SHTF : Why AR's ?
- Thread starter Slowbalt
- Start date
- Status
This is not like they only wanted a pair of $70 Levi's and then left everything else untouched.
Monetary loss or possible monetary loss in this case can be to the extent of the store being cleaned out and thrashed by looters. Unless you actually have an insurance company, which would pay out for damages happening under a riot you could be up s**t creek. You might not have the money to renovate the store or be in a financial position to have the store down for several months with no income, which could mean that you might have to declare bankruptcy, because all goods in the store were given you on credit and you are still responsible of paying for the products. The bank could repossess your home due to you not being able to pay you mortgage, which in the US can easily mean that your new home could be a cardbox under some bridge where you and your family would live. Your family's new jobs might be to beg for money on the street so you can eat and heaven forbid if your family would be in need of medical care, cause you would be flat broke and unable to pay for any health insurance.
Would you put your family through something like this or would you try to fend off looters and vandals until order were restored?
Have in mind that you don't necessarily have to kill people at sight.
Firearms works perfectly fine as an deterrent as most people tend to thread carefully when bullets zing right over their heads.
If the above was the grim future for me and my family I would probably react like the shop owners did and I'm sure there are others here, which would react the same way too. Even if I would be charged and had to face time in the slammer, at least I would be more at ease knowing that my family would have a roof over their head and food in their belly because they still have the store as a livelihood.
EDIT:
Sorry for the derailing of the original topic.
Starscream
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Alberta
Sorta kinda not really. If they are running around smashing your store up, lethal force can be justified because you cannot know if they're going to just stop with property and instead turn on you or loved ones when they're done. A group of six young males jumping around in your store with tire irons, pipes, etc breaking everything for the simple sake of breaking things is really hard to predict.
It's because of the uncertainty and high stakes of these situations that make them so dangerous. Retreating is good in theory but makes several assumptions.
1) That you had sufficient warning of the impending SHTF situation, which was the case in New Orleans when the majority of people left before Katrina hit. The LA riots however struck with very little warning.
2) That you have secured a means of escape. Cars were some of first items destroyed during the riots. Roads can be blocked or destroyed faster then most people realize. Driving out of the riots for instance you'd be more likely to kill someone by running them over as you tried to get out. Assuming they didn't jump on your hood and smash your windshield out.
3) That you've secured a refuge, which is probably the easiest of the three points to plan for and the least likely to fail.
The situation those guys were illustrating in the videos was not just a pissed off minority group. Those were the LA riots. 53 fatalities, $1 billion in property damage, lasted almost 6 days before the situation was under control. Biggest kicker being that the police were ordered to withdraw at the start of the riots for their own safety.
In the end it took about 4,000 soldiers from the national guard, the regular army and the USMC to restore order. Worst of it was over by day 4 but the troops weren't effective until day three when they rolled in. 72 hours is a long time to wait, especially when emergency services were unable to evacuate many of the wounded.
Also, understand that a rifle can potentially be just as effectively without having fired a single shot. Pointing the rifle at the mob and shouting, "Get the f**k out or I'll shoot you!" can be just as effective at stopping an angry mob-o-loot-rape-kill as shooting them all.
If they move on, hey it's for the best. You don't waste bullets, the store stays intact, most damage done is to a bunch of egos. This is what happens most the time in those situations.
If they choose to attack, then they do so at their own peril rather then yours. Still a considerably better alternative then thinking happy thoughts and hoping they won't hurt you.
Last edited:
here's a good SHTF scenario where an AR would work fine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VmExQq2gWs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUaoil0wsyU
The best part was there was no hesitation when it came to fight or flight, especially when the car pulled up and shot at the Koreans. The Koreans focused on the car and shot back.
slinged Win 94' 30-30.....iron sights with some extra rounds on the butt stock
GLOCK 17 in my coat with a "few" extra mags
A few folding knives in my pockets/pack/coat and one real big one on my belt
Hear hear!!
