JAB

Thanks for the 'heads up' on ammo prices.  Year before last, I stumbled across a guy selling ammo who had three or four boxes of Hot Shot 7.62 Nagant ammo for something like ten or twelve bucks apiece.  I bought them all.    Did you see many firearms for sale?  I don't mean ancient, antique (and high-dollar) collectible stuff or even modern, high-dollar stuff.  I mean the kinds of firearms you used to be able to find at flea markets - like, maybe, well used but not abused single shot shotguns for around (or under) $100 or maybe 'utility grade' type pump shotguns for $150 or so, that sort of thing.  I think a friend and I might hit the sale tomorrow.  We usually head up to the Crossville/Jamestown area.  I also like checking out the sale in the Dayton area and might head down that way on Sunday.

Funny thing, a poster on the Kel Tec owner's forum made a post in the thread about this incident over there claiming that Embody is held in pretty high regard in the firearms community for his firearms related woodworking skills.  I had never even heard that he possessed such skills.  Further, the poster claimed that Embody has a 'stellar rep' among the locals in Nashville who are actually 'from' Nashville (not music biz types, etc.)   I could not resist calling BS on that, in a somewhat more polite manner (the 'tone' over there isn't always as 'direct' as it is on here) by pointing out that even the folks who defend his actions on the TN gun owners site generally do not seem to hold him in very high regard.  But, being that I live in East Tennessee, I do have to ask, just to be sure, am I wrong?  Are there really a bunch of Embody groupies in the Nashville gun scene?

  Nah.  The last time I actually found .22LR in stock at Walmart there was another guy in front of me who bought both boxes of Winchester 550 (this was before the one box per limit.)  I had to settle for a couple of the the 325 boxes of Remington that were left.  I didn't think he was a scalper.   I do admit that I was a little ticked, though, because I was there before he was.  I was standing at the ammo case (which had no .22LR) waiting to ask if they might have some under the counter.  The clerk walked up and was walking toward me when this other guy walks up to the counter, catches the clerk's attention, and asks if they have any .22 under the counter - so the clerk helped him, first, and he got the better deal on (IMO) the better ammo.  If there had only been the two boxes left, I would have said something about having been there, waiting, first (not that I am sure it would have done any good.)  Since there was at least some kind of .22 left, I just let it go.  That was probably four or five months ago, now, and today I'd be excited to see that Remington bulk stuff in stock.  Oh, and that Walmart location apparently now has a policy that they will not keep any ammo under the counter - if they have it, it goes in the case.

I don't want to make light of the death of a bear.  I don't want to but this damned smartass nature of mine won't be stopped so:   The article says that the bear turned his rear toward the hiker.  The hiker then said, "Hey, bear," in an attempt to let the bear know he was there and not startle it.  At that point, the bear charged at the hiker.   Being as it had just turned its rear toward him, I wonder if the bear might have misheard, "Hey, bear," and though that the hiker was calling him a, "Gay bear."  Maybe the bear then went running toward the guy to exclaim that he (the bear) was NOT gay - just curious.  Would that make killing the bear a hate crime?

At this point, I don't even blame folks who are buying for their own use who buy as much as they can even if they won't be shooting it, immediately.  After all, if you happen to find some .22LR (for example) on a shelf at a 'normal' price, who is to say when you will ever see it, again, or that you might not be able to find any the next two or three times you want to go shooting?  I'd rather those folks buy it, if they can, before the scalpers have a chance at it.  It is the folks who are buying only to resell at profiteering prices that I would like to see take a good, swift kick in the nether regions from a Belgian draft horse.

  Oh, wouldn't it be the most awesome example of awesomely awesome karma if someone who did suffer harm due to the 911 system being backed up could prove that they suffered more harm than necessary due to Embody's actions having the system tied up, could further prove that he was intentionally seeking a police response - and then go on to successfully sue HIS ass?  Probably not possible but if some savvy lawyer figured out a way to make it work then that, my friends, would be justice.

