Foe Women: Firearms

It’s an appealing movie image: a beautiful but determined woman blazing away with any number of weapons, mowing down foes unflinchingly, firing shotguns freehanded, making impossible shots with .45 s held at impractical angles.

The reality is somewhat different. Very few men can handle weapons the way they do in the movies, and women, due to their lighter frames, shorter stature and smaller hands, are at even more of a disadvantage. Unfortunately, few survival writers take this into account, preferring to pontificate on the ‘best’ weapons and calibers regardless as to their suitability for use by females.

There are a number of things women can do to ensure they are armed with effective weapons that they can handle comfortably. We’ll start with firearms, since that is probably the most ‘macho’ of weapons, and where women have been most poorly served.

First, ignore the bleating of the gun aficionados that argue for a particular caliber or make of weapon. The proper firearm, for men as well as women is the one you can handle comfortably and can use effectively. For women, this comes down to two main issues: recoil and size of weapon. First, firearms such as rifles and shotguns tend to have stocks sized with a particular proportion between butt and fore grip. For some women of shorter stature, this makes for an awkward hold that will affect accuracy and lead to excessive fatigue.

If custom stocks are not an option, you may need to look for weapons particularly sized for women or perhaps the youth market. As well, look at moving down in caliber if necessary. I’d rather have a woman making comfortable, aimed and effective shots with a Ruger 10/22 than doing spray and pray with a heavier weapon unsuited to her.

And that brings us to recoil. If the weapon is of sufficient caliber, it will literally shift a small shooter backwards. I have seen this on a particularly small girl at a range. After every three or four rounds shooting prone, she had to squirm back to her original firing position. She was game, but the weapon she had was obviously far too heavy for her, and she wound up with some spectacular bruises to show for it. Given a long enough time, the bruising recoil will eventually make a shooter shy of the weapon, making effective aim very problematic.

Finally a word about weapon caliber. While you want the most effective round you can get, remember that a light round that hits the target is far more preferable than a clean miss. In fact, in some circumstances, a smaller round may be more devastating. In the recent shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in the United States, it is thought that had she been shot with a less penetrating round, the bullet would have caused more damage internally rather than exiting.

In conclusion, the rifle or shotgun for women is one which is comfortable to hold and to shoot, which they can use with accuracy, preferably with a largish magazine capacity. Everything else is at best secondary.

Handguns are also a problem for some women. Grips tend to be sized for male hands, and again, much BS floats about with regards to caliber and make. The same advice applies: use heaviest comfortable caliber (or even one less), good magazine capacity, comfortable to hold. As I said before, caliber doesn’t really matter. I’ve seen a variety of handguns carried by women, including a seven shot .22 caliber automatic called the Escort. Known as a ‘purse’ gun or ‘belly’ gun, the barrel is so short that it is wildly inaccurate beyond a few feet (hence the ‘belly gun’ appellation: you stick it in the opponents belly and pull the trigger.) It is far from ideal, but I’d rather see that carried than nothing at all. At least if the lady carrying it manages to get several rounds into an attacker, it will likely do the job.

Again, custom models, smaller calibers and so on are all options in handguns as well. As well as sizing the gun to the user, it is important that there is enough training undertaken to make the woman confident and capable in whatever weapon she is carrying.

All in all, there is no reason why women should not be as effectively armed as the men in your group. Anything less is putting your life and theirs at risk.

Originally postewd September 19, 2011 @ MPN

Packing

“I know how good a gun feels. It makes you bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, three meters tall and covered with hair. You’re ready for anything and kind of hoping you’ll find it. Which is exactly what is dangerous about it – because you aren’t anything of the sort. You are a feeble, hairless embryo, remarkably easy to kill.
- Tunnel in the Sky by Robert A Heinlein

The protagonist in Heinlein’s novel is wondering about what sort of gun would be best for a survival test, and his advisor convinces him not take one. I’m not going to say you shouldn’t carry a weapon, but I do want to talk about the role firearms should play in your preparations.

First, let’s be honest. Guns are cool. Carrying a gun makes you feel cool. Further, it makes you feel powerful and in control, whereas in reality you are not. It does have its uses, and to be without a firearm in a major crisis that involves a serious breakdown of civic authority will likely make you a victim.

Unfortunately, a disproportionately large amount of writing, money and effort have gone into the firearms aspect of prepping. What gun to buy, how many, marksmanship, small unit tactics and endless thinking about scenarios (or fantasies) of how they might be used take up far too much time and effort. Far too little time is spent on how and when not to use them and what might be the disadvantages of using firearms.

