Tag Archives: theory

Stepping off the porch

Posted on by

I must say, for a fella whose blog is, nominally, not a ‘preparedness’ blog, once in a while Joel hits it outta the park with this simple-but-profound line:

“…I have a strict policy of never leaving my porch unless I’m ready to go to war.“

Now, for context, Joel lives in the lonely desert and in this case he was talking about the risks posed to him and his dog by bold coyotes. But…there’s some good sense in that statement, especially if your anticipated threat is more than just a bunch of tweaker-lookin’ dogs. (Or, as someone once opined, “coyotes look like German Shepherds on heroin”.)

I commented that my similar policy is that I don’t leave my house without the gear necessary to either fight my way back to it, or to abandon it. And, broadly, thats true. When I leave for work every morning I have my Bag O’ Tricks which covers a pretty wide range of possibilities. I also have a good bit of gear (including a thundertoy or three) stashed in my truck. And, finally, I’ve a carbine and plate carrier discreetly tucked away next to my desk at work. Power failure, road closures, civil unrest, earthquake, whatever….if I’m away from my house, odds are I’ve got the gear handy to enable me to either get back to my house or to survive away from it.

I’m pretty sure that by just about anyone’s standards that might appear a bit extreme, but thats the lifestyle I’ve chosen and it makes me….calmer. The odds of me ever having to Omega Man my way from my workplace to my houseplace are virtually none, and I know that…but thats still a more-than-zero chance. On the other hand, it is orders of magnitude more likely that I will be caught away from  my house when here’s a power outage or some other event that precludes the normal ease-of-travel.

Give you an example…back in ’97 a bunch of tanker cars derailed at the town of Alberton, about 30 miles down the road, and the folks there had about the same experience as Chernobyl evacuees. It’s not impossible that a hazardous chemical spill of some type, accidental or purposeful, will shut off my ability to return to my house. Thus, I need to be able to function with whatever resources I have with me or that I can count on at other locations.

And it could be something other than a chemical spill. Police activity, civil unrest, a plane crash, earthquake, gas leak, bridge collapse, etc….all are reasonably possible events that would inhibit my ability to return.

When I leave my house, it’s not necessarily ‘prepared for war’ but it is prepared to not return for a few days at least. In a time of crisis, my house is, for now, the safest place for me to be. It may not always be that way, but for now thats the way it is. It’s the boat that keeps me afloat in the sea of uncertainty. Why would I want to take my chances away from it if I didnt have to..Never get out of the boat.

You do you, of course. What works for me (or that I think works for me) may not be something that you think works for you. But I feel that being prepared every time I leave the house to not come back gives me options. I like having options.

 

 

CR123, AA batts, and desert hermit logisitcs

Posted on by

FriendOfTheBlog(tm), Joel, had himself a bump-in-the-night encounter a few weeks back that I mentioned here. I mentioned it because it underscores the utility of weapon-mounted lights and how, in some circumstances, they are just what the doctor ordered.

What I didn’t mention was that I gifted Joel one of these so that he could light something up without pointing a carbine at it, if he needed to. We all know the rules about not pointing a gun at anything you don’t want to destroy, so I figure that a high-capacity-intensity flashlight would be handy for when you’re not sure that whatever is out in the dark is something you want to be pointing a loaded gun at.

Anyway…

There was a comment in the post Joel made about how, given his hermit location, finding CR123 batteries for this light, in case its rechargeable batteries zonked out, would be a difficulty and he would be better serviced with the dirt-common alkaline AA-batts. I politely disagreed because, in my experience, every Home Depot, hardware store, gun store, and supermarket carries CR123 batts.  But..I’ve been wrong before, so I’m open to the possibility that perhaps my experience in the matter differs from what that experience would be if I lived in Joel’s neighborhood.

But the crux of the matter, really, is this: is a device that runs on CR123 batts a liability over a similar device that runs on AA-batts? In terms of price? In terms of availability?

One of the points brought up in the comment was that AA batts were cheaper than CR123. This is quite true. But, as I pointed out, it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison. AA alkaline batteries are cheaper than CR123 lithium batteries. But when you compare AA lithium batteries to CR123 lithium batteries, there is a niggling difference in price. A quick perusal of Amazon showed Energizer lithium AA’s and lithium CR123’s being pretty close to each other in bulk price.

