The Advantages of A flintlock Gun for Long Term Wilderness Living/Survival.

[Janne]

Unfortunately that will happen. The Vegan / vegetarian/ treehugging community is trying to ( quite successfully) to change peoples minds to be anti Hunting. If no hunting - no need for those guns.

In UK the authorities used a mentally disturbed persons horrible act to ban all handguns.
Here in this tiny corner of Earth, the latest British police Commissioners have been rabid anti legal handgun.

 

[mrcharly]

To be more exact I mistrust those who would be given the authority of deciding who's fit or not. There's just too much at stake to entrust anybody with that much authority. I also know that gun "control" is a euphenism for incrementally banning guns altogether. Y'all have already banned handguns and semi-automatics. Australia has gone farther and banned pump actions and is on the verge of expanding that to include lever actions. .

This is where is gets all silly.

Australia hasn't banned pump actions. Nor has it banned lever actions.
They've restricted the licensing. You can't have one 'just because you want one'.

 

[santaman2000]

This is where is gets all silly.

Australia hasn't banned pump actions. Nor has it banned lever actions.
They've restricted the licensing. You can't have one 'just because you want one'.

Very well then; "restricted licensing" at current for a common hunting action (the pump) that's roughly 150 years old. And I didn't say they "had" banned lever actions yet (an even older technology) rather I said they're on the verge of doing so (over a newly imported lever action shotgun0

By the way, "just because I want one" should be reason enough. The state should bear the burden of proving why I shouldn't have one. THAT is a basic tenet of a free society. To believe or say otherwise is "where it all gets silly." The very concept of "rights" is that they are inherent in and of themselves.

 

[santaman2000]

Unfortunately that will happen. The Vegan / vegetarian/ treehugging community is trying to ( quite successfully) to change peoples minds to be anti Hunting. If no hunting - no need for those guns.

In UK the authorities used a mentally disturbed persons horrible act to ban all handguns.
Here in this tiny corner of Earth, the latest British police Commissioners have been rabid anti legal handgun.

Not so successfully here. There has indeed been a decline in hunting, and to a lesser extent fishing, here. Interestingly though there has also been a corresponding (though not necessarily proportionate) increase in legal firearms ownership. As the hunting has decreased, public opinion has shifted to see gun ownership more for defensive reasons. It was always split between the two, and still is, but now personal/home/family defense surpasses hunting as the top reason for buying and keeping guns.

Yes those who would limit those rights to self defense are just as vocal here as well. The difference being that we are just as vocal (or more so) in opposition to them.

 

[mrcharly]

By the way, "just because I want one" should be reason enough. .

I absolutely disagree. And in my time I've hunted and been an active pistol shooter. I'm not anti gun.

The state should bear the burden of proving why I shouldn't have one. THAT is a basic tenet of a free society. .

The basic tenet of a free society should be not feeling the need to walk around carrying a gun.

 

[santaman2000]

I absolutely disagree. And in my time I've hunted and been an active pistol shooter. I'm not anti gun.



The basic tenet of a free society should be not feeling the need to walk around carrying a gun.

"Need" doesn't enter into it directly. I don't need to eat meat but I like it. I don't need to watch or play sports but I like it. I don't need to be on this computer but I like it. However indirectly whenever any government tells you "you don't need a gun, you need a gun. Gun control, has never been about guns, it is, and always has been, about control.

 

[Janne]

Not so successfully here. There has indeed been a decline in hunting, and to a lesser extent fishing, here. Interestingly though there has also been a corresponding (though not necessarily proportionate) increase in legal firearms ownership. As the hunting has decreased, public opinion has shifted to see gun ownership more for defensive reasons. It was always split between the two, and still is, but now personal/home/family defense surpasses hunting as the top reason for buying and keeping guns.

Yes those who would limit those rights to self defense are just as vocal here as well. The difference being that we are just as vocal (or more so) in opposition to them.

It is important you Pro Guns ( hunting, sport, self defense, whatever) to resist. That you have some strong people amongst your politicians.

Look what happened in UK. Government banned ownership of handguns only because they wanted so, totally without a reason.
Then later they listened to the Bunnya*alsex people and banned the traditional fox hunting.

Here the police want to ban handguns, make it more and more difficult to get a permit. But we have some top notch lawyers in the club, plus some from our version of Parliament.

Unfortunately these bans tend to progress. Today handguns. Tomorrow knives. Then reading whatever book you want, or saying what you want.

 

[boatman]

Sixteen children and one teacher in Dunblain, the dead of Hungerford were not totally without reasons for a ban. The biggest fault was with the gun clubs and their macho attitudes and lack of concern about who joined. Home defence firearms kill most innocent people I believe.

 

[Janne]

Sixteen children and one teacher in Dunblain, the dead of Hungerford were not totally without reasons for a ban. The biggest fault was with the gun clubs and their macho attitudes and lack of concern about who joined. Home defence firearms kill most innocent people I believe.