The first disadvantage is illustrated by the quote at the start of the article. Guns make you feel confident, safe and secure, when in reality you are nothing of the sort. It doesn’t matter if you are carrying the ultimate battle rifle and plenty of ammunition if someone shoots you between the eyes with a single shot bolt action .22 as you saunter down a trail armed to the teeth. A rifle won’t save you if you step in someone’s well made punji pit, or take cover behind a rock that has a black powder nail bomb waiting for you.

The second disadvantage is that once you pull the trigger, you have announced your presence to anyone within a mile or two at the very least. In my opinion, one of the highest priorities after a major collapse would be keeping a low profile and that includes strict noise discipline. The report of a rifle is pretty much unmistakable for what it is, and is going to give anyone that wants it a rough bearing to your location.

Some might argue that a firearm is necessary for gathering food. In response, I’d argue that hunting with a rifle is a remarkably inefficient way to harvest wild game. You are far better off using traps and snares which multiply your effort for little expenditure of energy, and will not startle other game in the area. Even larger game such as deer can be taken with appropriate traps.

If you must hunt, consider using a bow. Although some types of bows require a fairly large investment of time to master, crossbows are easy to use and configured much like a rifle. All bows are almost silent in use (compared to a gun), and often as deadly in hunting.

Let’s look at some of the things that go along with guns and prepping. One is marksmanship, which I have no argument with, other than you also need to practice with things like bows and slingshots, in my opinion.

Another thing is the heavy emphasis put on small unit tactics and training. I;ve lost count of the videos I’ve seen with camo-clad guys sneaking about the bush in the best imitation infantry style. While training to work and fight as a team is good, too much time and effort go into it, and very little on camouflage, evasion, noise discipline and so on. You know, the things that keep you from being noticed and keep you out of the firefight rather than being in the position of having to win one.

Again, I’m not saying guns are bad. I believe that they are essential tools to have in the event of a major collapse. I just believe they should be the last option you go to, rather than the first. Once you start shooting, someone is going to get hurt, and that someone might be you, or someone close to you. So avoiding confrontation through other methods is far preferable than a shootout at the O.K. Corral.

It’s just common sense.

"And Elisha said unto him, Take bow and arrows..."

Elisha I'm not, but I’ve previously written and posted a couple of articles on primitive weapons. The first article concentrated on pretty basic stuff like throwing sticks and such, the second on a more advanced ones, like the sling. This third one is about bows, which are likely at the top of the heap in non-gunpowder weapons.

There are several good arguments for including some sort of bow in your planning. The first of which is that the bow is likely the most lethal of the non-firearm weapons. Using modern arrows tipped with razor-edged broad-heads traveling at a couple of hundred feet per second, you can count on penetration and killing damage if you hit the target properly.

The second reason to choose a bow is range. Generally, you can place an accurate shot out to 40 or 50 yards without an unreasonable amount of practice, and an expert bowman might take a shot on a large target like an elk out to 70 yards, but as accurate arrow placement is critical in dropping big game, shorter is usually better. Still, the bow outranges everything else except firearms.

Another reason to consider bows is the question of maintenance and ammunition re-supply. Generally, arrows can be recovered and reused without the need for additional equipment and supplies, unlike firearms. They are simple to maintain, and what parts you need are cheap and easily replaced by most people. This may not be strictly true in the case of some compound bows that require ‘tuning’. Still, the likelihood of you being able to maintain and repair your bow are far higher in my opinion than your chances of being able to maintain firearms and a supply of ammunition over the long term.

Of course, even the most careful archer will lose or break arrows and strings or even the bow itself. The advantage the archer has is that with again a not unreasonable amount of practice and skill, he can manufacture ammunition, parts, or the whole weapon! Other advantages of bows include the near silence of operation and the low carrying weight of the weapon and ammunition.

That said, taking a bow to a gun fight is usually bad news for the bowman. Despite their occasional use by special forces and guerillas, the likely defensive use for bows is limited to the occasional silent ambush. The more proper role for the bow in survival is as a supplement to firearms. As mentioned previously, ammunition will eventually run out if things are bad enough for long enough, and having a bow and some skill in its use will push the day when you fire your last bullet further into the future.

There are three broad classes of bows to choose from. The first of these is the compound bow (see picture above). Using a system of eccentric pulleys, the compound bow allows for a ‘let-off’ of a certain proportion of the bow’s draw weight, making it easier to wield a more powerful bow with less effort. They tend to shoot arrows in a flat, fast trajectory, and are a popular choice.




The second type of bow is the ‘simple’ bow, either re-curved or longbow style (A re-curve is pictured here). Simpler in construction, they require more skill to use, but generally are lighter than a compound bow and easier to maintain. Essentially having only two components (the stave and the bowstring), they are deceptively simple in structure. This type of bow is also the ‘easiest’ to manufacture from available materials.

