# Watch out for the Purge!



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

This made me chuckle!

https://www.zerohedge.com/political...d-arrests-force-people-comply-stay-home-order


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Quite fitting that the patriot in the meme is holding an AK.
He knows what really rocks!


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Quite fitting that the patriot in the meme is holding an AK.
> He knows what really rocks!


And since it's not an AR AND it's not black, it can't be evil.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

inceptor said:


> And since it's not an AR AND it's not black, it can't be evil.


If the S ever HTF, I personally want weapons that are simple, have been battle tested under all conditions and will not fail.

For me, of all the weapons I own, that would be a Colt 1911A1 and either an M1 Garand or an AK.
And I would probably lean toward the Garand, "the greatest battle implement ever devised".


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If the S ever HTF, I personally want weapons that are simple, have been battle tested under all conditions and will not fail.
> 
> For me, of all the weapons I own, that would be a Colt 1911A1 and either an M1 Garand or an AK.
> And I would probably lean toward the Garand, "the greatest battle implement ever devised".


You know you are right in this statement.:tango_face_smile:

Have plenty of all you say.

That AK in his hands is a Poly Legend AK47 not an AKM, it has a milled receiver, top of the line.

My first go to pistol is a 1911 any one of five,

sitting right beside me now is a WW2 Ithaca 1911A1 that I have had for 52 years.

Good as new, has a new chrome lined USGI Vietnam era tube made by H&R.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Camel923 said:


> This made me chuckle!
> 
> https://www.zerohedge.com/political...d-arrests-force-people-comply-stay-home-order
> 
> View attachment 105213


 He has the wrong darn gun.

Crime is up places are being broken into . LE in many areas told to ignore it.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Some times it goes right . Nuff said.

Doorbell video captures violent Illinois home invasion which left coronavirus mask-wearing suspect dead

https://www.dailyherald.com/news/20...olice-release-doorbell-video-of-home-invasion

https://www.foxnews.com/us/doorbell-video-shows-illinois-home-invasion-suspects-in-coronavirus-masks


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If the S ever HTF, I personally want weapons that are simple, have been battle tested under all conditions and will not fail.
> 
> For me, of all the weapons I own, that would be a Colt 1911A1 and either an M1 Garand or an AK.
> And I would probably lean toward the Garand, "the greatest battle implement ever devised".


I don't have a Garand but I think my M1A will suffice. Ditto on the Colt and a G19 to boot.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

If for some reason I think the Ar15 is not up to the job then the AR10


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

To anyone who things their gun won't break, Murphy is packing his stuff and heading for your place right now...

The AK would be crap for a weapon of choice in this country during a real SHTF scenario. Most of them are built incorrectly, and the ones that are built right are inaccurate at distance by function of the correct design.
If the bolt breaks, and it will, you can't drop another one in. You're SOL. You have to get a whole new gun, or spend time hand fitting a new bolt. Snap a trunion cuz your cheap ass bought one that uses steel? You're boned.

There is no magic gun. They all break. If yours hasn't YET, it's simply because you've never used it as intended. Safe Queens need not apply. Your experience is irrelevant. It's a machine. Machines break. Prepare for that.
Your best option is to have the gun that can be fixed in the field and matches the gun of the fellow assuming room temperature next to you. When yours breaks, you already know how to run his, and can continue to fight. Fix your own later, if you so choose, from the parts that are common among the dozens to hundreds around you.
If you were playing in the sandbox overseas, that would be the AK.
In the blessed land of the free, it flat out isn't. In the year 2020, it won't be a Garand either, haha.
Keep your nostalgia in the safe, and get a gun that will work, break, and be replaced immediately so you can keep fighting.

Or... you know, pin all your hopes on 70-90 year old tech with a one-time use. Whatever.
At least you know your corpse will get to hold on to it forever, since nobody's looting that off you once you fall.
:vs_lol:


----------



## SGG (Nov 25, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> To anyone who things their gun won't break, Murphy is packing his stuff and heading for your place right now...
> 
> The AK would be crap for a weapon of choice in this country during a real SHTF scenario. Most of them are built incorrectly, and the ones that are built right are inaccurate at distance by function of the correct design.
> If the bolt breaks, and it will, you can't drop another one in. You're SOL. You have to get a whole new gun, or spend time hand fitting a new bolt. Snap a trunion cuz your cheap ass bought one that uses steel? You're boned.
> ...


I think this post just made me decide to take the AK off of my shortlist for my first rifle


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

Kauboy said:


> To anyone who things their gun won't break, Murphy is packing his stuff and heading for your place right now...
> 
> The AK would be crap for a weapon of choice in this country during a real SHTF scenario. Most of them are built incorrectly, and the ones that are built right are inaccurate at distance by function of the correct design.
> If the bolt breaks, and it will, you can't drop another one in. You're SOL. You have to get a whole new gun, or spend time hand fitting a new bolt. Snap a trunion cuz your cheap ass bought one that uses steel? You're boned.
> ...


Sorry Ron I can appreciate your smarts on some subjects but
This time you are wrong.

AR's suck and so does their fussy shit on themselves design.


----------



## RubberDuck (May 27, 2016)

Just a another AR is better fan. I own both to solve any arguments. And where do you get that you can't just drop in another bolt? They are interchangeable just like the AR


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Trunion? what trunion? my AK's don't have no trunions, they have receivers.

Where do you get that I just can't drop in a new bolt?

I have spares for both the 7.62X51's, 7.62X39's and the 5.56X45 ones, 

THEY ALL INTERCHANGE between their respective models!

And they head space correctly also.

An AR can shit its gas tube on you real quick with no clue coming.

It is the #1 part I replace on them followed by the extractor assy.

In the military, as an armorer, I saw plenty of them with bent or broken extension tubes, mostly broken.

No, I will take my AK's and variants for close in and M1's and M1a's for distance.

In over 60 years I have seen very little parts breakage on either one, worn parts yes.

Yeah I do have AR's also 6 I think, two are M4's.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> If for some reason I think the Ar15 is not  up to the job then the AR10


Neither one would have made it off the beach at Normandy on June 6, 1944.
The M1 did. Full of sand, seabed mud, and salt water.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

SOCOM42 said:


> Trunion? what trunion? my AK's don't have no trunions, they have receivers.
> 
> Where do you get that I just can't drop in a new bolt?
> 
> ...


I have some bad news for you then...





If you have spares *THAT FIT*, then you already heeded the "prepare for that" advice I gave concerning breakage.
However, if we are swapping parts with battlefield available options, you're SOL, as I said.

