Prepared Society Forum banner
1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I read some statistics a while ago that stated how many tens of thousands of rounds on average were fired for each "kill" in the decade-long war in Afghanistan. It was staggering. I suspect it was a similar ratio in 'Nam as the "go switch" was thrown to full-auto and the trooper went into "spray & pray" mode.

America was once called a country of riflemen. Certainly that no longer holds true since our PC culture now frowns on guns and most of our youngsters are never taught how to properly shoot.

It got me to thinking, for almost any scenario we here might have to contend with in the future, might an accurate bolt (or lever) gun you are good with be better (one shot, one kill) than a semi-auto that would seduce you into expending four, five, or more rounds for the same result? Think about it... that old codger with his 30-30 making a kill every time he pulls the trigger or that youngster with the semi-auto that has put a lot of lead down range but has yet to hit his target.

I know many of you are good with your semi-autos. I like to think I am as well. Still, I can make hits with my trusty deer rifle through a thicket or across a field that I question making with my semi-autos. Just think about it.

Open for discussion.
 

·
performing monkey
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
don't forget the original one shot one kill weapons... bows & crossbows! ;)
 

·
Aesops Ant (not Aunt)
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
I would prefer to have the best of both worlds. An accurate, well practiced, semi-auto. Accuracy is king but having speed on your side can be a blessing as well!

I also believe we in the US still have some awesome marksmen. Look up some stories from snipers in our military! Awesome! It is sad though that so many are taught to fear guns instead of respect them.
 

·
I invented the internet. :rofl:
Joined
·
3,698 Posts
I would prefer to have the best of both worlds. An accurate, well practiced, semi-auto. Accuracy is king but having speed on your side can be a blessing as well!

I also believe we in the US still have some awesome marksmen. Look up some stories from snipers in our military! Awesome! It is sad though that so many are taught to fear guns instead of respect them.
Very well said!

Several advantages to an auto-loader: First, there's no "secondary" sound of racking the bolt to chamber a cartridge. It can be difficult to pinpoint the origination of a single shot but make two shots or chamber a round and your location is known exactly. Second, multiple opponents. A quick second, third, etc. shot might keep you alive. Third, if you need cover to move or someone else needs you to cover their movements, rapid, close firing from a semi-auto might make the difference. Third, ask any WW2 Japanese survivors what they thought when going up against the M-1 Garand with their bolt action rifles. The people who do this for a "living" all use automatic rifles. Every army in the world has gone to the semi-auto. The automatic rifle made one soldier able to stand off multiple opponents. Fourth, learn some fire control. Then you have the best of both worlds ... rapid fire when needed and one-shot accuracy when appropriate. Don't ever disregard accuracy of any semi-auto. My MAK-90 with a good scope and mount and careful aim is almost as accurate as my friend's AR's. I can think of more reasons but I'm short on time here. If there was any advantage to a bolt action on the battle field every army in the world would have bolt actions.

A bolt action is better than nothing but to think one rifle is best for everything is like thinking one knife is adequate for every chore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,183 Posts
Wonderful! I love these kinds of threads!!!

For years I've been asked what I thought the best survival rifle was and I've always said the 22 rifle , and the questioners always say well what if you need more power, I answered "Shotgun".. and all ..yep "ALL" of them said well what if they are too far away??

My answer...IF you are moving properly and using all the concealment and camo that you can, you should see them long before they see you.... but they still ask, what if you see them but they are too far away?..my answer is always the same... drop down and crawl away!!! but then I have to explain "WHY" start a gun fight?... slip away... avoid them... if they are scouts then they have nothing to report.... Maybe they are innocents... if you aren't close enough to know for sure then your not in immediate danger...

My whole point is that if you can, avoid contact... it's called "Survival" for a reason... having a full auto gives a lot of people a big false sense of " I'm the bull of the woods... " unless you have a big supply unit backing you up then an ammo burning fore fight ain't in your favor... I know what I can carry and if I got trigger happy and went crazy I'd be out of ammo real fast..

I have several AR's and AK's... I prefer the AK.. I also have 3 Heavy BBL bolt guns and love em all.. the 308 has a 20 inch bbl and takes my can.. I'd take it if it was take one leave the rest... I figure if need be I can get what I need from the people who are hunting me.. quietly..

I'd rather have a savvy old woodsman with his 30-30 backing me then 5 green kids with autos...

