MOST COMMON AMMO WHICH WILL ALWAYS BE AVAILABLE FOR RIFLES

[timmy]

Our breed of firearms owners and advocates is a diminishing one and we're held to account for everything we do or say hence the bar has to be set at the highest for our folk.

Oggie, you are right on here. The world is such a different place than it was when I got my first gun, bought my first gun, and began delving into firearms in depth as an adult. Those days, kids didn't bring guns to school, I bought guns during lunch and took them to work until I went home, and terrorism was something associated with lands far away.

Even in your country, you must see some changes. Just today, terrorists attacked the Canadian Parliament! When I was there in 1995, the guards didn't have guns and I walked through the main door as if it was the local library!

It's in this crazy world that we've banded together as gun lovers to obtain legal gun rights in India. There are times when this primary mission of IFG seems forgotten by a few. Think of our diversity here: Some like hunting (out of India, of course -- I'd wager to say we're all strong on conservation here), some are against it. Some are concerned about their ability to protect themselves. Some want to have a gun collection, and others are interested in competitive shooting. Some would like to try reloading or black powder. Some folks like knives and like hanging out here. Finally, some are gun enthusiasts outside of India and want to share our interests and our rights with our brothers. We're here for our own reasons, but we are all here because of one thing: RKBA in India.

We badly need to convince our neighbors that we are responsible, law-abiding folks like anyone else. Even here in the USA, I've met a lot of Indians who are horrified that I own a gun! We have a mountain to climb, in convincing others of the just and reasonable position we are taking.

Folks that espouse dangerous or illegal behavior, or who come here and abuse their privilege for their own personal agendas are not helping our cause. One key attribute of such types is very common: they will assert their right to free speech, as if someone else isn't footing the bill for this site and others aren't the ones who contribute to the running and upkeep of it. Their demanding their rights, rather than acknowledging their privilege reflects their attitude of coming here to take, rather than to contribute.

All of us, I hope, derives some enjoyment from participating here, but when the purpose is all one way, other behaviors are commonly found accompanying theat one-sidedness.

BTW, it's quite obvious you' know your way around guns and I certainly salute your contributions here!

Wow...I did not realize that my post would generate so many comments..

Let me get to the point. I wanted to elaborate on all the posts but here's the deal, the replies should either criticize or validate a person's comments but should not question the person himself.

Gautham, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, normally I would agree with you. We ought to restrict our comments to addressing the comments of others, but when others exhibit antisocial behavior and disturb the accepted norms of our community, I think identifying that bad behavior is a positive, not a negative thing. Granted, it ought to be done sparingly, and thank goodness we don't run into very many folks who light on Internet forums and carry on in unconstructive ways. In other words, my own opinion is that it is appropriate to question a person when his ways are questionable.

Regarding your views on the the effects of gunshots on humans and other mammalian species, I would have to say that the issues and problems are very much the same, but I'm sure others have plenty to say on this, so I will leave that subject to them.

[xl_target]

First of all, Gautham and Oggie, no ire is directed at you two. We can discuss points brought up by both of you logically. Both of your contributions are valuable.

BTW, just FYI; Two Rivers is an old Alaska hand and has a lifetime of experience under his belt. He doesn't always say too much but when he does, I sit up and listen.


In the meantime, .... back at the ranch:
Just some random thoughts:

Random thought one:
I actually subscribed to Gautham's theory of point a shotgun in a general direction and shoot. It kinda works with 7 1/2 or 8 shot. At 20 or 30 yards, you can get a decent pattern. In that context it works but if I'm trying to stop a home invader, birdshot might not do me much good. It might deter the casual neighborhood goonda but seriously, if I want to stop a threat ASAP, I'm not using birdshot. If someone just broke down my front door, I want to stop it now. Good luck, by the way, this is an old house and the front door and frame is solid Oak and the hinges are recessed. The back door is steel.

See when you get older, you tend to ramble. Ok where was I? Oh yeah, when using something more potent like buckshot, things change a bit. At 20 yards with a 20 ga. cylinder bore, 18" barreled shot gun, I got a seven or eight inch group (000 buck, 3" cartridge). Definitely need to aim here. With a 12 gauge modified choke 18" barrel and 00 buck (2 3/4" shell), I got about the same pattern, maybe a little wider. Surprised the hell out of me. Note to self; definitely need to aim! The shotgun, however can be an efficacious weapon and will definitely work if applied properly. I don't think anyone doubts that.