Any AR-15 variant will have fully interchangeable parts, and they will be lying around EVERYWHERE.
The same simply can't be said for AKs. Not in this country.
And if I need to pick up the gun of my enemy to continue the fight, the AR variant will be the one I see when I look down. It won't be an AK.
So, I learn the ins and outs of the AR platform. That does NOT mean I don't fully intend to purchase an AK. (a good one)

I love kicking this hornet's nest because people think I'm attacking their gun, and by extension, them.
I never said the AK wasn't a good gun. I gave PRACTICAL reasons for why it would make a terrible SHTF gun in the US of A.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Neither one would have made it off the beach at Normandy on June 6, 1944.
> The M1 did. Full of sand, seabed mud, and salt water.


I have a feeling the boys in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom would have a few words to say about it, actually.

You pretend as if we haven't had numerous other conflicts over the past 70 years where the M4 platform didn't perform just fine in all kinds of conditions.
If it couldn't hold up, being the absolute primary firearm for all armed forces for 70 years, we would have been overrun decades ago.

Caveman Grog's stone axe and wooden club would have survived even better than the M1 at Normandy. No rust! Should we still use those instead of other options?
I get that you have a personal connection to these things, but it appears to blind your perspective a bit.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

RubberDuck said:


> Just a another AR is better fan. I own both to solve any arguments. And where do you get that you can't just drop in another bolt? They are interchangeable just like the AR


Sorry sir, they aren't. See the video I posted above.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

hawgrider said:


> Sorry Ron I can appreciate your smarts on some subjects but
> This time you are wrong.
> 
> AR's suck and so does their fussy shit on themselves design.


I didn't claim they were superior, all things being equal. Almost every gun is better at something than another. They are just tools, and we should pick the right tool for the job we intend to carry out.
But, given the idea behind a SHTF "purge", as this topic jokingly eluded to, the advantages of the AR in the United States make it the better choice.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

SGG said:


> I think this post just made me decide to take the AK off of my shortlist for my first rifle


A top shelf AK will not have the kind of problems that Kauboy is talking about. Arsenal is a top shelf AK that you should still consider. Spendy though.

https://www.arsenalinc.com/usa/


----------



## RubberDuck (May 27, 2016)

Kauboy said:


> Sorry sir, they aren't. See the video I posted above.


That video is not good argument for you.
Clearly states talking more about first gen junk imports to begin with guns that when a person serious about AK wont even pick up.
That aside you are correct that in this country you will be more likely to pick a AR from dead guy. Now these are also semi automatic versions not full auto so none of our weapons will see the abuse that military versions see also in your scenario it is all apocalyptic doom and gloom. I would also wager there are far more AKs in circulation then you give credit.
So in close yes my statement stands AK bolts are interchangeable minus the junk
Like said I own both AK AR basses are covered.
Let me ask a honest question I do not know.
Are the bolt from a gas piston AR interchangeable with a direct impingement AR?


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

RubberDuck said:


> That video is not good argument for you.
> Clearly states talking more about first gen junk imports to begin with guns that when a person serious about AK wont even pick up.
> That aside you are correct that in this country you will be more likely to pick a AR from dead guy. Now these are also semi automatic versions not full auto so none of our weapons will see the abuse that military versions see also in your scenario it is all apocalyptic doom and gloom. I would also wager there are far more AKs in circulation then you give credit.
> So in close yes my statement stands AK bolts are interchangeable minus the junk
> ...


In the beginning, he was talking about the difference between a "single stack bolt" and a "double stack bolt", referring to the 1st gen stuff.
But the rest of the video is for all AKs. You watched the rest, right?
Can you comment on that part? That is the information I've leaned on as to why these are not easily fixed in the field. If he is incorrect, I want to know about it.
Have you swapped out and fired with different bolts in your AKs?

The bolt on an AR is not different between a gas or piston system. The bolt carrier group is different due to the gas key design.
Here's a pick showing the difference. (yes, I did chuckle at the note about the AK)








So, all bolts would be interchangeable with a cotter pin pull. The BCG would not. That said, I don't advise the use of a piston AR for the same reason I stated above. You won't find that lying around everywhere. U.S. police departments don't use them. U.S. military services don't use them.
My advise is to carry what your enemy and friend carries. In the U.S., that will be a DI AR variant.

EDIT: To clarify, I LOVE the gas piston design. It is cleaner and causes less wear on the gun. I am not knocking the design, or anyone's choice for owning one. I am simply stating that I do not feel it is popular enough to perform field expedient repairs on should the need arise. Unless you carry your own spares, of course.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I have a feeling the boys in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom would have a few words to say about it, actually.
> 
> You pretend as if we haven't had numerous other conflicts over the past 70 years where the M4 platform didn't perform just fine in all kinds of conditions.
> If it couldn't hold up, being the absolute primary firearm for all armed forces for 70 years, we would have been overrun decades ago.
> ...


No sir, I am very well acquainted with the Armalite's shortcomings in combat in a wet, muddy environment.Very well acquainted with having to keep an assembled cleaning rod attached to the forearm of the M16A1 with blousing bands to knock empty cases out of the chamber when that plastic piece of shit would jam at a critical moment.
Combat is not like a day at the range. In fact, combat can not even be imagined by someone who has not experienced it.

I will stand by my statement that an AR platform would not have made it off the beach at Normandy.
When I'm betting my life on a weapon, I want one that WILL NOT FAIL. That means no AR. AK, yes. Garand, most certainly.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I have a feeling the boys in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom would have a few words to say about it, actually.
> 
> You pretend as if we haven't had numerous other conflicts over the past 70 years where the M4 platform didn't perform just fine in all kinds of conditions.
> If it couldn't hold up, being the absolute primary firearm for all armed forces for 70 years, we would have been overrun decades ago.
> ...


The M4 didn't exist 70 years ago,neither did the M16.

I was part of an investigating team sent to Nam to survey battlefield pickups of failed M16's.

They were as recovered ,nothing cleaned or altered, only cleared if possible, if not a block was installed.

You have no idea what they looked liked, made me sick to see what shit was issued to our guys.

We came back and shortly after started building M16A1's.

Your talking through your --- about the M1 and Normandy.

If they were so bad, why weren't they pulled right after the war?

They served in many other conflicts before being retired as a service rifle and replaced by the M14,

but still used by other countries.

I carried an M1 under combat conditions during the Berlin crisis,

M14's were available but not enough ammo was available, no M60's either.

Desert Storm, again you are short of facts, even M1D's were there as pulled from the POMCUS stores.

Sniper grade M-14's built by my company were issued to SF and SEAL units.

Here is a picture taken during desert storm of what my company built.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

RedLion said:


> A top shelf AK will not have the kind of problems that Kauboy is talking about. Arsenal is a top shelf AK that you should still consider. Spendy though.
> 
> https://www.arsenalinc.com/usa/


Another top quality AK is RIFLE DYNAMICS in Las Vegas. But $$$$.
Top quality ARs come from BRAVO COMPANY. Again $$$$.
If you want a weekend plinker, but cheap shit. If you think your life may depend on the weapon someday, buy the quality stuff.
And as to the AR vs AK argument........ buy at least one of each!


