Iirc, this is still the law in Iowa. Michigan too, south of Grand Rapids.

I agree with you here but sometimes a fight can not be avoided this is the type of situation I am thinking of and that unavoidable fight might be outside the effective range of a shotgun I am not talking about going all 75th Rangers here.A shotgun is great if you are inside a building like waiting in ambush on a flight of stairs but in the open (if you get stuck in that situation) not so much.

The problem with that theory is you simply cannot prepare for all the kinds of situations you might encounter and still remain mobile.

Yes a shotgun is not good for range but if you go with your hunting rifle you give up the close in firepower a shotgun would provide. Go with an assault weapon and the ammo becomes more difficult to obtain. The AW is also not as suitable for hunting as either of the first two.

It's all about choices and compromises and imo the best all around weapon for most people would be the trusty shotgun.

Who exactly are the people with "ballistic protection" that you would shoot at? I can think of only one group - the police. :o

Not every ballistic vest is worn by a cop.

Ballistic vests are available to the civilian population at large in the states. Any numbnut on the street that can afford one (through legal or illegal means) can get one. Drug dealers, bank robbers, etc are often equipped with such gear. If your in a situation where your talking "urban survival", then the authority structure has either broken down completely (meaning no governmental agency, police - etc are coming to help you) or Big Brother has turned on its citizenry. Sure, police may have them, but so can the people from across town (or across the street) that think you have food in your cellar while they starve.

Sure, a good headshot makes body armor irrelevant, but in tight quarters that's a skill you would be best off not having to rely on to win. To win you have to survive and make sure the other guy doesn't. Counting on a head shot every time isn't the way to go when the opponent is that close.

Your have your opinion I have mine personally I feel that a shot gun is to much of a liability you have no choice but to allow any threat to get close to you to insure that you can engage them which means that you have to be hidden you are assuming that everything is going to go your way and you will see a threat before he sees you which cant all ways be the case.

Also I have the preparation way of thinking I have plenty of what I need on my land I live in a rural area on acreage.It much wiser in my case to have plenty of ammo for more than one type of weapon.I will say that if you are going to pick only one fire arm to rely on in a survival situation select an AK47 reliable weapon easy to use handles conditions well can kill from range ammo is very common(must be thousands of AKs and SKSs in the US therefore plenty of 7.62x39mm) better engagement ability as well 30 rounds per reloading vs. 5,6 or 8 in a shotgun.

You can say a shotgun is better until your blue in the face you are not going to change my mind.:salute: Kind of like you take the high road I'll take the low road.

I don't care what you do. Note the thread title, read the op.

Oh and as far as picking an AK-47, then my AR-15 owns you from 300-400 meters away. My Remington Model 700 bolt action owns you from 300 out to 1000. Every weapon has it's strengths and weaknesses.

Get a rifle/shotgun combo!


http://images.ableammo.com/catalog/i...9/sm/14175.jpg



:yeah:

you know what they say!

Smaller the gun, the bigger the....ehh you get the point

http://mimg.ugo.com/201006/47719/cut...et_480x360.jpg

Call me old school, but...
http://www.militaryheritage.com/images/doglock1.jpg

I'll bet those are still in service long after the last AK or M-16 has gone to rust.

My Survival Weapons chioces are based on several factors.

I have close range weapons at first.
Long range weapons will be 'acquired' as time and situations go on.
:03:
As will Ammo and other needed 'time critical' supplies.
The longer the situation goes on?
Well, I guess you know the rest.

Well I guess we would own each other then because my Bushmaster AR-15 has the same performance as your AR I'm sure.What is so wrong about one expressing their opinion? I cant say that I disagree that a shotgun is not the ultimate survival weapon? Others besides myself did.

I'd just carry a mini gun like in Terminator 2 and own everyone I'd be the survival king because I'd convert it to run of off solar power and convert it to take any from form of ammo.

Nothing at all, sorry if I gave you that impression.

My point is for most people getting into a gun battle at anything but close range is a recipe for failure. You can have the best assault weapon in the world but it's not going to do you one bit of good if you don't have the combat experience or training required to use it effectively.

A shotgun provides good firepower, beginners can operate it, shot shells vastly improve the chances of a hit, especially at close range and ammo in general is a heckuva lot more plentiful than .223 or 7.62x39. .12ga hulls are a lot easier to reload too which is another consideration in a long term survival situation.

So to sum it up if I were starting up my post apocalyptic survivors band while I of course would arm any ex-Army or Marines with assault weapons, maybe any ex-cops as well, but everyone else would get either a .12ga or a .22LR.