Getting back to the original issues of the thread....My understanding is that 30-30 is still the most common commercial caliber around. I'd probably vote for a rifle in it. (unfortunately I'm thinking about one in .32 Win special because I found a nice one...). Don't see myself knocking over too many military convoys to acquire supplies.
The 9mm also seems a good choice... also very common and popular.
As an aside, in Cormac Macarthy's postapocalyptic novel "The Road", the father and son take refuge in an old bomb shelter and find... 30-30 and .45 ACP ammunition. Can't get much more American than that!(oh, and of course they don't have a firearm that chambers it. That would be too easy).
If S Really Hits the fan and any of 1,2, or 3 becomes a reality. I agree we will see neighbourhoods banding together to protect one another.
But I think I'd be packing up my tools and equipment and heading out of Dodge.... Out of the urban centre for sure. Besides I don't like my neighbours "THAT" much.
here's a good SHTF scenario where an AR would work fine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VmExQq2gWs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUaoil0wsyU
what happened to these koreans guys afterward? I mean, there's clear news footage of them firing.
Wouldn't the police pay them a visit afterwards for firearm offenses?
I can't see that happening here. Dennis Galloway had a good shoot in Port Alberni, and the RCMP still recommended charges against him.
Fortunately the Crown saw correctly and did not proceed.
But it would be nice, after having exercised your right to self-defense, not to have to rely on the DA's interpretation of the political sentiment at the time.
I can only imagine the months of legal torture Galloway would have gone through if he'd been in Toronto, and some self-serving politico saw a chance to make political hay out of this.
- Location
- Witness Protection Program
Wow! I actually read all the pages. Good ideas bounced from all corners here but I would have to side with those that preach use what you are familiar with and for me that is the 870 (w/G17 or P226). Its like an old friend that I never tire of seeing.
And in the event of SHTF, I pray that cooler heads prevail and that the majority of the population will come together. Then again I'm a big fan of Thomas Hobbes and it was his writings that kind of set me down the road of preparing for the worst.
And in the event of SHTF, I pray that cooler heads prevail and that the majority of the population will come together. Then again I'm a big fan of Thomas Hobbes and it was his writings that kind of set me down the road of preparing for the worst.
LA style riots in a Canadian city seem unlikely. However if it happened anyone protecting livelyhood or property with firearms and deadly force would find themselves on the wrong side of the law. Property is not as valuable as a human life and therefore one is not permitted to use deadly force to protect that property. Fair or not?
Maybe in 1980 when we were a fairly laid back right wing country. Now we have alot of people that arent really Canadianized yet. Have a look at the riots in Montreal's north end http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ_kg...rom=PL&index=4 . Mostly Haitian poplulation that burnt down a fire hall and random cars in a residential neighborhood.
Its truly sad though that you have to be thoughtful of what is gonna happen to you after the smoke clears when your protecting your life or life of loved ones.
Exactly so. All the more reason our laws want changing. Any individual who is willing to break and flout one moral and legal code of our society is more than likely to be willing to break and flout others on a whim. Such people are more than capable to behave violently.
As police simply hunt down the wrong-doers after they have already struck, protection of the citizenry is not within their ability or purview. This is why police cannot be sued for not preventing a criminal act perpatrated against a citizen.
Therefore it is really common sense that each citizen must be responsible for his own protection. If our governmant intentionally handicap us by removing tools that would give the ability of a weaker person to defend against a stronger person then such handicaps must be removed from our laws. But, Canadians must let their politicians know what they want.
As police simply hunt down the wrong-doers after they have already struck, protection of the citizenry is not within their ability or purview. This is why police cannot be sued for not preventing a criminal act perpatrated against a citizen.
Therefore it is really common sense that each citizen must be responsible for his own protection. If our governmant intentionally handicap us by removing tools that would give the ability of a weaker person to defend against a stronger person then such handicaps must be removed from our laws. But, Canadians must let their politicians know what they want.
Do the responsible thing and allow himself to be robbed and hope that compliance would earn him no beating or death. That is what Canadians who are politicians would do. Of course, these politicians are not being realistic; they wish the Canadians who are not politicians, whom they control via laws, to act out their theories of social order.
(Defend his property of course.)