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> No sir, I am very well acquainted with the Armalite's shortcomings in combat in a wet, muddy environment.Very well acquainted with having to keep an assembled cleaning rod attached to the forearm of the M16A1 with blousing bands to knock empty cases out of the chamber when that plastic piece of shit would jam at a critical moment.
> Combat is not like a day at the range. In fact, combat can not even be imagined by someone who has not experienced it.
> 
> I will stand by my statement that an AR platform would not have made it off the beach at Normandy.
> When I'm betting my life on a weapon, I want one that WILL NOT FAIL. That means no AR. AK, yes. Garand, most certainly.


AR's, M4's, M16's have come a long way since those days. They are very reliable is all evironments and rarely experience any malfunctions of stopages.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Worth repeating for those who have no idea!

Sidewalk commandos.



rice paddy daddy said:


> No sir, I am very well acquainted with the Armalite's shortcomings in combat in a wet, muddy environment.Very well acquainted with having to keep an assembled cleaning rod attached to the forearm of the M16A1 with blousing bands to knock empty cases out of the chamber when that plastic piece of shit would jam at a critical moment.
> Combat is not like a day at the range. In fact, combat can not even be imagined by someone who has not experienced it.
> 
> I will stand by my statement that an AR platform would not have made it off the beach at Normandy.
> When I'm betting my life on a weapon, I want one that WILL NOT FAIL. That means no AR. AK, yes. Garand, most certainly.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Chiefster23 said:


> Another top quality AK is RIFLE DYNAMICS in Las Vegas. But $$$$.
> Top quality ARs come from BRAVO COMPANY. Again $$$$.
> If you want a weekend plinker, but cheap shit. If you think your life may depend on the weapon someday, buy the quality stuff.
> And as to the AR vs AK argument........ buy at least one of each!


A lot of very good AR's in addition to BCM (I use BCM barrels and components), including Daniel Defense, Spikes and LMT.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

SOCOM42 said:


> Worth repeating for those who have no idea!
> 
> Sidewalk commandos.


I may have only spent about a month total in a more tropical environment during my service (Guatamala and Panama) I have two years and two tours in the big sandbox (Desert Storm and again 2003-04). I can attest from my experience in the desert environment and some fire fights via ambush and not, that the M16A2 and M4 are very reliable.
My understanding of early M16's in Viet Nam was a lack of a chrome bore in addition to not requiring that soldiers clean their M16's created the problems. My understanding is that after those problems were remedied, the M16 was plenty reliable.


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

Eugene 

"Stoner"

Think about that Lol!


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

hawgrider said:


> Eugene
> 
> "Stoner"
> 
> Think about that Lol!


Yep designed an excellent rifle.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

RedLion said:


> I may have only spent about a month total in a more tropical environment during my service (Guatamala and Panama) I have two years and two tours in the big sandbox (Desert Storm and again 2003-04). I can attest from my experience in the desert environment and some fire fights via ambush and not, that the M16A2 and M4 are very reliable.
> My understanding of early M16's in Viet Nam was a lack of a chrome chamber in addition to not requiring that soldiers clean their M16's created the problems. My understanding is that after those problems were remedied, the M16 was plenty reliable.


They improved the most when the A2 came out, change of forging material from 6061T6 to 7074T6,

reduced most of the sand galling problems.

You are correct on the Nam problem, but the entire bore needed chroming,

at first they replaced the M16 barrels with chrome chambered ones.

Carbon buildup in the bolt/carrier group was another problem encountered, last but not least,

The carrier key screws heads broke off, they had to buy a better grade of screw to solve the problem.

The carbon build up was not like today's problem, the powder was wrong,

it was re-processed WW2 naval gun powder with the addition of flash reducer

and others ingredients by LC created a nightmare.

When they went back to the right powder the problem went away.

When we did the A1's the whole interior of the barrel was chromed.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

RedLion said:


> AR's, M4's, M16's have come a long way since those days. They are very reliable is all evironments and rarely experience any malfunctions of stopages.


Still the same basic design.
Which is why I will never own one.

I do own a Mini 14, which is based on a well proven design.
In fact, I trust that Mini enough that it is one of three long guns that stay loaded and out in the open within immediate reach in my house. The other two are a Ruger 10-22 and a SXS double barrel 20 gauge. Because living on a farm my odds of an animal after my chickens is 10,000 times greater than a human trying to get on my property.
My AK is in a state of readiness right inside the closet door. You know, in case the Covid 19 Gestapo comes for me.:vs_laugh:


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Still the same basic design.
> Which is why I will never own one.
> 
> I do own a Mini 14, which is based on a well proven design.
> ...


To each their own.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Absolutely!!


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

As others have said (Duck) solved the problem, have plenty of each.


----------



## KUSA (Apr 21, 2016)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Neither one would have made it off the beach at Normandy on June 6, 1944.
> The M1 did. Full of sand, seabed mud, and salt water.


I'm not convinced. Please storm the beach with one and find out for sure. Otherwise this is an unsupported assertion.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

KUSA said:


> I'm not convinced. Please storm the beach with one and find out for sure. Otherwise this is an unsupported assertion.


No need to. 
I have fired the M14 in very heavy rain and mud. And as you know, the M14 uses same design as the M1, with only modification of the gas piston.
In fact, my M14 was so mud clogged I could no longer see thru the sight aperture and had to look around it. And manually slap the op rod closed on rounds. Still kept working.
So, I have no doubt my Springfield built 1945 M1 will perform the same.

My later Colt M16A1 would have puked in the first minutes in that environment. Perhaps before the end of the first magazine.


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

RedLion said:


> Yep designed an excellent rifle.


Crappy rifle I had one and then sold that junk.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

hawgrider said:


> Crappy rifle I had one and then sold that junk.


To each their own. Excellent rifle/carbine in my experience not only in the military, not only owning several of different calibers, but building several as well. Use good components and you get a very good to excellent rifle. I bet you had a budget/bargain/basement model AR?


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

RedLion said:


> To each their own. Excellent rifle/carbine in my experience not only in the military, not only owning several of different calibers, but building several as well. Use good components and you get a very good to excellent rifle. I bet you had a budget/bargain/basement model AR?


Haha I was waiting for the you had a budget model... Lol!

Nope I had Colt match Target competition H Bar. It was a 1100.00 rifle brand spanking new. Fiddle with the fussiness for 2 years and sold that fussy junk. Learned my lesson I'll take an AK any day!


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

hawgrider said:


> Haha I was waiting for the you had a budget model... Lol!
> 
> Nope I had Colt match Target competition H Bar. It was a 1100.00 rifle brand spanking new. Fiddle with the fussiness for 2 years and sold that fussy junk. Learned my lesson I'll take an AK any day!