The scarcity issue may have some merit, but CR123 batteries are easily ordered in bulk from Amazon during a time of non-apocalypse, and because of their lithium construction they can be stored longer than alkaline batteries with less self-discharge. (And, I am told, lithium batteries tend to puke all over themselves much less than the alkaline batteries do.)

The advantage to the AA-batt is that if you run out of lithium AA’s for your device you can, usually, still use the dirt-common AA alkalines….assuming its not eight years after the apocalypse when they’ve all self-discharged or leaked into a pile of crud.

All of this underscores that for your battery needs you need to think about things like this. I standardized a long time ago on three battery sizes – AA, D, CR123. Almost every device I could possibly need….headlamps, flashlight, gun sight, weaponlight, radio, freezer alarm, etc…can be had running off one of those types of batteries. Some devices, like a high-intensity weapon light, have power requirements that can’t be met with anything except a CR123. While there are weaponlights out there that will run on other battery sizes, it seems like they usually don’t have the same level of brightness intensity unless they make up for their non-CR123 power requirement by using a much larger quantity of batteries. (In other words, instead of using two CR123, it may need six or eight AA’s.)

Then there’s the matter of rechargeable devices. More and more stuff is of the USB-charger variety. The flashlight I sent Joel, for example, has its rechargeable battery charged through USB. I rather like this feature because it means in a pinch I can charge it from anything that would charge a cellphone….a small solar panel, a battery pack, etc, etc. But, as we all know, rechargeable batteries have a limited amount of duty cycled before the battery starts to no longer hold as much of a charge. This is mitigated a bit by the fact that the package I sent Joel has a spare battery and should, I would think, last probably the rest of his life. But even if the batteries died an ignoble death, the light can still run off CR123’s…which brings us back around to a few paragraphs earlier.

The person who commented on there being a disadvantage, in Joels case, to the CR123 batteries has a valid point – resupply is definitely a concern. But, in my opinion, that potential risk or failure point is mitigated by the the CR123 being able to be long-terms stored meaning that a supply of them purchased now should take care of things. Also, for what I was looking for – a compact, handheld light with tremendous brightness – wasn’t as readily available in a non-CR123 version while still meeting the compact requirements.

Anyway, some food for though there.

 

Meeting life in a violent new way

Posted on by

Whenever someone points out how things ‘now’ are different from how things were ‘then’ it raises a question: are things really different or are we just more aware of it than we were before.

Let me give you an example: I want to say ‘it seems like the world today is more violent and unpredictable than it was ten years ago’. So the question arises: is the world more violent and unpredictable today than it was ten years ago or is the world just as violent and unpredictable as its always been and we are just more aware of it now because of increased media about it?

I try to keep a close eye on the news and it is my opinion that the world is more violent and unpredictable now than it was ten years ago. Yes, there’s more news coverage of violence these days than there used to be, so it would seem reasonable to think that the level of violence and crime is really fairly static and we’re just hearing about it more. But…I disagree.

Given the outrageousness of the violence and crimes that seem to be taking place with alarming regularity these days, it would seem likely that even when we didnt have the media coverage we have today we would have heard about these atrocities. So…I think we hear about violence and crime more these days because we are experiencing more violence and crime.

But its not just in the media, I also just look around me and see the same thing. The town I live in has had an exponential increase in homeless people. And, being a college town, we’ve just pandered to them and made things so easy for them that we have become a vacation destination for the state’s homeless. And, naturally, these aren’t just the usual homeless but the crazy, screaming-on-a-street-corner kind of homeless. Now, I’ve lived in this town for thirty years and I know darn well that we did not have this level of dangerous homeless people twenty years ago.

So, as far as I’m concerned, yeah the world is a more dangerous and violent place these days. So what does that mean in the long run? Good question.

