Book Review: Boston’s Gun Bible

If you have been looking to learn more about rifles, shotguns, pistols or carbines then look no further, Boston's Gun Bible is a trustworthy book for the beginners to the advanced gun owner.  This is a great addition to any Survivalist’s library.

Overview:

As complete a work on all things dealing with guns and other self protection devices as I have found anywhere.  Rifles, carbines, handguns, shotguns, vests and various add-ons are all addressed.  In addition, tips for dealing with local, state and federal laws and enforcement efforts are included.

About the Author:

From Wikipedia.com
Kenneth W. Royce is an American author who primarily writes under the pen name of Boston T. Author Boston T. Pary Party. He has written non-fiction books that offer a libertarian stance on privacy, police encounters, tax resistance and gun politics.  His books are published by Javelin Press.  He has written one fiction novel, Molôn Labé!, and is one of the founders of the Free State Wyoming project.

Favorite Part

His methodology for rating each weapon is clearly explained as is the weight given to each category.  Everything from handling to cleaning is rated to come up with his recommendations. The discussion of various manufacturer’s strengths and weaknesses plus the value added versus weight and cost for the more popular add-ons is a big plus.  He does clearly state in his book when something is his opinion versus test data.  If you don’t have any interest in a certain rifle/cartridge then you can skim over the technical data quickly and only cover the general comments sections.  Since I have no interest in the 6.5mm round I simply skipped all of the details about that caliber for example.

Boston's Gun Bible
  • Used Book in Good Condition
  • Boston T. Party (Author)

Last update on 2020-07-05 at 06:38 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API

Do You Have Concealed Carry Weapon Insurance?

USCCA review

Self-defense can land you into major legal battles, or even jail. USCCA provides top-class CCW insurance plus training for you and your family at $22/mo with $2,000,000 in coverage.

Join USCCA

His section on how to acquire guns and ammo is well written.  He understands starting with nothing on a limited budget and makes excellent recommendations on how to build a battery for survival.  He does have a bias toward battle rifles (one which I share, but it is a bias) that might not be applicable to the urban survivalist who wants a rifle/pistol combination in the same caliber for instance.

Dislikes

While I share many of his political points of view and his displeasure with the lukewarm citizen, I find his vehemence a distraction to an otherwise worthy book. I am not quite so cynical about all of our politicians; perhaps I should be but I am not yet there.

He also seems to be of the opinion that any SHTF scenario will involve armed militias fighting against hordes of rabble out to get what they can. He may be correct, but I simply do not think this will be the case.  I think that his case for some of the gear he advocates does not need militia vs. MZB (Mutant Zombie Bikers) to justify the purchase of those items. The implication that you are not prepared unless you have a modern battle rifle is a disservice in my opinion. The data is there to help you choose a good carbine/handgun mix but forming lines of battle is not in my survival plans if I can avoid it.

While I do agree that the government may well be our biggest threat before, during, and after SHTF (New Orleans, anyone?) planning to violate local law is always risky business.  The founding fathers (quoted often and well by Mr. Party) understood the price of getting caught or not succeeding.  I am not sure the average reader of the book understands those consequences.

Summary

The best all around arms and accessory guide out there for anything related to guns, ammunition, reloading (not a reloading manual – you’ll need one of those too), vests and other implements of defense and offense.  Well written, a little technical in spots and designed to get you thinking logically about the unthinkable.  It helped shift my focus from assault weapons back to battle rifles for example.  The book is written in a way that you can safely skip the sections that don’t apply to you (the Norwegian 6.5 mm round as an example in my case) but there are nuggets of wisdom on every page.  Be careful of implementing things that might be illegal in your jurisdiction.  While all the information is worthwhile, playing games with the BATFE or local law enforcement is probably not a good idea.  One of his best recommendations is to put a good gun attorney on retainer against the day you may need to call your lawyer.  For the technical information alone, well worth the price.  For the historical perspective, one of the best collection of the founders’ attitudes and history of weapons I’ve found in one place.  If you are not a staunch libertarian, you may find his politics a little unusual but even here, there is food for thought.