So you did not know how to tune it then. Interesting that our military, law enforcement and other nations have been using Colt AR's to great success in combat and service since Viet Nam, but yours did not work out for you, hmmm.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Ak and SKS have a good track records. JMHO. As does the Garand. I would not feel under gunned with any of them. If you like the ar 15 better go for it. All have pluses and minuses discusses in great detail on this and other forums. What we chose is betting our lives and our family’s lives on reliability. The ak is for in close. It is the ultimate meat grinder that functions in abysmal conditions that cause other weapons to malfunction. Engaging at longer distances the ar is a better choice for accuracy. Both are good systems. 

Had similar discussions when I bought a Toyota. People loudly derailed my choice that replacement parts were way more expensive. I said it’s not an issue if does not break. Other than tires and brakes I traded it in with 200k on it.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Camel923 said:


> Ak and SKS have a good track records. JMHO. As does the Garand. I would not feel under gunned with any of them. If you like the ar 15 better go for it. All have pluses and minuses discusses in great detail on this and other forums. What we chose is betting our lives and our family's lives on reliability. The ak is for in close. It is the ultimate meat grinder that functions in abysmal conditions that cause other weapons to malfunction. Engaging at longer distances the ar is a better choice for accuracy. Both are good systems.
> 
> Had similar discussions when I bought a Toyota. People loudly derailed my choice that replacement parts were way more expensive. I said it's not an issue if does not break. Other than tires and brakes I traded it in with 200k on it.


True. I like a variety of rifles, including the AK, M1A, Garand and others without doubt. I like the AR as well. I do have two AR's that shoot 7.62x39 very well and yes it is a very good intermediate round.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

RedLion said:


> So you did not know how to tune it then. Interesting that our military, law enforcement and other nations have been using Colt AR's to great success in combat and service since Viet Nam, but yours did not work out for you, hmmm.


Law enforcement uses them because they are military surplus rifles that the government either gives free, or sells cheap, to the agencies.
FWC - Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission is one agency that uses this government program.
The rifles are modified by the government to be semi auto only. At least the FWC's are.


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

RedLion said:


> So you did not know how to tune it then. Interesting that our military, law enforcement and other nations have been using Colt AR's to great success in combat and service since Viet Nam, but yours did not work out for you, hmmm.


I'm sorry but you assumed wrong again.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Law enforcement uses them because they are military surplus rifles that the government either gives free, or sells cheap, to the agencies.
> FWC - Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission is one agency that uses this government program.
> The rifles are modified by the government to be semi auto only. At least the FWC's are.


For some Law enforcement agencies, but most buy new AR's. At least that is what I have been told by a number of law enforcement officers that I have known in person and via other forums.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

hawgrider said:


> I'm sorry but you assumed wrong again.


So what was it about that Colt that was not working? What did you try to do to remedy it? Be specific please.


----------



## KUSA (Apr 21, 2016)

Plenty of proof that an AR works great in mud.


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

RedLion said:


> So what was it about that Colt that was not working? What did you try to do to remedy it? Be specific please.


Its not important that I be specific to convince anyone of my opinion of the AR platform. Think about this- If the AR platform was any good it wouldn't need "tuning."
"You can tune a piano but you can't tune a fish."


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

hawgrider said:


> Its not important that I be specific to convince anyone of my opinion of the AR platform. Think about this- If the AR platform was any good it wouldn't need "tuning."
> "You can tune a piano but you can't tune a fish."


Most do not need any kind of tuning, but some do. That is true for all rifles and firearms.


----------



## RubberDuck (May 27, 2016)

Here just do a Google search and vary it any way you like but search in general 
What is the most reliable battle rifle in the world.
See what comes up #1 we all know Google is the end all argument


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

RubberDuck said:


> Here just do a Google search and vary it any way you like but search in general
> What is the most reliable battle rifle in the world.
> See what comes up #1 we all know Google is the end all argument


Yup thread closed!

Searched " What is the most reliable battle rifle in the world."


> AK-47 Rifle
> AK-47 Rifle
> Maximum peoples on earth know the word 'AK-47' a most effective and accurate weapon, designed by Mikhail Kalashnikov in 1946-1948 from the Soviet Union.


----------



## KUSA (Apr 21, 2016)

RubberDuck said:


> Here just do a Google search and vary it any way you like but search in general
> What is the most reliable battle rifle in the world.
> See what comes up #1 we all know Google is the end all argument


If a lie is repeated enough, it becomes the truth.


----------



## RubberDuck (May 27, 2016)

KUSA said:


> If a lie is repeated enough, it becomes the truth.


Exactly keep telling yourself the AR is #1 and you will believe it.
Or accept that it may be popular it may be reliable but it's not #1


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Technically, the M16 is NOT a battle rifle. 
In fact, neither is the AK47.
They are both intermediate cartridge assault rifles.

And, the AR is not even that, since it is not select fire.

The last American battle rifle was the M14.
And I consider myself fortunate that I served during a time when it was an issue rifle.
Troops today who never use anything other than an M16 or M4 have no idea what they missed, and nothing to compare them to.


----------



## csi-tech (Apr 13, 2013)

I have both. My AK is a fun, reliable rifle. I have drums, bakelites, Yugo BHO mags and Romanian surplus mags. It has never let me down. It is dated. To scope it, put lights or accessories on it is difficult and expensive and it is not accurate past 200 yards. 

My AR is accurate, modular, has a far superior trigger, readily available parts and ammo and very inexpensive. IMO the AR-15 is a better rifle. People can badmouth it all they want, "but in 1968!!!". Get over it. It has been fixed.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

The Army is beginning to equip its combat units with the new Squad Marksman Rifles made by H&K and chambered in 7.62MM and designated the M110A1.
This is a fill in weapon until the new Next Generation Squad Weapon, chambered in 6.8MM, can be brought on line.

The M110A1 will be replacing the currently used Enhanced Battle Rifle 14, which is a modernized M14. Read that again - A MODERNIZED M14. I LOVE IT!!!:tango_face_grin:

www.military.com/daily-news/2020/04...-getting-new-762mm-squad-marksman-rifles.html

I guess the 5.56MM M16's will be obsolete because they have been deemed by the Army as not powerful enough. But, not to weep. Y'all think my M1 is obsolete too.:vs_laugh:


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

SOCOM42 said:


> The M4 didn't exist 70 years ago,neither did the M16.
> 
> I was part of an investigating team sent to Nam to survey battlefield pickups of failed M16's.
> 
> ...


Save your grandstanding and show me, SHOW ME SIR, where I claimed the M1 was bad.
My point, and you have done NOTHING to disprove it, is that the M1 Garand and the AK## are crap guns for SHTF in the United States. Plain and simple.
Dammit, you people get so bent out of shape about a piece of your past, you are absolutely blinded by it and are willing to see what isn't there, and refuse to see what is.