It means that you’re not being paranoid, you’re not being delusional, you’re not being anti-social, and you’re not being crazy by elevating your personal level of situational awareness and taking precautions. Maybe nowadays you carry an extra magazine of ammo that you didnt normally carry before. Maybe you stop and take a hard look at your surroundings before you get out of your car at the WalMart parking lot. Maybe you walk around your house and double-check the doors are locked before you go to bed at night. Maybe avoid crowds and do’t let anyone you don’t know get within arms reach of you. Whatever you do to increase your awareness of the possble threats around/to you, know that you’re not being overly dramatic. The world really is getting more impolite and only the foolish ignore it.

That pesky upcoming bleak future

Posted on by

Well, I ordered some new grips for the Ruger Redhawk .357, they arrived,  and I’ll take it out tomorrow and see if that makes a difference. While I’m at it, I’ll also take the CZ457 ‘Jaguar’ .22 out for a spin and see how quiet a 29″ barrel is with another 8″ of suppressor on the end. I expect it to sound like a staplegun.

I didn’t watch the State of The Union speech yesterday because, well, it’s pretty predictable and I saw no need to rush into my first heart attack. Nice of whoever was feeding Biden lines to make sure to get that whole ‘assault weapon’ thing in there. I am amazed at how the Democrats never seem to learn that it’s not an issue that does them any favors. Republicans do the same thing with the abortion issue, and Libertarians just can’t let go of their drug legalization fantasies.

I have spent the last thirty years as a survivalist and I do think that every year I say “this coming year is the one that will justify everything I’ve done”. And…I’ve been right every year.This year will be no different.

Is the economy ‘the envy of the world’ as was said at the speech? Maybe. I suppose when everyone is dying of cancer the guy with ‘only’ diabetes is the envy of everyone else. But if you ran the question of ‘are things better now than they were four years ago’ I think you’d have a strong case for a negative response. Inflation, interest rates, foreign affairs, crime, and the price of gas….there’s a bit to look back at fondly a bit over four years ago.

Nothing is perfect, though, and we tend to look at the past with a bit of rose-tint. The future, on the other hand……is there anyone who thinks good things are in store? “Good” will be defined as things not going as badly as we expected.

As the man(?) said, the avalanche has started…it is too late for the pebbles to vote.There’s no magic pill that’s going to just make things better. Even if you elected the perfect candidate, you can’t unscramble these eggs overnight. No matter who gets elected, it’s still going to be a bumpy ride…just a question of whether its a bumpy ride towards the better or a bumpy ride towards the worse. Either way: bumpy ride.

But, hey, those are just observations and musings. What’s the useful part? I suppose the useful part is that it’s worth noting that no matter who gets elected, the ride is still gonna be humvee-at-55-mph bumpy. So don’t let your guard down thinking that ‘after the election the threat will be reduced’. Nope. Nada.

I’ll continue to do what I’ve always done: stay on top of food and supplies, avoid debt and liabilities, sock away cash and cash-like instruments, be ready for things to go (further) downhill, but also be prepared for them not to. What not to do is get complacent and think there’s a light at the end of the tunnel because someone is going to get/notget re-elected.

Tomorrow, in addition to the range, I’m heading to Winco, CostCo, and WalMart, and continue to keep the pantry full, the gas cans topped of, and supply shelves stocked. Then I’m going to spend time in my budget spreadsheet and make sure I’ve got enough cash tucked away for an emergency. And then it’s a trip to pick up some precious metals. And when it’s all over, I’ll feel like I have some control over my future instead of just being a victim of it. I recommend you do something similar. Weekends are two days: one to do what you want and one to do what you need. Invest a few hours in a more resilient future for you and your loved ones.

Pre-TEOTWAWKI survivalism, a.k.a. ‘life’

Posted on by

If you polled a group of people about what ‘survivalists’ or ‘preppers’ do, I would wager that the majority of answers are something along the lines of ‘they prepare to survive and live through the end of the world (or some flavor of it).” Now, this is a reasonable, albeit uninformed, opinion to have. I mean, we have camouflage, guns, ammo, bunkers, night vision, freeze dried food, livestock, gold coins, etc, etc. These are things that, normally, are kinda regarded as ‘end of the world’ items. Apocalypse is nigh? Get thee some chickens and rabbits. That sort of thing.

