More than one or two guns?

[LarryC]

To All,

If I was reading the original post correctly it was a Doomsday prepper who had the bulk majority of his firearms being pistols.

That just doesn't add up for good planning, in my opinion. Have pistols? Hell yeah. Have backup pistols? Heck yeah. But out of 30 firearms over 20 are pistols? Nope, not at all.

For hunting and defense rifles, of various calibers naturally, and shotguns should be the bulk majority of the armory.

A pistol is a backup weapon that you grab because you don't have a good rifle, carbine, or shotgun handy.

Don't get me wrong! For SHTF you want pistols! You want backup pistols! It just seems to me pistols should be the minority of the prepping and not the majority.

This opinion is based upon prepping being the the highest priority! If someone just loves collecting pistols and is incorporating it into their prepping that is a different story.

Regards,

Doug

Well, I am not a "registered Prepper type" but I have a decent supply of food stored and many firearms and much ammo for each. After analyzing the situation, I would far rather have firearms than gold or cash on hand if SHTF. I feel sure I could trade a Mosin Nagant 91/30 for more gold than I could carry when people are frightened and have a real need for defense and hunting food (or keeping the food they have). My son and I have 30-06, 308, 8 MM, 7.5X55, 6.5x55, .243, .303, .223, 30-30, 22 mag, 22 Lr rifles, and handguns from 22 cal to 44 mag, and .410, 20ga and 12 ga shotguns - with ammo and reloading capability for all. IMHO, there are several reasons to collect firearms. First, I enjoy the guns! I like shooting them, learning the history of the older ones, disassembling and tuning them. Second they are a great investment, I can't think of a single firearm I own that has not appreciated in value more than any other investment I have made. Third - if SHTF, I am WELL armed and have the capability of arming all my extended family and friends. Forth - As I have said, if SHTF, I believe I have the Most Valuable trading goods available. The firearms could be traded for any other asset I need - food, shelter, medicine, help, etc. Fifth: I have firearms that will take any game I would want to eat or defend myself from, in North America.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Each to their own, but there's little PRACTICAL reason to own such a wide variety of firearms. Like the old saw goes, beware the man who only has one gun because he probably knows how to use it.

I've got a few "toy" guns, and would like to get a few collectibles, but I only use a hand full for social work. A DAO .38 for a BUG and a full sized Sig P220 for primary. I never carry anything else. I know where the trigger breaks, where it resets, I don't have to adjust my grip, I know the sights, etc.

Working guns can be viewed like a golf bag. There's little reason to carry two putters, but you'd be at a severe disadvantage to not have a driver, a few woods, a range of irons, etc. From a strictly practical standpoint, one long range rifle, one small bore game rifle, etc. etc. makes sense. Then your practice time isn't divided up among so many firearms, you get better with what you have, parts, magazines, and ammo is easier to stockpile and you have more money for setting your guns up, training, etc.

 

[rwhitmore8]

Owning different guns gives you a great opportunity to become more well rounded as a shooter. I like to have different guns scattered around the house as well, but I like to keep the caliber or style somewhat limited to what I feel most comfortable with. In the end though every gun collector knows that if money was no option we would own everything. Id probably have a m134 on my roof, and 2s7 pion in my front yard, and a mark 19 on top of my truck.

 

[SERparacord]

Try carrying 20 to 30 guns. If you are going to sit in a hole in the ground, you don't need that many either.

 

[42769vette]

Years ago I went from having lots of guns that I rarely shot to a handfull of better guns that I shoot enough to be good with. I think it was a wise move

 

[DoggyDaddy]

 

[mac45]

I was watching Doomsday preppers earlier, and this guy and his wife had like 30 different firearms, mostly pistols. I would love to have a collection like this guy, but one has to wonder if it's actually necessary to have that many pistols. Don't get me wrong, it's impressive and I don't think the guy wasted his money, but why not just one or two of pistols, shotguns, and rifles? I think a well rounded collection is a better idea.

I dunno....maybe the guy just "LIKES" pistols?

 

[Leo]

One sturdy, accurate rifle
one dependable shotgun
one good Pistol

In my mind that would pretty much have it covered.

 

[Hookeye]

By my count, it takes 13 different rigs to just hunt critters in Indiana

 

[Rocket]

Maybe They only showed a portion of their collection? Perhaps they have two more safes with 60 or more long guns in them. If so I want to be his friend. But my thinking is that pistols were their hobby then they got into prepping. Or maybe just not that bright. I have wrestled with the caliber reduction Idea many times. It makes sense but so does being able to shoot any of the popular calibers you may come across. There is no formula for non resupplied groups. So go where your gut and wallet take you. Just remember that while you can hunt with 30 pistols (technically) you can't eat them.

