I'd like all the banter brothers to weigh in if you care to share your knowledge and experience. If you had to choose only one of each, one handgun, one rifle and one shotgun for one's personal safety and hunting which 3 would you choose, keeping in mind value/price, reliability, ease of use, maintainence & security. Of interest also would be a decent number of rounds that it can hold without reloading and shooting long guns off of left shoulder. (right handed but opposite eye dominant), or so I've been told.
You didn't specifically mention a SHTF type of global or national catastrophe, but given that I live in earthquake and volcano country I have to consider the possibility. So if I only get three:
Handgun: Glock 17 (9mm)
Rifle: Remington 700 in .308 NATO
Shotgun: Remington or Mossberg 12 gauge.
Simple reasoning: These are all at or near the top of the list of most popular weapons of all time, especially among law enforcement and military. So ammo, parts, and accessories would be easy to scrounge, steal, or seize. I don't include a military-style rifle (AR, AK, or the like) because:
A) They are not great hunting rifles, and the rounds for which they are most commonly chambered are not great hunting rounds
B) They are designed to be most effective in support of squad-based tactics, not individual self defense
C) They require careful maintenance to remain operable.
D) I don't believe that in a SHTF scenario the general populace will suddenly become battle-hardened and competent at squad tactics. So I can deal with the likely threat scenarios nearly as effectively with a .308 bolt-action and the shotgun as I could with a semi-auto military-style rifle, and still bring down about any size dinner-on-the-hoof.
But if you let me have four weapons instead of three, then I'd want to add an Armalite-style rifle in 5.56 NATO, just for dealing with the possibility of being surprised by a marauding group.
Of course, if Mt. Rainier goes up, it's an academic discussion for me, because I'd be vaporized in about 8 seconds.
If you believe the likeliest threat scenario is personal or property crime, then go for the Glock 22 (.40 S&W) for a handgun and make the shotgun a short-barrel.
If you believe you'll be stuck in an urban environment, make the rifle an Armalite-style rifle in 5.56 NATO.
Yes, I know you can get AR's in .308, but if it breaks and the power is out you'll have difficulty sourcing parts.
You'll notice I don't include any compact or sub-compact weapons. If I can only have one, it has to be full-sized. Compact weapons only have value in a relatively ordered society.
Thanks, Raz, for your input, especially for including your reasoning ... because that helps ...
very interesting that you said, " But if you let me have four weapons instead of three, then I'd want to add an Armalite-style rifle in 5.56 NATO, just for dealing with the possibility of being surprised by a marauding group." because that's exactly what's going on only 40 miles to the north of us, and has non-stop local news coverage going on ... they aren't even stopping for commercial breaks ... no other coverage, just this with news copter footage. Before I was aware of what was going on, I spoke with my North Baltimore, CiL, about our CFest plans, smokes we've had over the weekend (FWIW, he liked the Nica Libre 25th Anniversary torpedo that I sent him), and an upcoming cigar dinner. This stuff hadn't really broken out yet at that time.
But you have to consider that against my squad-tactics statement. Just because there's a group of people rioting or marauding doesn't make them a militia-type threat. Start shooting and there is a good chance that they'll break ranks and run for cover, unless they've been trained otherwise.
There is no way to make one handgun, one rifle, and one shotgun an all-scenario perfect solution. You have to compromise and you have to consider the likely threat scenario, your own abilities, and your personal tactics and strategy. A military-style rifle is designed for use by trained groups to respond against trained groups. But if the likelihood of going up against some sort of paramilitary gang is less than the likelihood of dealing with a couple of bad guys or a starving small mob, then a bolt-action rifle and my own training and practice will likely get me through and still allow me to hunt up plenty of meat.
But if I was stuck in an urban environment, where the likeliest scenario is getting ambushed by an unruly mob, and the only game around is stray pets and coyotes, then I want a smaller-caliber weapon that can hold lots of cartridges. That's when a military-style rifle becomes a better choice than a hunting-rifle.
In my opinion, of course.