How many of you threw this kind of wall-eyed fit when talks started about replacing the M1903 Springfield?
Or the .30 Krag-Jørgensen?

Every generation *thinks* theirs is the best, until it isn't.
I never claimed the M1 was a bad gun. I said it was a crap choice for this scenario.
But, if you think it's better, then why is there not a single advanced nation using it for combat anywhere on the planet?
Have all the conspiracies you like about our government and their choice to go with the M4. But does that hold any water when you have to contend with the fact that NOBODY uses the M1?

I hate having this conversation, since it always leads to people having to face a reality they don't like and getting mad about it, but the truth is that technology changes and there will ALWAYS be a better model.
The AR/M4 has it's shortcomings. They are NOT remedied by going back to a less effective design. They should be improved. Some are trying, and I actually welcome it.
But until the new one has proven to be better so much so that every military branch, security company, police department, and mercenary agency adopts it, the AR will still the be ubiquitous winner, and best choice for an end-of-the-world gun that we have on U.S. soil.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

One round center mass with my 100 year old Mauser Model 98 works a hell of a lot faster than multiple rounds of 5.56.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

I replied to @SOCOM42 before finishing the rest of the thread.

Good Lord do you folks get into off topic pissing matches fast....

I don't give two squirts what ANYONE considers the "best battle rifle". That is opinion based on effectiveness to get the job at hand completed, and it only applies to one using it. It means NOTHING in the proposed scenario.
The M1 is heavy, holds only 8 rounds, is better suited for a club in many instances, and is a BEAST not prone to breakage. I never claimed it was "bad".
The AK is sloppy, inaccurate at distance, hard to fix in the field, and will run in just about ANY environment due to its intentionally wide tolerances. I never claimed it was "bad".
The AR/M4 uses a tiny low-power bullet, can jam due to gases blowing carbon back into the chamber, requires proper maintenance to keep working, and is one of the most accurate, modular, conforms-to-any-job rifles available to the civilian market. I never claimed it was "good".

My claim, this ENTIRE TIME, has been the following:
In what is left of the United States...
In a world without abundant resources...
In a country where governmental tyranny was the very REASON for our existence, and could easily become the enemy again...
What gun will BEST SUIT *that* situation?

I didn't ask what gun stormed Normandy. I didn't ask what gun is the most effective at killing a man. I didn't ask what gun will last the longest, since that is only a matter of time and then you're screwed.
I asked what gun will best suit a patriot and survivor in the post-U.S. landscape where the government, national and local, could become the enemy.

My answer is ONLY to carry what they carry. This offers advantages in every realm. Repairs, resupply, familiarity, abundance, etc...
Being able to restock from the bodies of your fallen friends and enemies is paramount to winning a guerrilla style war. You have no supply chain running logistics behind you. You have what you carry, and what you can gather.
That won't be an AK or ammo for it. That won't be an M1 or ammo for it. That won't be an FAL, AUG, SCAR, P90, or countless other versions and variations of the weapon we call the gun.
In the United Frickin' States of America, it WILL be the AR.
Love it, or leave it. Facts are facts.
When facts change, I change. Until they do, I work with them, not against them for the sake of ego or nostalgia.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> The AR/M4 has it's shortcomings. They are NOT remedied by going back to a less effective design. They should be improved. Some are trying, and I actually welcome it.


The Army is, by going to new weapons and better calibers. See my link above.
The Marines are as well, but in a different direction.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> The Army is, by going to new weapons and better calibers. See my link above.
> The Marines are as well, but in a different direction.


And I welcome the change. But it does not change what I said above your quoted post.
Until it is everywhere, it will be ill-suited to the scenario we foresee.

And yes, your M1 was made obsolete by the M14. You seem to acknowledge this, but fail to notice.

The model mentioned in your link has this on it's wiki page:


> The HK417 is similar in internal design to the HK416, although the receiver and working parts are enlarged to suit the larger 7.62×51mm cartridge. The bolt is a seven-lug rotating type, which sits in a bolt carrier and operates in a forged alloy receiver *resembling those of the Stoner-designed AR-10, AR-15 and M16 rifles.*


That made me chuckle.
:laugh:

I welcome improvement. We can always make a better stick.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I replied to @SOCOM42 before finishing the rest of the thread.
> 
> Good Lord do you folks get into off topic pissing matches fast....
> 
> ...


Good God, son. Relax! 
Take your blood pressure medicine and breathe!!

The finest, best equipped military the world has ever seen was fought to a standstill in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan by people who basically had no more than light infantry weaponry.

And you know what? My 100 year old (actually 103) Mauser will, with just one shot, get me a full auto M16 or variant along with whatever grenades and ammo that dead soldier had on him. A bonus would be if he had a claymore too. You know how to set one up, right?
And yes, I would have no qualms about killing an American soldier who was fighting against his countrymen.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Good God, son. Relax!
> Take your blood pressure medicine and breathe!!
> 
> The finest, best equipped military the world has ever seen was fought to a standstill in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan by people who basically had no more than light infantry weaponry.
> ...


This gives me hope that you're at least practical.

But I have a feeling the Mauser would never see the dirt in this exchange. Can't leave it behind, right? 
:tango_face_grin:


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> This gives me hope that you're at least practical.
> 
> But I have a feeling the Mauser would never see the dirt in this exchange. Can't leave it behind, right?
> :tango_face_grin:


It's got history.
Made at the German's Danzig Arsenal in 1917, it was refurbed in the 1930's to K98k specifications, and then captured by an American soldier during WWII.

And you mentioned Springfield M1903's. Until a grenade launcher was developed in 1944 for the M1, each Army infantry rifle squad had one man equipped with a 1903A3 to be a designated marksman and rifle grenade shooter.
The 1903A4 served into Vietnam as a sniper rifle, and would in fact be just as effective in that role today.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Don't give a particular rifle a "gold standard" rating.
As we were taught, "my rifle and bayonet are only tools. I am the weapon."


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> It's got history.
> Made at the German's Danzig Arsenal in 1917, it was refurbed in the 1930's to K98k specifications, and then captured by an American soldier during WWII.
> 
> And you mentioned Springfield M1903's. Until a grenade launcher was developed in 1944 for the M1, each Army infantry rifle squad had one man equipped with a 1903A3 to be a designated marksman and rifle grenade shooter.
> The 1903A4 served into Vietnam as a sniper rifle, and would in fact be just as effective in that role today.


I'm sure it would. I don't claim otherwise.
I recognize the merits of it, and the M1, and the AK, and all the rest.

