 5.56 neutralize a enemy combatant at distances out to 500m in a short word yes. However it fails to do so reliably as the distance gets beyond 300m. This is the exact reason the MOD 262 ammo was developed and what a lot of SPEC OPS use instead of the M855. How do I know this you might ask? because they issued it to my entire company the first time I worked with them. Then there is the development of the 6.8 SPC. Which was devleoped due to the high failure rates of the 5.56 at distances beyond 300m in Afghanistan. Then we also have the SDM rifles. Those are no longer the M16A4 chambered in 5.56mm, but rather a modified M14 and there is a reason for that.
If you think that the SPEC OPS guys dote on the 5.56, try to get to the next annual small arms conference at Ft. Benning. There is always a good representation from all of the different units to include SPEC OPS. You would be very suprised what they have to say when the discussion turns to the small Arms and ammunition. When I was there the discussion was very heated in regards to the 5.56mm performance at long range and the SDM rifle. Well I guess the lab rats listened to us because now the vast majority of SDM rifles are M14's.

I'm by no means trying to single you out here so please don't take it that way. I just get sick and tired of hearing how folks in general think that the 5.56 is the final word in combat scenarios. And they think that because the military uses it. Well yeah because that is what we are issued, however the 5.56 is not with out weaknesses. If it were then no one would be trying to improve upon it's performance which has been going on since we have been in Iraq and Afghanistan. The M4 is a great platform to work with and is very ergonomic and I do like it. However we need a cartridge that can perform reliably out to 500m on enemy combatants, and that is not the 5.56.

[76/444]

In the OP's scenario and STAYING on topic,...I won't engage a target at 500, or 400, or 300 yds. I use the 5.56 as it has been used more successfully ,.. at 110yds and less.

Now for the plus side, I can carry a whole lot of 5.56, compared to to larger cased calibers. And,.. it has been awhile,... but I believe the 5.56 has the same FPE@ muzzle as a 44 mag.. That works for me.

[MrMurphy]

I agree. As a 240 gunner for almost half my time in, while i never ended up seeing combat, having 700+ 7.62 with me I considered "good". I just get tired of guys saying "but it never stops anything" and recycling tired old BS from the 1960s (incidentally, my father carried both the M14, M16, M16A1 and M16A2 as well as the -60 at various times in his career and used them all except the A2 in combat....didn't have problems at the ranges encountered).

I'm all about "bigger is better" especially if it's high explosive. But people undercut small high velocity rounds unneccesarily.....I've seen people killed by .22 LR's and .25 ACPs.

I'd rarely fire a 5.56 past about 200m simply because having a clear, identifiable line of sight would be a problem around here. With most leverguns (or surplus bolt gun), I'd be restricted to the same (if not closer). The 5.56 isn't perfect, but it's not exactly just going to tickle someone and tick them off. That said, when a Ranger who was in Panama, Gulf War 1, OEF (multiple times) and OIF (multiple times) and who just got back tells you "yes, it does the job if you know what you're doing" you tend to believe him. Even 7.62 can take multiple hits at distance, or even close in if you don't put them where they're supposed to go (see multiple times in WW2 where guys took 4 or 5 peripheral hits from 8mm Mauser, etc and kept going)

Personally, i've seen a guy take a .40 JHP at about five yards who was unaware he'd even been shot. He knew he was all cut up (flying window glass) but he didn't know he'd been hit in the back.

A good .30-30 (or better, .45-70) to keep on topic will certainly change someone's channel if you put it in the right spot, but with that tube mag, you'd better practice (like with shotguns) "Shoot one load one" or "shoot two load two" whenever possible and keep it topped off. Ashley Emerson took a 336, long barrel with 9 round magazine through a carbine course, and as long as he kept continously topping off, he stayed with them pretty good.

[tman]

in bad times the hordes from the citywill kill off the game in a month, poison the water, burn the plants and vegatation. you got a strong hold with supplies, you'd get burned out. shot out. don't care if your rambo/ sgt. york combined. i want a glock 33 cause i got to move from food source to food source. it ain't gonna be a romantized grizzly addams setting. i want portability, firepower above everything else. forget about humane one stop shots, your guns too small, the bear will eat you nonsense. but, then again, i'm a nutjob

I don't believe city dwellers will make it 10 miles outside of the city limits. I believe suburbanites and other city dwellers will position themselves to snipe all who try to evac.,... for their weapons, vehicles, gasoline, and supplies. I don't believe most city folk think as country folk. I think they are basically afraid of the wilderness. And don't have a clue how to survive in it!


Just one man's opinion.

when they get hungry enough, they're be on your back porch. the smart ones' will figure it out

[donw]

which kills/stops the best? in a bad times scenario...anything is the best...very few have the nerve to look down the bore of ANY firearm and scoff at it...

odds are that in the city, you ain't gonna be shooting 300 yards...more like 30 yards...or less.

odds are, if you are faced with being able to get 5.56 readily "off the ground" you're up against the cops or military...you might get one or two of them but, more likely, they'll put you down before you know what's happening.

civil unrest (rioting)...it's up for grabs...do what you must and use what you have.