Boston's Gun Bible
  • Used Book in Good Condition
  • Boston T. Party (Author)

Last update on 2020-07-05 at 06:38 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API



Joel Jefferson
Written by Joel Jefferson

Joel is one of the original founders of SurvivalCache.com. After college, he joined the USMC where he served as an (0302) Marine Infantry Officer. Joel is an avid outdoorsman and spends much of his free time in the mountains. Joel’s hobby is researching survival gear & weapons as well as prepping. Read his full interview here. Read more of Joel's articles.

40 thoughts on “Book Review: Boston’s Gun Bible”

  1. It's a great book, a fine addition to my collection. I couldn't get it in UK but managed to obtain it during my last trip to US. I only wish I could also buy some guns to go along with it.

    Reply
  2. Thanks Cpt. Bart, however I was wondering why you did not expound on Kenneth W. Royce’s background to serve as compelling reason to consider his book as authority on the subject? I like researching an author’s background before I read their book, however it appears as though Kenneth W. Royce has a military background but I could not find any credible info pointing in that direction.

    Reply
    • Sir,
      Mr. Royce has no military service listed that I found on-line. I am not saying he has or hasn't served, just that I found no record of it. Since his knowledge of politics and weapons speaks of considerable study and dedication to the history of the United States and its small arms, I decided that more looking into his biography was not warranted for this book review; his demonstrated skill seemed sufficient.

      Most G.I.'s have used at most a few weapons unless they have had special ops training or their own collection. Since I found his opinions of the technical aspects to be accurate (he does do excellent research) for weapons of which I also have knowledge or experience and since an individual's experience with a weapon is necessarily limited and parochial (the failure of an M16 to function when needed has soured me on that platform for example) I decided that his military experience or lack of it was irrelevant to the topic. Where I pursued his comments with additional research I always found his technical work impeccable. In those places where we disagreed about some weapon or another, it was a matter of preference or TSHTF scenario, not a matter of bad research. I do not agree with all of his politics nor do I think that combat at 500 to a 1000 yards between opposing large groups is the most likely scenario. That said, I stand by my comment that for the technical information, the book is worth the price.

      I do suggest caution with regard to the laws in your individual area. Some of his comments could get you crosswise with the legal authorities and that would not be a good survival move. As always, we are responsible for our own survival so be sure you understand requirements where you live and remain within their limits.

      Reply
  3. Sounds good. I'm what would be considered a "Beginner" when it comes to BUYING guns. I grew up shooting with my father but haven't decided what my first firearm purchase will be.

    Thanks for the good review of it. gettin it.

    Reply
    • Mike,
      I hope it proves useful to you. Remember, there are two basic reasons to buy a weapon. First and (I fear) most often because 'I WANT IT'. That is OK if you realize that is what you are doing. I want an M1 Carbine. If I get one, it will be because I want it not because it fills a need.
      The second reason is to fill a niche in your battery. In this case, determine what your need is; that need determines caliber and platform. You don't get a .375 H&H Mag to go squirrel hunting and you don't use a .22LR as Grizzly bear protection. For a city dweller looking for an E&E weapon a semi-auto pistol (Glock or 1911) and a Kel Tec carbine using the same magazine and round can make a lot of sense. Yes, I am a .45 bigot but a 9mm in this case can be quite useful. Not so good out in the tall and uncut and way underpowered for big bear country. Out in the mountains, a rifle is probably more useful than a carbine and a heavy pistol or revolver for up close and personal makes more sense. Identify your mission and that will determine the caliber and platform. Don't make the mistake many make of choosing the gun which determines the caliber and thereby defines the mission it can be used for.

      Reply
  4. Friends: Capt. has his own good reasons for recommending this book, but you might do yourself a broader favor by reading all the reviews for the book at Amazon. I have read many other books like this where the language and writing is butchered. They must be self-published as no respected editor would allow such. Sounds like his politics get in the way of his firearms analysis to be worth the price of the book. There is so much credible information out there now, and so easy to obtain, I see little reason to fork out $20-33 for a poorly developed manuscript.

    Reply
    • John,
      no disagreement about the literary merits of the book. If you have settled on your survival battery and don't foresee any future acquisitions then you are quite correct, the money may be better spent elsewhere. I find I use it when friends ask me about a particular platform or cartridge that I am unfamiliar with as well as a starting point for research from other sources. Since the data is presented, I sometimes draw a different conclusion than the author but that makes the book valuable as a resource, in my not so humble opinion.