I'd do some reading on actual scenarios first before deciding on a platform. I predict that running around with an AR-15 in a SHTF situation will get you noticed quickly and get you disarmed and locked up, specifically in urban areas. Look up Argentina and Katrina and see what's what. I think the key element (for me) is concealability, ruggedness and intimidation factor = 12ga. Ammo availability is not a big a factor as they would predict (i.e. sticking with NATO calibers) unless you plan on shooting everything that moves, causing another SHTF scenario on the side for other innocent folks. IMHO, the AR-15 fits in a WW3 scenario better than SHTF, how ever ridiculous that may sound. Heres hoping we never have to find out the answer.
All in all, I'd rather buy guns for the range.
you only be disarmed if you let them take the gun from you..
Then agian why would you need to run around with guns anyways?
I believe very strongly that property is not as valuable as human life.
I therefore advise everyone to stay the hell off and away from my property...it's hardly worth losing your life over!
Seriously though, I would not recommend taking the chance on assuming anyone is only after your property in a riot, and that they will just come in, take your stuff, smash a window, and leave.
Now they might well not intend anything worse than that and if they don't do anything worse than that, you probably shouldn't be shooting them and legally speaking you definitely shouldn't be shooting them.
But I think it's not a bad idea, while you're figuring out exactly what their intentions are, to be holding a reliable gun of some sort. That way, if it turns out their plans extend beyond your lettuce and levis and in to your wife or daughter or yourself, you can ensure that doesn't happen.
Now maybe just holding your AR/M14/AK/CZ will be enough to dissuade most people and that's great. If not, of course, you have the option of shooting them.
I think a rifle in any realistic SHTF Canada scenario is unlikely to be used outside the home so as long as it's mag-fed, semi-auto, centerfire and reliable, I don't think it matters all that much what you choose.
I do think trying to "blend in" with LEO/Mil is a spectacularly bad idea that will get you shot at worst but arrested and seriously ####ed at best. If you want to pick people to blend in with, it's people who aren't walking around with something that is totally illegal for civilians to just walk around with, because if the #### is hitting the fan, it won't look like Mad Max or even 80s Beirut, it will look like Canada, right after a major earthquake or major hockey loss, and crimes you commit will still all be punishable, including running around with restricted rifles. And if you think the police will be so busy responding to other issues that they won't be worried about reports of guys walking around in "army clothes with machine guns and hand grenades", well, I think we will have to agree to disagree on police priorities.
I therefore advise everyone to stay the hell off and away from my property...it's hardly worth losing your life over!
Seriously though, I would not recommend taking the chance on assuming anyone is only after your property in a riot, and that they will just come in, take your stuff, smash a window, and leave.
Now they might well not intend anything worse than that and if they don't do anything worse than that, you probably shouldn't be shooting them and legally speaking you definitely shouldn't be shooting them.
But I think it's not a bad idea, while you're figuring out exactly what their intentions are, to be holding a reliable gun of some sort. That way, if it turns out their plans extend beyond your lettuce and levis and in to your wife or daughter or yourself, you can ensure that doesn't happen.
Now maybe just holding your AR/M14/AK/CZ will be enough to dissuade most people and that's great. If not, of course, you have the option of shooting them.
I think a rifle in any realistic SHTF Canada scenario is unlikely to be used outside the home so as long as it's mag-fed, semi-auto, centerfire and reliable, I don't think it matters all that much what you choose.
I do think trying to "blend in" with LEO/Mil is a spectacularly bad idea that will get you shot at worst but arrested and seriously ####ed at best. If you want to pick people to blend in with, it's people who aren't walking around with something that is totally illegal for civilians to just walk around with, because if the #### is hitting the fan, it won't look like Mad Max or even 80s Beirut, it will look like Canada, right after a major earthquake or major hockey loss, and crimes you commit will still all be punishable, including running around with restricted rifles. And if you think the police will be so busy responding to other issues that they won't be worried about reports of guys walking around in "army clothes with machine guns and hand grenades", well, I think we will have to agree to disagree on police priorities.
- Status