  Who...us...go off topic?  You must be kidding.  :whistle:

  I would.  I can understand private businesses not being 'forced' to allow guns (although I believe that - as in other states - the sign should have no force of law and the only 'violation' should be if you are asked to leave and refuse.)  That said, government buildings, land, etc. are NOT private property and should NOT have the legal ability to post, period.

  I often find myself hunting my keys.  By the time I find them, I sometimes want to shoot the b@st@rds.  If I did, I'd probably use a shotgun.

Guys, I don't think that The Itis is saying shotguns are worthless.  Instead, he posed a hypothetical question that went something like, "IF you were on the move in a SHTF situation and IF you could only carry two guns and IF one of them were going to be a .22LR and IF one would be a long gun and the other a handgun and IF neither of them could be a shotgun, THEN what would be your setup?"   Sure, the question makes no more sense - in an overall survival scenario - to many of us than if he had asked, "IF you needed to travel from Tennessee to Florida and IF you don't want to use any mechanical conveyance and IF you also do not want to use any animal-powered conveyence and IF you don't want to utilize any waterways THEN what brand of walking shoes would be best?"  Sure, just like in my example, his question disqualifies many superior choices but that was his question.  Heck, I remember something from my Philosophy classes about being able to discuss a subject even if the parameters were wrong by having everyone agree to accept the parameters and go from there.  Something like, "IF unicorns existed, they would _____."  Not a realistic question, really, but possibly an interesting mental exercise - just like the question posited by the OP.   Now, I admit that I did bring up a couple of points to disagree with him on shotguns, too, but that was only because he stated the reason for omitting shotguns as being the 'bulky' ammo.  I couldn't resist pointing out that, if such were his only reason, it really wasn't as 'valid' a reason as some folks seem to believe.  Yeah, I also couldn't resist stating my opinion that .22WMR would be superior to LR in a survival/subsistence situation.  But calling him names because we aren't working within the parameters of his original question is probably a bit over the top.

  For that matter, in this part of the country, a good, portable set of basic fishing tackle would probably provide one with a more steadily reliable source of protein with less effort expended than any firearm.  Not even going for the 'big ones' so much as working the rocks, etc. in shallows from the bank to catch several of the fairly easily caught, small fellahs like bluegill, etc.  Too bad I'm not that crazy about eating fish more than every once in a while.  Then, again, if it is that or starve I imagine some panfish would start tasting pretty darned good.

  Yeah, while watching the video I was thinking that it should have been titled, "How to be a Dumbass."