      When I had little ones in the house, we had a copy of Dr. Spock's book on raising children. The medical data was excellent and often used. As to his philosophy on how to raise children, the hard bound cover made an efficient paddle and was occasionally used for that purpose. The point being to determine what, if anything, is of value to you and use that. If the value is not enough for the price, then the book should not be purchased.

      I have no quibbles with you if you decide the book isn't worth the price. I find it useful when comparing firearms but then I sometimes trade, buy or recommend guns to others. To me it is worth the price for the use I get from it. Apparently you find it wanting. Thank you for sharing your disagreement. It gives others food for thought; they might decide the money is better spend on other needs.

      Reply
      • Astute reply. I covet your seasoned advise though I am 60 myself. I guess I have to keep in mind I have been a hunting and guns writer for 35 years and my library is too cluttered now. Cartridges of the World is my "bible". I recall reading Tappin's Survival Guns and having written a manuscript of my own never to be published. Guess the NBC movement wasn't scary enough.

        Reply
        • John,
          I've always liked Tappin's stuff but somehow I missed his Survival Guns. I'll have to look into it. I'm sorry your manuscript was not published. I would have liked to read it. I sincerely appreciate your comments and thoughts on my piece.

          Reply
  5. I have a copy of the book and highly recommend it. I think that Capt Bart has done a good job of summarizing its strengths and its weaknesses. However, as Capt Bart points out, some of the information one gets on various weapons tends to be a little "parochial", thus I feel the need to set the record slightly straighter on a battle rifle that Boston had some negative comments on.

    At least part of the problem is that people in different countries sometimes do things differently than we do here in America. If you have been trained to shoot an American designed rifle here in America, then one of the things that would have been emphasized in your training is the need to establish a proper "cheek weld" with the receiver of the weapon when you are getting into position to fire the piece. By putting your cheek into direct contact with the receiver you are effectively ensuring that your head is always in the same position relative to the sights each time you shoot the weapon, and thus your fire will be more accurate as you are eliminating a possible source of shot to shot variation. As the way the vast majority of weapons are designed the recoil impulse is transmitted directly to one's shoulder that is not a problem.

    However, in the case of the German G-3 and the semiautomatic HK-91 and various other clones that have been based on that weapon, establishing a "proper" cheek weld with the rifle's receiver is not exactly the best idea out there. The German armaments engineers who designed the weapon to begin with claim that it has a "delayed blowback" action. While under normal circumstances I would not choose to debate the matter with such experts, if I were to tell the average person that the action was in fact "recoil operated" it would be close enough for government work and give that individual a more easily understandable idea of what was going on.

    As the action of a G-3/Hk-91 or clone based on that design cycles, the bolt carrier comes crashing back against the rear of the receiver like a miniature jackhammer. Thus if you have established a proper "American cheek weld" on this German designed firearm you will find that your face is now taking part of the recoil because you have put it into contact with the portion of the weapon that the bolt carrier bashes against. Other rifle action designs do not have that problem so it makes perfect sense to establish a cheek weld when shooting them, but not the G-3/Hk-91 and their clones. The bottom line, when shooting one of those weapons you have to figure out a slightly different way to hold the weapon so you can get to the point that you can precisely and repeatedly position your head with respect to the sights in order to get a good sight picture while avoiding putting your face into direct contact with the receiver.

    Yet when Boston reviews that weapon in his book, on page 13/4 he states that the weapon "gives a poor cheekweld" apparently not realizing that it wasn't designed to be fired that way in the first place. On page 13/8 where he rates the recoil of the weapon he states: "The HK91 gets a 4- poor and is brutal to shoot after 80 rds or so." My comment would be that the recoil is brutal only if you're holding the weapon "wrong". Granted that not establishing a proper cheekweld will likely mean that accuracy will suffer slightly, at least initially, but I believe that once one gets used to their particular weapon and gets dialed in with it that will be less of a problem.

    Personally I have fired the M-14, I have fired both .30-06 and .308 bolt action rifles, I have fired a Chinese M-14 clone, and I have fired my HK-91 clone. If you're holding it "right" (no cheekweld) the HK-91 is actually pleasant to shoot, and much more agreeable than any of the other rifles mentioned that I have fired. You can get good shot to shot accuracy and a reasonably rapid rate of fire because the action is soaking up the recoil, not you.

