The most important reason to stockpile ammo is so you have enough to go to the range whenever you want, without worrying that much about the next ammo crisis. It is literally the number one reason people stockpile it.
I carried the 60 in Nam. Our basic issue load was 1200 rounds divided between three of us. I decided, however, that we could manage to hump 1800 rounds instead and there were a few times I was thankful we had that extra 600 rounds of ammo. I say go ahead and stock up.
@sheparddog117 Per round you're going to get better bang for your buck from .223/5.56 over the cheapest shotgun shells. I'm not irresponsible with my money, but I'm not the most thrifty, and I can afford to stock up on a blue collar salary.
I shot 5 big game animals last year legally hunting during hunting season. 4 one shot kills, 1 I had to shoot twice. So, I used 6 rounds. However, I shot over 1000 rounds during the year to make sure I developed and maintained the skill to use 1 bullet when it mattered.
Okay,, let’s see here. I carry a 1911 holding 9 rounds. Since the likelihood of even being in a single gunfight is negligible, and my pistol holds enough for 3 gunfights, those 9 rds should last my lifetime. Got it. Next point. Hunting. Best to go primitive. Arrows are reusable, ammo is not. Besides, in a SHTF situation, there won’t be any game to hunt anyway. Understood. Next, resistance against an occupying military is futile so don’t bother. I hear ya brother. And lastly, the most valuable non renewable resource you own must not be bartered in a SHTF situation. Not even with your family, friends, neighbors, or anyone else you know to be on your side. Glad you cleared all this up for me. I guess I’m gonna sell all my ammo except the 9 rds in my pistol since I won’t be needing it. Could really use the money for knee pads to use while I kiss the asses of my oppressors.
Do you not have the intilect to comprehend the context of what I wrote and I am not a Glock fanboy it is like I said a bug out scenario where you more or less abandon society and live off the land also if you didn't notice I never really said that any of the ammo would be relegated to man on man violence. What you are thinking about is you taking on the badguys of the world and getting into a gun fights cause you get robbed of your iPhone. You are what is wrong with gun people. Enjoy concealing tour boat anchor oh and my idpa shoot theigh rig has a Kimber stainless 2 yup a 45. You didn't read the very first word of what I said about being completely generic
Tanks and APC's dont enforce tyrannical laws. Boots do. Boots kick in doors and Fighter jets cant stand on a corner. When the people are armed it becomes a lot harder to kick down doors
JohanssenJr the fact that a bunch of rice farmers defeated our military that had napalm, mortar fire, air support, and body armor and people still think that a militia can’t beat an actual military surprises me 😂 people like this boomer making the video make me laugh so hard because the guerrillas always win
@@MinkSignal no no I misinterpreted your tone. I was being sarcastic, we never should've gone over there, we gained absolutely nothing but dead Americans
That sniper you talked about didn't get that good unless he trained constantly and fired thousands of rounds. Practice can get expensive but it's well worth it.
A friend of mine and her family survived the Bosnian civil war. Their family was involved in more gun fights than any city cop. They assured me you will shoot everything you have at attackers out of fear. They only had two M70 rifles looted from a military warehouse. Those rifles and the 7.62 rounds were worth their weight in gold. Only people with military experience were able to have the discipline to not shoot out of fear. Often times small battles for neighborhoods would end as attackers or defenders ran out of ammo. The more ammo you have the better. From their experience and not mine. They also used ammo as currency. Small, portable, fungible, and useful. It was the default currency for long periods of time.
@@gwydionrusso3206 to sum it up, that it can be traded out between something, for example, I could give you a box of ammo, and as long as you gave me a box of the same caliber of ammo, both boxes would effectively shoot out of said guns
How awful would it be to have TOO much ammo when you find yourself in a gun fight? Simply question: would you rather have too many rounds, or not enough?
I agree, magazines are just as important. Someone I knew always told me. Have 10 mags loaded at ur house for a fighting rifle. I buy 500 pistol and 1000 rifle, from there I get 1k pistol 3k rifle. And I have 500 for my hunting rifle.
As a few others have mentioned, you apparently don’t realize some of us train, practice, compete, and shoot thousands of rounds per year. I don’t stockpile Ammo - never have. But I like to keep a lot on hand. If I have 5K rounds of pistol Ammo, that sounds like a lot but i can shoot that in 6 months more or less, depending how much I train.
Remember kids: “insurgency isn’t about killing all the enemy that invaded, its about making it so miserable and bad that moral gets so low they stop fighting and leave.” Anyone who knows anything about history.
I realize in an shtf scenario I'll probably be one of the tens of millions that die , I'm not a highly trained badass but I don't plan on dying for lack of shooting back
Anecdotal at best, but perfect "barter" scenario, all the same. 10000rnds of .22lr was bought at 3.5c a rnd. a few yrs later, sold at 20c a rnds (in boxes of 50) all day at gunshow. Some 9mm traded for 4 rack of pork rib amd 2 cases beer. so, yeah, the barter doesn't have to be end of world, it could just be supply shortage, or people not allowed to go shopping for "15 days".
I did not consent for my photo to be used in this video. I’m not sure where you got it but this video will be taken down, and i am not “playing army” 7 year infantry and cavalry veteran continuing to train. Pretty weak ass anti gun video though
No one is rational in a prep scenario - it’s basically civil war Communities will club together but for the most part (as we see in previous rioting/civil disorder situations where Maslow hierarchy of needs hasn’t actually compromised) People can and will kill to survive. Foregoing all the normal rules of today’s society I almost feel off my chair watching this buttercup none sense Playing Army? Anyone who believes this video to be truth would be in a shit storm in any scenario it lists. Prior planning and preparation prevents pitiful poor performance ..... although I guess you could use the information in this video as a guide and defend your family with a fistful of rounds / unreal This video is made to deceive the unwitting into indirectly thinking you don’t need guns or ammo Just a troll video designed to edge people towards a greater goal - control
Also...I almost made it a minute into the video before throwing up. You can't start off with average, rule of law statistics on civilian and LE engagements and extrapolate to *any* kind of anormal societal state. This whole bullshit video is based on a blatant logical fallacy.
SO MUCH WRONG here! Just owning a gun and having 100 bullets automatically protects you for life? So you've never heard needing regular practice so you can hit the target consistently? I don't believe you've ever fired a gun before.