Sorry, but one or two nut cases does not mean all gun owners are the same.
What bout that deranged guy that killed a score of people with a shotgun a couple of years ago? Shotgun ban in UK?

All the gun clubs I have belonged or belong to, in 3 countries, (Sweden, Norway and Grand Cayman), weed out the nutcases and wannabe cowboys/James Bonds quite well. For our own safety. But the responsibility issuing a permit is with the Police, so if a nutcase uses his legal gun to murder it is the licensing authority that did not do the job as they should. Gun clubs are there to teach, train and compete in. Have no access to somebodys police record or medical record.
All clubs I have belonged to the last 40 years do demand a clear Police Clearance just to enter the grounds.
I believe background checks were done in UK too before Dunblane??? But no police got disciplined??

Home defence firearms - what are those? All hunting and sporting guns can be used for home defence. A kitchen knife, or a machete, indeed, a cricket bat too!
Legal hanguns do NOT kill most innocent people in Europe. Tools like kitchen knives, hammers do.

 

[CumbrianLad]

I think the thing you make clear is that your isolation and living off grid have ill prepared you for handling anybodies opinion other than your own.

Two or 3 of the people you have blown up at have at least us much experience as you Loupy. Play nice with your peers and stop being abusive.

You might learn something!

Well put friend manners and respect coat nothing at all

 

[Janne]

What are your thoughts about the two topics in this thread?
I mean, it would be interesting to hear your opinion !

 

[CumbrianLad]

What are your thoughts about the two topics in this thread?
I mean, it would be interesting to hear your opinion !

Well my opinion on the what is better new or old i think in this case newer weapons are far more safe and reliable

But i think the old weapons should all ways have the respect they deserve as they are where it all started

But my overall opinion is safety and reliability wins

Im pro fire arms as you might be able to tell haha
Guns don't kill people . people kill people and if someone wants to cause another person harm they will find a way to do it gun or no gun

Just to point out i have only small experience with shotguns and the like i am in no where near the knowledge of the majority off you

 

[Le Loup]

For all I do like muzzle stuffers I have to admit I'm in camp cartridge. More so a design like a flintlock. Yes they're still I viable hunting option, in the same way a traditional sling, bolas, spear or wooden club is. But I can't help but think they've been largely replaced by modern systems for a good reason. Even taking lock times and accuracy out of the equation, convenience would be my major draw factor. As for making powder, yeah, anyone can make a basic black powder, it'll burn, it might even go bang, but it probably won't be all that consistent. Assuming of course you aren't making it in a laboratory. Its also a little more unstable, I remember a very very learned chap from the amateur pyro community having a mishap with black powder in ball mills.
As I said I do enjoy muzzle loaders, they're a lot of fun. I just think there are better and safer options. And as a member of the British muzzle loading association once said to me (after a few aim straighteners in the bisley pavilion) "muzzle loaders using black powder all take 21 minutes and half a second to take every shot. Half a second for the shot to go off, a minute to reload, 10 minutes for the smoke to clear and 10 minutes to put the fires out!"

Mick, would you be prepared to list all the advantages of using a modern gun for long term wilderness living/survival?
Regards, Keith.

 

[mick91]

Mick, would you be prepared to list all the advantages of using a modern gun for long term wilderness living/survival?
Regards, Keith.

In my opinion the fact that the vast majority of modern propellants will go off soaking wet is a major advantage in that situation. The residue inside the barrels is not as corrosive and you don't need to pay half as much attention to cleaning in a situation where you may have limited access to solvents etc. Modern cartridge rifles are significantly more accurate and powerful than their black powder equivelents, yes a .68 caliber musket may indeed rival smaller carbine cartridges, but compare that to even a smaller centre fire like a .223 and the 2 are apples and oranges. Go on the other end of the scale you can suppress a .22 easily and use it effectively while not disturbing other quarry, I'd also wager I could carry more .22s than I could .68 caliber ball and powder. Simple bullet design is also an advantage. If ball ammunition was better, the boat tail wouldn't have become the norm. But that's splitting hairs. There are probably a few more of I'm honest too.

In actual fact for LONG TERM survival, neither is truly suitable. You're going to run out of ammuntuon eventually. And the Swiss family Robinson approach to milling your own black powder is predicated on finding or carrying the ingredients with you. Yeah you can make black. But go refine me a meaningful quantity of sulphur or potassium nitrate in the woods? Doesn't happen. Youd have to go more primitive eventually. Slingshots and bows both spring to mind.

As I said I'm not against muzzle loaders far from it I enjoy them, but I think cartridge weapons are far more practical and efficient. If not quite as charming

 

[santaman2000]

Sixteen children and one teacher in Dunblain, the dead of Hungerford were not totally without reasons for a ban. The biggest fault was with the gun clubs and their macho attitudes and lack of concern about who joined. Home defence firearms kill most innocent people I believe.

