JAB

Yeah, well, I don't own a 1911, either. I don't like the idea of 'cocked and locked' carry and I don't like the idea of carrying a striker fired pistol. In pistols, I like DA, I like DAO and I like DA/SA because those are the most like a (traditional) revolver and revolvers are still my favorite. That is interesting. I have previously seen the Rhino described as being striker fired which is a little different than an 'unexposed hammer'.

I think the idea of the barrel firing from the bottom cylinder to reduce muzzle flip and so on is a neat idea and design. The deal killer for me, though, is that - unless I am totally mistaken - the Rhino is actually striker fired. I am not even really that big on striker fired semiautos much less a revolver.

Me, too.

I agree. Once I get comfortable with reloading I hope to start casting my own bullets. After that, most of my onhand supply for .38/.357 will be lead round nose. Not exactly 'tactical' or even the most effective ammo available but it will still punch a hole. Until then, I'll be buying inexpensive bullets (LRN, wadcutters or SWC) and reloading those. I'll keep a few boxes of the 'better' stuff onhand but those would be my 'deep supply' rounds. I also have no problem buying the inexpensive 9mm Federal or Tula ammo at Wally or Monarch ammo at Academy. All are FMJ and I have had no problems shooting either brand. Throw in a couple of boxes of Remington or Winchester's budget line JHPs and a box or two of 'premium' ammo and I'll feel pretty good about my stock.

Let me begin by saying that I am in no way a survival expert nor am I highly (or even not so highly) trained for survival. I am just a guy who thinks about preparedness and knows that he needs to do a whole lot more preparing, just in case. This is just something that has been bugging me for some time, now. I have seen the oft repeated statement that one criteria to consider when choosing handguns and/or rifles for possible SHTF scenarios is to look at what calibers LEO and the military are using. The theory is that, if ammo is no longer commercially available, the stockpiles of ammo amassed by such agencies will still be available. My concern with that thinking is: To my mind, if I survive whatever 'event' brings society as we know it crashing down and society is either no more or takes many years to recover then it stands to reason that at least some of the folks who are already better trained and better equipped to weather such an event will survive, also. These folks, military for instance, will already have access to the aforementioned stockpiles. Therefore, they will be better equipped, better armed and will be (rather jealously, I imagine) defending those stockpiles out of a desire to keep those supplies for themselves. It is also likely that, once the reality that our society is gone settles in, at least some of them will fortify and hole up in the military structures where those stockpiles are held. Why, then, should I assume that they will just let me back a pickup truck up to one of their supply houses and load up on ammo? I really doubt that happening. The same goes for LEO. Once there is no longer a society to 'protect and serve', I imagine they (like the rest of us) would either go the 'every man for himself' route or ally with each other against potential threats. Again, then, they would already hold the police store rooms and I doubt they are going to let me go 'shopping' there. Now, if we are envisioning a 'battle in the streets' scenario where one might be liberating supplies from the bodies of dead combatants then I can see the possibility that one would be picking up a magazine or two, here and there, of the military or police's 'ammo du jour'. In that case, though, the same person could also simply pick up the rifle or handgun to fire that ammo from the corpse of that same individual. Therefore, it would seem to me to make more sense to build a reasonably sized (that term can vary between individuals) stock of ammo in whatever caliber or calibers you like/can get/ can best afford. Better, to my mind, to choose a chambering based on your own projected needs and preferences. If the firearms you choose happen to be chambered for the ammo that the military or police use then maybe that could be considered a 'bonus' but I honestly don't see how it would be a major factor. For instance, I like .357 Magnum and, given that one can be loaded with anything from shotshells to .38 Special to heavy-for-caliber rounds that will likely stop even the biggest critters we have in this area, I see it as a good, all around choice for TEOTWAWKI. I hope to begin reloading for .38 and .357 soon which should help me build a pretty good stock of ammo. I already have one .357 revolver along with a couple of .38 Special revolvers. I hope to get a lever action carbine so chambered in the near future and would like to have another revolver or two in .357 - maybe a Blackhawk for it's strength and ruggedness. Likewise, I think that 9mm will do most of what I need doing. I already have a couple of pistols so chambered as well as a semiauto carbine (it is 'just' a Hi Point 995TS but it works great, is accurate and so on.) I like that ammo for 9mm is relatively inexpensive, meaning I can build a decent supply of factory ammo for those without breaking the bank. It is (currently) also a caliber that is widely used in the military but, as I said previously, to my thinking that is merely a 'bonus'. Moving up the power band, my Mosin-Nagant is ugly, outdated, cumbersome and slow to employ. It has also already survived military use, is still just as functional nearly 70 years after it was built as the day it left the factory new and packs a pretty good whallop. The ruggedness and longevity of that rifle - along with the fact that I could pick up one or two more as backups or for spare parts for less than $200 each - appeal to me in a rifle for use in a theoretical SHTF world. Ammo for it is still pretty easy to come by and, compared to other rifle ammo in it's power class, relatively cheap for the surplus stuff. I doubt I would last very long going 'mobile' on foot and trying to live off the land (alongside 1000 other people who plan to do the same) so losing access to my ammo supply is not high on my list of concerns. If I did lose access to my supplies, then I would probably also lose access to whatever firearms I had chosen, as well, so the choice of chamberings wouldn't really matter, anyhow. It would seem to me, then, that I would be better off deciding that I like these firearms/chamberings for reasons other than projected and possibly faulty supply criteria and simply building a supply that I know will be there if I need it. Being that I don't have military/battle training, I doubt that I would survive a scenario that would require me to fire thousands upon thousands of rounds, anyhow. I would think that 1k - 2k rounds of basic 'low dollar' loads along with a couple of hundred more 'premium' type rounds in each of these chamberings, supplemented with the proverbial boatload of .22LR (see below), along with the three or five boxes of ammo I keep onhand at all times for the other chamberings/calibers/gauges I own should cover any realistic shooting needs I would have in a post-apocalyptic world. Finally, I have multiple handguns and long guns chambered in .22LR. It will handle the majority of skills maintenance needs, put small (or, in a pinch, maybe even larger) game in the pot and can even be pressed into a defensive role. Bought in bulk packs, it should be easy and financially feasable to stock many thousands of rounds of LR ammo. Of course, the potential problem with rimfire ammo is long term storage but I am not sure that it is as unstable as some believe. I know I have personally shot LR ammo that was pretty old - possibly older than me - and it worked just fine.