The real reason to have loads of ammo is practice and training. Just shooting once a week requires a ton of ammo over a year's time. If you don't practice, the skills go away. This of course assumes that practice shooting will be an option in a shtf situation. Anyone who shoots regularly must have a lot of ammo, shtf or not.
Skills can be practiced with air rifles. Once your firearm is zeroed shooting is comparable to riding a bike.....just takes a little time to pick up where left off.
Just remember, in the 1700's a ragtag group of shop keepers and farmers stood up to and defeated what was at the time the best trained and equipped military in the world. Waco was a totally different scenario.
"Those munitions are simply not effective against today's soldiers" Then why would "today's soldiers" use those very munitions against each other, if they are "simply not effective"?
So if no enemy is killed by your bullet, the firing of it was a complete failure? What's that term I'm trying to remember? Oh yeah: "Suppressing fire" How many rounds do you need to stop a home invasion? Well, first I need to know how many attackers there are and then I need to know how many times I am gonna miss. One shot MIGHT do it, even if I miss all of them.
This is one of the worst use of cherry picked statistics I've ever seen. Example: you use a very loose calculation to determine 5 rounds needed a year for current recreational hunting, then determine that's all you'd need in a shtf situation. Not only does recreational hunting have no relevance to shtf hunting, it assumes you'd only need to hunt once a year, and that you'd make every shot, every time. That's absurd.
@@corneredfox Right on all counts, but none of that rebuts what I said. He is comparing incompatible statistics about gun usage in shtf scenarios, both relating to gunfights and hunting. I did not argue any other points.
@@corneredfox The point is that it is unreasonable to assume what would likely be necessary in an shtf/wrol situation based on recreational numbers that are hardly realistic to begin with. You may not shoot 5 deer a year, but could easily expend five bullets trying for one or two. I'm a pretty good shot, but I've had my share of misses too. Deer get spooked, bolt, or turn the head abruptly, and there goes a round. You shoot a running deer, you're likely to miss the kill shot and need a follow up. Or you wound it and have to track it down. Assuming you make every shot, and don't miss even once, five rounds a year might be fine. But you cannot count on that. In a survival situation you might end up hunting with and/or for a group, which would require more ammo. You might get into a defensive situation that might require more ammo. You might lose/drop your bag/magazine while in the bush. You might get robbed. Lots of possibilities to go through, and in that kind of scenario, it's not like you can run to the nearest Wal-Mart and grab some more. I'm speaking only from a standpoint of prepping, and while it is impossible to store every possible thing necessary to outlast the apocalypse, I do think it is more than reasonable to keep a couple hundred rounds or so of hunting caliber ammo.
@@corneredfox I think a couple hundred rounds is still on the low side of what is wise to put aside, and that is in reference to larger rounds like 308. I'd stockpile many more smaller rounds such as .223, since it is cheaper and more versatile, and thousands of rounds of 22lr. Much easier and more practical to catch rabbits, squirrels, etc than deer anyway.
@@corneredfox Trapping is a good idea, but you assume the option is static. You might have to hunt when traps are dry. You might have to travel further to catch anything, making trapping difficult. I simply like options. I prep like I'd have to depend on hunting, but when possible I'd raise livestock and set traps. The idea being that I cannot know how fluid such a situation would be. That said, I've hunted small game with 22lr for close to 30 years. It's reliable enough to me. I also agree that stocking a few main calibers is wise. I'm only concerned with 4; 22lr, .223, .308, and 9mm. I think a thousand rounds of each is a good starting point. Maybe half that for .308, since I'd have plenty of .223, which is cheaper. My problem is. I really enjoy shooting, and so I don't always have all that put away.
As long as it's stored properly, modern metallic centerfire cartridge ammo has a 'shelf life" of at least 50 years if not longer. So it basically doesn't expire...so why NOT keep adding? Plus, many SHTF plans include alternate locations with at least some supplies pre-staged. Ammo *is* heavy so ammo waiting for you can be an impprtant resource freeing up your capability to carry other, perishable supplies.
A lot of numbers but my guess is that this guy was never in the military. The real reason to stockpile ammo is because the other guy is and you might have to fight it out with him. His idea of just giving up is not what I am going to do.
So you plan to never practice? I go to the range once and use several hundred rounds. I admit, it may not be necessary to use THAT many but you should plan to shoot your guns once in a while.
Hey tell me how we did and are doing in Afghanistan? 7 time deployed Army Ranger here and I can tell you there is no winning going on in Afghanistan. It doesn't matter if the military has flying saucers with lasers, you can't win against Insurgency.
@@Desron58 Why not ? It's an insurgency. How about we point to Korea, Iraq or Vietnam instead ? Would those suffice for you ? Would all US soldiers be willing to go to war against other citizens ?
@@OveToranger Most successful insurgencies have one thing in common and that is they were supported by an outside power. If one wishes to study insurgencies in the Untied States an Colonies, then you ought to study the Indian Wars and the Civil War. In the War for Independence, we had the support of France and Spain.
@@Desron58 I see your point, though the Indian Wars was not a good example (the Indians didn't have support from an outside power and it was more a war of attrition, chemical warfare and outright war). I do believe that some outside powers would probably take an interest in an american uprising against the state, so your argument kind of supports mine...also take into consideration that many soldiers in the US army probably wouldn't take up arms against their own families/friends/fellow citizens and might take over materiel and bases. All in all - in my opinion it probably would be as successful as Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan... ie. not very.
While this was rather entertaining, I do believe that any shtf scenario that will happen in today's sociey will not be comparable to any of the statistics you quoted. It's called stockpiling for a reason.. it's not reasonable calculated stowage🤦♂️
I understand that there are literally thousands of "experts" here on the internet. The problem is when I listen to a video like this that cherry picks specific data to support a point but has no true scope of historical precedence let alone an understanding of warfare. As a retired Special Forces soldier I can speak to a long list of insurrections that a few men with a rifle were able to undermine and eventually overthrow a standing government thus ending the military's ability to control the populous. I war all of you that this sort of half-truth reporting has, does, and will get people killed and has no scope or dynamic introspection or objective view of real warfare and sustain low kinetic fighting. Also, the example of the Taliban for a militia force was outright embarrassing and I can attest that the ability to say that 0.0007 percent of US soldiers were killed by direct kinetic action involving firearms is a worthless point. It is a combined arms war and to say that the need to stockpile ammunition is worthless is for lack of a better word, stupid. That said, feel free to deal with your enemy with just a handful of ammunition, if anyone believes they can stand their ground in an SHTF scenario with a meager 1000 rounds then more power to you. As an actual expert who has spent the last 26 years serving and fighting for our country and has a full grasp of unconventional warfare, I would plead with you to NOT listen to this gentleman. This is what happens when experts make an argument but lack the depth of the scenario they are talking about. If anyone has any questions about what I would actually do please feel free to contact me on my page. Cheers.