Actually drunk drivers kill more innocent people. We tried banning alcohol once. It didn't work out as planned. Home/personal defense firearms most often result in nobody dying (innocent or guilty) On the other hand gang banging (where a teenage gang member shoots another teenage gang member) gets reported as a "child gun death" and gets entered into the stats just that way. And said gangs leave a trail of truly innocent children in their wake.

So do you think being "macho" should be grounds to disqualify somebody from gun ownership? That sounds very much like an elitist attitude: "Only people who think like me qualify...."

 

[CumbrianLad]

Actually drunk drivers kill more innocent people. We tried banning alcohol once. It didn't work out as planned. Home/personal defense firearms most often result in nobody dying (innocent or guilty) On the other hand gang banging (where a teehage gang member shoots another teenage gang member) gets reported as a "child gun death" and gets entered into the stats just that way.

Very well put my friend

 

[santaman2000]

In my opinion the fact that the vast majority of modern propellants will go off soaking wet is a major advantage in that situation. The residue inside the barrels is not as corrosive and you don't need to pay half as much attention to cleaning in a situation where you may have limited access to solvents etc. Modern cartridge rifles are significantly more accurate and powerful than their black powder equivelents, yes a .68 caliber musket may indeed rival smaller carbine cartridges, but compare that to even a smaller centre fire like a .223 and the 2 are apples and oranges. Go on the other end of the scale you can suppress a .22 easily and use it effectively while not disturbing other quarry, I'd also wager I could carry more .22s than I could .68 caliber ball and powder. Simple bullet design is also an advantage. If ball ammunition was better, the boat tail wouldn't have become the norm. But that's splitting hairs. There are probably a few more of I'm honest too.

In actual fact for LONG TERM survival, neither is truly suitable. You're going to run out of ammuntuon eventually. And the Swiss family Robinson approach to milling your own black powder is predicated on finding or carrying the ingredients with you. Yeah you can make black. But go refine me a meaningful quantity of sulphur or potassium nitrate in the woods? Doesn't happen. Youd have to go more primitive eventually. Slingshots and bows both spring to mind.

As I said I'm not against muzzle loaders far from it I enjoy them, but I think cartridge weapons are far more practical and efficient. If not quite as charming

Lots of truth in these points. However, regarding cleaning the guns with limited access to solvents; the traditional way to clean black powder guns was/is with hot, soapy water. Also remember that a round ball isn't the only projectile for black powder guns (and I'm not talking about shot either) The conical bullet was developed for them before cartridge guns became the norm (think of the minnie ball)

 

[Janne]

Some excellent points. But remember that the Miniè projectile was developed for a rifled barrel.

I recall that one way to neutralize the acidic deposits inside the barrel was to use your urine mixed with ash from a wood fire.
This was done as late as WW1 where my granddad participated.

To clean a rifled barrel from lead deposits is hell unless you have tools. I shoot about 95% .38 Spec with lead bullets in my revolver, and my way to remove the lead is to fire a cylinder ful of hot .357 Magnums with copper jackets

I think the longterm, ultimate "gun" is a Crossbow. You can make one with not much more difficulty than a bow, the bolts are just as difficult to make as an arrow.
But more powerful and accurate for a novice.

Many posts mention Black Powder, but is it not pretty difficult to get hold of?
Pyrodex and similar are what I have seen being used.

 

[Robson Valley]

Janne: Here in BC, things like GOEX FFg is easier to get as you get away from the larger cities. Plus, you need to know who to ask.
I used to shoot commercial fireworks in places across western Canada. The vendors were the ones with BP.
Very useful for "product development."
In smaller cities, say 150,000 or fewer people, there's usually one gun shop prepared to jump all the safety and storage hurdles
to keep a few 1lb tins in stock (in truth, they buy from the fireworks guys!)

 

[santaman2000]

Some excellent points. But remember that the Miniè projectile was developed for a rifled barrel.

I recall that one way to neutralize the acidic deposits inside the barrel was to use your urine mixed with ash from a wood fire.
This was done as late as WW1 where my granddad participated.

To clean a rifled barrel from lead deposits is hell unless you have tools. I shoot about 95% .38 Spec with lead bullets in my revolver, and my way to remove the lead is to fire a cylinder ful of hot .357 Magnums with copper jackets

I think the longterm, ultimate "gun" is a Crossbow. You can make one with not much more difficulty than a bow, the bolts are just as difficult to make as an arrow.
But more powerful and accurate for a novice.

Many posts mention Black Powder, but is it not pretty difficult to get hold of?
Pyrodex and similar are what I have seen being used.

Yeah the minnie was for a rifled barrel (which actually helps a round ball also) I've never fired a minnie myself; as I said, my BP is a replica Hawkin rifle.

I've also done the 357 FMJs to clear lead from a barrel. Harder to do with 45LC though, but not impossible

Black Powder (true black powder) is as scarce as hen's teeth here I know the synthetics work as well are even better/cleaner) but I really just like staying traditional.