    A final note: If you get the German designed collapsible stock for your HK-91 clone realize that it is, of course, a German design. It locks in two and only two positions. Completely closed and fully extended. If you try to fire the weapon with the stock in any other position it will attempt to close. While I don't recall Boston making that mistake, I know of another gun writer who got published who did and roundly criticized the weapon when the fault was with the nut behind the butt plate. He, an alleged expert, couldn't figure out that the stock needed to be locked in the extended position before one fired the weapon.

    Reply
    • Minarchist_1776,
      I am posting this in an upcoming Capt's Chair so I won't go into too much detail but a PTR 91 followed me home the other day and now I have to keep it! I look forward to shooting it this weekend. I'll keep your words in mind about the recoil. Thank you for the input, I'm sure it'll make shooting my new piece of German precision engineering more enjoyable.

      Reply
  6. Sounds like another book I need for the survival library. I am of the same opinion as you on the political front. I am not quite as cynical as I probably should be. I will have to check this one out and possibly do a review on it as well for my blog. Thanks for the review.

    Reply
  7. You won't catch any flack from me. I would add a handgun – probably a .357 Mag revolver for price, ease of use, and ammo (.357/.38) availability. Is it the best, perfect survival battery? Nope, not by a long shot. Is it a solid, serviceable arrangement for most survival situations? I would play 'you bet your life' with that trio. For a long time, I did essentially that. My battery was a .22, shotgun, and .45ACP (OK, I have a thing about 1911s). The handgun is for when the ugly, nasties that inhabit the world emerge, up close and personal, you have something to adjust the situation with. As I have said elsewhere, a handgun is my "where the H*** did that (insert least favorite predator here) come from and how did he get so bloody close?" gun. In big bear county that is probably a .45,.44 Mag, .454 Casull or larger. Anywhere else and a .357 is more than enough.
    We are interested in survival, not in fighting a major set piece battle. Your battery (I would still add a handgun when able) seems sufficient. Most of our pioneer ancestors didn't have any more than that.

    Reply
    • I love handguns as well, expescially 1911s I have a colt. Thanks for your opinion you have some very good points. My only issue is that handugns take quite a bit of practice to become good with and really for very short range, at least if you are watching your ammo comsumption. Where as the shotgun is good for very close range to medium range. Plus the shotgun has a good variety of ammo you can choose from. I think if you know how and where to shoot you can just about take anything down with a .22 or a shotgun.

      Reply
      • Very insightful. A handgun is NEVER the best choice of weapon for any application of deadly force. Its only purpose is to be there when I can't have my rifle or shotgun in my hand for what ever reason. I know folks who are excellent shots at 100 yards with a handgun over iron sights. I'm not one of those. One of the reasons I recommend revolvers is because it takes less practice to be proficient with a revolver than with a pistol; at least at the most likely engagement ranges.

        Reply
  8. Capt is right on with the 3-gun battery. All you really need is a good (pump) 12-gauge shotgun, a 22 rifle, and a good revolver or pistol. I favor the 1911, 45, but also like the 9s for large capacity mags. Add an assault or battle rifle and you should be good to go. If you are like me, you hope and pray nothing ever comes to an armed confrontation even including criminal home invasions, which are growing in my region of the south. Get your guns if you think you need them (and probably do), but then get to work on the real stuff you need like food and water, etc.
    If we have a total collapse, none of us will make it in the long haul. Otherwise we hope that Uncle will hold it together long enough to help us through natural or unnatural disasters.

    Reply
    • John,
      The one modification I make for folks based on terrain is the use of a carbine in a pistol caliber. For a city dweller, the enhanced accuracy of a .357/9mm/.40/.45 carbine contributes a lot and the hitting power at likely ranges is more than adequate. It has the advantage of a common round for the sidearm/carbine. That is an arrangement that was very popular in the late 1800s and worked well.

      Starting from nothing, I'd probably get a solid shotgun first as the most flexible member of the battery while also building my supplies. It provides excellent security for the house and depending on shot selection can help feed the family.