Random thought two:
As far as pistol cartridges go, in the ammo crunch of 2009, all 9mm ammo disappeared from the shelves. You could always get .40 S&W and 45 ACP. This time, I can find all kinds of 9mm, some .40 and occasionally .45 ACP but no .22 LR. One never knows. I can always find .223/5.56 and 7.62X39 now but the price has doubled.

Random thought three:
Then there's the SMLE. One of the fastest bolt action rifles ever made. The beauty of the SMLE is that the bolt can be so smooth, you can run it without breaking your cheek weld. The old #4 Mk.1 that I owned at one time, had an action that was as smooth as snot. Ya, its not a short rifle and its not particularly light but you can run 10 aimed shots, offhand, pretty quick. So why am I talking about the Smelly? I'm talking about the SMLE and self defense? You betcha.
As I found out recently, it is dang hard to hit an eight inch circle at 20 yards with a Ruger LC9. It doesn't matter wht you have with you, if you can place a shot where it counts. At 20 yards, with a Smelly, I would have no problems banging off 10 rounds into an eight in circle as fast as I could cycle the bolt. Hell, the Canadian Rangers used them for Polar Bear. I really wouldn't want to do that in town with neighbors in all directions, with any rifle. In the country, however, you could take care of a lot of threats if that was your only firearm. When I first got married, we rented a farm site and the nearest neighbor was about a mile away. Nothing else was within two miles.

Keep in mind, handgun bullets deliver a fraction of the energy that a rifle bullet is capable of delivering. For example, in .30-06, a Remington 150 grain CoreLokt pointed soft point will produce 2820 ft. lbs at the muzzle and at 400 yards, it will still produce over 1100 ft. lbs. The common 115 grain, 9mm Luger cartridge will produce about 310 ft. lbs. of energy at the muzzle. A hit with a rifle beats a hit with a handgun any day. The problem is, a rifle is a pain in the behind to lug around all day, every day. It is also not easily concealed so they tend not to be carried much for self defense in urban America or urban ...anywhere.
As some people say; a handgun is just something to fight your way to a long gun. We compromise and carry a handgun because it would not be practical to carry a rifle.

Random thought four:
There was a guy in one of the forums I participate in who was hunting on Kodiak Island and he had a large caliber rifle with him. He got surprised by a Griz and never got the rifle into action. He got tore up pretty good and is still alive only because a friend with another large caliber rifle was with him. Then there was a hiker in Alaska, last year, who was saved from a mauling by a bear because he had a AK 74 clone chambered in the pipsqueak (for bear) 5.45 X 39 cartridge. Go Figure. Sometimes the bear gets you and sometimes you get the bear.

[TwoRivers]

Here those close-quarter aggressors tend to wear fur and have big teeth, or have hard,sharp hooves. And move faster than any human ever will. And yes, I'll will put my trust in my rifle. As for all those animals standing broadside waiting for you to pull the trigger, most of the time they don't. They hear, see, or smell you, and get the hell out of Dodge trough the trees and brush. Or come at you like a runaway freight train. A human, unless on drugs, is far easier to put down than an animal of similar size. Just one broken leg will put a human on the ground.

At the close distance you are apparently talking about, in bed, with the intruder mere feet away, that shotgun pattern will be about three inches. Not quite enough for pointing in the "general direction". But, yes, a shotgun is devastating when discharged a few inches from the target. When the muzzle is touching, you don't need to aim.

As for a defensive handgun, yes, bigger is better. If you can handle it. But don"t expect any hydrostatic shock from a .45, ACP or Colt.

Stopping power. I get it. When the bullet can't make it through the body. Personally, I like some surplus energy and penetration.

[timmy]

re: XL's random thought three

There is no doubt that a rifle will beat a handgun anytime. This is even true for the situations where the rifle is chambered for a handgun cartridge. There is no problem with the British .303, either. It is more like a .30-40 Krag than a .30-06 or 7.62x54r, but it can certainly get the job done and has in most any situation in which it has been called to serve. Even the military ammunition, which uses an unstable bullet that tumbles on impact, is quite effective on any critter, two legged or four.