I've owned 8 full auto rifles..( well 2 were 9mm sub guns) and sold them all, to much attention, burns too much ammo, and I've used enough to know that unless your being overrun , FA is not your friend... Now I'll admit I'd not turn down a nice AR with a 3 shot burst !.. that's pretty sweet...

I guess to me it don't really matter..I was a hunter before I joined the Marines , I became a Rifleman in the Corps, I'm still one... aimed fire will win the day unless your caught in an ambush..then fire power and attacking is the rule ..

Snipers depend on stealth and concealment not fire power... one shot ,one kill, GTFOD!!

If you can hit a man size target in the center mass at 300 yards with your auto loader then your doing great and you should have one... if not maybe a bolt gun is your best bet...

Buy the best you can afford , shoot it a lot.. then shoot it some more.. having a gold plated whatever may be cool on the range but out in Indian Country, you best be able to shoot...

One last thing...IF you have kids and didn't start them shooting by age 6 then your missing out on a lot of fun! and your not doing your job as a dad and a prepper.. It's up to us to bring on the next generation of shooters.. hell if you know a kid who don't have a dad offer to teach him..or her..
 

·
Aesops Ant (not Aunt)
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
One last thing...IF you have kids and didn't start them shooting by age 6 then your missing out on a lot of fun! and your not doing your job as a dad and a prepper.. It's up to us to bring on the next generation of shooters.. hell if you know a kid who don't have a dad offer to teach him..or her.. [/B]
Right on!:2thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
784 Posts
I would prefer to have the best of both worlds. An accurate, well practiced, semi-auto. Accuracy is king but having speed on your side can be a blessing as well! .
Again I have to agree with ant here. ( Hey ant we gotta quit doing this people will talk LOL)

I as I've mentioned before own multiple firearms. They are all tools designed for a job. Use the right tool. Now as I've said I have a 30.06 bolt action that I can literally drive roofing nails with out to around 100-125 yards. "short" range it's great. however much further and it loses accuracy quickly. Okay I can step up I have a Barrett .416 in semi auto, With it I can extend my OSOK range to 750+ yards. If that doesn't work I can break out the "big guy" a Barrett .50 with a MARS scope then I can OSOK at 1+ mile away. Each one has it's use. However personally I've always been an (semi)Auto fan. But that's just me.
 

·
Function over Form
Joined
·
524 Posts
I read some statistics a while ago that stated how many tens of thousands of rounds on average were fired for each "kill" in the decade-long war in Afghanistan. It was staggering. I suspect it was a similar ratio in 'Nam as the "go switch" was thrown to full-auto and the trooper went into "spray & pray" mode....
Consider this in AFG: An enemy that knows to use cover/concealment. Very challenging terrain for our troops on the move; thus an enemy that can choose the terrain to THEIR advantage. An enemy that usually ambushes; thus the origin of fire is a direction, not pinpoint.

Tactics have been developed in response to these engagements. "spray & pray" it IS NOT. There is a method to the perceived madness.

When is the last time you reviewed respective branch basic rifleman's courses? They have the benefit of generations of riflemanship. Many times the regular line units are NOT given enough ammo to maintain high live fire proficiency at all times. But they have the training.

The "bolt vs. semi-auto" argument is bogus. Both are accurate enough. It's the indian, not the arrow. And the semi- can leave a hand free for some very important tasks.

I suspect we'll see you in court soon, pleading insanity by reason of firearm seduction. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hitting the target is hitting the target regardless of where on earth you are - Afghanistan or Alabama. Hitting the target means you can move on to the next threat. Racking another round into the chamber can be carried out as you rotate or pivot to the next threat and does not have to be a separate step. How long does it take for a practiced rifleman to crank a fresh round - less than a second, probably.

I'm not discounting any advantages of either semi or select-fire in a close quarter contact situation. But neither should a bolt gun be discounted as too antiquated to get the job done, and that would be killing an enemy.

I don't know how the Japs felt, but don't overlook the fact that the Brits and other Commonwealth troops fought throughout WWII and Korea with bolt guns. Germans, too.

Both semi and select-fire can be a force multiplier, especially in laying down suppressive fire. But thats keeping the enemy's heads done, not killing them necessarily.

Look at my original post. I expressly said situations we are likely to encounter, not a frontal assault on a battlefield. Thats a BIG difference. I envision more of a "shoot & scoot" scenario or one where we avoid contact altogether, if possible. It is the indian and not the arrow. We spend too much time on the arrow.
 