[76/444]

in bad times the hordes from the citywill kill off the game in a month, poison the water, burn the plants and vegatation. you got a strong hold with supplies, you'd get burned out. shot out. don't care if your rambo/ sgt. york combined. i want a glock 33 cause i got to move from food source to food source. it ain't gonna be a romantized grizzly addams setting. i want portability, firepower above everything else. forget about humane one stop shots, your guns too small, the bear will eat you nonsense. but, then again, i'm a nutjob

I don't believe city dwellers will make it 10 miles outside of the city limits. I believe suburbanites and other city dwellers will position themselves to snipe all who try to evac.,... for their weapons, vehicles, gasoline, and supplies. I don't believe most city folk think as country folk. I think they are basically afraid of the wilderness. And don't have a clue how to survive in it!


Just one man's opinion.

when they get hungry enough, they're be on your back porch. the smart ones' will figure it out

Never met a smart person who lived in a city. I think they'll eat their own before venturing out of their comfort zone. And, like I said, they'll be sniped before losing site of the last street light .



Just one man's opinion.

[Jason_W]

in bad times the hordes from the citywill kill off the game in a month, poison the water, burn the plants and vegatation. you got a strong hold with supplies, you'd get burned out. shot out. don't care if your rambo/ sgt. york combined. i want a glock 33 cause i got to move from food source to food source. it ain't gonna be a romantized grizzly addams setting. i want portability, firepower above everything else. forget about humane one stop shots, your guns too small, the bear will eat you nonsense. but, then again, i'm a nutjob

I don't believe city dwellers will make it 10 miles outside of the city limits. I believe suburbanites and other city dwellers will position themselves to snipe all who try to evac.,... for their weapons, vehicles, gasoline, and supplies. I don't believe most city folk think as country folk. I think they are basically afraid of the wilderness. And don't have a clue how to survive in it!


Just one man's opinion.

when they get hungry enough, they're be on your back porch. the smart ones' will figure it out

Never met a smart person who lived in a city. I think they'll eat their own before venturing out of their comfort zone. And, like I said, they'll be sniped before losing site of the last street light .

up here, the first winter after the collapse will kill a lot of them.

[76/444]

[/quote]up here, the first winter after the collapse will kill a lot of them.[/quote]


Yup,... and there is over a hundred and twenty-five miles of waterless desert from Tucson (nearest large city) to my back door.

[Bill_Rights]

Well, as I read along in our posts, I've been thinking about the practical uses of guns and us shooters in a realistic "bad times" scenario, like BDLO or TBDLO (break-down of law and order or total break-down of law and order), particularly the morning after the "zombie shootout" and every day after that. That is, assuming that law & order IS NOT restored in a few days. I think it is just too easy a problem, if law & order IS restored in a few days. As several here have said, just about any collection of guns, ammo, basic supplies and common sense will get us through a few days.

But what if things don't get back to normal for weeks , months or ever ?

To some degree, that is what has happened in Argentina, and PaulB has been following it at http://ferfal.blogspot.com/2008/10/thou ... -2005.html where a guy with screen name FerFAL lives and writes.

PaulB said:
But I've been reading that guy's blog [link above], the fellow in Argentina who has actually lived through a lot of this stuff. He does not have to deal with armies of flesh-eating zombies. His problem, the result of a long depression, is serious levels of crime. He says the most dangerous place is your own front door, where criminals will wait to kidnap you or rob you, or strongarm you into your house. The survival gun there is a good high capacity pistol. (By the way, if you do read FerFAL, which I highly advise, when he says "pistol" he really means "semi-automatic handgun".)

Well, FerFAL says a whale of a lot more than that. For one thing, he says that a rifle (of any type) is useless about 90% of the time, because you can't carry it around with you in public without attracting WAY too much attention, the key to survival being to go unnoticed while you're doing the necessary things of life: working, trading, cooking, taking care of children and so on. But you dare not go unarmed, either. Ergo, concealable handgun. FerFAL also has interesting observations on what really happens in power outages, black/grey markets, automobile trips and a mind-numbing number of other "stuff of life" things that have to happen if you're going to live indefinitely with BDLO.

The truth is, you who live way out in the country and (maybe) can survive on your own are so few as to be irrelevant, compared to the millions of people that live in cities and suburbs of cities. We millions (I am a suburbanite) cannot be wished away, we're not going to cleanly kill each other off and there are so many of us that only the barest few places far out in the wilderness are "safe" from our doings. And even then, you who live in those remote parts need us worse than we need you, in the long run (years). Sorry, but thems the facts.

The only hope for you out in the countryside, not to mention us in the city, is to keep the population centers livable somehow. I think that a lot of us with guns and training are going to need to be doing what the police do now, except way more so. For ex., every over-the-road trucker is going to need someone riding shotgun (or rifle, as the case may be) with him. Every store owner that doesn't already have guns will need them and maybe operators for them. There're a lot of people, places and things that need protected. Almost none of them were designed to be defensible. It depends somewhat on the threat, that is, what kind of bad guys are causing the "bad times". It is too much (for me) to predict right now how it'll all play out. (But I bet some anarchists have thought it through!)