  It is your thread and your question so you can rule out anything you want.  That said, I believe that the weight/bulkiness of shotgun ammo is often waaaay overstated and should not be used as a 'main' criteria.   Yeah, so one 3 inch 12 gauge shell might equal multiple .22LR rounds.  Guess what, though, that one shotgun shell has the potential to be more 'effective' than even multiple .22LR rounds.  Also, I personally don't usually even buy 3 inch shells as, for most of my needs, a 2 3/4 inch shell is probably going to work just as well.  Further, .22LR ammo is kind of a 'one trick pony'.  Okay, not just one trick - sure there are shotshells (I've shot a mouse - a little mouse - out of a tree with a .22 using shotshells and had to shoot it, again, once it was on the ground to put it out of its misery so shotshells do NOT turn your .22 into a shotgun.)  Sure there are quiet rounds like colibris, etc. (which may well be one of the biggest advantages of a .22LR.)  For the most part, though, the average shooter is going to be pretty limited in what he or she can do with a .22LR.   Now, let's look at that big, bulky shotgun shell.  It might be a field load that can be used to take small game, sometimes even on the run.  It might be a buckshot load that would be great for close range personal protection or even for close-in hunting of medium to large game (currently, use of buckshot for most if not all hunting applications is illegal in TN but, again, we are talking about an emergency, SHTF situation where laws may no longer apply.)  I mean, there is a reason it is called buckshot, right? Of course, that round might be a slug which with practice would allow one to reach out to, I would think, at least the effective lethal range of a .22LR but with a much larger/heavier projectile.   Because of the versatility discussed, above - and depending on the situation - I might even go so far as to say that I'd rather have a mixed bag of 100 to 150 'bulky' shotgun shells than 500 or so .22LR rounds.  I mean, honestly, how much shooting do you really think you will be doing?  I'd rather have fewer rounds but know that each shot will be more effective.   Another thing the 'bulky' argument overlooks is the existence of the .410 shotgun.  2 3/4 inch .410 shells aren't that bulky, at all.  However, the field loads still offer the benefits of scatter shot (although with less margin for error due to the smaller 'payload.)  There is buckshot available in .410.  Finally, .410 slugs are perfectly capable of taking white-tailed deer sized game if the shooter does his or her part.  The .410 is often maligned and considered 'under-powered'.  While perhaps 'under-powered' when compared to a 12 gauge, we must consider that the term is relative.  The following ballistics chart is for Winchester Super-X 2 3/4 inch .410 slugs, taken from the Winchester ammo website:   http://www.winchester.com/Products/shotshell-ammunition/Performance/Super-X-Shotshell/Pages/X41RS5.aspx       I don't know about you but to me 651 ft.lbs. of energy at the muzzle and 204 ft.lbs. of energy even at 100 yards doesn't seem all that shabby.  Heck, 174 ft.lbs. at 125 yards doesn't seem like something to sneeze at.  Certainly greater than any .22LR round of which I am aware - all in a shotgun shell that isn't really that much more bulky or heavy than many rifle rounds or even some big bore handgun rounds.  So, IMO, in a SHTF situation a .410 with an assortment of shells + a handgun (probably a .357 but possibly a 9mm for higher capacity) > any setup involving any .22LR + another gun.

  Sometimes people do things to legitimately protest a situation in which rights or perceived rights are being violated.  Other times, however, people do things just to be provocative.  How about considering another example:   Ever seen footage of one of those 'Gay Pride' parades that are held in places like San Francisco?  I am not talking about people simply stating their pride or support like the parade in Knoxville that was held recently apparently did (based solely on the footage I saw of it on the news.)  Nope, I'm talking about parades featuring men wearing only leather thongs, possibly sporting handcuffs and ball gags, being lead down the street on a leash by some other, hairy dude in leather.   In the above example, the folks who are respectfully participating in a parade/demonstration of their pride or support for the community are simply exercising their rights.  I may or may not agree with their message but they are at least demonstrating in the 'right' way.  The dudes in leather leading their nearly nude, gay 'subs' bound and gagged on leashes down a public street may also not, technically, be doing anything illegal but they still appear to be more interested in being 'provocative' than in honestly working toward more public acceptance.  They are more interested in being 'in your face' than fostering any kind of positive change for their community.  It is possible that the former can change public opinion to be more in favor or accepting of their community.  The latter, however, is simply going to disgust most members of the public at large - perhaps even anger the public at large - and, rather than bringing about positive change, is more likely to foster a backlash against their community and only set their cause back.  Embody, then, is at best the firearm community's equivalent of that hairy dude in leather, leading his boyfriend on a leash around in public - and I have about as much use for one as I do for the other.   That is why I don't believe that Washington, Jefferson, etc. would be in support of his actions.  Our Founders didn't do things just to be provocative.  I don't believe they engaged in stupid stunts like Embody does.  Instead, they stated their case and, when the statement was ignored, they did something about it.  Really did something about it.  They didn't engage in childish, "Na na nuh boo boo!" crap and then act like they were doing it 'for the good of us all'.