      I think 2 to 4 weeks of food/water/medicine/etc. will get you thought the most likely SHTF scenarios while making a solid base for a longer TEOTWAWKI build up. If you have nothing, buy 3 days worth on your way home tonight. (8 cans of chili with a bottle of Tabasco goes a long way. Add some tuna or canned chicken, some instant potatoes, crackers, and 6 cans of green beans and a few liters of bottled water and you're set for at least 3 days). It is hurricane season along the coasts and tornadoes and earthquakes are always in season so be ready for TSHTF right now. Once you're ready for the immediate threat then go to a week and then 2 and then a month and so on. At the same time you can look for good buys to fill out your pantry as well as to bring your battery up to where you want it.

      As far as the armed encounter goes, you might want to read the survival psychology – aftermath article. There are some things to be considered before you get that first gun to help prepare you for what would be a very, very bad day.

      Reply
  9. Capt.

    Great review of this book. I have it in my library. When the article first appeared on Saturday, I was going to post about what I think about Mr. Royce's political views in your cons area. However, I decided to hold off. It became a long ramble that was not necessary. Let me put it to you this way. I compare Mr. Royce to another learned survivalist….J.W. Rawles. While both "know their stuff" I sometimes get the feeling that these individuals want a SHTF scenario so they can try out there skills. I may be way off, just an observation IMHO.

    Ahhh…the survival battery question. I love hearing everyone's set-ups. You can always learn a few nuggets when people post there ideas on this site.

    My battery is as follows.

    Noveske 14.5" Light Carbine, BASIC MOE
    Ruger 10/22
    Tikka T3 Lite (chambered in .308)
    Glock 21
    Springfield XD-9 Subcompact 3" (CCW)
    Benelli Nova Pump Shotgun

    If I had the money…I would always buy more!

    Reply
    • Good thoughts, sir. I sometimes think we (perhaps all of us) fall into the trap of wanting a SHTF, but only for the weekend, just to prove how well set up we are. Silly but there is a bit of the I have it, let's use it. I often think J.W. Rawles and Royce, among others, are a little too focused on combat operations. If folks look forward to THAT, they should look at the history of the 'War of the Northern Aggression' (Civil War if you're from north of the Mason-Dixon line). Huge causality lists on both sides. I am not interested in losing 1/4 or 1/3 of my group in a combat scenario but that is what we'd be looking at and remember a "minor" (never minor if it's me that is shot) wound could well prove fatal as it did in the 1860's. I shot my first 10/22 a few weeks ago – that is a really nice little 22. Good choice for a 22: I don't have one but wish I did. The Tikka T3 Lite looks interesting. What is the recoil like? I am interested. I prefer 1911 platform to the Glock but that is strictly a personal bias. I also prefer doubles to pumps but I have absolutely nothing bad to say about a Benelli. I'm not familiar at all with the Noveske. Thank you for your input.

      Reply
  10. I like your selection. If you are not 100% sold on the XD I would recommend getting a subcompact .45 glock (30 i think?). You can use the magazines from the 21 to go in the sub compact glock (those extender things make it fit your hand nicely). I do this with my Glock 19 and 26. This way I buy lots of mags to fit both models. I keep one in car and one inside but have many mags in BOB, home, vehicle, and in the gun safe. Just a thought….

    Reply
  11. True that BamaMan. We have a salt and pepper Schnoodle (Poodle/Schnauzer mix) that is one big baby in reality, but just let somebody come to the front door. Anybody outside has no clue this little dog wouldn't chew their leg off. Her hearing is incredible, too. Good idea, get a dog and then back it up with a pump 12-gauge.

    Reply
  12. I try to stick with common calibers that I can find in the majority of your grocery stores and sporting goods places. .45, .9mm, .308, 5.56 (allows for usage of the less power .223 cartridge as well). I also have an old 1943 Mosin Nagant, not that I'll be relying on that for any life saving situations, actually haven't even taken it to the range yet, but ammo is dirt cheap and I got it for $80 so I couldn't pass up the deal. Anywho, in addition to building my BOB, food and water storage, GHB, and of course adding more to the old arsenal, I'm taking up reloading. I figure if I can load my basic range fodder, it will cut down on costs a good deal and allows me to be more self sufficient in the case of major issues. About the only round I'll precision load is .308 as the higher end precision loads cost around $28 per box of 20 and that's too steep to get any good usage out of the gun. The only thing that sucks is being a college student…kinda crimps the funds, though I do live at home so that helps, but I'm almost done, then its off to the Army, OCS, and hopefully the Rangers not too long after that.