One thing I assert is that, the more guns there are, and the more widely distributed they are amongst the productive and orderly citizens, the better off we'll all be. And I have reason to think that, already, there may be a "critical mass" of guns such that there is no reason we should be any worse off than we were in, say, 1787 when the Constitution of the United States was completed. So I have hope.

[76/444]

Well, I hate to be the bearer of the flip side of the coin, guy!

But, we out here in the remote parts of the country have little use for cities.

If the S_H_T_F so bad that Gov officials feel the violence in some cities need to be used as examples, and bomb the hell out of them,... I may miss a few trinkets I buy there four or five times a year, but that will be about it!!

Sooooo,.... if you would be so kind Bill_Rights,.... I would like to know just what you mean by this claim? With a few of YOUR "FACTS", if you don't mind! Please educate me!

Bill_Rights wrote;...."And even then, you who live in those remote parts need us worse than we need you, in the long run (years). Sorry, but thems the facts."

[Old Time Hunter]

To some degree, that is what has happened in Argentina, and PaulB has been following it at http://ferfal.blogspot.com/2008/10/thou ... -2005.html where a guy with screen name FerFAL lives and writes.

This was kind of interesting, pretty much describes probably what would really happen. Less than a complete breakdown of society, but a malfunctioning one none the less. After reading the entire post and researching past economic/social collapses going back to even Roman times, the same scenerio seems to always present itself...the mass of societies "middle" class falling into the "lower" class initiating social unrest. The "ruling" or "upper" class always seem to find a way to survive by having the means to seperate from the society either through being able to isolate, move, or forcing control of what is left of the society. That being said, it would behoove us to know the warning signs of a collapsing society and the endeavors of the society or government to still try to control what is left of the structure, my research point continually to these warning signs:

1. Control of public movement, i.e. "papers" such as national, regional, or local identification and the need by law to have possession of them. This might take years to implement and believe it or not, our government had the excuse to start a process under the "guise" of the "Patriot Act".

2. Weapon control, get the weapons out of the hands of the common citizens. This has been going on forever! Even the Romans in the last century of their existence slowly took away the rights of the citizens to have the means to protect themselves. From bows and arrows not being allowed within the limits of the cities initially to eventual bans on any citizen carrying a sword unless they were military or part of the "government".

These two items both seemed to become prevalent prior to either societal collapse or a form of government change, it is what Lenin did after the fall of Russia and Hitler did after he took control. It is also what every 3rd world country does when changing regimes, yet notice that the "upper" class still exists even after the "change".

Guess a levergun would be a premium, wouldn't it?

[Otto]

Well, I hate to be the bearer of the flip side of the coin, guy!

But, we out here in the remote parts of the country have little use for cities.

If the S_H_T_F so bad that Gov officials feel the violence in some cities need to be used as examples, and bomb the hell out of them,... I may miss a few trinkets I buy there four or five times a year, but that will be about it!!

Sooooo,.... if you would be so kind Bill_Rights,.... I would like to know just what you mean by this claim? With a few of YOUR "FACTS", if you don't mind! Please educate me!

Bill_Rights wrote;...."And even then, you who live in those remote parts need us worse than we need you, in the long run (years). Sorry, but thems the facts."

When reduced to a subsistence lifestyle, rurals can grow or hunt their own food, which many already do, as well as providing the food for urban centers. Many have their own water source. Because of that, I can probably drink water that would make most city-dwellers ill. Likewise the food; my system is more accustomed to stuff that isn't Grade A 100% USDA Prime, pasteurized and sanitized, etc. More rurals have woodburning stoves, generators, etc that most urbanites and suburbanites won't have. Many rurals, especially the older or more remote they are, have lived without modern conveniences in the past, and may still be doing so now.

[PaulB]

I suspect the barriers to travel will be handled the same way threats of gun confiscation will be handled: by killing those attempting to put controls in place. I think road blocks will eventually turn into war zones. Then the cops and others running them will decide to find a safer line of work. Note, "RealID" has essentially failed as a government ploy due to resistance of individuals and state governments.

76/444, before you jump on Bill_Rights, you might read what Ferfal has to say about isolated places in the country.

Yes, they are much better off in terms of availability of food. The problem is their isolation (and you thought that was an advantage). Ferfal says a typical thing there is for a bunch of guys to capture an isolated household, torture the owners until they get out of them where all their valuables are hidden, rape and kill them. No neighbor has a clue what is going on.

How is an isolated household going to prevent that? You still have to go out and feed the animals, work in the fields, go to the mailbox, take a trip into town every now and then. You can't sit bunkered up, with guns pointing out of windows, forever. The opportunity for capture obviously exists.

Isolated places can work but only if enough people are there to provide 24/7 security. That means several families. Then MAYBE you can ignore what is going on in the cities (but I doubt it - you can defend against gangs of 5 or 10 men, but not hundreds).