As regards the SMLE, you bet, it is very smooth. Other rifles that are regarded for their smoothness are the Krag and the Mannlicher Schoenauer. I have heard it said that the MS, when held vertically, will close the bolt and lock the action just from gravity alone. I've never tried that, but the ones I've handled were silky-smooth. I owned a Krag, and they are truly smooth. The SMLE won't close and lock by gravity because they are cock-on-closing, but from my perspective, it is smoother than the other two rifles, and also smoother than the M94 Swede (which I also owned at one time).

But, restating XL's points, let me draw a few reasonably common self-defense scenarios:

You are walking down the street with your wife/girlfriend, and three goons jump out in front of you. Luckily, you are carrying your SMLE...

You are in bed, sound asleep, with your SMLE beside the headboard. It is pitch-dark in your room and you hear someone rummaging around in the room. You whip out your SLML from beside the headboard, snake it between the bed and the nightstand, fling it around without hitting any other furniture or clothing laying about, and draw a bead on whatever's moving about.

You are driving down the highway in your Smart Car or Tata Nano, when an angry driver cuts you off and threatens to shoot you or run you off of the road. You reach behind your seat, whip out your SMLE, stick the muzzle out the window, and cut loose on the other car as you drive.

In other words... NOT! No, and not even with a Jungle carbine, either.

Getting a second shot off quickly, no matter how smooth the SMLE is, would be problematic in these situations, as well.

Of course, as XL outlines the .303's potent power, busting caps on a .303 in the direction of a goon when in any kind of suburban or urban setting will not only endanger the goon, but everyone else for a large distance beyond, whether on the street or in a house, sleeping in bed.

No, this thing is not going to be practical in almost any scenario one could propose.

Of course, a lever gun would beat a bolt, a pump would beat a lever, and a semi auto would beat a pump. My little SKS paratrooper, at less than a meter long, would be much more sensible than any bolt gun, but it still suffers from every drawback I've outlined for the SMLE above.

A shotgun, if one is using a long gun, does make more sense, even though it is unmanageable in two of the three above situations and not so hot in the other. Penetration isn't such a problem, however.

The idea of the shotgun, armed with buckshot and not birdshot, as XL points out, isn't that it magically spreads, goes around corners, and seeks out goons like a Sidewinder seeks out an enemy jet. It is that at close range, 8 to 15 buckshot pellets will carve out a sizable wound channel, which is quite effective. Shotguns do not, as Two Rivers points out, eliminate the need to aim or point accurately at what one is shooting at. Anyone who has ever played about with a shotgun in a defensive-like scenario knows better! Such a person knows how hard it is to hit something, even with a shotgun, by quickly pointing and firing, and I'm talking about a large target here. I fear that watching too many movies causes folks to form very erroneous impressions on this point.

A larger would channel does allow a slightly less precise targeting, but this isn't to say that one can promiscuously blaze away in a defensive situation and have any hope of hitting anything one expects to hit.

Regarding defending against humans vs hunting animals, all I can say is that it ain't as easy as it looks! Animals aren't just sitting around, waiting to get shot. That antelope in Wyoming out there grazing in the field looks pretty serene, but I'll bet he knows the range of your rifle better than you do. Regarding Mr. Elk, as I was taught, if you see him, he's already seen you a long long time ago, and if you heard him, he's already heard you a long long time ago, and if you have smelled him, he's already smelled you a long long time ago.

Maybe some here are under the impression that hunting is like going out and plugging some poor beast in a feed lot, but that ain't so! My younger son-in-law just started hunting feral hogs in Texas. I will share with you some of what he wrote, verbatim:

The hog I shot actually turned out to be a little over 200lbs. The game cameras on the property are showing hogs that are larger than the one I shot.
Without night lighting of some kind hogs are extremely challenging. I have had several hogs come within 20-30 yards of me but they stay in the brush out of sight.
Their eye sight is poor at best but their sense of smell and hearing is better than that of a deer. They are super loud when they are nosing through dirt and eating the fruit from the cactus here. It is quite a rush to hear them coming. Lucy joined is on our platform stand last night and began squeezing my hand extremely hard when we heard a hog get within ten yards of us. It stayed on the other side of a brush pile so we could not see it.

