- Messages
- 5,069
- Reactions
- 11,352
" and I wasn't "afraid" of any martial law or SHTF scenarios, "
Think about this. This is apples to apples isn't it?
I mean why else would you only be allowed 3 guns?
I thought this was a good comparison ,3 for this or 3 for that,but if the second scenario was to happen the first wouldn't be far behind
I suppose that's why I just chose the 3 and not a second 3
I was looking at it more as a hypthetical mental exercise. A Supreme Court ruling that says that as long as you're allowed to own "A Gun" it's not an infringement on your right to keep and bear arms. Scary thing is that such a ruling isn't far fetched. We're one justice away from the Supreme Court eviscerating our rights if they so chose. It's bad enough that a conservative justice screwed us with Obamacare "it's a tax not a law" BS.
In a real SHTF / end of civilization / martial law scenario - all gun ownership would likely be outlawed, so it's just as illegal to own one as three as thirty, so if someone was inclined to keep and bear arms in such an event, you would be only limited to your own comfort level, or the level to which you could conceal the collection when you weren't using them. I'd think that if a fellow (or lady) were much good with one gun, it'd be a fairly easy task to come by others, possibly along with some "used" and "slightly damaged" armor, spare mags, ammo, etc. The enemy might not be wearing red coats in the next revolution (if there is one - I pray not) but they might be wearing blue helmets or black ninja warrior outfits.
The problem with "just three" is that you have too many categories of typical modern weapons to choose from - bolt action rifles, semi auto rifles, semi auto shotguns vs pump guns, semi auto handguns, revolvers, lever action rifles, break opens, pump rifles... you've got to seriously think about what your most realistic uses would be and how likely you were to exchange gunfire with others vs collecting food.
If you weren't concerned with engaging armed and armored opponents at close distances you could forego a semi auto for a good bolt gun. Maybe with a suppressor. Good meat collector and good for removing hostile targets from a distance. Or if ammo is scarce and you've got a good supply of a revolver ammo you could opt for a lever gun / wheel gun combo for ammo commonality and have a shotgun for defending against lightly armored hostile entities as well as putting meat on the table.
If you think you're going to be facing a homegrown Falluja or you're anticipating defending against hordes of hostile thugs, the semi auto rifle would be of more value. It'd still work for collecting meat, although depending on caliber and configuration maybe not as well as the bolt gun. Depends on the user.
Or a guy could have a semi rifle, a bolt rifle, and a pistol and forego the shotgun option. I personally feel that a concealable, reliable handgun would be one of the most important SHTF/TEOTWAKI firearms to have - it could always be on you, hidden from the public eye. In a martial law scenario the handguns would be the easiest to hide from a non-permissive authority. It would be more more difficult to walk around with a slung rifle, and short of walking around looking like Neo from the Matrix with a big trench coat, or running around with something like a Kelty pack on your back, you're not concealing a readily usable rifle on your person, certainly not without drawing unwanted attention to yourself. So 3 guns really means you need to choose two long guns to round out the list. Then again, a guy could be a terrible shot with a rifle and much better with a pistol, so he might want two or three handguns and skip the long guns...
Way too many possibilities and way too much thought to have to really choose just three. Thankfully we don't have to really do that!