Personally, I think the suburbs are a pretty good bet. There is enough land there that, intensively farmed, food production should be fine (as long as people ignore government codes). It's the cities that I worry about. I can't see how food riots can be avoided.

[Jason_W]

There seems to be an assumption that if you live out in the sticks, you're a single family unit alone on an isolated farm. Around where I live, there are isolated dwellings, but there are also a lot of small rural communities. In a period of extended, nation wide breakdown, I could see such communities banding together and forming their own security forces to patrol against incoming hordes. I could even see taking out large sections of highway along likely travel routes from southern new england and new york in order to slow the tide a bit.

As long as the power lines still stand, we wouldn't be completely without electricity. We get a lot of ours from Canadian and in state hydro dams.

A single family probably couldn't stand very long against a large group of ne'er do wells, but A coalition of Northern New England States would probably be able to mop them up. I could actually see Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire and even parts of Quebec forming it's own power bloc if the US as we know it ceased to be.

[76/444]

I suspect the barriers to travel will be handled the same way threats of gun confiscation will be handled: by killing those attempting to put controls in place. I think road blocks will eventually turn into war zones. Then the cops and others running them will decide to find a safer line of work. Note, "RealID" has essentially failed as a government ploy due to resistance of individuals and state governments.

76/444, before you jump on Bill_Rights, you might read what Ferfal has to say about isolated places in the country.

Yes, they are much better off in terms of availability of food. The problem is their isolation (and you thought that was an advantage). Ferfal says a typical thing there is for a bunch of guys to capture an isolated household, torture the owners until they get out of them where all their valuables are hidden, rape and kill them. No neighbor has a clue what is going on.

How is an isolated household going to prevent that? You still have to go out and feed the animals, work in the fields, go to the mailbox, take a trip into town every now and then. You can't sit bunkered up, with guns pointing out of windows, forever. The opportunity for capture obviously exists.

Isolated places can work but only if enough people are there to provide 24/7 security. That means several families. Then MAYBE you can ignore what is going on in the cities (but I doubt it - you can defend against gangs of 5 or 10 men, but not hundreds).

Personally, I think the suburbs are a pretty good bet. There is enough land there that, intensively farmed, food production should be fine (as long as people ignore government codes). It's the cities that I worry about. I can't see how food riots can be avoided.

Well,... first of all this ain't Argentina,...and the possibility that anarchy in America will be 50% the same as his experience will be a long shot. so i have little interest in his experience,... I have enough survival experience of my own, to need any of his.


In my remote area, most of us have generators, wind power, or solar.

Most of us have a minimum of a few hundred pounds of meat in chest freezers. I have three with a few hundred pounds each. Not counting thousands of pounds on the hoof.

Out of the 40 to 50 residents here in my immediate area,... we have an active homeland security defense group of about 15 on a good month. More, in the case of anarchy, would surly evolve!

Then we all probably have 15 or 20 friends each in our town of 3,000, that is 23 miles away. With friends having friends, in a time of such magnitude,.. creating a defense militia of more than 300 (10%) would not be a huge task. This is the country. We all have weapons. We all know how to use them. We all will be defending our homes and family. We all will be well fed and rested for a few dozen city boys hungry, thirsty and tired.

IF they make it through the couple dozen towns between us and Tucson,.... IF!!!

Supplies, transportation, logistics,... and a TRUE CAUSE,... must always be considered when taking on an enemy!

Nope,...in my opinion,... those who survive trying to leave the cities will be lucky to get the edge of it. Those who do get out, won't be carrying more than a few days supplies. Won't know where they are going. Won't know where they want to go. And,...Won't know what they are facing in resistance. All these unknowns would be against them.

Just as they would be for any country folk,... if they tried to invade the city.

During a time of such anarchy,.... three things become paramount. the same three basic things that man has faced since living in a cave.

FOOD, WATER, SHELTER.

All to be had as God's gift for those who have the knowledge.

Cities produce none of these!

Disaster 'think tanks' have for decades, reported about the failure of infrastructure amenities (lights, water, sewer) and the ceasing of truck deliveries resulting in about a 3 day span to the end of all food inventories for most major high population cities.

Once the resources become scarce,... so does life expectancy of the weak and unarmed. Bad guys aren't going to just run through the armed without loses,... and even before considering leaving a city, their number will dwindle, drastically. In my personal opinion.

Bottom line,... as a last resort,... I have riding and pack animals enough to carry many months supply of food and ammo to the mountain range less than a days ride from my ranch. Where, even the most staunch macho city folks I have packed back there , soil their panties when told they have to sleep on the ground in the middle of bear and cat country.

Sorry,... but there ain't no way anyone is going to convince me that city folks will overcome country folks and survive!!

NO WAY!

[tman]

no matter how far you go back in the woods others know about it,have skied, hiked, fished, flown over it. it ain't Mars. anybody with half a brain and a gps can find it. 75% of the city dwellers will be your new neighboors. best hope is that the idiot extreme liberal and conservative politicans don't screw thinks up so bad that it comes to this. then, NOBODY IS SAFE

[76/444]

75% of city folk can't find their butt with both hands ,... unless Katie Couric tells them six times a day for a month , when, where and how!

