Training For Reality: Why Carry a Rifle?

[GardoneVT]

This is a topic that's been bothering me since I read about Fernando Aguierre's experiences in post-economic collapse Argentina. His book provides a great picture of what happens to a first world nation when it slides into disorder and chaos-many of the SHTF situations people in America prepare for actually happened there.

One of the matters he discusses is the use of the rifle. While the typical survivalist considers an openly worn long arm and accessories "necessary", Aguierre states that a rifle is useful in the context of home defense against multiple bad guys , period. Contrary to the "Mad Max" concept, when the S hit the fan in Argentina it didn't totally wipe out law and order. When the President of Argentina fled the country due to currency problems and riots were all about, one still couldn't just walk out the door with an AR15 . Even when society is falling apart, the kids still have to get to school and you need to run your daily errands.

When I evaluate the idea of a long arm in post collapse society, I come to another reason which justifies concealed carry of a handgun over a rifle. When one is walking about, naturally such a person isn't cognizant of borders or property lines anymore-especially in rural areas. Walking around with an openly worn plate carrier and a shouldered SCAR17s would trigger someone observing their property line to shoot first and ask questions later. Why risk personal contact with an openly armed stranger when you can just pre-emptively shoot them , take their stuff, and bury the corpse with no risk of loss to you and yours?

A man walking about with a concealed handgun might not be able to hit a target "way out past Fort Mudge" , but inside of 70 yards he's still deadly assuming good proficiency with the pistol in question-and he won't necessarily be shot on sight by remnants of police or trigger happy people watching their property lines.

What say you all on this topic? Am I off my rocker to consider this?

[JHC]

This is a topic that's been bothering me since I read about Fernando Aguierre's experiences in post-economic collapse Argentina. His book provides a great picture of what happens to a first world nation when it slides into disorder and chaos-many of the SHTF situations people in America prepare for actually happened there.

One of the matters he discusses is the use of the rifle. While the typical survivalist considers an openly worn long arm and accessories "necessary", Aguierre states that a rifle is useful in the context of home defense against multiple bad guys , period. Contrary to the "Mad Max" concept, when the S hit the fan in Argentina it didn't totally wipe out law and order. When the President of Argentina fled the country due to currency problems and riots were all about, one still couldn't just walk out the door with an AR15 . Even when society is falling apart, the kids still have to get to school and you need to run your daily errands.

When I evaluate the idea of a long arm in post collapse society, I come to another reason which justifies concealed carry of a handgun over a rifle. When one is walking about, naturally such a person isn't cognizant of borders or property lines anymore-especially in rural areas. Walking around with an openly worn plate carrier and a shouldered SCAR17s would trigger someone observing their property line to shoot first and ask questions later. Why risk personal contact with an openly armed stranger when you can just pre-emptively shoot them , take their stuff, and bury the corpse with no risk of loss to you and yours?

A man walking about with a concealed handgun might not be able to hit a target "way out past Fort Mudge" , but inside of 70 yards he's still deadly assuming good proficiency with the pistol in question-and he won't necessarily be shot on sight by remnants of police or trigger happy people watching their property lines.

What say you all on this topic? Am I off my rocker to consider this?

I think you are on pretty solid ground. [The less than all out war levels of breakdown in developed countries] That article you reference is a very good read.

Interesting his emphasis on driving a 4x4, urban vs remote rural vs small community too.

[TGS]

This is a topic that's been bothering me since I read about Fernando Aguierre's experiences in post-economic collapse Argentina. His book provides a great picture of what happens to a first world nation when it slides into disorder and chaos-many of the SHTF situations people in America prepare for actually happened there.

One of the matters he discusses is the use of the rifle. While the typical survivalist considers an openly worn long arm and accessories "necessary", Aguierre states that a rifle is useful in the context of home defense against multiple bad guys , period. Contrary to the "Mad Max" concept, when the S hit the fan in Argentina it didn't totally wipe out law and order. When the President of Argentina fled the country due to currency problems and riots were all about, one still couldn't just walk out the door with an AR15 . Even when society is falling apart, the kids still have to get to school and you need to run your daily errands.