Do you acknowledge my points, and understand why I choose the AR as my SHTF choice?
I don't consider it the best. But it will be the thing I can find to fix or replace my own in a time when mine stops working.
If facts can be presented that reveal why it will not be the best choice in this situation, I am open to them.
As of yet, I've only heard why people like their particular gun and what it can do. Not why it is best for the situation we could face.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Don't give a particular rifle a "gold standard" rating.
> As we were taught, "my rifle and bayonet are only tools. I am the weapon."


_*cough*_
You quoted Patton.
_*cough*_


rice paddy daddy said:


> And I would probably lean toward the Garand, "the greatest battle implement ever devised".


:tango_face_grin:


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Never mind me; I am just an observer of this thread, which has gone a tad off course. :vs_laugh: Still, I have some thoughts as well as some experience, both in civilian life as well as military.

My M16 always ran well (M16A1) because I kept it extremely clean and oiled. Others had malfunctions. My M21 (sniper version of the M14) wasn't nearly as much a princess as the M16.
The M21 ate a caliber of ammo that put the target's dick in the dirt, no questions asked. The M16's ammo was lighter and smaller, so more ammo could be carried. That's a plus, if you can keep your finger off the group-therapy selector. That's a waste of ammo and it doesn't compensate for being a bad shot or for being impatient.

Bottom line in my mind? Need a tactical rifle? Going to be kicking in doors and the like? Take the AR. Need a battle rifle? You'd better grab your M14 and join your buddies in battle.

While arguing whether a claw hammer is better than a jack hammer it's wise to consider the job at hand.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I'm sure it would. I don't claim otherwise.
> I recognize the merits of it, and the M1, and the AK, and all the rest.
> 
> Do you acknowledge my points, and understand why I choose the AR as my SHTF choice?
> ...


If you are more comfortable, and more proficient, with an AR, then that would be good for you.

I personally want a rifle with more muzzle energy, better terminal performance. That is why I prefer the .30 caliber. Of the over two dozen rifles I own, other than 22's, the only one that is less than .30 caliber is my Mini 14.
My 8MM Mausers are actually .32 caliber, and a 197 grain 32 caliber soft point hits with authority. I have never shot a man with one, but I'd bet it would only take one center mass to put someone on the ground.
Personally, I can fight just as well with a Winchester 30-30 lever action than I could with a semi auto AR.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> _*cough*_
> You quoted Patton.
> _*cough*_
> 
> :tango_face_grin:


Of course!!
I'm a 5th Infantry Division Red Devil.
And ever since the autumn of 1944 we have been known as "Patton's Red Diamond Devils".
The 5th Infantry, and 4th Armored were with Patton's Third Army longer than any of his other divisions, actually from the beginning to the end. 
We were the ones Patton used to spearhead his army all the way across France, across Germany, and into Czechoslovakia.

The 5th Inf Div made the first assault crossing of the Rhine River since Napoleon. In fact, the 5th crossed so many rivers, in his farewell letter to the Division he said he "was convinced we had webbed feet."

So, yeah, I like to quote Patton. I have very few personal heroes - Patton, Churchill, Eisenhower, and the nameless faceless clerk at Battalion headquarters who typed up my orders to go home from Vietnam. :tango_face_smile:


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> If you are more comfortable, and more proficient, with an AR, then that would be good for you.
> 
> I personally want a rifle with more muzzle energy, better terminal performance. That is why I prefer the .30 caliber. Of the over two dozen rifles I own, other than 22's, the only one that is less than .30 caliber is my Mini 14.
> My 8MM Mausers are actually .32 caliber, and a 197 grain 32 caliber soft point hits with authority. I have never shot a man with one, but I'd bet it would only take one center mass to put someone on the ground.
> Personally, I can fight just as well with a Winchester 30-30 lever action than I could with a semi auto AR.


I would personally prefer a larger caliber too.
In fact, that's why I built a 7" .300AAC AR pistol. It uses the same parts as my full size 16" 5.56 rifle, except for the barrel and gas tube, obviously. I maintain parts interchangeability and get a bigger punch.
Those are the only ARs I own. Each for a different purpose.

Again, when looking for an all-around best suited option for SHTF in the US, it's got little to do with the effectiveness of one gun or caliber over another.
I have lots of other guns that are not ARs. I like them a lot, and they are great for their intended purpose.
But none of them will be dropped by my expected enemy.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Of course!!


I have a sneaking suspicion that you avoided my point, rather than missed it.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I have a sneaking suspicion that you avoided my point, rather than missed it.


That is a subject he has discussed since I've been here. He talks about it a lot so this wasn't just for the present discussion.

Some own what they own for precisely the reasons you stated. They are popular, readily available and easy pick up when the situation calls for such.


----------



## SRU Viper (Mar 17, 2020)

Well this has been a fun read.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

Do we get to start the 9mm vs 40 cal argument now?
How about the Glock vs Sig pissin contest?


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

Chiefster23 said:


> Do we get to start the 9mm vs 40 cal argument now?
> How about the Glock vs Sig pissin contest?


No dishwasher safe Block for me thank you. 1911-A1 thank you.


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

I actually use dawn dish washing liquid to clean my glock barrels. :vs_smirk:


----------



## hawgrider (Oct 24, 2014)

Chiefster23 said:


> I actually use dawn dish washing liquid to clean my glock barrels. :vs_smirk:


Any spotting or etching from the dishwasher?


----------



## RubberDuck (May 27, 2016)

Cleared up that confusion too I own one of each but edc a 45acp


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Well, I'm not stuck in 1918, I DO have one 9MM pistol.:tango_face_smile:
A Walther P-1, which is a post WWII P-38 with the only difference being an alloy frame. Mine is an ex-West German Army example made in 1974.
I'm thinking about concealed carry since for a revolver guy the function is familiar - draw, point, shoot. Carry with one in the chamber safety off.

And, as far as rifles, we all know Townsend Whelen said "The 30-06 is never a mistake.":vs_cool:


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

Kauboy said:


> To anyone who things their gun won't break, Murphy is packing his stuff and heading for your place right now...
> 
> ... Your best option is to have the gun that can be fixed in the field and matches the gun of the fellow assuming room temperature next to you. When yours breaks, you already know how to run his, and can continue to fight. Fix your own later, if you so choose, from the parts that are common among the dozens to hundreds around you ...


Exactly why AR's and Glocks make so much sense in the USA.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Hemi45 said:


> Exactly why AR's and Glocks make so much sense in the USA.


That's the exact reason I bought the visual abomination that is the Glock 19. I'm a fan of Beretta lines and curves.
But seeing that the 92F is no longer the #1 handgun carried by PDs in this country, I accepted the reality that the Glock is everywhere, and if I want to take advantage of the spoils, I needed to know how to run it and have compatible gear for it.
After losing mine to an unfortunate incident, I've yet to replace it, but have been giving it stronger consideration in the last few months.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

I don't care about the caliber debate either. I don't base my SHTF decisions on that kind of nonsense arguing.