  As I said, I normally would not even enter because if they don't want my gun in their establishment then I figure that they don't want me or my money, either.  That said, if for some reason I did have to enter then it would make a difference to me whether they were properly/legally posted or not.   I am not going to be looking to break the law so a properly posted establishment is a different matter.  With an improperly posted establisment, as you say, I used to figure that either way we should respect their wishes.  Lately, however, I have come to the conclusion that as they do not respect me and my ability to safely and legally carry but can't be bothered to actually post properly then screw their 'wishes'.  I would not open carry into such an establishment as that would just be 'looking for trouble' but if I did decide to enter and my firearm is in my pocket, not visible and not 'disturbing' anyone else in a case where the posting is not legal then I figure that is my business.  Maybe not a very 'moral' argument but that is the way I feel.

  At one point, there was so much discussion of Embody (aka Quikrnu) on the 'Net, including this forum, that many began to feel that we shouldn't continue to give him any attention/publicity by continuing to discuss his dumbassery ad infinitum.  At that point, some jokingly began to refer to him as 'he whose name shall not be mentioned' which naturally lead to his being called Voldemort.

  They would probably be combing over their writing and speeches, trying to figure out why some folks believe they would have encouraged citizens to act like dumbasses.

  Could be.  At any rate, I don't think his actions are in any way intended to help further firearms or carry rights, even in a misguided sense.  Either he is actively and knowingly working against firearms rights or he simply wants attention and a payday and doesn't give a tinker's damn how much damage he does to firearms rights in his quest to get that attention and money.  Whichever the case, I do not for one second believe he is a firearms rights advocate.

  Truly, based solely on reports of his actions past and present, I really believe that this guy is a raging anti-gunner.  Everything he has done seems to have been designed to call attention to extreme instances of technically legal firearms carry.  In other words, I think he is saying:   1.  It probably seems crazy to a lot of people - especially those unfamiliar with firearms - that someone could wear fatigues and legally carry a Drako (AK-47) pistol around a public lake but under the current law it is perfectly legal.  Most responsible gun owners would realize that, while legal, it probably isn't a very good idea.  Why, then, would someone do that unless the desire was to draw attention to the fact and foster a change to the law?   2   It likely seems odd to a lot of people - especially those unfamiliar with firearms - that the same person could walk around a neighborhood carrying a handgun in his hand but under the law it was perfectly legal (actually, required although that was an old law that was apparently no longer being enforced.)  Why, then, would someone do that unless the desire was to create concern that people can legally walk around armed in that or any, other neighborhood?   3.  It really seems not only overly confrontational but, in all honesty, detrimental to business for a person with an FFL who wishes to sell firearms to foster an intentionally adversarial relationship with LEO via statements on one's business website.  Sure, a person should be free to do business (or not) with whomever he or she pleases as long as that person's actions are legal but why would someone go to such lengths to alienate a large part of their potential customer base unless the desire was to portray 'firearms rights activists' as fringe-group trouble makers?  I am not always a super-supporter of LEO or their actions but still find his downright anti-LEO approach to be unnecessarily confrontational and a poor representation of legal firearms sales and service.  I think that is the image he wants to project.   So, again, I am very nearly 100% convinced that, far from being a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, this loser is an anti who is willing to take extreme action, maybe even willing to get shot, to tarnish the image of responsible gun owners and further an anti-gun agenda.  To me, it is much like the woman who is the subject of this thread:   http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/topic/66753-extreme-danger-brady-liberal-with-a-gun/?hl=%2Bliberal+%2Bwith+%2Bgun   Not carrying for self defense, etc. but to help 'prove' how 'lax' gun laws supposedly are and try to bring attention to said laws in order to get more strict gun control enacted.  Far from being our 'friend', I think he is knowingly and actively working against us and our firearms rights.