    Reply
    • Actually, even though the Mosin Nagant is considered antiquated by modern standards, it is still classified as a "battle rifle" chambering a distinctly potent cartridge, being inferior only to 30-06. I have taken my Mosin to range a few times and must tell you that its a beast. Reliable, rugged and powerful. Just be sure to check the headspace and firing pin on that before firing. Its a pity, most Russian semi-auto sniper rifles chambering 7.62x54r are not available in the U.S. 🙂

      Reply
    • JonM1911,
      I basically agree. I'd add 30-06 and 30-30 to the list just because they are everywhere in my neck of the woods. I've said elsewhere why I don't like 5.56/.223 and I'm finding 7.62X39 more available in many locations. I think that the less common calibers are OK provided you plan accordingly. I'm thinking of a Mosin Nagant for myself – it'll mean buying all the ammo I'll ever have for it since it isn't common. The same is true for rounds like the 7mm Rem Mag, .270 etc.
      You are correct about a 5.56 shooting .223 – just don't make the mistake of thinking a .223 can shoot the 5.56

      Reply
      • I'm beginning to look at the .300 Blackout round. Seems to be promising but I haven't looked into it a whole lot yet, mainly b/c its a round that would need to be reloaded in large quantities as it is not readily available. The one nice thing is that you can use existing 5.56 mags, all you need is a new upper.

        Reply
        • JonM1911,
          I did a quick look up on the .300 Blackout. Not too shabby. I certainly wouldn't buy an AR to shoot it as the increase over the 7.62X39 is minimal but if I already had the AR and the new upper wasn't more than an AK or Ruger mini-30 I'd be tempted to add it on to my AR platform. It has the advantage of functioning like the weapon you're used to using plus you could use the 5.56 for GOOD and have the .300 at the BOL for the heavier needs. Of course, if the upper was priced too high, AK's are still relatively cheap and put close to the same energy downrange. Only other drawback would be using the same mags for both calibers. If you got them loaded wrong, you have a club, not a gun. Also, I'd want to be sure that if I shot a few hundred .300 rounds out of one, the mag would still be usable as a 5.56 mag. (not deformed or damaged so that it mis-feeds).

          Reply
    • JonM1911,
      Good luck, sir, in your Army career. I was Artillery OCS, Class 14-70, at Ft. Sill. I went to flight school instead of Rangers so my only experience with Ranger school was flying the students around on their field problems but that is a tough road. Again, good luck and God Bless you, sir.

      Reply
  13. No apology needed CaptBart. Your reply was more than adequate and sufficient to convince me that not all civilians lack knowledge in the area of firearms and conversely, not all military folks have the in-depth expertise on the said subject. Thank you for replying, Sir!

    Reply
  14. BamaMan,
    The Tibetan monks had the concept of big dog – little dog. We have a Papillon that thinks he is a wolf. He hears EVERYTHING. We also have a Great Pyrenees that looks like a small bear. Little dog wakes up big dog; big dog eats intruder. And anyone who hurts the family pets may have more problems than the police to deal with.

    Reply
  15. I would definitely take a 5.45×39 over 5.56 any time, even though this caliber is very uncommon in the U.S. What's your take on it, CaptBart?

    Reply
  16. I've never handled the 5.45×39. The ballistics data I've found is inconsistent. I'd say it depends a lot on bullet weight and barrel twist. The 5.56 is a .223 and the 5.45 is a .220 but the energy levels seem relatively close. In both calibers, in FMJ military ammo, the tumbling of the round after impact seems to be a part of the energy transfer mechanism. It appears the 5.56 has gone from a 1:12 to a 1:9 or less kind of twist and so does not tumble as readily. This means for FMJ the 5.45 puts more energy into the target. That said, I suspect that ammo availability – before, after and during – TSHTF could well be the determining factor. I'm not as insistent on ammo being available after TSHTF as some are. I think is you should stock what you need. If you can resupply great but be prepared to live on what you have. The other thing is that I suspect that a greater variety of 5.56 bullet types are available based on the large US shooting base. I'm not sure the 5.45 can say the same. I don't know but it would bear checking.
    I personally don't like 22 calibers as a battle weapon. I favor a .30 as the minimum caliber for an assault rifle or battle rifle because of the flexibility of the round to do other things. That said, a 5.45 or a 5.56 will get anyone permanently dead if handled by someone who can shoot. Select the weapon that you think will most enhance your survival possibilities and that you are comfortable carrying through the tall and uncut. Then make sure you can feed and care for it. Once that is done, then that is the choice for you.