Well I'd say a good keyring has it's place in preparedness planning. After all, if the 'pocalypse hits and I survive, I'm going to be driving some damn nice cars and living in some very nice houses (yeah, I said houses - plural) once the former owners are deceased. Given such an opportunity, it would suck to lose the key to my new Lamborghini, my newly acquired, early '70s Mach 1 Mustang and my new house on the lake! That doesn't even get into the inconvenience of losing the key to the pool house or the keys to all those new gun safes that I will be stocking with all the 'battlefield pickup' firearms I'll obviously have. Being prepared to securely carry the keys to my potential, new-found stuff around just shows good planning and foresight! Reminds me of a really funny bumper sticker I saw once. My thinking is it was in response to the bumper stickers which read, "In case of rapture, car will be unoccupied." This one read, "In case of rapture, can I have your car?"

I find your argument about the use of 'American Indian' to be ironic. That is because you are talking about the misuse of words yet you keep saying that the MISUSED term 'American Indian' should remain in use. Keep in mind these folks were called Indian in the first place because the explorers thought they had found a new route to India. They were wrong and the native peoples were incorrectly called 'Indian'. They were not, are not and never were 'Indian'. They were, however, the peoples who were indigenous (native) to the Americas and had been for a period beginning about 20,000 years ago, whose cultures were native to the Americas - ergo, Native Americans is the term that more correctly describes them while 'Indian' is simply, totally, 100% incorrect. As for the whole use of the word 'gay', what bugs me is that homosexuals want to use the word to mean something it didn't mean then turn around and have campaigns to stop people from using the word to mean strange or dumb, as in, "That's so gay." Well, guess what, just as the homosexual community is free to use that word to mean what they want, the rest of us are free to use that word to mean what we want. Equal rights (to use words) are a bitch, aren't they.

Personally, I wouldn't give a crap about undergoing a background check if they would just do away with the $10 'sin tax' for HCP holders. I have filled out those stupid forms often enough that I can now literally complete them in less than two minutes. Fill in name, address and so on, check 'yes' on first question, 'no' on all others, skip the one that is for legal immigrants (#12 iirc), fill in place of birth, state of residence and sign on the back. No problem - I mean, the state already knows I have an HCP so it isn't like they don't already know I own guns. I just don't think we should be paying $10 every time we want to excercise the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms - especially after paying $115 startup + $50 every four years for the 'privilege' of exercising our right to be equipped for self defense.

I don't know about 'sissy'. I mean, it would take a hell of a man (admittedly more man than me) to tickle fight some crowbar-wielding home invader into submission.