But I disagree. You, right here right now, are engaged in survivalist activity. When everyone is driving their car down to ‘E’, you’re never letting it get below half-full (or half-empty, I suppose). When people blissfully walk out the door of their houses unarmed, you’re slipping some thundertoy in your pocket. They’re buying jet skis and big screens, you’re paying off debt and saving cash. In short, even before the bombs drop and the pathogens spread, you’re engaged in various acts of survivalism.

Survivalism is giving yourself as much advantage as possible for when something big and bad happens. If we were to sum up the nature of survivalism in one word, one idea, it would be resilience. For most anticipated unfortunate events we can’t be 100% proofed against them..a lot of that stuff is out of our control. But, while we can’t control what happens to us, we can control our response to it.

An example… I worry about being unemployed. I increase my resilience to that by trying to do a good job at work, but also by living within my means, keeping as much money as possible, and making sure I’m ready to go find new work if I have to. By not carrying debt, keeping plenty of cash, and keeping my skills up to date, I increase my resilience to losing a job. Contrast this with someone who lives off their credit cards, spends everything as fast as they get it, and never develop or grow professionally.

Another example…when I take road trips my biggest concern is getting stuck somewhere due to bad road conditions, fuel issues, vehicle problems, etc, etc. I increase my resilience to these threats by carrying water, extra fuel, backpacking gear, food, cash (notice that money is a multitool for pretty much every emergency), and that sort of thing. Contrast this with someone who just blithely hops in their truck for a four-hour drive and winds up running out of gas when the gas stations are closed, gets stuck on a closed highway due to snow, or winds up on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere with a busted u-joint.

The message I’m trying to communicate here is that as a survivalist, you aren’t engaging in survivalist activities after the bombs drop, but that you’re actually engaged in them pretty much 24/7 in your pre-TEOTWAWKI life.

Or..at least…you should be.

Here’s a truth that you can absolutely bank on: before the big EOTWAWKI happens you will face many smaller, personal ones. You may be in one right now. What do they look like? Job loss, divorce, medical emergency, foreclosure, busted transmissions, leaky water heaters, tennis-ball-swallowing dogs, vulnerable loved ones, home invasions, unexpected expenses, 2am phone calls, and a thousand other crises that mean nothing to everyone else but are paramount to you because they are happening to you.

THIS is going to happen ALOT more often.....

THIS is going to happen ALOT more often…..

…than THIS.

But if you’re a bit prepared for those events…youve increased your resilience against them…then, guess what, they aren’t EOTWAWKI events. They’re learning experiences. Or pains in the ass. Or simply and only…inconveniences. And I will happily trade EOTWAWKI for an inconvenience all day long.

So, moral of the story here – being a survivalist is an every day affair.

 

 

It tolls for thee

Posted on by

One of the blogs I read daily is The Field Lab. Basically, a guy in Texas moved to the middle of the desert and lives his life the way he likes…flying drones, building stuff, and doing life on his terms. (Basically, a  more theistic version of Joel over at TUAK.)

Right up until a tumor shows up in his pancreas. As you know, a pancreatic cancer diagnosis is pretty much a one way trip to the forever box. This guy, in less than a month, has gone from “Waitasec Doc, youre telling me….” to checking in to hospice. It happens that fast apparently.

While I am all for doing whatever it takes to preserve my comfort and life in a world that shows ironclad disregard for both, I am very cognizant that, eventually, the music stops. Its easy to forget that, but sometimes stories like this remind us to memento mori.

:::shrug::: Can’t fight it…sooner or later, you gonna dance wit da reaper.

I had planned on mentioning this last week, but I got sidetracked: don’t get so focused on the future (and preparing against it) that you don’t enjoy the moments in the present. Walking through the snow at night, watching stars twinkle, enjoying every sandwich, etc. The day will come when you won’t have the chance to do those things again, so appreciate them when you can.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled apocalypse…….

Standardization

Posted on by

So this popped up in comments from the last post, and there’s a lot to unpack, so it becomes a post all its own:

At what point is it a good idea to standardize?
Lets say you plan to use 308, 9mm, 12g and .22.
Other than some “trade goods”, why carry other calibers…
Having just to have costs – either financially or in storage space.

“Standardize” means different things to different people. Are you standardizing on a particular caliber? A particular firearm? Both? Theres some big differences there. Lets give a couple examples and the problems they incur.

