Really didn't want to put this in the "weapons" category.

Home Forums Security & Defense Weapons Really didn't want to put this in the "weapons" category.

This topic contains 8 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Tolik 1 week, 6 days ago.

  • Author
  • #29817


    Looking at the situation today, as well as past events that I have experienced as well as those related to me by family and friends going back nearly a century,  certain “tools” keep coming to the top, for their usefulness and durability.

    Looking at our needs, not just defense but food procurement as well as size and power considerations. And lets not forget being ‘grey’ or unnoticed.

    Any number of guns fall into this category, but certain ones do stand out more than others, especially if we take “sport” hunting out of consideration.

    But getting into the individual makes/models that should get a second look, and the first is the Ruger 10/22 takedown. And even in its most pedestrian version the versatility by simply adding a red dot, scope and possibly higher capacity magazines.
    The ability to take the gun down and conceal it, carry it easily, and to take game outside of the normal hunting concepts with careful use. And it can be used to good measure in a defense situation, not an ideal option but it does work.


    • This topic was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Whirlibird.
  • #29819

    • Second,

    (This should make Tolik smile)

    The AK. And more specifically the folding stock AK in 7.62x39mm.

    Why does that gun score so high? Simple, it’s reliable, rugged and accurate enough with good ammunition to fit our needs out to 200y. It also is compact enough to fit in places that other choices will not, even with a 16″ barrel.
    Why the 16″ barrel? And why the 7.62 caliber?
    The 16″ barrel because of the ballistics. Certain guns/calibers do not lend themselves to short barrels as much. The loss of power and accuracy stand out, especially when we are considering quadruped use.

    Also the legality of the SBR/pistol length barrels. Too many possible problems with the “braces” to make me consider one when it could be illegal to possess tomorrow.

    The 7.62 caliber? Because there is more of it in the US than other options and it is able to be reloaded with conventional .308″ bullets, not perfect but they will work. The 7.62 is also much easier to handload for, including lead bullet loads for practice and subsonic options.

    I prefer the underfolding stock for the surreptitious game gathering and concealed aka hidden gun use. But prefer the sidefolder and fixed stock for everything else.
    The underfolder is more compact and doesn’t thicken the receiver area as much as the sidefolder, and when concealing the gun, that is a consideration.
    On a fighting gun, I want the fixed stock, and for the GP gun I want the left side folder.

    With a decent optic, either a scope or red dot, and a decent US barrel, there are few things that I cannot harvest or hit within reasonable ranges, so long as good ammunition is used.

    And with the addition of a suitable muzzle device and the appropriate ammunition, this package can account for quite a lot of edibles.

    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Whirlibird.
    • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by  Whirlibird.
  • #29822



    The AR-15.

    And more specifically the AR-15 Carbine .300 Blackout with a 16″ barrel and pistol length gas tube.

    I cannot recommend any of the side folding stocks, as they leave the gun unable to fire until deployed. The collapsible models will have to do.

    By taking the gun apart, it becomes fairly compact, but useless until you reassemble it. More on this later.

    Kept as light as possible, with an M4 profile barrel and GI style handguards the gun is accurate enough, light and very dynamic.

    The Blackout is similar enough to the 7.62×39 to negate any real power discussion, but is more friendly for reloading and making specialty ammunition.
    Again a sub-200y cartridge for our use.

    Personally I prefer the AR platform to the AK, handling, operation, and experience all play into this, but they both work.

    Much like the AK, modifications are simple, some optic such as a red dot or scope, and backup iron sights.
    Why optics on these two? Simple, I want and possibly need to hit the target.
    Being injured and being able to only use one hand for example, I can still shoulder the AR carbine and make hits with the red dot, and have but not with the irons.
    Or if the families chance of eating is dependent on my not missing.

    Again the 16″ barrel for legality and ballistics. Yes the BO can be shot well down to a 9-10″ barrel, but when you use full power high velocity loads, you do get more velocity and less bullet drop with the longer barrel. My standard hunting/defense load is right in the 7.62×39 power range.

    And unlike most other options, you can pop out two pins and change calibers/cartridges by simply swapping the upper and mags. Again the gun is useless when broken down, the modularity is key to its popularity and usefulness.

    The BO was something of a niche round, but this is a place where it shines. And it has grown in popularity in the last decade.

    Modifications or extras? A light mount for a small tactical light. That’s it, outside of the optics previously mentioned. And possibly a muzzle device.

  • #29824


    Thanks for this, Whirlibird. Good food for thought.

  • #29827


    Good advice , thank you !  I know what you mean tho , I sometimes find it hard to choose where to put a topic . As far as weapons go tho , Spetsnaz saying  ” Everything is a TOOL , YOU are the WEAPON ” . That could go equally for our SFs and Seals . The only thing about the AR , I’ve never owned one , or fired one . Too many things put me off about the platform . Biggest thing is that inferior cartridge . What I consider the need for excessive cleaning also . Too much plastic , I like heavy guns . The military knew it made a mistake with the 55sucks , when it was combat tested in Vietnam . They were just too far into it to turn back . Now with NATO not all that important , they have finally admitted their mistake , and are seeking a heavier replacement for the 55sucks .  as a combat round ? what are you .? a French Communist , trying to sabotage the US ? The 39 isnt the greatist either , but its better than the 56 . The Czechs came up with the 7.62 x 45 during the cold was . It was superior to the 39 in every way , the Russians poo pooed it  out of politics . Too bad , that might have been another option for us today .

  • #29835

    Crow Bar

    The 10/22 is a great small bore rifle. I dont have a take down, as I bought mine but the factor Target version with a tighter chamber and a bull target barrel.

    AKs are good. But you are limited as to what bullets you can load with it, due to COL. I think 130grns are the max. Play around with the “jump” in your reloads and accuracy may improve.

    I would never own a AR15.

  • #29836


    LOL , another great little 22 is the Winchester 190/290 . My father got me one when I was 10 years old . I still have it ! The 1022 is great because it has a magazine , instead of a feed tube . Then again , the 190 will hold around 12-15 LR , which isnt bad for an older firearm .

  • #29889


    AKs are good. But you are limited as to what bullets you can load with it, due to COL. I think 130grns are the max. Play around with the “jump” in your reloads and accuracy may improve.

    AK’s can use a variety of bullet weights, including factory 150’s.

    Was shooting the wife’s with lead flat nose 170’s for the .30-30.


    By selecting higher quality ammunition than most of the cheap commie imports, you can normally cut the group in half. But it’s still generally a 2″ gun at best.


  • #29891


    An Arsenal ( 100% American made ) can hit to 500 yards . Like anything else , if you and the gun are one , you can do things people wouldn’t think possible . The only way to do that is to practice , practice , practice . I could take an FAL , or any other gun out to the range , then blast it for not being accurate enough , being awkward to charge , etc. etc. All that when it comes down to the fact that I have only fired the thing for the third time , or the first time . Remember folks , the bottom line is this . The weapon doesnt suck , YOU SUCK using it . Stop blaming the weapon . “Mosins suck ” …. Really ? Then how were Soviet snipers able to rack up over 200 kills with them , some being other snipers ? Because they were one with the gun , they took the time to learn , and work with the weapons quirks ………….and every gun has them . Another thing , dont depend on optics , learn to use iron sights .

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Skip to toolbar