The 9mm is the most widely used caliber by LE and military sidearms in the US. It is not the most effective caliber, but it will be ubiquitous if SHTF happens.
Have a gun that can eat it, but carry whatever floats your little boat as an EDC.
We don't need to go off on another "mine's universally better than yours" tangent, since that is completely irrelevant to the topic.
If you want an option that can be repaired with widely available parts, that is currently the Glock 17 or 19, as it is one of the most popular models used by PDs in the U.S.
When that changes, and we know it will, I will adjust to the new standard.
Be practical folks.
Or, as Bruce Lee said, "Be water, my friend."


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Far more Ruger hand guns out there than glock. heck some Ruger hands guns sell more than the entire glock line up.


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

Smitty901 said:


> Far more Ruger hand guns out there than glock. heck some Ruger hands guns sell more than the entire glock line up.


I'll have to take your word for the sales volume but part of what makes Glock so desirable (apart from rugged reliability) is the magazine from the 17 also feeds the 19 and 26. I'm no shill for Glock but I own a few for the reasons outlined above.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Hemi45 said:


> I'll have to take your word for the sales volume but part of what makes Glock so desirable (apart from rugged reliability) is the magazine from the 17 also feeds the 19 and 26. I'm no shill for Glock but I own a few for the reasons outlined above.


 glock was the amsoil of hand guns. they sold to LE agency's well below cost to build a market. They mastered the internet forum flood. glock is a good hand gun not the greatest. glock cover up issue failed to aggressively go after recalls. Ruger on the other hand is still searching for hand guns sold before many were born. And the recalls items would never have been an issue except in today's world.
One of the most reliable full size hand gun's is the FS92. 
Not long ago it was reported Ruger had sold more LCP380 than all the glocks line. Man buys what a mans buys . I just did not fall for glocks market game.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> glock was the amsoil of hand guns. they sold to LE agency's well below cost to build a market. They mastered the internet forum flood. glock is a good hand gun not the greatest. glock cover up issue failed to aggressively go after recalls. Ruger on the other hand is still searching for hand guns sold before many were born. And the recalls items would never have been an issue except in today's world.
> One of the most reliable full size hand gun's is the FS92.
> Not long ago it was reported Ruger had sold more LCP380 than all the glocks line. Man buys what a mans buys . I just did not fall for glocks market game.


Ruger did the same sort of marketing scheme.

With us(PD) they offered to give us all the guns free, no trade ins if we would allow them to use us in their advertisement.

They wanted to say that we chose them above all others because of, blah, blah , blah. Was a SS revolver.

I was carrying a S&W 66 at the time, they were told to stuff it,

Glock came around much later and offered us a one to one trade, nothing else, with the same ad requirement.

I was not going to give up my S&W 639 for that Gen. 1 KLUNK.

Somewhere in that era, H&K came to us with a good deal, which I took.

I got a H&K 93 with 20 mags for $100.00, had to write a review of it as a PO.

I was going to get an MP-5, but took the 93 instead with both stocks.

Now I do own a couple of glocks a G17 and a G23, but did not buy them, came from 2 different estates.

Ended up putting night sights and Lone Wolf SS barrels in/on them.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Smitty901 said:


> Not long ago it was reported Ruger had sold more LCP380 than all the glocks line. Man buys what a mans buys . I just did not fall for glocks market game.


The Ruger LCP 2 is the only piece of synthetic I own.
No rifles, no shotguns, no other handguns have synthetic parts since I got rid of my New England Firearms Handi Rifle 22 Hornet that had a syntetic stock.

Why would a full size 1911 guy buy an LCP 2?
Where we live, a full size anything plus an extra 20-30 rounds is totally unnecessary. I had been pocket carrying snub nose revolvers in 38, 357, or 44 Special, but even they got to be heavy and lumpy in the pocket.
I tried the little Ruger - small, flat, and light.

I know Ruger has sold over a million LCP's and LCP 2's.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Smitty901 said:


> Far more Ruger hand guns out there than glock. heck some Ruger hands guns sell more than the entire glock line up.


If you go back several decades, then sure. If you look at the past 20 years going forward, then I would say no way. World wide sales of Glock crushes Ruger without a doubt. As far as mechanical concerns/issues, the only one Glock ever had was that some early Glock could fire when dropped on a hard surface on occasion. This was fixed years ago.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

RedLion said:


> If you go back several decades, then sure. If you look at the past 20 years going forward, then I would say no way. World wide sales of Glock crushes Ruger without a doubt.


I tend to agree.
There was a shift about 20 years ago after Glock worked out their issues with the first generation, and we have seen departments adopt it more an more since then.
Ruger makes fine weapons, no doubt. But I've tried to keep this topic on target with the focus that your SHTF carry should be what is most likely to be found in the wild.
As far as handguns go, article after article reveals this will be Glock for the next few years at least.
US Law Enforcement Agencies Make the Switch to GLOCK Pistols
US Secret Service switching to 9mm Glock pistols
Police Sidearms: The Handguns of America's 10 Largest Departments (5/10 choose Glock)
A growing number of US law enforcement agencies make the switch to GLOCK pistols
Glock Remains Top Choice for Law Enforcement Sidearm in 2018


> The number of law enforcement agencies using Glocks grew by more than a dozen during the first quarter of 2018, and the company's handguns are currently the preferred pistol for *65 percent* of departments nationwide.


When that changes, we should be prepared to change. Keep and daily carry whatever you like. I'm not arguing that. But keep an eye on what is the most popular, and plan accordingly. For me, that means owning and training with the popular thing. For some, it may just mean being familiar with it. It is the poorest choice to simply discount and ignore it.
I'm not trying to beat people into submission. *I'm NOT arguing that Glock is "better". Or ARs for that matter.* I'm just arguing the point that you should be aware of what you may need to use if the world goes to hell. We are "preppers". We prepare, right? Training should be a part of that. Learn to use what you will find, or do one better and already have gear that functions with what you will find.


----------



## SRU Viper (Mar 17, 2020)

I'll wade in a little bit pistol wise, however it's just my experience and people are free to agree/disagree of course. When I want to play at the range, I take my SA Lightweight Operator. It's fun to run 1911 style pistols but I wouldn't trust it with my life. 
When I carry, I always carry a Glock and its usually my Glock 19. It needs to work all the time every time....And that's what it does. 
When I'm at work, I carry a Glock 17 as it's the pistol mandated and provided by the client.
I also have a G35 with a KKM 9mm match barrel and Trijicon RMR red dot. I love that gun  but it's a little large for concealed carry for me.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

SRU Viper said:


> I'll wade in a little bit pistol wise, however it's just my experience and people are free to agree/disagree of course. When I want to play at the range, I take my SA Lightweight Operator. It's fun to run 1911 style pistols but I wouldn't trust it with my life.
> When I carry, I always carry a Glock and its usually my Glock 19. It needs to work all the time every time....And that's what it does.
> When I'm at work, I carry a Glock 17 as it's the pistol mandated and provided by the client.
> I also have a G35 with a KKM 9mm match barrel and Trijicon RMR red dot. I love that gun  but it's a little large for concealed carry for me.