Let’s say you standardize on caliber. Everyone in your family/group/clan/stick/team/cadre/cell//whatever decides that .223 is the way to go. That way everyone can use the same ammo. You’ve got an AR,, Bob has an AUG, Uncle Billy has a Mini-14, and Crazy Steve has a .223 AK. You guys can all eat from the same pot of .223 ammo. And then…Steve loses some magazines in an impromptu bugout, or Billy only had a few to begin with and needs more, or the feed lips on your mags are getting tired and you think its time to swap out for some new mags. Well, you’re all shooting .223, which you standardized on, but everyone has their own magazine logistics. Billy can’t give Steve any of his mags, and your mags wont work in Steves gun, and you see where I’m going with this?

So, maybe you standardize on a gun (‘platform’). We’re all gonna rock the AR. For the most part, we’re all gonna be able to swap parts and accessories if we need. Your AR is 7.62×39, mine is .223, Steve’s is .300 Black, and Billy has gone way off the res and adheres to the 6.8 SPC. But we can all swap small parts, optics, lights, accessories, and we all share the same manual of arms. But…I’ve got plenty of .223, Billy is having trouble finding ammo, Steve can’t give any ammo to you, and .300 Black isn’t found at the local trading post. Again, see where Im going with this?

For me, I’m thinking long term. As far as guns go, my thought process is “If I can’t buy more tomorrow, will I be able to spend the rest of my life with what I have?” And spending the rest of my life with what I have is a lot easier when its common to what my buddies and the locals carry.

For me, the end of the world looks like an AR in .223 and a 9mm Glock. Two platforms so widely supported that you can literally build them from parts you purchase online and a receiver you make yourself.

Other than some “trade goods”, why carry other calibers…

Because not every problem has a solution that can be optimally met with the survivalist’s classic calibers. Do you have livestock? Do you have bears? When you’re woken up at 2am to the sound of your goats/chickens/cattle getting mangled by a bear you’re probably gonna want something with a bit more horsepower than a .223 or .308…and out comes the Marlin in .45-70…or the Mauser in .35 Whelen…or the Browning in .338.

And you may have a gun/ammo preference for hunting that you’re comfortable with. For example, I have rifles in .308 to hunt with but I have sentimental attachment to a 7mm Mauser I had built up years ago and prefer hunting with that. Logistically it makes no sense, but since I have three dozen AR’s, a thousand magazines, and piles of .223 ammo, I don’t feel that having a little boutique gun/caliber is creating a risk for me.

Having extra guns/ammo in ‘non standardized’ calibers does cost, financially and in terms of space. I agree wholeheartedly. But I have the financial and spatial margin to have a few things just because I like them or think theyre cool. I wouldn’t run out the door to WW3 with my Marlin .357, but I enjoy it enough that I don’t mind making room for it in my gun safe. If youre living on a tight budget then, yes, be as practical as you can…get your AR or AK, your 870 or 500, and the ammo you need. But once youve done all that, if theres a toy or two you want where is the harm? Just know that it isn’t part of your preparations and is just a ‘want’.

As for trading purposes…we’re seeing that now. There are plenty of people who went heavy on primers, for example, who are making crazy money selling them off and using the proceeds to plug whatever holes are left in their checklists. If you have the space and money, by all means, have something for trading purposes so that one day you can get the extra ammo or extra mags you thought you didnt need.

But the standardization thing goes beyond guns, as you know. Batteries are a great example. CR123, coin batts, AAA,AA,C,D batteries are needed for all sortsa useful gizmos. Who wants to keep that many different types of batteries around? And its virtually a promise that whatever battery you need will be the one size that youre out of. For me, its AA and D batts. Thats it. Anything that runs on AAA, C, or CR123 is either available in another battery format or is available as a USB rechargeable.

Same for fuels. You have a diesel truck, propane stove, kerosene heater, gas generator, and white gas lanterns.Thats just asking for troubles.

If you can afford the money/space, then logistics may not be an issue for you. You can have a steel building full of cases of different calibers, different size batteries, different types of fuels, and therefore don’t have to worry about each piece of gear requiring a different item to make it work. More power to you. But I want the smallest, most efficient, logistical footprint possible and for me that means standardizing on things.