Can't fix stupid. Folks like this guy will never understand the deterrent power our forefathers and collective culture blessed us with. I have to admit, I got a bit of a juvenile giggle when it got to the bit on modern soldiers' armor. He's right enough about 5.56. Not sure he has a solid grasp on what a varmint rifle in .243 WSSM or.. say a .300 Win Mag running a berger solid at mach-damnit can do. Those prairie dog hunters out west would have a field day. Individual snipers do very poorly in asymmetrical warfare situations as a whole. Nothing calls down suppressive fire followed by arty like an active sniper. What the hell do you do when there are 20 of them though? Especially considering that.. in the case of an invading force, local marksmen would likely get coordination and instruction from special forces? 20 Deer hunters being coordinated by a military expert? I sure as hell wouldn't want to be that enemy radio man. That is enough to give the devil himself a cold chill.
1 thing.... he really assumes that no one, literally no one, practices frequently. I use more ammo in one day of practice many times a year then his calculations of "what you really need" would be.
The real reason to have a bunch of ammo is because it's usually cheaper in bulk and you'll burn through a lot of rounds at the range. It sucks to have your range time curtailed 'cause you ran out of ammo. When I was breaking in a new pistol (the manual said that would take 500 rounds), I'd put 100-200 rounds through it at each visit to the range. Blazing away at the gun range is NOT a SHTF scenario! So you're "stockpiling" because the ammo is cheaper per round when you buy in bulk. Also, for the SHTF scenario, ideally you should be growing as much food as possible. Grow an assortment of dry beans and lentils because they'll store well (ideally, you let them dry before harvesting them) and are a good source of protein. That's even easier than raising chickens and rabbits. Grow some grains (choose what does well in your area; research that in advance, and it would be a good idea to learn to do it long before you need the knowledge). You'll need some land for that.
Best reason to stockpile...ammo is cheapest in 1000 round boxes
5 ปีที่แล้ว +2
Exactly! Besides, we might have an other Democrat president and another fake ammo shortage. You need to stockpile at least 8 years worth of ammo at any time. Minimum.
WOW, you really didn't get the point of the video like others. Yeah you have the money and space to buy and store as much ammo as possible go for it. The point was to show that IF YOU CAN'T there are better things to invest in.
@@JohnSmith-yd5wq why would he have to make a video telling people that if they don’t have the money to then they shouldn’t stockpile ammo lol they should already know that it’s pretty obvious
I have never heard anyone in a gunfight say “ I have too much ammo!” . Stockpiling is smart especially when it’s cheap and available. All that is needed to have another panic buy is one election away. I would always rather have more, than not enough any day.
There's a lot wrong with this video... If you look at self defense shooting statistics, yes the average comes out somewhere between 3-4 shots before the situation has ended. Be that somebody runs away, somebody dies, or etc. By this logic, most 5 shot revolvers are adequate for self defense. But obviously more rounds available means better chances. The statistics you used talk about number of rounds fired to kill, but not total rounds fired as a whole. But what you also displayed was simply that... a statistic based on other statistics and then averaged. It does not represent the actual average. Just the average of the averages you selected. As people say.. statistics can be used to reflect whatever you want if you put the numbers in the right places. Just like when you mentioned hunting... I do know a lot of hunters who only fire maybe 5 or 6 shots in a given season. I also know plenty of use their weapon year long for various game and fire hundreds between target practice and taking game. It will be much harder as you mentioned because yes... you'll have everyone and their mom trying to hunt out there. Game will be killed off very quickly, a lot will go to waste. But you have to consider a few factors... are you hunting for just you? Got a family? Close friends? Etc... Because a sizable deer will easily feed a whole family for a while IF they exorcise portion control and you know how to cook/clean the deer. So harvesting 5 would be an extreme waste in so many ways. Even then, you may want more than just 30 bullets because you never know when you're gonna have to shoot back at somebody trying to take your meal. So those numbers and averages again represent the outcome under current ideal circumstances. While it may be true that for militia use we dont stand a chance against armor and air support but they gotta land sometime, got to refuel and resupply... You hit them there and you hit them hard. It worked in Afghanistan. And sure... the Afghan fighters only killed 14 or so... But we spend almost a million rounds of ammo and such for one guy. SO in the war of economics we are losing HARD. Vietnam, Korea, and other places around the world would have taught us that. Guerilla warfare can be done QUITE successfully. Look at Joseph Savimbi for example. Major military powers have often failed to end guerilla wars that have lasted DECADES or longer. Chechnya comes to mind..Georgia(the country not the state), several African nations, Afghanistan, and etc. So its proven we CAN stand up to armed force like that and win. More importantly in just about EVERY single conflict where an ill equipped force faces an armed nation... it draws other nations in to support sides. Somebody will be willing to supply arms, armor, and vehicles to the opposing side so to think if it was an all out war or whatever we wouldnt get some kind of help is absurd. Lastly.. its no longer that kind of world where we stand on open battlefields. We have urban warfare, cyber warfare, and etc. It doesnt have to be at the end of a rifle to do some damage anymore. Also the idea that ammo wont be used as a currency is also dumb...You dont think prepper types wont band together to pool resources which will likely mean trading ammo for food or vice versa? It wont just be preppers either. Now will it be the most common practice? I doubt it.. But it most certainly would be likely at some point depending on the severity of the conflict, the length, and how long it may be before one could resupply. At the end of the day... yeah how much you need IS up to you entirely. I often feel one needs less than many project but more than one might suspect. It should be based on your survival plan if you have one at all. My plan calls for maybe 500 rounds tops. Thats what works for me personally. But this video is full of a lot of disinformation be it intentional or otherwise.
Plus, it's not like its going down in price, ammo, some nearly doubled. Like 357 Sig. Plus you can pawn em or trade for 100% what you paid value, unless you overpaid.
Completely worthless video. Lets flip the question this way. Statistically you only need 800 Kcal a day to survive on a starvation diet. So by that statistic you should never stock pile more food and water then you need at a bare minimum to sustain your own life and ignore all the food needs of others who you may have to feed in your family.
