What type of handgun would be best for a SHTF situation?

reply to post by vor78


200 years ago life wouldn't be possible without owning a gun... even though the times have changed I dont feel its wrong to own a gun or to have laws inplace wich condone the owning of guns... however I feel that under NO circumstances should those guns be brought outside when facing humans... you wouldn't only endanger the life of whoever you're targetting but you're also drawing a lifesize bullseye on your and your family's chest if you do so....

reply to post by faceoff85


No doubt, there are risks associated with either stance. As a matter of personal preference, I lean towards your position and wouldn't carry a weapon unless the proverbial SHTF, but I also support each individual's right to decide for themselves if they wish to carry a concealed firearm or not.

I would suggest a .40 cal. Ammo is usually easy to find, its a great round when studying its ballistics. I personally own an FNP40 (FN Herstal). Good stopping power. I would also recommend the XD 45 =) I just picked one up and I'm LOVING it. The 5" barrel really makes a difference in compensation and accuracy. But really, at this point, I wouldn't mull it around in your mind too much, just go get one. A good shooter can be effective with almost any kind of firearm. Glocks, FN's, and Springfields IMO are your best bang for your buck. But as I said, don't sit around thinking about it too long.. get the best pistol you can afford and start practicing. Start at 10-15 yards, and once you can land a half decent grouping at 50 yards, you'll be ready for almost any situation. Good luck and happy shooting!

Oh, and I'd HIGHLY recommend checking out Magpul's video on handguns, lots of great tips to improve your shooting technique.

Originally posted by RussianScientists
reply to post by Tayesin

 

Don't tell me you are going to carry a bow and some arrows to a gun fight.

WOW!!! You must be as dumb as a plank!

When the SHTF, you will be lucky to last 3 minutes.

GUNS = CERTAIN DEATH when the SHTF.

The objective is to AVOID A GUNFIGHT in the first place.

If the SHTF, the state will pull any and every stunt to save itself to avoud collapse.

Most of the worlds guns are already held by the state. It out guns everyone,so the state will push for a gunfight whereever possible. Remember,t here is one gun for every three humans on this planet.

You have a gun, you will be dead. In Katrina, the first thing the military did was to target gun owners and a score of gunseiges that resulted in total family wipe out followed in minutes.

WIth a Bow, you have the option to escape to the countryside and still remain armed if anyone challenges you.

Also, the North American Indian did NOT have English Long Bows, but stupid weedy ones that do nothing but stick an arrow in your arm. An English long bow will go stright through your target's torso and blow his spine out the other side.

reply to post by TheFinalTruth14


Well, I personally don't think it's really smart to have guns, what happens when bullets run out? can you make bullets? Do you even have the know how? I have personally several crosbows and a compound bow and several swords and daggers, those things are very good because one, yes I can make arrows and arrowheads, I can sharpen my daggers and swords, and I will never run out of ammo, as long as there is wood and stone.

Originally posted by JohnJasper

When you start shooting, when do you stop? If you go to the trouble of buying a gun, then how many do you buy and how much ammunition. Why buy the best gun for the situation when it makes more sense to buy weapons for every situation.

There is one gun for every three humans in the world.

If you have a gun and the SHTF, you will be forced into a gunfight. The better your armament, the more seconds you will stay alive. Instead of 10 seconds, perhaps you can raise your family's survivial time over a minute and with really, really deadly automatic chain guns, you could push it over 5 minutes before you, your wife, your kids and your baby are all rotting meat, to be slung into the back of a truck, taken away to a camp, have gas poured over them and be burnt with the rest.

reply to post by LurkerMan


There are several reasons why a long bow is better than a crossbow:-

- You can dismantle a long bow and make it look innocent.
- It is safe around the kids
- It packs a far more lethal punch.

16 gauge shotgun with a wide choke and pump action reload 8 shot magazine. Use 00 buckshot loads. Keep it under your bed. Great for home protection. Pistols are hard to be accurate with. Make sure your kids know whats up. Tell them they can see the gun anytime they want as long as you are there with them. Let them hold it and satiate their curiousity about it. Sport version of an ak 47 is good for longer range if you are willing to take instruction and practice a little.


I have a 22 myself but not really a whole lot of stopping power. It takes instruction and practice to be accurate with this type of weapon.

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Deuteronomy 23:13]

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
Wildey survivor .45 magnum.
Or an Automag .44 magnum.
If TSHTF then these are the Handguns i would like to have around.
Feel lucky?