“Having just to have” does, in fact, cost. But if you’re able to absorb those costs then there’s not really a problem. When I was but a wee baby survivalist in my early 20’s, I had no margin in my life at all. I had an AR, an 870, a 10/22, and a.45. That was it. Money was very tight and rather than pick up a gun I wanted for fun, I kept that basic survivalists battery. Nowadays, money is less of an issue. And I’ve had over 35 years to acquire the basics. So, if I want, I can (and do) buy a gun that absolutely does not fit anywhere into my preparedness plans….and it’s fun. I’ve got the basics covered so thoroughly that if I want a .22 caliber copy of the MP40 to play with at the range, I can do that and not feel that I’ve neglected my other responsibilities.

Not sure that addresses the initial questions, but thats where it took my mind.

Standardization is important. You need to really think it through. When it’s Day 37 in the post apocalyptic world the last thing you want to have to worry about is where to find a replacement oddball-size battery or hard-to-find magazine.”Most common denominator” is the way to think on these matters.

No doubt the comments to this post are gonna be full of “I went with this caliber…I went with these guns..” and everyone will list off their ideal mix. Thats fine, although unnecessary. More interesting comments would be from people who didnt go the ‘usual’ route and why.

Shots fired in anger vs. shots fired in fear

Posted on by

Friend Of The Blog, Tam, over at View From The Porch, had a post up with a link to this post about how the best fight is the one you never get into. Or, in other words, “The best defense is still not being there.” (Whcih, by the way, is my number one rule for surviving a disaster.)

The post basically says what I’ve said all along: that bullet parties are the exception rather than the rule, and that statistically your chance of needing to shoot someone is ‘not zero’ but fairly close.

But I take tremendous issue with this line: “First, (and I know some people are really going to be disappointed about this), you are most likely not going to be in a gunfight tomorrow. I can say this with some confidence, because statistically very few people ever need to fire their gun in anger.”

Can you spot the issue in that statement? It’s the use of the word ‘anger’. As a law-abiding, peaceful, I-won’t-bother-you-if-you-won’t-bother-me citizen there is never a need to fire a gun in anger. We don’t shoot people because we’re angry…thats what bad guys do. I can’t really think of a time when you’re justified in shooting someone because you’re angry, I can only think of times when you’re justified shooting someone because you’re scared.

The correct construction of that argument should be that “…statistically very few people ever need to fire their gun in fear.”

Crom forefend that you ever have to shoot anyone for any reason, but if it happens I believe that “I fired in anger” will not help your case nearly as much as “I fired in fear”. It is inculcated the minute we start looking into self-defense that you only shoot “in the gravest extreme”, as one author says. No one should be firing their gun in anger.

Am I being nitpicky about the use of words in the OP’s post? Maybe ‘fire their gun in anger’ was just an expression. Perhaps. I’m a  bit sensitive on the subject, and I’ve always been a stickler for precision in language. But, I think that, for me, the only reason to shoot someone, heck..or even point a gun at someone, is out of genuine heartfelt fear for my own safety…not out of anger. Be angry after the incident for the bad guy forcing you to do something that, I assume, you did not want to do. Be angry at him for the way he’s now changed your life and your assumptions about. Be angry at a lot of things. But righteous self-defense comes from a place of fear, not anger.

 

The multi-cartridge approach

Posted on by

Tam, over at View From The Porch, had a post about how the .327 Federal pistol will shoot several cartridges – .32 S&W, .32 Long, .32 Mag, .327 Federal, and .32 ACP. She  opined that for those of us scavenging for cartidges after the apocalypse, this multi-caliber functionality might have an appeal.

That got me thinking about where we’ve been and where we’re going in terms of the ‘one-gun, multi-cartridge’ pistol. (Note there’s a difference between multi-cartridge and multi-caliber.)