Once there is no TV to tell them how to live,... they'll be walking around in circles, like they have one foot nailed to the floor, wondering what to do next!

[tman]

never underestimate your potential enemy. countries have been overthrown in times like these. the poor, uneducated survived. let's hope neither of our senerio's are put to the test.

[L_Kilkenny]

Some interesting ideas and thoughts here. While I like to think I'm pretty safe and can defend against all threats in the 1 in 1,000,000 total collapse, I do agree that I may not be as safe in the country as I might like to think. Personally I think that things will revert back 150 years or so in that unthinkable bad times. Communities will band together. Criminals will be dealt with quickly and severely. Much more will be done on a local and county level. People on the edge civilization had to deal with Indian and outlaw/renegade back then and in a bad times us folk on farms may have to deal with undesirables on our own. The biggest thing I have the advantage of is I do have GOOD neighbors within "sound of gun". I hope that in a collapse we'll be able to cover each others backs.

LK

[Lastmohecken]

I live in a rural area, and frankly, in a real bad collapse, probably 50% of the population will be dead in 6 months, maybe less time then that. Also, In my area, many people hunt, and own guns, even in the citys which are not really that big. If the power goes, the water system fails, and the trucks quit bring food in, the food markets will be empty in 3 or 4 days, maybe less.

When people get hungry, they are likely to get mean. They will be combing the countryside looking for food, water, etc. Some will be looking to piliage. Most game will be shot out in short order, If you own cattle or other livestock, GOOD LUCK, because unless you have a 24hr guard, your livestock will be stolen, or shot for a few strips of meat, and the rest will be left to sour, if it's not consumed quickly. And even many rural people will be out of food in a week to two weeks. Some rural people will be trying to pilage other rural people.

Todays populations in the U.S. are not used to going without. They have never been hungry, past being late for supper, and if forced to flee their home in search of whatever, it will be bad, and some will organize, which means that you maynot be able to defend you home even if you are well armed, or you may get burnt out. Heck, you might not even see anyone until someones drops you with a shot from ambush, on your own front porch, some morning.

It won't be pretty. I hope I never see it.

[AJMD429]

Most game will be shot out in short order, If you own cattle or other livestock, GOOD LUCK, because unless you have a 24hr guard, your livestock will be stolen, or shot for a few strips of meat, and the rest will be left to sour, if it's not consumed quickly. And even many rural people will be out of food in a week to two weeks. Some rural people will be trying to pilage other rural people.

Todays populations in the U.S. are not used to going without. They have never been hungry, past being late for supper, and if forced to flee their home in search of whatever, it will be bad, and some will organize, which means that you maynot be able to defend you home even if you are well armed, or you may get burnt out. Heck, you might not even see anyone until someones drops you with a shot from ambush, on your own front porch, some morning.

So true, based on the real-world experience of other SOCIALIST nations who turn to chaos when tyranny fails to stem discontent and starvation.

The folks who think they can 'hunt and fish' their way through such a scenario had better be very high up in the mountains, or they're crazy. Most urban people would be able to travel several hundred miles before finally giving out, and the successful pillagers would be that far out and still going.

If you have livestock, it'd better be CHICKENS, and they'd better spend the better part of their day in shelter or in your home itself. Unless you've a crew of 20-30 guards, what are you going to do when 20-30 armed thugs decide to spray your cattle with a .223 from the nearby hillside, and 'cut and run' while a few of their fellows provide covering fire at your house for the next couple hours?

Humans will survive, hopefully mostly the decent ones, but the 'wild game' will be quickly shot and butchered with much wasted.

[shooter]

If you want a small glimpse at what could potentially happen with a collapse of society, just look back 5 years to New Orleans. The scum went crazy, shooting at supply helicopters, and a portion of the law enforcement went overboard, leaving the average decent citizen to suffer. Guns were scooped up from people that had them by officers, and nobody put up much of a fight. I don't think a total societal collapse would be any better, and would probably be worse. If you live in a rural area, it would be most beneficial to have a pre-organized plan with your neighbors and those in the community of what to do in case of an emergency like that. The problem is that if you even utter the possibility of a social collapse, people automatically label you as a "survivalist wacko". Most people don't think that it could ever happen, or just don't want to think about it. I'm not crazy, I just want to be prepared.

The bottom line: "Civilized" people aren't very civilized when they are in a panic. You want to see people go crazy? Let people in inner city ghettos realize there is no law to stop them from doing whatever they want to do. Let rich suburbanites go without for a few days, or even think of having to go without, and you will see panic. I have no high hopes for an emergency situation like this. I have no expectations of most people banding together and keeping society intact. Sure there will be a few level headed people, but I think for the most part it will just be chaos.

[76/444]

New Orleans,... prime example,... everyone hanging on their roof tops or within a few city blocks of where they lived. Gangs claiming blocks and taking anyone and anything within their claimed domain. People don't head out into the wilderness when scared out of their minds. They hang onto what they are familiar with. That is human nature.