Right. Bare minimum numbers based on current recreational hunting, and applying that to a potential grid down survival situation is more than a little absurd.
Lol this video feels like a really really obvious anti gun argument at best. And at worst some kinda of 2nd grader level reverse psychology attempt to get all the ammo for himself. Literally the last point was, and I'm paraphrasing here "criminals will need lots of guns and ammo when they come to murder you for your guns and ammo. If you dont have guns and ammo they might not murder you." Fucking brilliant.. Lol i clicked on this because I thought this was a video on storage tips. How has this gotten this many up votes?
I like to keep plenty of ammo so that i can shoot at the range for the rest of my life. You seem to have not thought of target shooting as a reason for having ammo. Btw... my fishing pole has killed more things than any of my guns.
I guess I should consider it flattering that you removed my comment. All I did was point out that you'll be no threat to anyone in a bad situation since you apparently don't practice and stay in good form. Riflery and pistol craft are perishable skills. The omission of that glaringly obvious part of your thinking is pretty egregious, and no serious person should take what you're suggesting here seriously. I guess you'll delete that comment too... :/
You only need one bullet per gun fight per opponent. But it takes 20,000 rounds of practice to get to that point. And thousands of rounds per year to maintain that level of proficiency.
Yeah, he lives in a nation that was literally founded by civilians who defeated their own government's military, which was arguably the most powerful in the world at that point, and still insists that it can't be done. Not to mention the fact that we are FAR better off than the Founders were. We have a nation full of veterans, contractors and active service, who are patriots. If the government turned on the population, we are already inside the wire, trained in the tactics, operating the machinery, preparing the food, supplying the fuel and power, wearing the uniforms, speaking the language, and we are at every level of command. It will not play out as he imagines in his defeatist fantasy.
Your real data forgot to mention the CDC report that up to 3 million guns were used to stop a crime. Sometimes just the threat of lethal force is enough to stop a criminal.
Strangely enough, TH-cam videos of police shootouts seem to overwhelmingly show cops going through all 17 rounds of their Glock mag and even firing a few rounds from a second mag.
I agree. If you have magazine fed firearms I think it is wise to have at least five to seven magazines per long gun and four magazines per pistol. Full capacity twenty to thirty-two round magazines can get lost or broken and tyrant politicians are continually trying to ban them. Possession is 90% of the law. Most States where they have banned full capacity magazines allow their citizens to keep the magazines they already had. New Jersey is one of the exceptions but that is a tyrant crap hole State.
I simply don't agree with this fella. Most people are not stockpiling ammunition for the reasons stated in this video. Most people are stockpiling ammunition over fear of availability or outright banning in the United States. Before you give some song and dance about how that cannot happen and they're not coming after everybody's guns, Take 5 minutes and look at the new law going into affect here in California July 1st. It is a new way to monitor what you buy and also forces you to register rifles and shotguns that were never part of the registry in California in the past. For instance. That old 22 that's been handed down for Generations that sits in a closet. Or that shotgun that your dad bought you when you were a teenager 40 years ago. It's a bullshit law that intrude into our personal lives by monitoring how much ammunition people will buy. It will do nothing to stop crime. All it does is rightfully cause more concern about government intervention into our personal freedoms.
Reality is that if you want to stockpile ammo you got to buy as much as you want on each caliber you own without destabilizing your economy… you have to buy ammo depending on your budget … if you make good money per check then you can buy more ammo stockpile. Just don’t compare with so many guys that have 20000 for each of their guns, don’t be obsessed with stockpiling.. do your thing according to WHERE you live and make your plan according to possibilities !!!
My thoughts exactly. Even if it never hits the fan (hopefully it never will) shooting is a fun sport which I never want to be denied due to it being cost prohibitive. Even now Im kicking myself for not scooping up great deals of years prior. And it will only continue to rise in price.
That’s what many in CA did when our enlightened state leaders outlawed online purchases. They simply stockpiled like crazy leading up to it and won’t ever have to buy certain calibers ever again
5:58 you say that there's no way that people could stand up to a modern military, but you forget many things in this. First, Afghanistan is doing just that. Maybe not to the level of victory you might deem enough to make it worth it but it's still our reality. Then, there's the fact that if our government decided to used said tanks and bombs, they would instantly lose a vast amount of their support from the people. How exactly will they explain their decision to deploy heavy ordinance on American soil against American citizens? That would more than likely include non-combatants. Then there's the fact that the military isn't a bunch of robots. They are people too. People with families, ideals, and morals. The military wouldn't turn their might against the people. The government wouldn't command the vast numbers and ordinance that we do overseas. You cannot just observe the situation as if what is acceptable overseas is going to be acceptable here. Also, your numbers are bunk. You cannot judge how many rounds an individual needs solely based on how many hits on average it takes to end a threat. You are forgetting missed shots, suppression shots, and even faulty rounds. Numbers are easy to organize, yet surprisingly difficult to properly evaluate. You failed to do so properly.
KG Not to mention TRAINING, so that one can actually have a hope in hell of actually hitting what one aims at. Shooting is a perishable skill, just like piano playing and languages: use it or lose it.
Unsubscribed....... This tells me, you don't shoot your gun. You don't practice. You sit and look at your gun, play with it, read info online and make videos. I bet you never even killed a deer for the freezer, do you even know how to field dress a deer? Do you even know what that is without having to google it?
You stockpile ammo so you can continue to train/practice after: 1. It becomes unavailable due to supply issues (could hardly find .380, 308, .357 mag, 22 lr anywhere at points during covid) 2. It becomes so expensive that it is cost prohibitive to buy (prices hit $5 per round for .357 mag last year) 3. It becomes unavailable due to changing federal or state laws (like California’s ban on the sale of hollow points). People that are just getting into shooting do not have adequate skills with rifles and pistols and shouldn’t “hope” that supply, legality and prices continue to allow them to buy their ammo just-in-time when they go to the range to train. I typically use about 150-200 rounds of 9mm or 5.56 each time I visit the range (about every other month) and I usually go through 1200-1500 rounds per year which honestly isn’t enough practice. Even now we are still seeing limits on the number of boxes you can buy at a time. If you think buying your first gun and a few boxes of ammo to put under the bed is “good enough” to prepare you to defend yourself, you might as well just save your money. You will be a lot safer without a weapon and untrained gun owners in the house. A+ for video production quality, D on the narrative. I’m starting to wonder if this is just thinly vailed anti-gun propaganda.