I got started making home made wine because my dad used to make it. I made my first batch long before I was old enough to be allowed to drink it. Dad just used the old, country method of letting the natural yeast ferment the wine. That can work but you have to know when to stop the fermentation. Refrigerating the wine will stop the fermentation - at least as long as the wine is kept refrigerated. Dad used to think that fermenting too long caused the wine to turn to vinegar. Apparently (based on books about wine making that I have read), he was not exactly right. Instead, fruit flies carry a particular bacteria on their legs which, if the must isn't sterilized before fermenting, can cause the wine to turn to vinegar after it has begun fermenting. Letting the wine sit (while fermenting) too long can let some pretty good wine turn to vinegar (my understanding is that some of the 'fine' vinegar makers actually control the strand of bacteria in order to achieve a specific, end result in their vinegar.) If you sterilize the must and then add a packaged wine maker's yeast you cut down on the potential for it to turn to vinegar. It is also important to sterilize the wine making equipment and bottles in order to avoid the introduction of unwanted bacteria or yeast strains. I think some people - especially in the old days - would simply boil the must and clean equipment with hot water. That would probably still work but there are also chemicals - available in powdered form at home brewing stores - that can be introduced to the must in order to kill any naturally occurring bacteria, yeast, etc. before introducing the packaged yeast. These chemicals are also sometimes used to stop fermentation before bottling. If you cork a bottle and the wine is still fermenting the gases will build up and blow the cork out of the bottle - I know from experience. Champagnes and sparkling wines (at least sometimes) undergo a secondary fermentation process in the bottle. If you notice, those types of wine generally have corks that are held in by a wire 'cage' that is twisted tightly around them. My understanding is that the secondary (bottle) fermentation is how the 'sparkling' (carbonation) gets in the wine. When yeast digest sugars in the presence of oxygen, they use the oxygen to digest the sugars and give off carbon dioxide (which can 'carbonate' the beverage if it is sealed and the gas can't escape.) In the absence of oxygen or in low-oxygen environments, the yeast will use nitrogen (iirc) to digest the sugars and the by-product is alcohol. Therefore, using a setup that limits the amount of oxygen that gets in during fermentation can drive up the alcohol content of the final product. I guess enough oxygen gets into the wine during the bottling process that before the yeast use all the oxygen in the bottle up they give off enough carbon dioxide to carbonate the wine. Before I knew about all that, I once 'bottled' some home-made blackberry wine (one of the first where I used a packaged yeast) in pint Mason type jars with tightly screwed on lids and didn't keep the jars refrigerated. When I got ready to drink that wine it was highly carbonated - fizzed almost as much as a Coca Cola. It was danged tasty, though.

Last time I checked with them, the Tennessee Valley Winery, located just off of the Sugar Limb Road exit, sold wine making equipment, including carboys. You might want to call them and check. Also, I see you are in Athens. Last I heard, the Stryker winery was still open (it is in Athens.) I don't know if it has since closed or if they sell any winemaking supplies but you might check with them. There is a place in West Knoxville called Fermentations which is a beer and wine-making supply store. They are still in business, as far as I know. Finally, there is a place in the South Knoxville area called Allen Biermakens (again, I think they are still in business) which is also a home brewer supply store. I haven't made any wine in a few years and in the past I have mostly used a combination of 'serious' methods and old 'country' methods. I have never used a carboy but came up with a home-made alternative based on a setup one of my uncles told me about. This year, I hope to get a carboy and make a small batch or two of beer (haven't made beer, before) and maybe a batch of wine. I'd kind of like to try my hand at making a batch of homemade hard cider, too.

Unless I am mistaken, however, the case against the pharmacist wasn't proven by some uber-forensic expert. Instead, that pharmacist got into trouble because there were security cameras that showed the assailant he killed was pretty much lying motionless on the floor when the pharmacist finished him off. I'm not sure that forensics could have conclusively proven that the assailant was lying still at that point and not reaching for a weapon or something that might have been perceived as a weapon. I agree that shooting an assailant after the assailant is no longer a threat is likely a bad decision. Of course, only the person who is in the situation at the time can judge if the assailant is still a threat or not. Whatever the case, basically executing the dude on camera is certainly not a good idea. As for me, I live alone. I would not necessarily 'want' the guy to die but if such is the result of my stopping him from being a threat to me then so be it. I am not dropping my guard in order to render aid beyond calling 911. I am also not risking being exposed to disease nor do I feel the least inkling of a 'moral obligation', beyond calling 911, to aid some scumbag who would kill me without a second thought. Honestly, I don't understand why anyone would feel such a moral obligation (not criticizing - simply stating my point of view.) If the guy is moaning then there is a chance he is conscious and so getting too close could still be dangerous. I'd probably toss him an old bath towel and tell him to apply direct pressure until professional help arrives. Honestly, I have no real medical training and certainly am not a trauma surgeon. My HD weapons at hand are a 12 gauge loaded with 00 Buckshot and a .357 Magnum. Where I live, there are coyotes. I carry the .357 when I need to be outside after dark so I have it loaded to deal with a potential threat such as a rabid coyote or other potentially dangerous, wild animal (158 grain JSP) as I honestly consider that to be a more likely threat, if I am at home, than a human assailant. If I am forced to shoot an assailant and put two rounds from either of those firearms in his upper torso, I doubt that any level of basic first aid - or anything less than intravenous fluids and a trauma surgeon - would be of much help, anyhow.

