Firearm Forums - Arms Locker banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
9,121 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
or less,no problem at all. I could easily take 2-3 elk a year with 2-4 rds of 223, too. So WHY do you "think" you will "need" so much ammo, hmm? :) Traps, nets, snares, trotlines are far more efficient for taking flesh food than guns are, and half of your diet has to be of plant origin, anyway, or you get sick. So you will only be taking maybe 100 lbs of meat per year, per person, with a gun. Most of that will be livestock or dogs, anyway. So a .22lr suffices. You aint Audie Murphy, and Audie was the first to admit that only LUCK saved him (many times) So, no, you will NOT be getting in lots of fights, where you fire lots of rounds, and survive it, except by LUCK. If you go at it right, by the time you fire even 50 rds of suppressed .22lr's, you will be able to "recover" dozens of guns and hundreds of rounds of ammo. Much of that ammo will be .22lr, and a fair amount of it will be 223. So the fact is, if yoiu are any good at all, you wont need a lot of ammo, to start with. If you AINT any good, you ALSO won''t need much ammo, cause you'll be DEAD before you could fire much of it.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
9,121 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
so? put them in the WOODS, or at NIGHT

trying to SURVIVE, and see how much concentrated firepower they can bring to bear. :) After a week or so of such stupidity, it won't be MUCH, count on that. Most of their ammo will be GONE, many of them will be dead or wounded, the rest will be busy trying to purify water, gather food, etc. You never saw me advocting taking on ANY body that a silenced .22 ambush couldn't handle.
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top