200 rounds ant nothing if you practice regularly at different positions, unfortunately my ar hasn't collected dust since buying it 2 years ago. May not be a sniper but I do intend to hit what I aim at .head shot no walking away
Well if your home is being threatened by a group of 20 raiders following an economic collapse in a world without law you are going to need more than 2 rounds.
So the most powerful military in the world, got sent home by guys using mostly 7.62x39 small arms, and tactics. But militias, according to this guy are ineffective for the most part against mechanized military. OK you keep your ideas close, they just might keep you warm one day.
Hurr durr you dont stand a chance against modern military. Tell that to vietnamese farmers. Also as a prepper you should know its better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it
@@corneredfox im talking about the guerrilla fighters that kept up a fight with the us till we eventually gave up and left. Same with the towl heads. I dont like em but we shouldnt forget about how much shit a group of determined people can stir when they have weapons. Also we gotta remember if america has a civil war the military will likely be fractured so it wouldnt he near the strength of the military that faced the vietnamese. Also itd be stupid to try and fight straight up against the american military straight up. Guerrilla tactics would be used like ieds and hit and run attacks. Remember the japanese wouldnt even consider a land invasion because "there would be a gun behind every blade of grass"
@@corneredfox im gonna have a few thousand to ensure ill have more than ill ever likely need, if things go tyrannical im gonna move back into the hills and if i see a force i think can win and i agree with ill join if not ill fly under the radar as much as possible
@@corneredfox because you have militaries spraying and praying. A shooter makes shots count. You dont need 50k rounds to kill someone. If so these filthy gang members would get no kills. Law enforcement we have killed no one. Forest for the trees. I was trained to dump a mag into an offender. And in the heat of the moment yes fine motor skills will be rough. I can still tear the shit out of a guy at 15 yards with a pistol. I wont need 50k rounds. Get real.
Gator70 I agree brother. The Vietnam war was lost largely due to the Vietnamese people forming militias to fight against the invading nations. A lot of which were farmers, and common citizens, and they inflicted extremely heavy casualties on invading forces, despite being out gunned. End result, over 58,000 American troop deaths, and the United States leaving Vietnam, having accomplished nothing. This guy is a clown.
I believe that military records-keeping does already identify the amount of ammo that our soldiers use against the hadjis, and they expend just as much ammo as the bad guys, IMHO. In a firefight, I'm pretty sure that at least 4-5 30rd mags are emptied, possibly 6+, depending on the number of opponents engaged. There are times when snipers can eliminate the threat because of their stand-off capability, and there are times when regular ground troops get the job done because they can employ volume fire to kill the enemy. Volume fire, of course, means that the rounds-expended-per-enemy-soldier count is gonna go WAY up... altogether, this is why in a separate post I completely scoff at RP's dismissal of the importance of having a certain amount of ammo on hand. Some people live in such remote areas that they'll never need 1000 rounds ever. But most American preppers either can't or won't live in Alaska or Idaho, so that means we'll need more. Common sense must dictate our decision as to how much one believes is appropriate.
Not the same situation, at least in most cases. But as I understand it, 7 30 round magazines seems to be standard equipment, rounds fired is inaccurate by the nature of our military. When you're shot at you unload at the guy that shot at you, or the best guess at where he's at from what I've seen. That's not exactly what's going to happen stateside if things go bad
Robert I was thinking of a time where the military commonly engaged in urban warfare, which was ww2, I don’t expect it to be a free for all where everyone is shooting at one another, I just expect the kind of firefights that happen to be vary different than common defensive gun use because you’re probably never going to be at point blank range, so I would expect a lot more expenditures in ammo due to that fact, like you would see in ww2
In WW2 American soldiers and marines fired 52,000 rounds for every enemy kill. In Vietnam it went up to 525,000 rounds. So yes you need ammo, lots of ammo.
I don't think any single person will ever shoot that many rounds before being killed in one gunfight. WW2 American soldiers were also trained to use a type of fire that lit up a whole area, obviously increase the ammo use.
Its called suppressive fire....and its not always intended to kill...sometimes its intended to create cover or to avoid the enemy getting an opportunity to shoot back. These stats are so skewed and unexplained.
@Mustang .308 Yes, I know. But most preppers wont't be doing that by themselves. Even if Tom's stats were real, it is fallacious to compare military tactics to what a random gun enthusiast/prepper boy would do.
My friends and I stockpiled probably a literal ton of ammunition over the course of a few years and I was glad we did once the great ammo shortage of 2020 hit. You can't target practice if you can't find ammo.
The most important reason to stockpile ammo is so you have enough to go to the range whenever you want, without worrying that much about the next ammo crisis.
It is literally the number one reason people stockpile it.
agreed. 2020 and 2021 have proved that
Totally agree with this, and - it's proven.
#Reload
@@ardascholar5289 2013 proved that for me.
Or, you know, to have enough to still go to the range and continue training when there's a shortage and ammo prices are outrageous...
"Buy it cheap and stack it deep"
Well even these days with the inflated ammo prices I still go with quality ammo just so ik it's reliable
@@michaelhoffman9573 actually there’s 3 websites that sell every caliber cheap asf
@@demsticks4771 locally been getting better lil by lil
yes
Stack it high. Let it fly.
This guy apparently spends no time at the range. The reason for an "oversized" stockpile is so you have ammo to spare for honing your skills.
I carried the 60 in Nam. Our basic issue load was 1200 rounds divided between three of us. I decided, however, that we could manage to hump 1800 rounds instead and there were a few times I was thankful we had that extra 600 rounds of ammo. I say go ahead and stock up.
Thanks for your service, and thanks for the comment. I'll take my advice from some one whose actually used a gun in combat.
@sheparddog117 then if you’re in a different economic situation don’t stockpile ammo easy fix lol
@sheparddog117 Per round you're going to get better bang for your buck from .223/5.56 over the cheapest shotgun shells. I'm not irresponsible with my money, but I'm not the most thrifty, and I can afford to stock up on a blue collar salary.
@sheparddog117 Do you want to try that again? Was that english?
@sheparddog117 Yeah, your inability to string together a coherent sentence isn't my fault. Try again.
I shot 5 big game animals last year legally hunting during hunting season. 4 one shot kills, 1 I had to shoot twice. So, I used 6 rounds. However, I shot over 1000 rounds during the year to make sure I developed and maintained the skill to use 1 bullet when it mattered.
Congrats, what animals, and what state (states)? If you dont mind.