I carried a 1911 in the Army. Yeah. I'm old. So what? I have no problem trusting my 1911s with my life. 230 grains of lead in someone's body is going to make them stop and ponder priorities. 
A few months ago, however, I bought a Glock 34 from a friend. He did a trigger job on it. I've decided that 134 grains surgically placed will prevent someone from contemplating anything at all.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> I tend to agree.
> There was a shift about 20 years ago after Glock worked out their issues with the first generation, and we have seen departments adopt it more an more since then.
> Ruger makes fine weapons, no doubt. But I've tried to keep this topic on target with the focus that your SHTF carry should be what is most likely to be found in the wild.
> As far as handguns go, article after article reveals this will be Glock for the next few years at least.
> ...


This, of course, presumes that in a conflagration as big as you are sketching that you would remain alive long enough to "pick one up" after yours breaks or runs out of ammo or whatever.


----------



## Hemi45 (May 5, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> This, of course, presumes that in a conflagration as big as you are sketching that you would remain alive long enough to "pick one up" after yours breaks or runs out of ammo or whatever.


Well, he might and regardless, you can't knock a guy for maintaining a positive outlook


----------



## RubberDuck (May 27, 2016)

Hemi45 said:


> Well, he might and regardless, you can't knock a guy for maintaining a positive outlook


I might hit the lottery and bang a super model not likely but can't blame be for buying a ticket


----------



## SRU Viper (Mar 17, 2020)

Denton said:


> I carried a 1911 in the Army. Yeah. I'm old. So what? I have no problem trusting my 1911s with my life. 230 grains of lead in someone's body is going to make them stop and ponder priorities.
> A few months ago, however, I bought a Glock 34 from a friend. He did a trigger job on it. I've decided that 134 grains surgically placed will prevent someone from contemplating anything at all.


Denton. When I say it needs to "fire all the time, every time" that's exactly what I mean. I don't doubt that you trusted your 1911, lot's of people have. However, I have a different outlook on what a pistol needs to do so no biggie. Hell, they make conventional forces carry the Beretta's :crying: 
Knowing that I might transition to it at any moment is a big ask. I need to be sure it will perform as advertised. All the time. It needs to run 500+ rounds every single day, 7 days a week, when doing workups. No stoppages. Then it needs to perform on any mission profile it's carried on. 1911's haven't been able to perform in today's operational tempo for years. The one's that did last for a little while were not the run of the mill 1911 and had a shitload of gun smithing/money spent to keep them running. Kimber 1911's come to mind. Frames were failing due to the crazy amount of rounds being fired in training and operationally by FR.

Like I said, just my view. Thought I'd add the additional comments above to show were I'm coming from.
And yes, I was also won over on the G35 after a good friend of mine let me use his. I left the range, stopped at a local store and bought one on the way home.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Hemi45 said:


> Well, he might and regardless, you can't knock a guy for maintaining a positive outlook


In combat, everyone thinks that it's the OTHER guy who will get hit. :vs_laugh:

It's just human nature.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> This, of course, presumes that in a conflagration as big as you are sketching that you would remain alive long enough to "pick one up" after yours breaks or runs out of ammo or whatever.


Well, naturally... lain:
It also presumes we don't just take a tank round to our entire cache and get blown to kingdom come from the word "go".
Playing the "what if" game is only so helpful. In the end, we all lose.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

I am a realist. I know how fast, and sudden, things turn straight to crap.
Which is why I would never stand and fight unless I had 20 or so well trained close friends with me.

Since that will never happen, I’ll be the guy who quietly slips away and takes shots at targets of opportunity only when conditions are favorable for me. 
I understand guerrilla warfare. During the day, I’m just the old farmer, at night I’ll shoot you in the back.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

LEO for the most part carry what they are told to both caliber and brand . What is chosen is most often based on price, inside deals and perks. glock mastered that.


----------



## KUSA (Apr 21, 2016)

Glocks have the wrong grip angle. I just can’t get used to them. I’ll stick with my Sigs.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

As for the Purge. Milwaukee and Madison Dey be killn as always. Dey be dealing and stealn. LE just let it go.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> To anyone who things their gun won't break, Murphy is packing his stuff and heading for your place right now...
> 
> The AK would be crap for a weapon of choice in this country during a real SHTF scenario. Most of them are built incorrectly, and the ones that are built right are inaccurate at distance by function of the correct design.
> If the bolt breaks, and it will, you can't drop another one in. You're SOL. You have to get a whole new gun, or spend time hand fitting a new bolt. Snap a trunion cuz your cheap ass bought one that uses steel? You're boned.
> ...


We need a Half-Like button. I liked half of this a lot. :vs_lol:


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

Denton said:


> I carried a 1911 in the Army. Yeah. I'm old. So what? I have no problem trusting my 1911s with my life. 230 grains of lead in someone's body is going to make them stop and ponder priorities.
> A few months ago, however, I bought a Glock 34 from a friend. He did a trigger job on it. I've decided that 134 grains surgically placed will prevent someone from contemplating anything at all.


You are running 134 grn bullets in your 9mm? I am not sure I have ever seen any. Specialty bullet? The very first Glock I ever shot was a 34. Didn't care for it at the time, although it was very accurate. Flash forward to today, and I own several Glocks.


----------



## stevekozak (Oct 4, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> I am a realist. I know how fast, and sudden, things turn straight to crap.
> Which is why I would never stand and fight unless I had 20 or so well trained close friends with me.
> 
> Since that will never happen, I'll be the guy who quietly slips away and takes shots at targets of opportunity only when conditions are favorable for me.
> I understand guerrilla warfare. During the day, I'm just the old farmer, at night I'll shoot you in the back.


What happens if the enemy force is one that does not like daytime farmers? :vs_smirk:


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

stevekozak said:


> What happens if the enemy force is one that does not like daytime farmers? :vs_smirk:


Well, neither did the Americans in Vietnam. But they/we were looking for military age men, we left the old men alone.
I'm 71.
See how that works?


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

stevekozak said:


> You are running 134 grn bullets in your 9mm? I am not sure I have ever seen any. Specialty bullet? The very first Glock I ever shot was a 34. Didn't care for it at the time, although it was very accurate. Flash forward to today, and I own several Glocks.


124 grain. Surprised my posts typed on my phone are anything less than gibberish. :tango_face_grin:


----------

