LDS Freedom Forum

I have heard people recommend spreading scrap metal , nails, etc, over an area where they would want to bury a weapons cache. Again, though, use them, don't bury them.

ChelC wrote:By the way, the bury the gun idea isn't intended for home intruders, but actually a store for when things turn to anarchy.

The gun isn't supposed to be buried, it's supposed to be used on the intruder -- then you bury the intruder. Isn't that how it works?

I think I like the way you think Ithink!

Bob

I imagine for a well organized militia, having a store of guns in a secure place for a futureneed could be beneficial. For indidvidual defense I dont know? The other benefit may be for hunting. What are some other methods to conceal weapons? Obviously they are of no use if confiscated.

I think the best way to conceal a firearm is to disguise it; make it look like some other common place item. And I suggest no discussion on this topic.

lundbaek wrote:I think the best way to conceal a firearm is to disguise it; make it look like some other common place item. And I suggest no discussion on this topic.

Sorry, but I can't resist. While in the Marines, I heard a story, or a rumor, about someone successfully sending an AK-47 home from somewhere (I don't remember if it was Vietnam or Iraq) by taking it apart and putting an electrical cord through the barrel and a lampshade on it and labeling it as a lamp.

That story has been around since Jan of 1964, when I heard it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eyFHYQLzIE

The British called - They want their guns back!


Looks like it's too late for them!

The US M-4 and M-16 A-2/A-3 rifles need to be either upgraded or replaced. The .223 round on this platform is ok in it's tactical niche...urban, CQB. On human targets bent on killing you past 100 yards and in dirty nasty muddy or sandy environments the piece is too high maintenance for your average trooper. Please cease fire while I squirt some CLP on my weapon please. I have extensive experience with this weapon and I would trade it for an AK any day. Direct impingment gas operation? PLLLEEAASE. Lets give our guys a fighting chance an give them a .308 with a good top op type system (ala M-14 AK-47) and put the Black Rifle to rest ( In it's current form and caliber). The only ones that will mourn it's passing are the bad guys.

Not sure I agree, the AK round has the same ballistics as our 30-30. Range differential between the .223 and the AK round is minimal. also I can carry more ammo. There is a big difference between the M-14 .308 round and the .223, but the M-14 wasn't built for close quarters combat. New weapons utilizing the .308 entering service may solve these problems you mention, but until then I'll take the .223 in it's many variations. My M-16 has never miss fired, never jamed, and never missed what it was aimed at. By the same token, I've never been in the mud with it. It's a home defense weapon, nothing more!

Bob

Ar15 /Ak47 Food for Thought

Ok my 2 cents in the great debate . Lets break it down M16( ar 15 is of this family).The selector switch safe semi auto ( A2 varient 3 rd burst).the ar15 is a light weight presion rifle with supressive fire capability U.S doctrine is marksmanship based.The direct gas feed makes the rifle ammo sensitive.Ball powder caused build up and failuers in Vietnam. Think it craps where it eats powder residue , excesive heat tight tolernce means more posibilty of failure .The small parts are easy to loose field stripping in the woods .Reliabilty means regular cleaning with any weapon ( sorry this means the ak too)but much more so with this family.However we are dealing with semi auto weapons so accuracy not volume is the name of the game. Remember 5.56 depends on bullet upset on impact The way it dose this is not as reliable as the 5.45.Ar15 human engineering are just superior.The A2 sights are excellent.It will drop small game but will require some precise shooting to drop a deer.

The ak 47/74 selector is safe, full, semi .The ak 47 is a hard hitting rifle designed to be appiled more like a subgun with 100+ yard cability. It is my understanding they have marksmen with svd in each platoon to handle long range work.The 7.62x39 hits hard but is not very accurate (kentucky windage).Their are no small parts to loose easily.The ak family was made to be thrown in to a conscripts hands and go bang.It will hit center mass at 100 yards.Human engeneering suck but can easily be overcome by simple training . If you are on foot the 7.62x39 ammo is heavy as compared to 5.45 or 5.56.The ak can also bring home deer but if the shtf big game could becme scarce and if 7.62 hits a rabbit there will not be much left for the pot.
Survival,lets face it long term resupply is not likely.Parts will dry up and if availble will cost you alot of barter goods.Guns are tools like hammers.Would you use a sledge to drive tac nails or a tac hammer to drive rail spikes?I keep a lot of hammers each dose the job it was desined for well.what if you could only take one hammer with you.What would that hammer be? .I myself would take a solid framing hammer. I could do handel most jobs with it .The ak is that framing hammer (IMO) it is rough and ready it will serve .I will be honest I perfer to shoot the ar15.For short term survival post disaster the ar15 will do nicely.I am not so confident of its abilty to hold up long term.
The ak will serve long after the the spare batteries on the reflex sight are gone and the little parts on the ar15 are lost in the brush .The ak will go bang when your flash light is usless and you are using a torch to see at night .These weapons are proven to survive the primitve conditions.God forbid we end up in a 3 rd world conditions.Good solvent will be hard to find for the ar15.You can clean the ak with used motor oil.That practice would not work well for the ar15.
Ammo look at 5.56 in the last two Gulf wars.Prices were/are up avalibilty down .You will not be droping zombies at 100 yards with eye socket shots.You can fend off attacks effectively with an ak.
I once heard it said the ar15 is a prom queen and the ak a biker chick .Who would you want with you in a fight?(IMO) THE AR15 IS A BETTER RIFLE .THE AK 47/74 A BETTER WEAPON.