Dylan Ward 3 doe Antelope, 2 doe deer. Wyoming. Nothing super difficult.
Okay,, let’s see here. I carry a 1911 holding 9 rounds. Since the likelihood of even being in a single gunfight is negligible, and my pistol holds enough for 3 gunfights, those 9 rds should last my lifetime. Got it. Next point. Hunting. Best to go primitive. Arrows are reusable, ammo is not. Besides, in a SHTF situation, there won’t be any game to hunt anyway. Understood. Next, resistance against an occupying military is futile so don’t bother. I hear ya brother. And lastly, the most valuable non renewable resource you own must not be bartered in a SHTF situation. Not even with your family, friends, neighbors, or anyone else you know to be on your side. Glad you cleared all this up for me. I guess I’m gonna sell all my ammo except the 9 rds in my pistol since I won’t be needing it. Could really use the money for knee pads to use while I kiss the asses of my oppressors.
what oppressors? wtf are you talking about?
🤣😂
Do you not have the intilect to comprehend the context of what I wrote and I am not a Glock fanboy it is like I said a bug out scenario where you more or less abandon society and live off the land also if you didn't notice I never really said that any of the ammo would be relegated to man on man violence. What you are thinking about is you taking on the badguys of the world and getting into a gun fights cause you get robbed of your iPhone. You are what is wrong with gun people. Enjoy concealing tour boat anchor oh and my idpa shoot theigh rig has a Kimber stainless 2 yup a 45. You didn't read the very first word of what I said about being completely generic
Who shoots standing still any more that's childs play bros hahahahaha I haven't shot standing still since I was 7
@@b.p.stimemachines2327 You go Rambo!
I'd rather have a 1000 rounds extra than be 1 round short.
GOOD POINT
Tanks and APC's dont enforce tyrannical laws. Boots do. Boots kick in doors and Fighter jets cant stand on a corner. When the people are armed it becomes a lot harder to kick down doors
IKR?
"Fighting a personally funded militia war against a modern invading military force is an absolute dead end strategy."
*laughs in rice farmer*
JohanssenJr the fact that a bunch of rice farmers defeated our military that had napalm, mortar fire, air support, and body armor and people still think that a militia can’t beat an actual military surprises me 😂 people like this boomer making the video make me laugh so hard because the guerrillas always win
tell what to vietnam? that we didnt LOSE? lol
@@MinkSignal no, we just left right?
@@Cleveland951 bro, leaving without winning is called retreating, thats a loss. the american loss of life was INSANE.
@@MinkSignal no no I misinterpreted your tone. I was being sarcastic, we never should've gone over there, we gained absolutely nothing but dead Americans
That sniper you talked about didn't get that good unless he trained constantly and fired thousands of rounds. Practice can get expensive but it's well worth it.
A friend of mine and her family survived the Bosnian civil war. Their family was involved in more gun fights than any city cop. They assured me you will shoot everything you have at attackers out of fear. They only had two M70 rifles looted from a military warehouse. Those rifles and the 7.62 rounds were worth their weight in gold. Only people with military experience were able to have the discipline to not shoot out of fear. Often times small battles for neighborhoods would end as attackers or defenders ran out of ammo. The more ammo you have the better. From their experience and not mine.
They also used ammo as currency. Small, portable, fungible, and useful. It was the default currency for long periods of time.
What does fungible mean?
@@gwydionrusso3206 to sum it up, that it can be traded out between something, for example, I could give you a box of ammo, and as long as you gave me a box of the same caliber of ammo, both boxes would effectively shoot out of said guns
@@jacobj9237 okay thanks
Selko???? Is that you?
>MuH mIliTia CaN't FiGhT ThE mIliTaRy
Vietnam and Afghanistan would like a word with you
Completly ignored the idea of target practice
How awful would it be to have TOO much ammo when you find yourself in a gun fight? Simply question: would you rather have too many rounds, or not enough?
I agree, magazines are just as important. Someone I knew always told me. Have 10 mags loaded at ur house for a fighting rifle. I buy 500 pistol and 1000 rifle, from there I get 1k pistol 3k rifle. And I have 500 for my hunting rifle.
As a few others have mentioned, you apparently don’t realize some of us train, practice, compete, and shoot thousands of rounds per year. I don’t stockpile Ammo - never have. But I like to keep a lot on hand. If I have 5K rounds of pistol Ammo, that sounds like a lot but i can shoot that in 6 months more or less, depending how much I train.
Extra ammo is insurance. Better to have it and not need it, etc.
Remember kids: “insurgency isn’t about killing all the enemy that invaded, its about making it so miserable and bad that moral gets so low they stop fighting and leave.” Anyone who knows anything about history.
Putins stategy lives on
Kinda like Ukraine we all bored of it lol
1000 meals on five deer? This is completely false information people.
He is the type of person to say "the average self defense Shooter only uses 2.8 bullets so you only need a 5 round magazine☝️🤓"
Gee, I brought too much ammo to the gunfight...…..SAID NO MAN EVER!
So.... The message I got was "stockpile 1,000,000 rounds."
I don't know if that was the intended message but that's the one I heard.
Yes.
I realize in an shtf scenario I'll probably be one of the tens of millions that die , I'm not a highly trained badass but I don't plan on dying for lack of shooting back
Amen!
Well that'll increase your chances of getting away but more importantly if you can evade danger, you'll probably live.
If you bought ammo in 2018 it's worth more than double 4 or 5 years later that's a good investment
Anecdotal at best, but perfect "barter" scenario, all the same. 10000rnds of .22lr was bought at 3.5c a rnd. a few yrs later, sold at 20c a rnds (in boxes of 50) all day at gunshow. Some 9mm traded for 4 rack of pork rib amd 2 cases beer. so, yeah, the barter doesn't have to be end of world, it could just be supply shortage, or people not allowed to go shopping for "15 days".
@@ts89540 yeah I went to a few autions and couldn't believe what people would pay for 22lr and 9mm 50rds
What about stock piling for range use? You left that one out.
Ammo has been used as currency, cowboys would trade one round of ammunition for a shot of whiskey. That's why it's called a shot.
I did not consent for my photo to be used in this video. I’m not sure where you got it but this video will be taken down, and i am not “playing army” 7 year infantry and cavalry veteran continuing to train. Pretty weak ass anti gun video though
Its not an antigun video, he isnt telling you to not have guns or weapon or ammo.