If I was choosing between these two types my choice would be the traditional bow over the compound, but I’ve shot and enjoyed both.



A third type of bow you might want to consider is the crossbow. The crossbow has two main advantages. The first is that the draw weight is far higher than with the other two bows, giving the bolts (not arrows!) a lot more kinetic energy upon release. The second is that it most often has a rifle style stock and trigger, and is sighted much like a rifle, so the transition from rifle to crossbow may be easier for some people. It also retains most of the simplicity of the traditional bow, and both crossbow and the ammunition for it can also be built from scratch.

The downside is that due to its high draw weight, the crossbow is more difficult to reset, which leads to a slower rate of fire. It also tends to weigh more than traditional bows, and that combined with the difficulty of cocking it may make the crossbow a less than ideal choice for people of smaller stature. Additionally, it can be somewwhat more complicated mechanically, although this depends on the maker.

Finally a word about the ammunition for bows, whether arrows or crossbow bolts. There are many different types available. There is of course the traditional razor edged broad-head, which will do fearful damage to any living thing hit solidly. Additionally, there are ‘blunts’ for hunting birds or other small game, as well as arrows designed for fishing, complete with attached fishing line. These tips are usually interchangeable, and make the bow a very useful and versatile weapon.

So there you have it. Bows don’t replace firearms, but they are an incredibly efficient and economical addition to any survival ‘battery’. So give some thought, and see if you can’t get in touch with your inner Robin Hood…



Originaly posted December 03, 2010 @ MPN

Beyond Sticks and Stones

A short while back, I posted an article on different types of primitive weapons, and why acquiring skill with at least one is a good thing. This is a continuation of that article, but instead of sticks, stones and slings, we’ll now be looking at the so-called primitive weapons that don’t depend on muscle power alone.

In reality, it is a pretty short list, but these weapons are probably the ones you should consider most seriously. They tend to be more accurate and more lethal in even minimally practiced hands than anything we’ve discussed so far. They also have the greatest probability of putting meat on the table, although there are some drawbacks.

The first weapon up for discussion is the humble slingshot. Yes, Dennis the Menace’s armament of choice is as close as you can come to an ideal ‘primitive‘ weapon, in my opinion. A commercial version is my preferred option, where the power is supplied by surgical tubing and a wrist brace is provided for a steadier shot. Accuracy is fairly easy to achieve in a short time with a reasonable amount of practice. Size and strength of the user are not an issue, unlike some weapons.

The device is light and portable, easily stowed in a pack. Ammunition can be deadly ¼” or 3/8” steel shot, or even .177 sized pellets used to create a shotgun effect. However, even a reasonable amount of practice will allow you to become very good at selecting small stones suitable as ammunition, ensuring that you never run out. If you’re careful enough in your selection, accuracy and range will be nearly as good with ‘primitive’ ammo as with the steel shot.

A decent slingshot is capable of bringing down birds as large as a duck, and animals as large as rabbits, but are pretty much useless against anything larger. They are almost silent in operation, and have an effective range of about 20 meters or so.

Since they are so quiet in operation, a ‘shot’ will not betray your presence in an area. Should it come to a situation where you need to hunt for food, this means you aren’t being advertised to others in the area, whether other game or other hunters.

It is a ridiculously inexpensive weapon, the price of slingshots ranging from ten to forty dollars, with accessories and replacement parts such as spare tubing and steel shot being dirt-cheap. I stock several spare assemblies of tubing and pouch, as well as a supply of steel shot for hunting, but the complete kit including slingshot cost me less than fifty dollars. But you needn’t think that a commercially made slingshot is the only way to go.

While the commercial models are nice, a handmade slingshot is ridiculously easy to make. A bit of surgical tubing, part of a bicycle inner tube or other elastic material supplies the needed power. Add a forked stick and a bit of material to form the pocket and you have yourself a slingshot kit. As with other primitive weapons we’ve discussed, the slingshot allows you to be armed with only basic materials and a little ingenuity. It might not be quite as good as a commercial models (no wrist brace, for example), but a little practice will allow you to make s slingshot fully capable of doing the job.

As handy as it is as a hunting weapon, it is not very worthwhile as a defensive option, despite the use of it by the IRA against the British. While a headshot might indeed stun or even kill an opponent, bringing a slingshot to a gunfight is usually just another way of showing why guns are at the top of the charts in killing people.

That aspect aside, the combination of simplicity, reliability, silence, accuracy,ease of use, lethality for small game, availability of ammunition, ease of repair and the ability of almost anyone to create one out of the simplest of materials make the slingshot a ‘primitive’ weapon everyone should consider having in their preparedness and survival plans.

Just make sure Mr. Wilson doesn’t find out you have one…

Originally posted June 10, 2010 @MPN