Actually, just to correct...


Wildey "I want my head blown off by the authrities" survivor .45 magnum.
Or an Automag .44 magnum.
If TSHTF then these are the Handguns we'd like you to have around so you won't be troubling other folk for long.

Pistols and sporting rifles are next to useless if you have to face trained assault units. (The Marines verses Ted Nugent and Wayne LaPierre.) Plus the military has cannons and rocket launchers, heavy armour and air power.

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Deuteronomy 23:13]

Originally posted by Deuteronomy 23:13
16 gauge shotgun with a wide choke and pump action reload 8 shot magazine. Use 00 buckshot loads. Keep it under your bed.

...And then the next day, you are woken up by the loud bang as little Johhny, your four year old kid, blows his brains out by accident.

reply to post by airvicemarshal


I guess if it works for you, go for it.

My primary concern with any bow, however, are the chances of injury to my shoulders, arms or hands. I could still use a rifle or handgun with a few broken fingers, a separated shoulder, or some other somewhat serious injury. It might not be much fun, and I might not be as effective as when fully healthy, but I could still do it. A 60lb draw weight bow under those circumstances? I probably wouldn't be so lucky. That could be the difference between putting food on the dinner plate and going hungry.

I'd also be concerned about the speed of follow-up shots even when healthy.

That's not to say I wouldn't have one, but that no single solution is ever ideal. I do think it has its place, but it has serious limitations and would be better suited to use in conjunction with a firearm.

Originally posted by airvicemarshal
GUNS = CERTAIN DEATH when the SHTF.

That's nonsense.

After Katrina, the Federal gubbmint dispatched the Oklahoma National Guard, along with NOLA city police and a few U.S. Marshals, to go door-to-door in a few New Orleans neighborhoods, confiscating privately owned guns. It was a gubbmint experiment to see if it could be done.

Yes, it could be done, on a very small scale, like, in a couple of neighborhoods, when communications were down.

But you know what the gubbmint learned in that experiment? It learned, number one, that the National Guard was openly questioning the constitutionality of their orders; number two, they learned that within just a very small haul, the private American gun owners were better equipped than the National Guard.

Now, don't give me all that crap about the State owning the most guns — that's a bald-face LIE. Over 80 million American Citizens own nearly 300 million firearms and a bottomless cache of ammo. The American military has nothing to compare: About 2 million active-duty personnel to carry how many guns?

So, you think 2 million military personnel with small arms are going to confiscate nearly 300 million firearms from 80 million gun owners?

Aint happening, Hondo.

The military may as well just commit collective suicide or stage a coup against our socialist regime, because if even one tenth of one percent of all American gunowners fought back, we'd WIPE OUT the American military.

Hey, I'm not looking forward to it, and the military is pretty smart, so they know the intelligent option is to seize control of Washington, topple the regime, then publicly guillotine all the socialists and traitors and scumbags in the great halls of government. Which is practically all of them.

Then they'd move on to the University campuses across the nation, routing out the commies and socialist scumsuckers indoctrinating American youth against America — witness the bonfires of the bodies of liberal professors all across our fair land. It almost brings a tear of joy.

All of this would be a MILLION TIMES EASIER than trying to overthrow the American gunowners.

I mean, I don't know where these anti-gunners get their information. The FACT is that the American Gunowner is the 800 lb Gorilla with twin M4/A3s that is BLOCKING materialization of the Global Union.

So long as one nation retains its sovereignty and independence and freedom, the Global Union can never work.

And THAT'S why these globalist hacks are drumming this propaganda into your heads:

Oh, the American gunowners aren't organized enough, they only have small arms, they aren't motivated enough to stage an insurrection, and the big, bad U.S. Military [who can't even defeat a bunch of towelheads with outdated weaponry in Afghanistan for 9 fekking YEARS] is gonna come slaughter the American gunowners who dare rebel...

Yeah, RIGHT, Ivan.

— Doc Velocity

Nice replies for the most part everyone.

I was expecting at least one "anti-gun" post, and we got it. I'm anti-war and I, too, dislike the idea of having to use one, but I hope I wouldn't hesitate if my life was on the line.

Of course an army could wipe me out, but if they'd be wiping me out with or without a means of protecting myself, I'd rather have a fighter's chance. I think the fact that I felt awkward even asking this question shows how we've been conditioned to think about guns in our country. I think there are perfectly peaceful ways we can go about changing our country for the better, and I hope in the next elections it starts, but I'm not gonna feel bad for owning a gun to protect myself if need be. I don't appreciate some people attempting to make me feel bad about it either.