Funny that there can be so much variance between individual examples of the same product. The owner of my LGS sold me a 15 round ProMag magazine for a P95 for five bucks. He said that they had tried it in a couple of other P95s and it wouldn't work. Told me I could try it and bring it back when it didn't work. It works as well in my old one as does the factory mag and feeds/fires as quickly as I can pull the trigger. Come to think of it, I am not sure I've tried that mag out in my newer one (my old one only came with one ten rounder - must have been made during the gun ban because the factory plastic box it came in only had room for the one mag - and my new one came with two fifteen rounders.)

That's 'The Pug', right? I've heard good things about them - particularly that the sights are better/somewhat more usable than on the standard models. I have heard that the pebbled, slip on grips they come with work well, too. I think I would really like the fixed sight Black Widow model for the better sights and slightly longer barrel (2 inches.) I wouldn't mind having a convertible BW but I don't want to pay $$$ for one (MSRP for NIB is $304 for the model I would want.) I got my NAA used for $160 - which is less than the price I usually see on NIB two-shooter Cobra derringers. As much as I like it, I don't know if I could bring myself to pay $300 for a .22 mini revolver.

Yeah, I guess whether or not I am equpped to act in self defense isn't my employer's problem. That being the case, I'd have to respond, "How is a perceived loss of business owner property rights my problem?" Compared with my being able to survive a potential life and death encounter, I'd have to say that business owners whining about 'losing property rights' over something that they would never even know was in my car unless they searched isn't my problem.

Convenience? CONVENIENCE??!! How is the ability to be equipped to defend one's life against violent attack a 'convenience'? It is not. Rather it is a natural right.

I think Campfield is a loon. I don't live in Knoxville so have no say in voting for him. All that said, I will here paraphrase my comment on the story in the News-Sentinel: The Bistro is in Downtown Knoxville where the customer base is already limited. There is plenty of competition in the restaurant business in Knoxville as a whole as well as specifically in the downtown area. The real outcome of this whole debacle is that the restaurant owner has driven off at least one customer out of an already limited customer base. As for the would-be customer, he will now be 'forced' to take his dining money to any one of hundreds of other restaurants in Knoxville. Yeah, that'll show him!

I swear I posted in this thread, already. Anyhow: I have one in the 1 5/8 inch WMR model that I bought used. I couldn't do much with the birdshead grips so I put the oversize rubber grips on it and that helped a lot. I'm still not that great with it but can do okay out to about seven yards. Mine gets carried as a weak side BUG, sometimes. Here are some pics of it with a pocket holster I made for it. The holster works pretty well. I got a little carried away punching stitching holes in the thin leather so that is what the reinforcing strip of leather is all about.

Not really all that heavy, either, IMO. I have two because my first was a gift and I didn't want to carry it so I got a second one to carry. Now, I'm not going to say that I carry it in t-shirt and shorts weather but it carries pretty easily and hides pretty well for 'casual concealment' OWB in a leather belt slide holster under just an untucked shirt as a cover garment. I have only ever experienced any kind of ammo 'pickiness' with one type of ammo. It came in white boxes with simply the caliber and some kind of lot number or something stamped on them. The primers had red around them and I believe they were probably intended as sub-machine gun ammo which is said to have harder primers than regular ammo. Shooting those, there was a couple of failures to ignite on first strike. The P95 fired even those on second strike, however. Beyond that, I have run all kinds of junk from Wolf to factory reloads through it without a single issue. This is despite the fact that I once was not as conscientious about cleaning my guns as I am now and didn't even clean my older P95 beyond swabbing out the barrel for the first five or so years I owned it. The P95 manual expressly states that the pistol is suitable for use with any ammo loaded to industry standards regardless of whether the ammo uses steel cases, aluminum cases or brass cases.