Jammer man, 5:50
No one is rational in a prep scenario - it’s basically civil war
Communities will club together but for the most part (as we see in previous rioting/civil disorder situations where Maslow hierarchy of needs hasn’t actually compromised) People can and will kill to survive. Foregoing all the normal rules of today’s society
I almost feel off my chair watching this buttercup none sense
Playing Army? Anyone who believes this video to be truth would be in a shit storm in any scenario it lists. Prior planning and preparation prevents pitiful poor performance ..... although I guess you could use the information in this video as a guide and defend your family with a fistful of rounds / unreal
This video is made to deceive the unwitting into indirectly thinking you don’t need guns or ammo
Just a troll video designed to edge people towards a greater goal - control
Rogaine you're internet famous! Finally!
Also...I almost made it a minute into the video before throwing up. You can't start off with average, rule of law statistics on civilian and LE engagements and extrapolate to *any* kind of anormal societal state. This whole bullshit video is based on a blatant logical fallacy.
Visiting this video after massive worldwide shortages where me and my "prepper" buddies were still able to put in good training with our stockpiles.
Well. That was 10 minutes of my life that I'll never get back.
That's a classic tactic people use when they can't refute anything in a video.
@@gorgonwiesel8768 No, it's actually because I have more important things to do in my life...Like, cut my toenails.
You forget about training, suppression, and the fact that in combat accuracy is very low.
SO MUCH WRONG here!
Just owning a gun and having 100 bullets automatically protects you for life? So you've never heard needing regular practice so you can hit the target consistently?
I don't believe you've ever fired a gun before.
This is for stockpiling AFTER you've had practice. There's nothing stopping you from buying a thousand rounds & practicing with that
You obviously didn't watch his vid then and listen to his claim.
Firearms proficiency declines like any other skill without constant practice.
I literally said you SHOULD practice, but keep at least the said amount
Don't care what you said, you're commenting on what I said.
It's called an insurance policy. Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.
The real reason to have loads of ammo is practice and training. Just shooting once a week requires a ton of ammo over a year's time. If you don't practice, the skills go away. This of course assumes that practice shooting will be an option in a shtf situation. Anyone who shoots regularly must have a lot of ammo, shtf or not.
Skills can be practiced with air rifles. Once your firearm is zeroed shooting is comparable to riding a bike.....just takes a little time to pick up where left off.
Just remember, in the 1700's a ragtag group of shop keepers and farmers stood up to and defeated what was at the time the best trained and equipped military in the world. Waco was a totally different scenario.
"Those munitions are simply not effective against today's soldiers"
Then why would "today's soldiers" use those very munitions against each other, if they are "simply not effective"?
Right? I mean, who uses NATO 5.56 against troops?
Oh, right, NATO.
Someone that knows nothing about what they are talking about trying to school others on the subject.
So your video is missing an essential evaluation. How much ammo is need to stay proficient with your firearm?
Exactly, my ammo doesn't sit there "just in case"..
So if no enemy is killed by your bullet, the firing of it was a complete failure? What's that term I'm trying to remember? Oh yeah: "Suppressing fire" How many rounds do you need to stop a home invasion? Well, first I need to know how many attackers there are and then I need to know how many times I am gonna miss. One shot MIGHT do it, even if I miss all of them.
This is one of the worst use of cherry picked statistics I've ever seen.
Example: you use a very loose calculation to determine 5 rounds needed a year for current recreational hunting, then determine that's all you'd need in a shtf situation. Not only does recreational hunting have no relevance to shtf hunting, it assumes you'd only need to hunt once a year, and that you'd make every shot, every time. That's absurd.
@@corneredfox
Right on all counts, but none of that rebuts what I said. He is comparing incompatible statistics about gun usage in shtf scenarios, both relating to gunfights and hunting. I did not argue any other points.
@@corneredfox
The point is that it is unreasonable to assume what would likely be necessary in an shtf/wrol situation based on recreational numbers that are hardly realistic to begin with. You may not shoot 5 deer a year, but could easily expend five bullets trying for one or two. I'm a pretty good shot, but I've had my share of misses too. Deer get spooked, bolt, or turn the head abruptly, and there goes a round. You shoot a running deer, you're likely to miss the kill shot and need a follow up. Or you wound it and have to track it down. Assuming you make every shot, and don't miss even once, five rounds a year might be fine. But you cannot count on that. In a survival situation you might end up hunting with and/or for a group, which would require more ammo. You might get into a defensive situation that might require more ammo. You might lose/drop your bag/magazine while in the bush. You might get robbed. Lots of possibilities to go through, and in that kind of scenario, it's not like you can run to the nearest Wal-Mart and grab some more. I'm speaking only from a standpoint of prepping, and while it is impossible to store every possible thing necessary to outlast the apocalypse, I do think it is more than reasonable to keep a couple hundred rounds or so of hunting caliber ammo.
All that said, you make a good point. I'd rather keep livestock than have to hunt, but I wouldn't want to put all my chances on that alone.
@@corneredfox
I think a couple hundred rounds is still on the low side of what is wise to put aside, and that is in reference to larger rounds like 308. I'd stockpile many more smaller rounds such as .223, since it is cheaper and more versatile, and thousands of rounds of 22lr. Much easier and more practical to catch rabbits, squirrels, etc than deer anyway.
@@corneredfox
Trapping is a good idea, but you assume the option is static. You might have to hunt when traps are dry. You might have to travel further to catch anything, making trapping difficult. I simply like options. I prep like I'd have to depend on hunting, but when possible I'd raise livestock and set traps. The idea being that I cannot know how fluid such a situation would be.
That said, I've hunted small game with 22lr for close to 30 years. It's reliable enough to me.
I also agree that stocking a few main calibers is wise. I'm only concerned with 4; 22lr, .223, .308, and 9mm. I think a thousand rounds of each is a good starting point. Maybe half that for .308, since I'd have plenty of .223, which is cheaper. My problem is. I really enjoy shooting, and so I don't always have all that put away.
As long as it's stored properly, modern metallic centerfire cartridge ammo has a 'shelf life" of at least 50 years if not longer. So it basically doesn't expire...so why NOT keep adding?
Plus, many SHTF plans include alternate locations with at least some supplies pre-staged. Ammo *is* heavy so ammo waiting for you can be an impprtant resource freeing up your capability to carry other, perishable supplies.
A lot of numbers but my guess is that this guy was never in the military. The real reason to stockpile ammo is because the other guy is and you might have to fight it out with him. His idea of just giving up is not what I am going to do.