Very good points. Where I live I seriously doubt I'll be doing much praying and spraying. Also, I have a Ruger -06 with a great scope for long distance shooting. I have limited myself to 1000 rds for each weapon I own, except for my pellet guns which I don't consider weapons. My sons and I load everything we shoot "Except" the .223's, we have purchased factory ammunition for our .223's.

I would consider the .308 loaded with 130 grain HP as the ultimate battle round for my purposes. The 130 grain HP is what I use on deer, I've "never" had to shoot a deer twice. that would be over 50 deer. (used to help the local fruit farmers clean deer out of their orchards)

Marksmanship is the key! In more ways then one, I prefer the prom queen!

Bob

You can build your own ak....http://www.ak-builder.com

Direct impingment gas operation? PLLLEEAASE.

Not sure I agree with your assessment of the AR-15, but...

It's really too bad that the Daewoo assault rifles were banned from import (under Bush I, by the way). They are basically the S. Korean version of the AR-15, some parts are even interchangeable. But, the Daewoo uses long-stroke gas piston operation--almost identical to the AK-47.

Best of both worlds. Very accurate. Very reliable. If you ever stumble across one, give some serious consideration to buying it.

I believe the M-16 is a lot of fun to shoot, but worthless as a battle rifle. It was designed for women because they were integrating women into the military and wanted a weapon they could handle. Shotgun News did an article on it a couple of years back. It lacks power and dependability. It really doesn't take much grit to shut it down. I believe a battle rifle shouldn't have to have a forward assist. I think the military should field a modernized version of the M14. I think the shortened versions would do nicely for urban work. If marksmanship is the deciding factor, and I believe it is very important, the 7.62x51 (.308) is perfectly good. It may weigh a little extra, but if you are relying on marksmanship and training, you don't need tons of ammo as you would if you were relying on the spray and pray technique. Furthermore, you wouldn't have to hit the enemy as many times to kill them as you would with the 5.56mm.

The USMC has been putting M14s back into action because the dimunitive 5.56 lacks killing power over the longer ranges encountered in Afghanistan. They are also using them in Iraq. I have heard they have come out with a new squad or fire team position, called the Designated Marksman. That Marine carries an M14 w/ a scope and is not deployed as a sniper, but as a long range shooter.

Check this site out English Saint, he is a fellow Englishman.

http://www.thehomegunsmith.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exxGeszB ... re=related


Daewoo DR-200 Rifle

Vin,

Designed for women? no! The AR -15 was designed as a replacement side arm for Air Force military police to replace the aging M-2 Carbine. I was there! Early 60's. I took part in the demos made by Colt. My job in the Air Force was munitions or weapons Tech, I had to be trained on every weapon. Colt reps put on some great shows!

Bob

What do you thnk of the British L1A1 SLR?

I used to shoot these as a boy back in the early 1980s. I think the 7.62 mm round is a bit more manly than the 5.56 mm that our feminised forces use today.

What do you thnk of the British L1A1 SLR?

One of the best rifles ever. Built like a tank. Very dependable. Reasonably accurate. Easy to work on.

I've even built a FAL (L1A1 is a version of the FAL) and intend to build another once I scrounge up the dough for another receiver. A little easier than building an AK-47. Not as easy as putting together an AR-15.

Oh dear... this thread just gave me deja vu from air show days. All the letters and numbers and you people actually have visuals to go with them? I mean, some are obvious like the AK47, 9mm, 40 caliber, 308 etc. But it all went downhill for me right here:

The 7.62x39 hits hard but is not very accurate (kentucky windage).

What on earth is that?

ChelC wrote:Oh dear... this thread just gave me deja vu from air show days. All the letters and numbers and you people actually have visuals to go with them? I mean, some are obvious like the AK47, 9mm, 40 caliber, 308 etc. But it all went downhill for me right here:

The 7.62x39 hits hard but is not very accurate (kentucky windage).

What on earth is that?

A 7.62x39 is the cartridge that an AK-47 (or an SKS) shoots. It is metric measurements for the land to land diameter ( I believe-because the bullets are usually .310", not really .308 inch [which is 7.62 mm]) x the casing length in mm. Same goes for 7.62x54 (for the comblock Nagant & Tokorav rifles), 7.62x51 which is .308 Win (though some will argue that point), and 30-06 is 7.62x63? I don't recall the case length off the top of my head for that one. I should remember because I just trimmed over 100 of them this evening. The western cartridges (.308 & .30-06) use the groove to groove diameter.

The Shotgun News article stated the M-16 was adopted as a weapon because women could use it comfortably because they wanted to integrate the military and recruit women. It makes sense. It is a very light weight weapon that doesn't kick at all. I wish I still had the article, however I gave it away. I had a neighbor at the time who was around at the time as well. He hated the M-16 and hated the general who adopted it because he believed he was the casuse of many needless casualties due to the original faulty weapon (prior to the addition of the forward assist, the one with the crappy sights that had to be adjusted with a cartridge).

The vet I recently spoke with at Center St. Brass had the same opinion of the M-16 and the 5.56 mm cartridge. He mentioned having to kill enemies with his 60 who had already been shot with a 16.

Shotgun News also did a great ballistics article where they compared current military cartridges. The 5.56 mm was fairly worthless after 100 or 200 meters. I don't recall exactly. I just remember being very unimpressed. Many Russians are also apparently unimpressed with their 5.45 mm cartridge. It appears to be a necked down 7.62x39. Reportedly they want to go back to the 7.62x39. I wouldn't blame them.

I think ChelC was asking about Kentucky windage.

Actually, both! I had no idea. Now I know, and knowing is half the battle. GI Joe.