And for the ones who do head out across country,.. to an absolute unknown situation,.... they have to get through tens of thousands sitting in wait to snipe their butts and take what they have on them. It will be like an endless gauntlet, no one I know would be able to survive such. Just like trying to travel in Iraq or Afghanistan. Just the gangs claiming the best sniper turf on the major highways alone will eliminate the possibility to travel! Try to move without 50 to 100 in a group and you're toast! Even then they better be good!

[Old Time Hunter]

From the gist of some of these posts, it reflects an "Us" vs. "Them" attitude from the perspective of "rural" vs. "urban". Even though my peers consider that I am "rural", my primary residence is only an hour drive from a major urban center, I classify myself as "ex-urban", anotherwise within commuting distance. We are also in an area that supports quite a few boutique farms and that will attract the urban contingent if shortages come to exist. The other magnet that draws them, is that our immediate area also is considered "lake" country (I live on a 850 acre lake with another seven lakes within a five mile radius) littered with YMCA camps, Salvation Army camps, and a bunch of "Bible" camps. In the last year or so our town board has noticed that these one time "seasonal" camps have had some residence almost year round, and yep, after investigation, it seems that a few displaced urban families had been offered shelter to help them bridge the economy. Our concern is, not a "few", but what happens when these "displaced" families talk back to the "hood" and we end up with a migration. Then the table will be set for easy access to my domain by already desperate people that have nothing to lose. Thankfully, I have only a few hundred miles from my primary residence a very isolated residence (3 miles off of a paved road) on my own private forest land(a few hundred acres) that has provisions to not be on the "grid" (both solar and diesel generator, manual and power deep well), a rotating vegetable/grain garden that uses about 3 acres of land(great feed lot for the deer), and a compound that has multiple "cabins" (my Fathers', my Uncles', and mine). My cabin alone has 5 bedrooms that have five beds(two sets of bunk beds and one single) in each along with two complete bathrooms and a main kitchen that can accomodate 30 people around two large tables...I guess you would call it a lodge. My Dad's has accomodations for 18 and my Uncles has bunk beds for another 10. Even with all the available space, and over the years we discussed the bad times scenerios, we feel that even with our extended families (I have five children, three of which have significant others and/or kids of their own) we would only be at about 50% occupancy rate. Therefore we all are quite involved with the locals and contribute both time and donations to the various volunteer emergency services, along with our family ties that go back to the settler days of the mid 1800's that establishes us into the "contigency" meetings held around every 90 days or so. Believe it or not, the community actually has a bad times plan, and the first action is establishing a parameter to secure the township (my land is on the very edge of the township so we have an additional plan that has a secondary parameter). We have local LE on board (their relatives anyways), but have been chastized in the past by the county government for not involving their "emergency" government plans (we say ok, then ignore them as they want to centralize it in their "city"). My problem would be the logistics of getting from my primary residence to my "isolated" residence and to be proactive, we have to know the initial signs of societal collapse to move before it is too late.

[PaulB]

I think sneering at city folk is a big mistake.

Yes, some percentage of city folk will just give up and die. But you still have a huge problem if even 10% or 20% don't. The problems will be gangs. They will be run by resourceful and ruthless leaders, who probably will have a military background. They may have 500 or 1000 people out scavenging; how will you handle them? Don't underestimate these folks.

Personally, I don't think things will go into total chaos, even if a lot of people die. 75,000 people die every day in this country anyway. Life goes on, people adjust.

But if you think the possibility of an Argentine scenario is remote, you are kidding yourself. It will almost certainly be worse than Argentina in at least some respects. At least Americans are heavily armed. That is a blessing.

Keep your eye on lewrockwell.com. They have been sounding the warning bells for a long time. Here is one example of an article they posted:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/20 ... -july.html

[76/444]

Ahhhhhh,... pundits, pundits everywhere,... YOU'LL want to know FOR sure when the time has come?


When you sit down at your keyboard, to boot up,...and nothing happens.

Then it is time to lock and load, gentlemen.




just one man's opinion

[Old Ironsights]

One of the reasons I've heard for the military never accepting a lever action design is that a lever gun is not easy to lever while lying in a prone position. Sure, it can be done, but the rifle needs to be tipped sideways with the sights coming off of the target. Now before anybody jumps on me and says "I do it all the time!", I'm not saying you can't do it, or that it isn't possible. It is just easier with an autoloader or a bolt rifle.
Just something to think about for a bad times rifle.

That's an argument I've always found specious considering that a 30rd mag props a rifle up higher than my '92 lever does...

Yes, gas operated MBRs are handy... ish. But my Go To will always be mt .357 1892. My current MBR is a 5 shot Mosin Nagant. Between the two I've got both Long Range and everything but house-to-house CQB pretty well covered.

[Gary]

Just finished reading all 5 pages of this. I think everyone's "bad times" situation would be different. For me, the worst case scenario would be my next door neighbor. You see, he's a drug dealer. If a bad drug deal went down and a worst case scenario happened, it would be a car load of gang bangers bent on revenge that want to take him out... and picking the wrong house to shoot at. It could likely be a Honda car with 2 to 4 ghetto rats armed with 9mm pistols aiming "gangsta style".

