First things first, this guys videos are not on overthrowing the government or doing anything illegal. These videos are purely informational and are mainly on the use guerrilla partisan sniping in a grid down shtf type scenario. He goes over why it would be useful, the gear,camo and tactics along with some historical info.
Good stuff! I’ll watch these tomorrow on my down time after the range visit. Wife’s watching TV right now. Hah.
I should buy a dedicated dmr rifle
The vepr 54r fills that roll right now
But I was thinking about a Remington 700
I like the idea of a 300 win mag or possibly a 6.5 creedmoor Tika.
^ This. I’d love to have of those. I’d also like to have a .224 Valkyrie for a sniper rifle.
I dont agree with alot of what the guy in the video says but I figured its still a pretty good watch.
Good set of videos. In a SHTF scenario, gear selection needs to be tied to skill set, terrain and level of competence/training of any expected OPFOR.
As far as the “sniper” role, in reality the vast majority of shooters would be best served with a DMR set up. Those who truly have the practice, equipment and skill set to be a “sniper” are few and far between and too often we conflate the two terms.
Something that needs to be remembered, and often is not thought about, is that a marksman/sniper will not survive long solo. Teamwork is crucial. Having a “team” environment where a designated sharpshooter has backup is vital to survivability.
Finally, anyone who wants to go the route of sharpshooter needs to invest in quality optics. This includes spotting optics as well as weapon optics. Followed by practice, practice, practice. Learn how to read wind, judge distance (better yet, have good LRF), how to prep and use a DOPE sheet, the differences true distance versus angled distance, proper camouflage for the terrain one is operating in, etc, etc, etc.
If one is looking at a DMR then a gas gun in my opinion is the way to go. The Russians knew this with their SVD series. A Remington 700 is a great platform but in a up close engage the slow rate of fire and longer time it takes to reacquire a target will be fatal. Even the U.S military figured this out with their optic mounted M14s and then MK12s in the sandbox.
in my opinion, in a SHTF situation, 99.99% of the time, if it’s far enough away to be considered a “sniper” shot, then your best bet would be to just keep on moving and not draw attention to yourself.
99.99%? What information or experience are you basing this number on?
Same place the rest of this is, fantasy.
Let’s think about a SHTF situation, which is going to involve lots of fantasy because there are so many different potential scenarios. You’re trying to survive. You’re running around solo or in small groups. You see someone hundreds or even over a thousand yards out.
Are they an enemy? Or are they friendly? Sure, you can see someone. But how do you know who they are? What do they want? Why would you shoot them?
Let’s say you can determine, yes, they are an enemy. Why would you want to draw attention to yourself and create a manhunt for you?
Ok, so they are an enemy and this particular SHTF fantasy (because there are so many variations) is a guerrilla warfare situation. That means you’re on the backpedal. You’re outnumbered. You’re hiding. You’ve got one shot. After the first shot, they hide, and you don’t have much of a window for a second shot. At these types of super long shots, hit rates for the first shot aren’t the greatest. You can speculate the wind, but there are a lot of factors that will alter the path of the bullet that it is impossible to account for. Wind across the several hundred yards between you and the target. What if the target moves? Can you even get a lethal hit at that distance? Your bullet has lost a lot of energy at that point, so the area for a lethal wound is smaller and smaller.
So if you are trying to attack an enemy because it is a guerrilla warfare scenario, the super long sniper shot is going to have extremely minimal (if any) impact. Closer shots will have a much greater chance at success, and now we’re getting into the realm of an assault, not a long distance sniping whatever.
In short, even if it is a situation where you can positively determine an enemy, that type of shot would have minimal impact.
Most SHTF scenarios I hear preppers talk about aren’t full blown warfare anyways, and instead are society collapse and everyone’s just trying to survive. In that case, why draw any attention to yourself? Why shoot at someone who may or may not be an enemy? Why take the shot when there’s such a low chance of dealing a lethal hit?
Pretty much the only scenario this would be a thing is if you’re using fire and move harassing fire on an enemy camp to keep their heads down. It is a valid strategy, but isn’t something useful for every scenario. It keeps them on high alert, which is good in a way and bad in a way. I’m certain someone could think of another exception, but when it comes to guerrillla warfare… harassment is pretty much the only one - and that type of harassment isn’t always the best strategy.
On top of that. How many people practice those distances? How many people can actually make those hits? I’ve trained at those distances. The first shot is always the hardest - even on stationary targets. First shot hits on moving targets is mostly luck. It’s fun to hit moving steel at 550 yards with a bolt action, and it’s fun to put quick shots down range at 250 yards at fast moving targets - but those hit rates are quite poor, even for skilled shooters. I’ve done both.
tldr: Why kick the horent’s nest? Especially since you might not even know the intentions of the target? Do you practice this stuff now? Because if you don’t, then you certainly don’t have the skills to do it in a SHTF scenario.
So you pulled it out of your ass. so maybe then 99.99% certainty was not the way to go on your first response?
I did not pull it out of my ass.
I stated that as my personal opinion based on my long distance shooting experience and skills, which includes shooting at sub-moa targets many hundreds of yards out, man sized targets way out there, and even moving targets at 550 yards. This opinion is also shared by experts in these realms of knowledge who made arguments that helped me come to this conclusion, which I had before this thread was created.
Am I not allowed to have and share my own opinion?
Do you have any counter arguments? I even provided a tldr to make it easier for people to provide rebuttals.
By the way, anything anyone says about a SHTF situation in America is complete speculation. It can be speculation based on skills and experience, or it can be speculation based on fantasy. But it is speculation nonetheless.
at no point did you say this was a pinion you gave a 99.99% certainty
Do I need to say, “this is my opinion” any time I say anything?
Still waiting for rebuttals.
Losing interest in this conversation as well…
99.99% would be stating a fact
I agree with Brian.
If I ever got into a survival situation, I wouldn’t try to use a firearm, especially while hunting.
Every shot gives away your presence.
I’d prefer using a bow and try not to draw attention to my where-abouts.
I’d druther be the predator than the prey.
Why? I commonly use percentages in my discussions to state my certainty of something.
You’re hung up on my phrasing and still haven’t provided any rebuttals. So I’ll rephrase my original comment so we can just move on.
Can we move on?
And again, any opinion on anything about any type of American SHTF situation is speculation, not to mention extremely situational.
Still waiting on rebuttals.
You provided absolutely no facts to discuss. Opinions are always welcome, with your 99.99% certainty, I simply asked your source or experience in the matter to avoid misinformation from being spread. Had you left out the know it all attitude 99.99%, & stated your opinion, it would have made sense.