 

[actaeon277]

One sturdy, accurate rifle
one dependable shotgun
one good Pistol

In my mind that would pretty much have it covered.

Till all the ammo you find doesn't match your weapon.

 

[johnny45]

I would have thought somebody like that would go for redundancy in common calibers.

 

[88E30M50]

Besides the fact there are different uses, as previously mentioned, what about ammo?
If ammo is this hard to find after the last tragedy, what about after a disaster?
One caliber is easier to feed.
But, what if all the ammo you find is to other calibers.

I come at this from the opposite point of view. After a disaster, you need to be able to shoot what's available if you find yourself running short of ammo. If all you have is a 9mm, all the .40 S&W in the world will do you no good. I think it's a good idea to have something that will eat anything you bring home, within reason. It's probably a good idea to have something that will shoot .22lr, .380, 9mm, .45acp, 40S&W and 10mm. It also lets you make use of whatever reloading components you can find. If you have a Glock 20 in 10mm and buy a .40 S&W barrel, you can shoot two calibers in one gun. If all you can find is large pistol primers, you load 10mm. If all you can find is small primers, then you load .40S&W.

It would suck to have a shiney new 9mm in a world that had no 9mm for sale or no small primers available.

 

[CitiusFortius]

If I had the disposable income I'd probably have whatever type of gun suited my fancy. But since I don't I only have a pistol and an SBR. And I train with them both.
.

This. As guns are very expensive, i only have a handful myself. The poster is correct in that you can only shoot one at a time. In a firefight, you will probably only use 1, 3 at the most.

But, most of us have guns for recreational purposes too. When viewed as a hobby, you can see how and why someone would amass so much firepower.

 

[draytime]

Never too many!

 

[tj_v89]

The best answer I can offer to the general question is that much in the same way you don't go golfing with only one club, you don't use one gun for everything, at least not unless your needs are very narrow or your means won't support buying more.

In a SHTF situation, you are probably going to want everyone in the house to carry a full size handgun chambered for an effective defensive round at all times. This covers close range defense. Intermediate-range defense calls for a different weapon which the dreaded AK and AR families being the most obvious choices. Long range defense calls for yet another weapon, which may or may not overlap your hunting needs. A good defensive shotgun fills the area between the handguns and rifles. A good .22 will handle light hunting needs and allow for use without making enough noise to wake the dead and/or every two-legged predator from here to North Carolina. For a family of two, we are already up to at least 6 guns. My guess is that you are going to want an intermediate range rifle for everyone engaging in defensive duties which can be shelved for something else in the case of a specialized need, boosting our family of 2 to 7 guns. Now, if you are going to have a more concealable EDC or a backup weapon to compliment your full size handgun, we must add a couple more to the total. If you are going to have a dedicated defensive shotgun separate from your hunting shotgun, add one more.

By this standard, figure on adding at least three guns per able-bodied person at arms above my baseline of two people. You also have to account for weapons being lost in a fracas if you have a bad trip out and drop one. I know, I would hope a person fit for self-preservation would be able to keep that down to a minimum, but stuff happens. Same deal for damage/breakage.

Now that we have covered minimum standard, it seems reasonable that having guns for common ammunition is a plus. While you would normally think that guns would be found in the event that you come by an ammunition windfall, it isn't necessarily so. I would have to be running low and, say, come by a case of 9mm when all I have are a bunch of .45 pistols. Another joker in the deck is specialization by purpose. A .44 magnum is a fine handgun for hunting and some specialized defensive purposes, but it does not meed my standards for suitability as a general defensive handgun on account of recoil, noise, and expense of ammunition. By contrast, I would not want to try stopping a bear with anything much smaller. I know, we already have rifles, but what happens when the bear catches you taking a leak with the rifle propped against a tree? needless to say, two-legged predators are less common in bear territory making the need for a fast-firing higher capacity autopistol less critical.

I comes down to four basic conditions, which are being inadequately equipped, equipped well enough to get by but no more than that, being adequately equipped for most reasonably possible situations, and being equipped for anything that may happen short of a nuclear detonation which probably puts you past the point where diminishing returns is setting in on your gun investment. In the end, you have to determine where your needs, wants, and budget meet, but rest assured that going beyond a handgun, a rifle or two, and a shotgun does not necessarily put you into the realm of arbitrarily collecting for fun.

^^^^THIS^^^^^

wow, well said