Out would come Mr. SKS in 7.62X39. Ammo would be steel jacketed. Ain't a Honda door made that's gonna stop that. 200 rounds on stripper clips ought to do. If not, oh well.

In a TEOTWAWKI situation, I bow to the experience of the Argentinian fellow. Lay low, CC a pistol in something bigger than .22 rimfire and don't draw attention to yourself.

/2 centavos

[AJMD429]

That's an argument I've always found specious considering that a 30rd mag props a rifle up higher than my '92 lever does...

I gotta admit, I always found that 'prone shooting' argument kind of bizarre. Besides, that may be a common military position of fire, but I'm doubting the average homeowner uses it much, even in 'TEOTWAWKI' scenarios.

[Jason_W]

It would take a pretty harsh and wide scale disaster to cause the sudden overrun of the countryside depicted in this thread. It would take cities becoming suddenly uninhabitable. A global nuclear war or asteroid impact could do it, but in that case, few of us will last long due to the death of our ecosystem anyway. An EMP could do it, but at least that renders most automobiles inoperable, which would slow any migration. I think my favorite mode of annihilation, though, is plague. It's an equal opportunity killer that doesn't make any distinction between race, class, or ethnicity. That would also be a boon to survivors in the countryside as it would cut down on the number of people able to flee urban centers.

Barring one of the above events (or something similar) our country likely faces a slow death. Empires tend not to die overnight. It took Rome centuries. The most likely scenario would be a steady decline in the economy and a steadily decreasing quality of life. The gears of society wouldn't halt completely, but we would be left in a third world scenario. I doubt the slow decay would result in droves of refugees fleeing the cities.

[Rifleman336]

Yeah, I love the guys that think you need an assault rifle, a grenade launcher and a M-1 Tank.

These are people that are afraid of their own shadow and once you knock their "assault rifle" they start getting bent out of shape, real quick.

I worked is some of the worst of the worst in two major Ohio cities as a Security guard for HUD housing. For the first four years I carried a .357 Magnum Revolver and I had no problems with multiple assailants (gang members) that thought because they had the numbers on their side, wanting to leave post-haste or going spread eagle, after drawing down on them. For If I was going to "go" in a gun fight I was taking someone(s) with me. In the end Gang members are chicken, if they think that their ticket is going to be punched.

A levergun will do if you will do. Yes, it's best to avoid a fight, but if it comes down to slinging lead, go for the leader or the most mouthy individual in the group first, if the rest of the mob gets the brains of one or two of their friends, on their outfits they'll run for they don't want to be next. For a gang feeds on fear, if you show it or back down, your going to get it.

As they say fight smart not hard, try to secure your place the best you can and it great to have friends and neighbors to work with, for even if a lone wolf had a m-60, he can be over come, if the mob was big enough and didn't care how many of their number dies to get what you have.

You gotta know when to hold'em, know when to fold'em and know when to run............

A levergun will work in either .357, .44 Magnum or .30-30 Win, just get better sights than what the factory give you. A squared front post and a ladder sight from Dr. Skinner will help. Next practice, practice, practice. Or no gun will be good for you. Another couple mods as money becomes available is get a heavy duty mag tube from DRC custom guns if it's a Marlin, and get the feed port edges "melted down" so to be easier on your fingers.

Another thing that can help is Both Thunder Ranch and Suareze international have levergun fighting classes. Learn to use what you got or can afford within reason and you should be OK.



Rifleman 336

[Bill_Rights]

Moderators and Members,

In my post http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... 90#p312490 I realize I did not mention lever rifles in any significant way in the thread "Thoughts on lever as bad times rifle?????????".

Sorry. It is so easy to do (wander OT), but I have no real excuse. I got carried away.

After a few days' break, to settle myself out and attend to some other matters, I see that several Members have posted some reasoned comments somewhat reflecting off of some of my comments plus others. I will study those posts, and I would give them their due return comments, BUT I probably would drag us further OT by doing so.

I do see that there is a need to more thoroughly discuss these matters (bad times) completely aside from the lever rifle aspect. I am glad the Moderators are letting us run off the leash on this one, a little bit.

Should I start a thread over in the Political area for this general topic? Somehow that doesn't seem right. This subject, which in my mind is something like "How to maintain the civil society our parents and their forebears worked, sacrificed and died in battle to create and defend, in the face of forces that would rip it apart" IS WAY WAY MORE IMPORTANT AND FUNDAMENTAL THAN POLITICS. If you don't have this civil order, then politics can't exist. In short logical order, we come to the understanding that, since guns are critical to civil order in times of crisis, GUNS themselves are MORE IMPORTANT THAN POLITICS. Indeed, our founding fathers and mothers thought so to, which is why they put the 2nd Amendment in the US Constitution. By doing that, they separated RKBA (right to keep and bear arms) from politics and put RKBA over and above and on a higher plane of reality than politics. (Not to say politics is irrelevant - within a civil society, politics is our first line of defense to preserve our RKBA aginst the purely political forces that would try to dismantle our RKBA in reality.)