(Lucy is my Granddaughter.)

There can certainly be difficult situations when hunting wild hogs, but the hunting mentioned above isn't terribly difficult. Maybe the human is quite evasive, but whatever one is hunting, they have had millions of years of evolution that protects them from getting eaten, caught, or shot. If this were not so, they wouldn't have survived until now!

[winnie_the_pooh]

Most commom ammo which will always be available for rifles----I guess the one that goes bang

Sorry...could not resist that

[Gautham Devara]

xl_target, tworivers, I have read your posts and appreciate the feedback.

Tworivers, I have had a chance to read your posts and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that you have way more experience/knowledge in firearms than I do. I would never dispute that.

However, I have spent a good deal of life tracking animals and studying their behavior. Like xl_target said, most animals hear you or smell you way before you see them. And in my experience, no animal, unless wounded and pissed off, or in heat, will come looking for you, fur and teeth included.

My comments about hunting were never meant to give the impression that hunting is like a video game where the animals are there giving you a broadside shot and waiting for you to sneak up to them. You need skill, patience and above all, experience. What I meant to say was, in most hunting scenarios, an experienced hunter will make the call to make a shot or not. Alaska included.

My first post was addressed to a guy from Naperville, Illinois, a highly populated suburban area. In his case, walking around with a gun chambered in a 30-06 for self-defense makes little sense.

And just to end this subject once and for all; Tworivers, I must admit my emotions may have influenced my replies. You may have more experience in firearms or even life in general. But when you say stuff like " You read a lot but don't comprehend" to someone you don't know, it sounds judgmental. And frankly, a bit arrogant.

[TwoRivers]

re: XL's random thought three

... I have heard it said that the MS, when held vertically, will close the bolt and lock the action just from gravity alone. I've never tried that, but the ones I've handled were silky-smooth.

Pure urban myth. It doesn't, and it can't. The bolt will glide forward when you lower the muzzle, but it wilI not rotate into locked position.

[TwoRivers]

I have spent a good deal of life tracking animals and studying their behavior. Like xl_target said, most animals hear you or smell you way before you see them. And in my experience, no animal, unless wounded and pissed off, or in heat, will come looking for you, fur and teeth included.]"


"[And just to end this subject once and for all; Tworivers, I must admit my emotions may have influenced my replies. You may have more experience in firearms or even life in general. But when you say stuff like " You read a lot but don't comprehend" to someone you don't know, it sounds judgmental. And frankly, a bit arrogant.

"

Well, then get between a moose cow and her calf, or get too close to a bear cub without even being aware of it, and you'll find out that you don't have to piss them off. Or don't just quietly give up your deer to a bear, or stumble to close to his cache.

Fell free to think so. Your post spoke for itself. Read...yes. Actual experience...no. Just repeating opinions picked up along the way. Yes, this topic has been hijacked enough.

[bennedose]

There can certainly be difficult situations when hunting wild hogs, but the hunting mentioned above isn't terribly difficult. Maybe the human is quite evasive, but whatever one is hunting, they have had millions of years of evolution that protects them from getting eaten, caught, or shot. If this were not so, they wouldn't have survived until now!

Forget moose, elk, bear, wild hogs. It's damn difficult to get that one bandicoot in my backyard that keeps digging holes. They guy is generally visible without cover for a maximum of 1 second and even then he is moving.

[timmy]

There can certainly be difficult situations when hunting wild hogs, but the hunting mentioned above isn't terribly difficult. Maybe the human is quite evasive, but whatever one is hunting, they have had millions of years of evolution that protects them from getting eaten, caught, or shot. If this were not so, they wouldn't have survived until now!

Forget moose, elk, bear, wild hogs. It's damn difficult to get that one bandicoot in my backyard that keeps digging holes. They guy is generally visible without cover for a maximum of 1 second and even then he is moving.

Yes, indeed!

Go to Yellowstone Park and see the elk grazing while they are slowly ambling along. Then, go out there with a bow (this is hypothetical; you cannot hunt in Yellowstone Park, ever!) and try to creep up to them close enough to get a shot. You find that what seems to be a slow, ambling walk turns out to be equal to a very brisk walk for a human, and they are hard enough to catch up with and keep up with, much less creep up upon!