    Reply
  17. You underscored the point very well, Sir! Likewise I prefer the .30 and do have a couple of .30 cal scoped rifles, however my determining factors are the gross equipped weight, rate of fire and ability to move with the gear if needed. Nothing, an AK platform would not handle 🙂

    Reply
  18. I have a Mossberg 500 with the interchangeable home defense/range barrels (with a variety of ammo). I'm looking for opinions on what to purchase next. Handgun or rifle? I live in an urban area. Money is obviously a factor and so is the fact that I live in CA. Any responses are greatly appreciated!

    Reply
    • Mr. Eck,
      My apologies for the delay in answering you, sir. I don't always check back as often as I should. You next purchase should be driven by what you see as the primary mission of the weapon. With the 500 you have a great defensive arm out to 75 yards or so depending on ammo selection. Also a hunting weapon for small game, birds, and (with slugs) even some larger game. In CA, handguns are not very popular politically and you must stay within the law. With that said if your primary mission for the next purchase is close in defense, I would seriously look at a handgun with a view to a handgun/carbine mix. Any of the popular pistol calibers are available in a long arm of some type. Eastern CA can be bear country so I'd tend to look at something at least in .40 and probably larger. Revolvers are easier to use and less threatening politically so have some advantages for the new shooter. That as a given, Glock has some nice platforms in 9 and .40 and the magazines fit the Kel Tec carbine.
      If close in defense is not the primary need, a basic .22LR is a great long arm. I have high regard for the Ruger 10/22. This rifle is great for small game up to dog size animals and can be used as a defensive arm out past shotgun range. It isn't the big 'Bear Stopper' (used against a Grizzly you'd only make him mad) weapon but it will put food on the table. The other option is to look for what most hunters from your area use. What ever is the most common deer rifle in your location is probably a good bet. A lot of folks can help you with the weapon since it is very common.
      Again, everything else being equal, I would look for a handgun/long gun combination. A lever gun in .357 Mag or .45 Long Colt and a matching lever gun would be a fairly complete 3 gun battery and relatively inexpensive. If you go with something like a .22, I'd get a major caliber handgun as quickly as possible, just as my up close and personal equalizer for any large nasties that happen to get too close. Just my not so humble opinion.

      Reply
  19. OK I just read this book. I know very little about guns. This book gave me a great education about them. I learned alot of details and sometimes alot of details were over my head. I've read Boston's You and the Police and Hologram of Liberty. They were great and I highly recommend them. This book was a long read(alot of material). Although I'm a Libertarian myself I grew a little weary of the kick-ass and ask questions later mindset. To offset that, I followed his gun recommendations and I have to say he was spot on. Glocks, winchester 70 and M1A!

    Reply
  20. Question to those of you with more experience – any opinions of the Winchester 9410 (very hard to find anymore) & S&W Governor combination for a long gun w/ matching handgun (or w/ the Taurus Judge series for that matter, but I'm sort of a buy American type). I'm not necessarily considering these as a first line of defense but one of each sure gives one a lot of capabilities.
    I haven't gotten the "Book" yet so don't know what B.T.P. may say about either firearm & the S&W is relatively new so may not be in there anyway.
    Any comments?

    Reply
    • Add the Judge/Circuit Judge to your calculation. Yes, Taurus is not US based but do good firearms. Having grown up with a single shot .410 as a kid I am quite comfortable with it as a hunting/survival/self defense weapon. The Governor is a .45 Colt/.45 ACP/.410 weapon while the Taurus firearms are .45 Colt/.410 only. The S&W also is a 6 round and the Taurus is 5. The Winchester is shotgun only, no ability to shoot the .45 Colt. Frankly, I love lever guns and I have thought of getting a lever shotgun. The Taurus combo gives you a carbine/shotgun/hand gun combo that seems quite usable.
      The handguns are rather large to conceal if that is an intent. I have heard nothing bad about either. I think the S&W is a more capable handgun and the Taurus the more flexible rifle/shotgun.
      I hope this helps.

      Reply

Leave a Comment