The most common would be the .357 Magnum – it can fire .38 Special and .357 Magnum (and .38 Colt if you somehow stumble into a hardware store that hasn’t been open since 1927). Ditto .44 Magnum, but I’ll bet there are plenty of .44 Mag shooters who have never even seen a .44 Special. The .45 ACP revolvers shot .45 ACP and .45 AutoRim. Smith and Wesson’s seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time .460 Smith and Wesson will shoot .45 Colt, .454 Casull, and .460 S&W. The guys at Ruger have a Redhawk that’ll shoot .45 ACP or .45 Colt.  The old Ruger single actions in .32-20/.32 Mag, .38-40/10mm, .45 Colt/ACP, 9mm/357 still turn up but you better make sure not to lose that extra cylinder. (And, really, how hard would it be for Ruger to come out with a convertible double action revolver, hm????) The Survivor/Medusa would shoot pretty much anything in the .38/9mm range but it was kind of a sucky gun to begin with. These are all examples (and, yes, I know there are others) of a multi-cartridge gun….but they are all of the same caliber. Once you get into multi-caliber guns things get more interesting.

A multi-caliber revolver is quite a trick to pull off since a ready barrel change would be required and thats a feature found on very few revolvers. (Looking at you, Dan Wesson.)  But, when you get to automatics, its a different story. Ruger had a P89 that was a ‘convertible’ that let you swap between 9mm (.35 caliber) and .30 Luger (.30 caliber) with just a barrel change. HK had a switch barrel auto back in the day (HK4) that let you shoot .22, .25, .32, and .380.

The larger Glocks lend themselves to this sort of thing and I have seen setups where people will have a Glock that can toggle between .40, 10mm, and .357 SIG. When it comes to autos, the real bottle neck is the breechface…the cartridges often need to share a similar rim diameter.

The undeniable king of claiber conversions is the Thompson Contender which is a single-shot but has no equal in terms of versatility and potential caliber changes.

Its an interesting things to ponder….what pistol would give you the highest odds of finding ammunition for it in a crisis? There are people who are quick to point out that if a fella had a 10mm, .38 Super, .40 Smith, or .41 Magnum he could probably have found ammo during the last ‘ammo drought’ when 9mm, .45 ACP, and .357 couldn’t be had for love nor money.

There is a little merit to that. Problem is, if the caliber is obscure enough that people leave in on the shelf during a crisis then it is probably obscure enough that most stores won’t have any of it in the first place. Sure, your local Cabela’s will probably carry .38 Super but the local KwikeeMart probably won’t…so you’re back to square one.

What would be the most common calibers to find for your pistol in a world gone mad(der)? For the autos, I’d think a man with a 9mm would have an easier time of it than a .45 ACP devotee or .40 S&W fan. In revolvers, I’d say the man with a .357 would do pretty well for himself.These are, of course, centerfire cartridges. Probably the most ubiquitous ammo will be .22 LR and having a couple pistols and rifles chambered in that cartridge would be a paramount idea. And, yeah, .22 Mag or .17 Whatever is a zippy little mofo but you’ll find a hundred or more rounds of .22 for every round of any other rimfire you come across.

Of course, some folks figure any cartridge will work if you stockpile enough ammo for it. Well, yeah, that’ll work….if you’re never away from your supply, if your supply remains safe and secure, if you’re supply can last you for your anticipated lifetime, if if if…..

This, in a roundabout way, gets us back to one of those classic survivalist discussions about ‘cartridges for the end of the world’ or some similar hot-stove-league topic. I settled that argument, for me, years and years ago. I’m confident that, given the chamberings of my pistols and rifles, I’ll not have the worst time trying to find ammo down the road.

I was about to say that someday someone will come out with a modular pistol frame that will enable a broad spectrum of caliber and cartridge swaps. And then it occurred to me that we are probably 90% of the way there with SIG’s 320 model that uses the fire control group (FCG) as the legally-defined firearm, letting you buy all the barrel/frame/slide/mag combinations you want without the hassle of federal paperwork.

Hmm. I should investigate that a bit. I’m sure the aftermarket will be jumping onto that platform and getting us all sorts of barrels and whatnot. Hmmm.

 

Sacrificing gear and why your 2nds should be as good as your firsts

Posted on by

A comment on the previous post about the perceived need these days to be more than a little armed at all times….specifically, regarding vehicles:

 If gear or extra guns must be shed, abandoned or cached away from home base in an incident so be it. That excess cargo kit in vehicles should be sacrificial extra inventory items any way. How much is your life worth? It may be stolen from vehicles, the vehicle stolen, or the vehicle totaled out or torched in some scenarios that are indeed possible. It is deadly serious out there, so equip yourself to at least stand a chance.