One thing Two Rivers said, however: drugs. A human who is on drugs can be a fearful opponent, for sure. Many here will recall the Moro tribesmen of the Philippines, and how their fearsome charges that could not be stopped with the Army's Colt revolvers, chambered in 38 Long Colt. The Moros applied tourniquets to their limbs and fortified themselves with drugs before the charges, and the Army had to recall the old 45 Colt Single Action Army revolvers to deal with them. Famously, this led to the development and adoption of the 45 aCP and 1911 pistol in the US Army. Similarly, when the British faced the Zulus at Isandlwana during the Zulu War of 1879, the Zulus were able to break the British defensive square by charges mounted by drugged storm troops, who overran the British firing lines. Once the British position was pierced, it was relatively simple to roll up the whole lot of them.

A drug- charged human, whose sensations of pain, emotions of fear, and instincts of self-preservation can be quite difficult to handle, as battlefield experience and the experiences of urban cops can readily attest.

[timmy]

Yes, this topic has been hijacked enough.

And why not? It's the only way any sense could be made of it!

[xl_target]

Most commom ammo which will always be available for rifles----I guess the one that goes bang

Sorry...could not resist that

Was waiting for you to chime in. I figured, this is too good of an opportunity for Winnie to miss.

However, I have spent a good deal of life tracking animals and studying their behavior. Like xl_target said, most animals hear you or smell you way before you see them. And in my experience, no animal, unless wounded and pissed off, or in heat, will come looking for you, fur and teeth included.

In most cases, absolutely, yes.

However, two examples come to mind.
The Griz, who is usually the king of his little patch, is not afraid of much and can be irritable and very temperamental. Especially when he comes out of hibernation. I'm talking about the males here and not a mother with cubs. I don't suppose that they will come looking for you though.
Another predator, to whom every thing looks like food is the Polar Bear. Many of them have little or no contact with man and to some of them, all those puny little humans are just ambulatory snacks.
Now, I will freely admit that I don't have first hand experience of this type of behavior. I have, however, spoken to people who have.

There are always exceptions to every rule. Sometimes you trespass on an animal's territory unknowingly. One example of this is the Hippo.
Apparently more people are killed by Hippos than any other? I find that a little hard to believe but then I have never seen a Hippo in the wild, so what do I know.

Random thought Five:
If forced to use a firearm indoors, I'd much rather use a handgun. A rifle or shotgun going off in the closed confines of a room would be painfully loud, even something as small as the .223 round.

[winnie_the_pooh]

If forced to use a firearm indoors, I'd much rather use a handgun. A rifle or shotgun going off in the closed confines of a room would be painfully loud, even something as small as the .223 round.

Even a handgun going off in the confines of a room is going to leave you with ringing ears.

[farook]

If forced to use a firearm indoors, I'd much rather use a handgun. A rifle or shotgun going off in the closed confines of a room would be painfully loud, even something as small as the .223 round.

Its worth considering here as to which weapon are the political leaders and VIPs protected with. Well it has to be a 9mm but loaded in Hks MP5. The design even though now 50 years is still popular when it comes to close quarter combats. I remember the Indian NSG had ordered for new MP 5 a few years back. The approval process took so long that the Hk had come up with the MP7 during the period ( their answer to FNs P90 ). It was smaller propriety armour piercing round. Though they offered the new one for the same price as MP5 the Indian army still preferred the MP5. Reason, the MP7 did have the penetration advantage over the MP5, the 9mm still sent more mass down the range giving more knock down power.

There are three aspects to be considered when using a weapon indoors. Manoeuvrability, noise level and collateral damage. Neither a shot gun nor a rifle can be as easily moved around as a handgun. An obvious winner here. For the second issue we can use a suppressor, pistol wins over a revolver. To avoid collateral damage a hollow point is the one to opt for over a FMJ.

If for what ever reason I still had to use a rifle in a closed room it would be a 300 blackout.

[bennedose]

If forced to use a firearm indoors, I'd much rather use a handgun. A rifle or shotgun going off in the closed confines of a room would be painfully loud, even something as small as the .223 round.

Even a handgun going off in the confines of a room is going to leave you with ringing ears.

I'm guessing that this will be the least of all problems that are likely if a gun goes off in the confines of a room