  I agree about the versatility of a shotgun and, like you, I would also likely at least strongly consider one for my SHTF long gun choice.  That said, I do think there is a valid argument for having a .22 (WMR or LR), too.   There is something I have read in other 'survival scenario' threads, maybe on this forum or maybe on other forums (or, maybe, both.)  I will present that idea in my own thoughts/words:   If you can, either step outside right now or look out a window.  How many deer do you see?  How many rabbits?  How many squirrels?  Depending on where you are, you might see one or two critters from the list.  Maybe.  Now, how many birds do you see?  I don't just mean doves or other, normal 'food source' birds.  I mean how many birds, period - from crows to cardinals to wrens, sparrows, even little goldfinches.  In a survival situation, those birds are all potential sources of meat.  Further, they are much more plentiful, much more ubiquitous and would likely be much easier to 'harvest'.  Now, myself, I really like seeing/hearing little birds and under normal circumstances wouldn't dream of hurting one.  If it came down to starving, though, then it would be songbird soup all the way.  Although shotguns are used effectively for taking things like doves, duck and other mid-sized to large birds 'on the wing', I believe the problem with a shotgun would be that, with the really small (yet more plentiful and widely available) birds, you might end up with more lead than meat in the pot.  Luckily, such small birds often perch on a branch, limb or power line and sit fairly still, making them pretty easy pickings for a good .22 without destroying as much of the meat.  As a 'bonus', one could probably take little birds like that using colibris or super colibris and keep things a lot quieter than a shotgun.  Just a thought.

  Good lord!  I thought that might be a joke so I looked it up and such a movie really exists.  Not only that but it looks like there is a Gingerdead Man 2: The Passion of the Crust and a Gingerdead Man 3: Saturday Night Clever.  I even saw some indication of a Gingerdead Man 4!   And I thought killer tomatoes were bad.

  As to folks who say, "You'll probably die in a day or two so why prep," I think it depends on what kind of 'SHTF' scenario as far as survivability.  Sure, in an all-out apocalypse, one might not survive more than a day or two.  Heck, depending on the nature of the apocalypse and aftermath, those who are killed in the initial event might be the lucky ones and surviving might not even be all that desirable an option.  Even still, not surviving more than a day or two indicates an end brought about by violence, injury, nuclear strike or some kind of fast acting pathogen.  Such an end would be relatively quick and, to my mind, isn't really the kind of death that prepping is intended to stave off.  To me, saying that it isn't worth prepping even a little because of that is kind of missing the point.  A natural disaster or temporary (or even long-term) interruption of food/fuel supplies, etc. would be pretty survivable.  So, let's say that you aren't dead within a couple of days.  Do you really want to die a slow, miserable death from starvation or lack of potable water?  Do you want to die a lingering death due to getting an infection in a relatively small wound that could have been treated if you had stocked up on even basic first aid supplies?  Even more importantly, how would you feel about dying of food or water deprivation all the while knowing that the situation is temporary and that you could have easily 'made it' if you had just stocked up on maybe a month's supply of food and water but, because you didn't, you are toast?    I am not prepped for an apocalyptic TEOTWAWKI event and probably never will be.  I simply don't have the surplus resources (time, money, etc.) that I think would be necessary to prepare for such a thing nor am I entirely convinced that such an event would be all that 'survivable'.  I am slowly but surely building supplies to be prepared for other - and much more likely - events in which a little preparation could go a long way toward survival.

  Heh, I am more about 'going about my business' than 'making a point' in situations like this so I don't have much advice for you along those lines.  Maybe you could buy a rubber chicken to carry in your holster in place of a firearm when in posted places?       Yep! :up:

The Wrath of Paul Bunyon?  What will the sequel be?  Wait, I know:   Blood Orchard:  The Revenge of Johnny Appleseed   Somehow, I don't think I'll be looking for 'Axe Giant' at Red Box.  Thanks for the warning...er, I mean review, though.

  Based solely on posts on this forum, I think it is safe to say that Spots and his father have oodles of invaluable and somewhat rare skills upon which they can draw when needed.  Some of them I'd like to learn (especially the whole blacksmithing thing.)  Others, like this, are amazing to see but would just get me killed if I tried to do it.  I know me well enough to freely admit that.