This ties into something I’ve always found interesting when it comes to survivalism – the notion that ‘just in case’ gear, or gear that you stash away for an unlikely-but-possible emergency can be several orders of magnitude beneath your ‘primary’ gear in terms of quality.

Let’s say that you decide you’re gonna ride out the apocalypse with your Daniel Defense AR, a tricked out Glock, and maybe a sweetly set up Rem 870. But you figure that you should have a stash somewhere else ‘just in case’. And, more often than not, that same person stocks their ‘backup stash’ with a Makarov, an SKS, and whatever extra shotgun they have laying around.

I’ve mentioned this before but heres the crux of things – if you need to resort to your hideaway stash becase you can’t get to your primary gear, then its safe to assume that your life has just taken a turn for the spectacularly ungood, agreed? So, in that time of (literally) existential crisis doesn’t it seem to make sense that you would want the best gear you can have?

Or, put another way, assuming the guns listed above, you show up at Uncle Steve’s cabin, tear up the floorboards, find your Pelican case of hideout gear, and throw the lid open. Would you rather your DD AR and Glock was in that case or would you rather it was an SKS and a Mak?

When people skydive, do you think their backup ‘chute is of lesser quality and construction than their primary ‘chute? When people scuba dive, do you think the respirator and tank that are carried for emergencies are made to a markedly lesser quality?

This is why, personally, I spend the money on such a heavy layer of redundancies. I can take a good Glock 17, a quality AR, and a reliable 870, tuck them into a Pelican case and stick it away in a hideyhole somewhere ‘just in case’ and be just as well armed with that set up as I would be as if I hadn’t had to resort to my stash. And I can do that several times. Sure, stash one and two may never get used, but when its 3am on a dark rainy night and I’m frantically pulling that Pelican case out from under the woodpile while looking over my shoulder for the headlights that I’ve been trying to avoid….that third stash will be worth the expense of the other two.

And this doesn’t just apply to guns. Think about the stuff you keep in your vehicle. I know people who, when they wear out a pair of boots, throw them in the vehicle for emergencies. Dude, an emergency is when youre gonna want a pair of good boots…not ratted out old ones with blown stictching, split seams, and floppy soles.

Your backup gear should be of the same ‘tier’ as your primary gear. Is that expensive? Heck yes. But it’ll seem dirt cheap if you ever need to use it.  Are there exceptions? Maybe. If your primary setup is a SCAR and a Zev Glock you could probably get by with an AR and a regular Glock, for example. But there is not going to be an award given to the person who made it through the apocalypse with the least expensive gear. I have no doubt that a person could make do with bleached-out two-liter pop bottles to store their water in, a ChinaSport 3-9x on their .22, and a Harbor Freight generator. Maybe. But if you didn’t have to, why would you? Don’t you want to give yourself every possible advantage at a time when you’re desperately going to need them?

As the commenter pointed out, yes, you may wind up sacrificing your gear for some reason. And thats gonna suck. But up until that point, you will have a tremendous advantage in your favor.

Everything is sacrificial when it comes to survivalism. Yes you paid $3k for that rifle. But if you go through that checkpoint and you get caught with it you may wind up in jail cell as the world collapses around you. So out the window at 45 mph it goes. It hurts, yes…but look at whats more important.

We purchase things all the time, never use them, and consider it money well spent. Take homeowners insurance for example. If you pay the insurance for 30 years and your house never burns down, was it a waste of money? No, it was not. For those thirty years you transferred your risk to someone else. For those thirty years you were effectively bulletproof if something happened to your house. So, no, not a waste of money. Same thing with any gear you wind up having to ditch or never get to use – it bought you a level of safety and security by its very existence. Worth the expense.

So do it right the first time and get back-up gear as good as your ‘main’ gear. Or if thats really too painful, and I know it can be, get the next step down. But for the love of Crom, don’t just skip the second- and third-best options and sink straight to the Mosins and HiPoints. Scared and desperate future you will thank you for it.