·
Aesops Ant (not Aunt)
Joined
·
1,499 Posts

·
performing monkey
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
Lee Harvey Oswald :nuts: used a mannlicher-carcano bolt action M91/38
 

·
Function over Form
Joined
·
524 Posts
Both semi and select-fire can be a force multiplier, especially in laying down suppressive fire. But thats keeping the enemy's heads done, not killing them necessarily.
You seem to allow for the concept of suppressive fire but scratch your head about why round counts are so "high".

And another contradiction. A base of fire is still meant to kill, "suppressive" or otherwise.

Look at my original post. I expressly said situations we are likely to encounter, not a frontal assault on a battlefield. Thats a BIG difference. I envision more of a "shoot & scoot" scenario or one where we avoid contact altogether, if possible. It is the indian and not the arrow. We spend too much time on the arrow.
The military IS looking for contact and IS looking to destroy. This doesn't jive with the mission or likely resources of your local Alabama Prepared Society.

It is an apples to oranges comparison. AFG ammo consumption does not support your argument.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
You seem to allow for the concept of suppressive fire but scratch your head about why round counts are so "high".

And another contradiction. A base of fire is still meant to kill, "suppressive" or otherwise.

The military IS looking for contact and IS looking to destroy. This doesn't jive with the mission or likely resources of your local Alabama Prepared Society.

It is an apples to oranges comparison. AFG ammo consumption does not support your argument.
Not an argument. And, you are correct.. it is apples to oranges although you and I might be thinking differently.

Going back to my original post, bolt-guns should not be discounted as a means of self-defense/deterrent in what many of us foresee as the most likely unsettled environment we will experience should society devolve into regional unpleasantness. Knowing some of the hunters that I do, I would not like it being unprotected and on foot with any of them as my adversary. After all, our snipers have been cranking rounds since WW1, although a movement to semi-autos is underway now that semi-auto accuracy is approaching that of bolt-actions. Still, it is a technology that most of us cannot afford even if available to the civilian market.

I personally own ARs, AKs, and FALs. I like them a lot and wouldn't hesitate grabbing any of them for a defensive application. However, if I want a rifle in the truck, or one to sling over my shoulder as I do a recce around the place, I wouldn't feel slighted or under-armed taking a bolt-action. Whats not to like? Accurate, potent caliber, light weight, fast, and fed by a box magazine that can quickly be switched out with a fresh one! I wouldn't necessarily choose it to assault Tora Bora, but, OTOH, a potent .308 would be better than the 5.56, wouldn't you agree?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
The reality is that most of us from a standing, unsupported position would have a hard time shooting either rifle with the accuracy it is capable of. Bolt vs semi is another version of the 9mm vs .45 debate. The fact of the matter is there are so many other factors involved that the debate is pointless.

Our task as prepper/survivalists is to be proficient with what weapons WE HAVE. I would assume in a a true melt down I will also be scrounging weapons and ammo. I have a wide variety of guns and ammo. They range for Mosin 91-30s that cost me 69 bucks to high end ARs. I also have a wide variety of hand guns, shotguns etc. I have calibers that I might just encounter ammo in. I also have linked with neighbors for mutual support.

I have lately been working on a plan to secure my small rural town from outside threat should the ballon go up. All of these concerns are far more important to me than bolt vs auto.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
The reality is that most of us from a standing, unsupported position would have a hard time shooting either rifle with the accuracy it is capable of. Bolt vs semi is another version of the 9mm vs .45 debate. The fact of the matter is there are so many other factors involved that the debate is pointless.

Our task as prepper/survivalists is to be proficient with what weapons WE HAVE. I would assume in a a true melt down I will also be scrounging weapons and ammo. I have a wide variety of guns and ammo. They range for Mosin 91-30s that cost me 69 bucks to high end ARs. I also have a wide variety of hand guns, shotguns etc. I have calibers that I might just encounter ammo in. I also have linked with neighbors for mutual support.

I have lately been working on a plan to secure my small rural town from outside threat should the ballon go up. All of these concerns are far more important to me than bolt vs auto.
It isn't a "concern" at all. Its just a subject thrown out there for discussion and no one should get their panties in a wad over it.

There are plenty of "preppers" out there, I'll wager, who don't have, and may never have, the money to put into an AR, FAL, certainly the overpriced M1A or even an AK. Many may live in a state or city where owning an "assault rifle" or even the magazines for one is illegal.