When I evaluate the idea of a long arm in post collapse society, I come to another reason which justifies concealed carry of a handgun over a rifle. When one is walking about, naturally such a person isn't cognizant of borders or property lines anymore-especially in rural areas. Walking around with an openly worn plate carrier and a shouldered SCAR17s would trigger someone observing their property line to shoot first and ask questions later. Why risk personal contact with an openly armed stranger when you can just pre-emptively shoot them , take their stuff, and bury the corpse with no risk of loss to you and yours?

A man walking about with a concealed handgun might not be able to hit a target "way out past Fort Mudge" , but inside of 70 yards he's still deadly assuming good proficiency with the pistol in question-and he won't necessarily be shot on sight by remnants of police or trigger happy people watching their property lines.

What say you all on this topic? Am I off my rocker to consider this?

Google images for "LA Riots Korean".

[Tamara]

There is a carbine loaded to "cruiser ready" in my house (my roommate has one, too, but she doesn't store the mag in the gun. Her gun, her choice.)

The envelope for which it would be useful, though, is a very narrow one: Somebod(ies) trying to force entry into the house, or civil unrest in the neighborhood (and the latter is not just paranoid rantings; there have been burning cop cars in the street within ten blocks of where I'm sitting right now within the last twenty years.)

Most problems with a ballistic solution would need solving with the gat on my hip.

[Chuck Haggard]

Google images for "LA Riots Korean".

That speaks right towards the exact same idea IMHO. Those folks were in static defense of their own property, in a aberrant and short lived scenario. Outside of those types of situations handguns are far more appropriate.

[Suvorov]

I tend to agree with you that the most likely scenario is a more limited collapse of society rather than Mad Max. I also have read Fernando's blog and view his and Selko (from the former FRY) to be a far better example of SHTF reality than a lot of what Rawles writes about.

The rifle will have its place, but its range of use will depend on where you are. If you are living in rural areas like Wyoming, Colorado, or even Northern California, where the sight of a rifle is not that rare and ranchers carry them for their daily tasks, then rifles will probably be a primary arm. Ranges are further, encounters with unknown rarer, and the local remaining law enforcement will probably be a lot more sympathetic. Heck, growing up in Wyoming, the rifle was a common sight in the back of pickup trucks every day including the HS parking lot where a lot of my fellow students would leave school to go work their ranch. They carried a rifle every day. Post (insert your favorite SHTF fantasy here), the practice would probably increase.

In the urban/suburban setting, then I'll agree that the rifle's role will be a lot more reduced. Home defense if that is the tool (and you are permitted to have it) you choose or basic area/neighborhood denial during riots such as was seen during the LA riots and post Katrina and Ike. Strolling down to the local food distribution center or farmer market with the AR slung to the back will most likely get you noticed in a bad way, just like it will in many places today.

All that said, when the time comes that you need that rifle, then you REALLY NEED that rifle! So a realistic approach to training with the rifle should be part of everyone who chooses to own a rifle's training plan. Also, if times become hard like they did back in the 1930s, then hunting may very well become a much more common way for people to fill their pantries. A rifle of suitable caliber would be a valuable item to have as would be the skill to use it.

[Suvorov]

Google images for "LA Riots Korean".

Also consider the defenses that farmers in Rhodesia had to put up against goons that roved the land in packs looking for reparations (and either allowed to operate with impunity or outright support by Mugabe's government).

[Drang]

THE FARMER AT WAR
Lessons from Wartime Bosnia-Herzgovina
Selco – One Year in Hell / Online Course | SHTF School Community
Listening to HURRICANE KATRINA

[vaglocker]

Can't hurt to have a properly secured rifle in your vehicle either.

[Tirofijo2001]

I agree that there is too much emphasis on the carbine in the civilian self defense world. It should be trained, but at a much lower priority than many other things.

(However, this site doesn't seem to be as preoccupied with the carbine as other places are. It's named pistol-forum, after all.)

Kyle Defoor has a few blog posts on training priorities. First you look at what skills you are most likely to need, then you consider how weak or strong you are in those skills.

http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/05/tr...d-is-good.html (Part 1)

http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/06/tr...d-is-good.html (Part 2)

He lists fitness as his number one priority, because it's so important in a hand to hand fight (which is his mostly likely SD scenario). I'd say fitness should be number one for most of us since we are more likely to die of a heart attack in the next five years than live through a Mad Max-style post-apocalypse.