And I guess the similarities with long range target shooting is that you end up dreaming about hitting something that you are never really going to be able to hit consistently unless you are willing to spend a whole lot more money.

I'd put the $700 you are giving us with the $2000 that Il Duce is giving us (over in 'the what if thread') and buy something really cool - maybe even a couple of somethings. Thanks, guys! Seriously, though, since you asked, "What would you buy and why?" I'd buy a lever action .357 carbine. Stainless with wood. In fact, I hope to buy one (probably the Rossi version) at some point after I finally get off my butt and get started reloading. Whatever is left of the $700 can go toward ammo and/or reloading supplies. Of course, I have no real desire to shoot anything at much beyond 100 yards or so. Oh, as for the why part of the question, because I love lever actions and .357 Magnum is probably my favorite all-around cartridge. Now, can I have another few hundred bucks so I can buy a single action revolver in .357 to pair with it? Thanks! Failing the lever action, I would probably buy a Ruger Mini 14 in .223 because I don't own anything in .223, see the practicality of owning something in that chambering and don't really have much desire for an AR type rifle.

If you haven't already, you might want to try shooting the Critical Defense and the Remington ammo back to back to see if they really do 'handle' the same, see if accuracy is comparable and so on. My carry ammo in my 642 is Winchester PDX1 .38 +P (130 grain, IIRC.) It uses a bonded JHP. I also have some Winchester White Box in (I believe) 125 grain .38 +P. The bullet in it is labelled as 'JHP' on the box but looks more like a SJHP, to me. The white box stuff kicks like a mule, makes accuracy difficult and is generally unpleasant to shoot. The PDX1 is much more controllable, has less felt recoil and shoots more accurately, for me. Just a thought.

Just to be contrary, Morrison didn't overdose on anything. He died of a heart attack that was the likely result of years of heavy drug use but doesn't seem to have been using at the time. Of course, by that time The Doors had already split and he was living more or less out of the spotlight. DING DING DING! We have a winner!

I think you are certainly correct, there. That is why I was thinking along the lines of a hot plate instead of trying to use the actual stove, etc. I have a charcoal grill, gas grill, propane fryer and a camp stove so for long term power outages I would start using those (when the weather permitted me to be outside in the case of the grills.) My mom has a kerosene heater and one room (added on after the central heat and air was installed) has gas heat so I could just pack in with her if a long term power outage became an issue. Also, my sister - who lives on the other side of me - has a fireplace. The stove in the camping trailer is a propane stove and the eyes are lit manually so a lack of electricity shouldn't prevent using the stove in true emergencies. Heat would be a different issue, though, so relocating to the camper may not be an option (then, again, I could always run the extension cord from the battery bank in the shed to the camping trailer, instead, I guess.) Between us all, we could make it for quite some time. My idea for the battery system would be more of a short term, stop gap solution for short term outages when the weather is too bad to be outside but where it probably isn't worth dragging out the more serious 'emergency' equipment or switching into 'long term power outage' mode. That is why I say I would just be looking for short term power to run one small lamp for light (if more light than my rechargeable Coleman lanterns puts off is needed), maybe run a very small, personal heater and maybe run a hot plate just long enough to fry an egg, make a grilled cheese, etc. I should probably look into a small generator, too. In fact, that might serve my stop gap purposes as well (or better) than the battery bank. I just like the idea that I could use one of the relatively low cost solar chargers I mentioned earlier to keep the batteries charged - especially since a long term emergency would likely see any fuel I could store for a generator run out but a solar charger could build the batteries back up after one or two sunny days.

I wasn't saying she would have won by a landslide because of her politics. I wasn't saying that her politics were/are any good or that she would be the 'right' person to hold the office. I was simply saying that the public goodwill and support she has garnered in the aftermath of the tragedy would likely have resulted in a huge win for her had she decided to run again. I was not yet born or even conceived when John F. Kennedy was assassinated. In fact, I was negative eight, give or take. However, judging by his brother Ted and the politics of many of the other Kennedy's as well as New England politicians, in general (Romney being one), I can't imagine there would be as much goodwill for him, based solely on his politics, had he survived to serve two full terms and were living in retirement, now. My guess is that, from a PR standpoint, getting shot in the head did more for his public image and how society as a whole feels about him (and his brother Bobby, too, for that matter) than any amount of political achievement. I don't say that to be callous, it is simply what I believe.