[Pathfinder09]

We were talking lever guns. I don't see the problem.

[AJMD429]

One thing is that there are lots of different kinds of "bad times" - we've already had the kind where income is down to zero for 8 or 9 months, and the car breaks down. Deer meat and rice can sure stretch the family food budget. We've not had the 'sudden' kind of crisis like a big terrorist act or something, that would have the grid down, total panic, and masses of people fleeing the city. I don't even know how realistic that would be, except if that particular city had something bad happen. I think it is more likely we'll have the 'gradual' erosion of social order, as the government mismanages the economy, drives small businesses out of business with taxes and regulations, and the 'programs' start shutting down for lack of funds. That won't have so much a big mob exiting the city, as it will people actually selling their homes at a loss, moving in with relatives, or out to a rural area. Violence won't likely be as much LA-Riot-style mobs, but more the result of the welfare-class no longer getting as many handouts, and the cops being laid off, or too busy out registering people's guns, or checking for marijuana plants. So, like the guy in Argentina found, conditions pretty much just warrant the same stuff we do now for 'survival' only more of it, more seriously.

I also don't think many realistic scenarios lead to folks heading to the hills and 'living off the land' for an extended period. Perhaps if a nuclear war happened, but otherwise, I doubt we'll be living the Daniel Boone lifestyle as much as the Mad Max Road Warrior lifestyle - not that it would be by my choice - I'd take the Daniel Boone one if I could.

no matter how far you go back in the woods others know about it,have skied, hiked, fished, flown over it. it ain't Mars. anybody with half a brain and a gps can find it. 75% of the city dwellers will be your new neighboors. best hope is that the idiot extreme liberal and conservative politicans don't screw thinks up so bad that it comes to this. then, NOBODY IS SAFE

That's definitely true. We aren't too far (35 miles) out from the city, but I meet people all the time who say things like "Yeah, when I was a kid I lived down there, and I used to hunt all over them hills right where you live..." - you can bet they'll have all the game shot up the first week if there is a sudden 'crisis', and it simply isn't possible to guard a rural perimeter 24 hours a day from that sort of thing.

There seems to be an assumption that if you live out in the sticks, you're a single family unit alone on an isolated farm. Around where I live, there are isolated dwellings, but there are also a lot of small rural communities. In a period of extended, nation wide breakdown, I could see such communities banding together and forming their own security forces to patrol against incoming hordes.

One BIG problem I would see is that most families have some members, in-laws, or close associates who they would pretty much demand be a part of the 'community', yet are not very trustable - often being into drugs, theft, etc. I've many honorable and decent friends with kids that are ok but grandkids that are in and out of jail all the time, or vice-versa. I doubt those people would break up their 'family' in time of crisis, so a cluster of neighbors getting together to share resources and defense might wind up having to deal with a VERY touchy issue.

[Gary]

In a "bug out" situation, I would pick my lever in 357 mag. Light & handy, it could take game from rabbit to deer and would do for personal protection from two legged predators. With 38 specials, it would not destroy too much meat on rabbits and other small game. Where a 44 mag or 30-30 would be too powerful for small game & birds.

Any caliber can be loaded down with Unique but reloading equipment would be low on anybody's list of things to "grab and go".

[Malamute]

Actually, I keep Lyman 310 tools around in calibers I use, and keep them with some basic supplies and a bullet mould in a small plastic tote. I take it along when I travel. The old style Lee Loader is also very handy and compact for keeping your guns fed with a minimun of gear and space. I used one for years and was quite happy with it at the time.

This is another instance of differing ides about "trouble". I don't really believe in the devastating collapse of society and combat in the streets idea that seems to be prevalent, nor do I plan on "going" anywhere no matter what the situation that may (or may not)happen. I'm where I want to be.

Besides my ideas about whats likely to happen or not, I absolutely positively do not believe that city folks will stay bottled up in the cities under any circumstances. Where I am, it's still VERY rural. Back in the depression of the 30's, there were quite a number of people that showed up in the area and moved into old cabins, or build one to live in. They scraped along and survived the times as best they could, then when times got better, they moved back to towns and cities. I believe much the same would happen if times got very tough. Because someone lives in a city, doesnt mean they're outdoors idiots or newbies. I run into guys during hunting seasons that are good hunters and outdoorsmen, but because of the realities of making a living and raising a family (and wives ideas about where is appropriate to live), live in towns and cities. They often have a good plan, good gear and campers etc, and would make it to, and make out, if they had to go somewhere out of a city to live for a while. I'm sure there are a fair number of guys on this board that would fit that description. It would only take a drum or two of gas to get a long long ways from "home" to somewhere you want to be, and you wouldnt have to stop along the way for fuel or supplies. I know I could easily get 1000 miles on what I have around here if I had to, without really even having a plan to do so.

I do agree most city folks would have a hard time gettimg by out of the city, but to write off all of them as incapable, incompetant, or fools is painting with far too broad a brush.

I find the 44 mag and 30-30 to be very flexible and useful for small game with appropriate loads, as do most high power rifle rounds used in bolt guns.