If you knew me in real life, you wouldn't think I was ever interested in owning one. I'm not a rah-rah military war kinda guy, I'm pretty much the exact opposite. Still, who knows. If I was in a situation where I was forced to protect myself and others, I want safety. And I'm sure if it did come down to it, I'd probably accidentally shoot myself or just completely miss, but it's about having that chance.

I wonder if I made any watch lists with this question?

Shotgun, no way. If you only have a weapon for protection, its better to buy a normal handgun.

I recently got myself a Beretta PX4 Storm en.wikipedia.org...

9mm ammunition is readily available and good for close combat.

Originally posted by TheFinalTruth14
I wonder if I made any watch lists with this question?

Going for the Gold, eh?

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by airvicemarshal


I get the feeling that you do not approve of my selection.
That's ok, you don't have to be around me if the SHTF.
Or are you saying something else?
And why would the Authorities want to blow my head off?
If some-one is threatening your life or my life with a weapon then it's reasonable to want to have as much firepower as you can handle.
I think the Wildey and the Automag fit the bill very much thank you.
At least they are hand-cannons unlike a lot of posts on this thread ie shotguns/crossbows/rifles.

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Cosmic4life]

Originally posted by TheFinalTruth14
I can't add much information in this initial post, so I'll just ask the question. I'm planning on purchasing a gun soon for personal protection and admittingly I've noticed things in the world that make me nervous. Hopefully I am just a paranoid conspiracy theorist, but having protection in these types of situations is probably #1 on everyone's list.

I have no experience with guns, I've never shot one despite living in the good ol' boy southeast. I'm a pacifist but I do completely understand the need for one in today's world and in any martial law situations. Would anyone be willing to recommend a good gun to get? I know money shouldn't be an issue when we're talking about personal safety, but it is. I would like something that is reasonably priced, easy enough to use, lightweight, and something that would work well in any of the scenarios that are discussed on this board.

I only ask this on this board because I was reading some other threads and saw someone mention that they see bad advice being given by gunshop owners. Mind you I have no idea what I would purchase, so I'd like to hear what yall think would work well in a SHTF situation. I apologize if this thread is misplaced on this board, but I don't really know where else to ask.

Well if you have no experience with firearms then I would recommend a 12 gauge shotgun, Remington 870 express pump action. Load it with "00 Buckshot", if you say you have no experience get the "Reduced Recoil Shells", will be much easier for you to handle the lighter recoil then the regular stuff, and with buckshot it spreads a wide pattern so you don't have to be a master in marksmanship to hit the target. Look at any police SWAT team usually the guy that is the first through the doorway when conducting a raid, he's armed with a 12ga. shotgun, that speaks for itself and serves a dual purpose as a universal key for locked doors.

Many home invasions have ended with just one pump of the action and "0" rounds fired its a sound that even people that have never been around guns know of. To be on the recieving end is ill advised for anyone in close range and won't penetrate thorugh your wall and through your neighbors and there neighbors walls which is something you should also consider when purchasing a firearm for home defense.

Originally posted by airvicemarshal
reply to post by LurkerMan

 

There are several reasons why a long bow is better than a crossbow:-

- You can dismantle a long bow and make it look innocent.
- It is safe around the kids
- It packs a far more lethal punch.

but what about all the negatives like....


....its huge...far too big and bulky to be practical in an urban environment

...expensive...both ammunition and parts...

and i would argue a crossbows ability to project weighted metal bolts, and reload/cock with 1 hand trumps the longbows power advantage, at least in my theater.

150lb+ is more accurate too, dont know about the smaller ones.

Hey man, I suggested he get a handcannon to go along with a shotgun.

Infact right now I would suggest a 10 gauge even, not some puny 16 gauge like someone mentioned above. I've maybe seen one or two 16 gauges in the wild around here, they just aren't common and you know what that means? Ammo is uncommon too. 12 gauge is the ultimate though, probably the most common gauge. Just stay away from the gimmicky 3.5 inch 12 gauges. If you want that just get a 10.

But you're right man, screw 9mm. I have nothing personal against it, but you want something that's going to hit like the rage of thor.

Also to airvice, just give it up about the bow. In your hypothetical situation whether you have a bow or a firearm you're screwed, atleast if I have a rifle I can shoot a deer long range for some food.

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Judohawk]