You're correct in saying that in a off-hand standing position we will never hit to the capability of the rifle. I will further add that under extreme stress you won't either regardless of the firing position.
 

·
Aesops Ant (not Aunt)
Joined
·
1,499 Posts
There are plenty of "preppers" out there, I'll wager, who don't have, and may never have, the money to put into an AR, FAL, certainly the overpriced M1A or even an AK. Many may live in a state or city where owning an "assault rifle" or even the magazines for one is illegal.
My first suggestion to said "prepper" above would be to move to a free state. Since that may not be possible for everyone I would make my second recommendation to get a bolt/lever gun and practice as much as possible with it. I stand by my OP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
I was suggesting that I'd much rather have a group of folks who can shoot than folks with cool toys. Everyone needs to prep within their budget. A spendy rifle with little ammo is a poor bargain.

As far as living in the States that limit ones freedoms, I wouldn't and don't. My dad was a decorated WWII vet who couldn't buy a .22 pistol in New York. He want to target shoot with it. Soon we moved to a state that was more friendly on the issue.

Why folks chose to have their liberties curtailed is curious to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
I was suggesting that I'd much rather have a group of folks who can shoot than folks with cool toys. Everyone needs to prep within their budget. A spendy rifle with little ammo is a poor bargain.

As far as living in the States that limit ones freedoms, I wouldn't and don't. My dad was a decorated WWII vet who couldn't buy a .22 pistol in New York. He want to target shoot with it. Soon we moved to a state that was more friendly on the issue.

Why folks chose to have their liberties curtailed is curious to me.
Couldn't agree more.
 

·
Scavenger deluxe
Joined
·
6,686 Posts
I read some statistics a while ago that stated how many tens of thousands of rounds on average were fired for each "kill" in the decade-long war in Afghanistan. It was staggering. I suspect it was a similar ratio in 'Nam as the "go switch" was thrown to full-auto and the trooper went into "spray & pray" mode.

America was once called a country of riflemen. Certainly that no longer holds true since our PC culture now frowns on guns and most of our youngsters are never taught how to properly shoot.

It got me to thinking, for almost any scenario we here might have to contend with in the future, might an accurate bolt (or lever) gun you are good with be better (one shot, one kill) than a semi-auto that would seduce you into expending four, five, or more rounds for the same result? Think about it... that old codger with his 30-30 making a kill every time he pulls the trigger or that youngster with the semi-auto that has put a lot of lead down range but has yet to hit his target.

I know many of you are good with your semi-autos. I like to think I am as well. Still, I can make hits with my trusty deer rifle through a thicket or across a field that I question making with my semi-autos. Just think about it.

Open for discussion.
I have two guns I figured would be my do all[until my back went out]
an FAL and M1A.I can hit at range with either but both have the firepower for up close and personal[I kept my 300 WM in reserve]NEITHER is a sniper rifle but BOTH can be.I guess when it comes to SHTF I'll be over the hill with my 8mm Mauser and Draco.I can dot a mouse's eye at 100 yards with the Mauser.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,183 Posts
The reality is that most of us from a standing, unsupported position would have a hard time shooting either rifle with the accuracy it is capable of. Bolt vs semi is another version of the 9mm vs .45 debate. The fact of the matter is there are so many other factors involved that the debate is pointless.

Our task as prepper/survivalists is to be proficient with what weapons WE HAVE. I would assume in a a true melt down I will also be scrounging weapons and ammo. I have a wide variety of guns and ammo. They range for Mosin 91-30s that cost me 69 bucks to high end ARs. I also have a wide variety of hand guns, shotguns etc. I have calibers that I might just encounter ammo in. I also have linked with neighbors for mutual support.

I have lately been working on a plan to secure my small rural town from outside threat should the ballon go up. All of these concerns are far more important to me than bolt vs auto.
Doc your 100% right about working to secure your small town.. I believe more people will make that way then alone.. in a SHTF the person who remains calm and has a plan will find himself in charge because most folks ain't got a clue.. of course that's assuming one wants to be in charge.. I'd rather do it then trust it somebody whose only claim to fame is being the Mayor of the Chief of Police , neither of which is proof of ability in a SHTF event... but one may want to also have a plan to move on if the PTB head off in a direction I don't wanna go... you'll be surprised at how many city leaders will want to disarm the towns population " for the common good" .

The smaller the town the better up to a point.. a place small enough that most folks know each other is about right..

I really liked the thought that went into the book "Lights out"... that's a great book that brings it all together...
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top