Obviously, the producer has never been in a firefight.
So you plan to never practice? I go to the range once and use several hundred rounds. I admit, it may not be necessary to use THAT many but you should plan to shoot your guns once in a while.
Hey tell me how we did and are doing in Afghanistan? 7 time deployed Army Ranger here and I can tell you there is no winning going on in Afghanistan. It doesn't matter if the military has flying saucers with lasers, you can't win against Insurgency.
One cannot point to Afghanistan to argue that an insurgency against the U.S. government fought by Americans on American soil cannot be defeated.
@@Desron58 Why not ? It's an insurgency. How about we point to Korea, Iraq or Vietnam instead ? Would those suffice for you ? Would all US soldiers be willing to go to war against other citizens ?
@@OveToranger Most successful insurgencies have one thing in common and that is they were supported by an outside power. If one wishes to study insurgencies in the Untied States an Colonies, then you ought to study the Indian Wars and the Civil War. In the War for Independence, we had the support of France and Spain.
@@Desron58 I see your point, though the Indian Wars was not a good example (the Indians didn't have support from an outside power and it was more a war of attrition, chemical warfare and outright war). I do believe that some outside powers would probably take an interest in an american uprising against the state, so your argument kind of supports mine...also take into consideration that many soldiers in the US army probably wouldn't take up arms against their own families/friends/fellow citizens and might take over materiel and bases. All in all - in my opinion it probably would be as successful as Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan... ie. not very.
Ammunition actually was used as currency in the old west..... The Shot glass was a glass of whiskey traded for one bullet. AKA the shot.
Those Idiots Traded Their Bullets For Whiskey?? F**king Idiot Pilgrims!!
While this was rather entertaining, I do believe that any shtf scenario that will happen in today's sociey will not be comparable to any of the statistics you quoted. It's called stockpiling for a reason.. it's not reasonable calculated stowage🤦♂️
I understand that there are literally thousands of "experts" here on the internet. The problem is when I listen to a video like this that cherry picks specific data to support a point but has no true scope of historical precedence let alone an understanding of warfare. As a retired Special Forces soldier I can speak to a long list of insurrections that a few men with a rifle were able to undermine and eventually overthrow a standing government thus ending the military's ability to control the populous. I war all of you that this sort of half-truth reporting has, does, and will get people killed and has no scope or dynamic introspection or objective view of real warfare and sustain low kinetic fighting. Also, the example of the Taliban for a militia force was outright embarrassing and I can attest that the ability to say that 0.0007 percent of US soldiers were killed by direct kinetic action involving firearms is a worthless point. It is a combined arms war and to say that the need to stockpile ammunition is worthless is for lack of a better word, stupid. That said, feel free to deal with your enemy with just a handful of ammunition, if anyone believes they can stand their ground in an SHTF scenario with a meager 1000 rounds then more power to you. As an actual expert who has spent the last 26 years serving and fighting for our country and has a full grasp of unconventional warfare, I would plead with you to NOT listen to this gentleman. This is what happens when experts make an argument but lack the depth of the scenario they are talking about. If anyone has any questions about what I would actually do please feel free to contact me on my page. Cheers.
Can't fix stupid. Folks like this guy will never understand the deterrent power our forefathers and collective culture blessed us with. I have to admit, I got a bit of a juvenile giggle when it got to the bit on modern soldiers' armor. He's right enough about 5.56. Not sure he has a solid grasp on what a varmint rifle in .243 WSSM or.. say a .300 Win Mag running a berger solid at mach-damnit can do. Those prairie dog hunters out west would have a field day.
Individual snipers do very poorly in asymmetrical warfare situations as a whole. Nothing calls down suppressive fire followed by arty like an active sniper. What the hell do you do when there are 20 of them though? Especially considering that.. in the case of an invading force, local marksmen would likely get coordination and instruction from special forces? 20 Deer hunters being coordinated by a military expert? I sure as hell wouldn't want to be that enemy radio man. That is enough to give the devil himself a cold chill.
From a "gun bunnie" to a Greenie bennie thank you for your service and sacrifice. 72-75
If you know how much you have, you don't have enough.
1 thing.... he really assumes that no one, literally no one, practices frequently. I use more ammo in one day of practice many times a year then his calculations of "what you really need" would be.
Yes this is a key point
This totally not government controlled channel just convinced me to buy as much ammo, arms and armor as possible...
Would rather have thousands of rounds I never use than not have the 1 round I really need.
The real reason to have a bunch of ammo is because it's usually cheaper in bulk and you'll burn through a lot of rounds at the range. It sucks to have your range time curtailed 'cause you ran out of ammo. When I was breaking in a new pistol (the manual said that would take 500 rounds), I'd put 100-200 rounds through it at each visit to the range.
Blazing away at the gun range is NOT a SHTF scenario! So you're "stockpiling" because the ammo is cheaper per round when you buy in bulk.
Also, for the SHTF scenario, ideally you should be growing as much food as possible. Grow an assortment of dry beans and lentils because they'll store well (ideally, you let them dry before harvesting them) and are a good source of protein. That's even easier than raising chickens and rabbits. Grow some grains (choose what does well in your area; research that in advance, and it would be a good idea to learn to do it long before you need the knowledge). You'll need some land for that.
Notice how he leaves training off the list as if he expects you to never need to practice shooting until your 3 shots are needed years later
Good eye.
Only 4 shots to sight in your rifle. Why not 3?
look it's a fudd, only need a few rounds cause I never train to be good, just semi shItty.
Better to have and not need than need and not have! I'll keep buying the ammo
Most defensive gun uses do not result in gun fire or a police reports.
Best reason to stockpile...ammo is cheapest in 1000 round boxes
Exactly! Besides, we might have an other Democrat president and another fake ammo shortage. You need to stockpile at least 8 years worth of ammo at any time. Minimum.
Can we talk about training. If you don’t train you won’t win. Not unusual to go through 500-1000 rounds of 9mm and 556 in a two day course.
I have never met a person who wished they had less ammo.
WOW, you really didn't get the point of the video like others. Yeah you have the money and space to buy and store as much ammo as possible go for it. The point was to show that IF YOU CAN'T there are better things to invest in.
@@JohnSmith-yd5wq I did get the point of the video. The point is, stop being poor.
@@JohnSmith-yd5wq why would he have to make a video telling people that if they don’t have the money to then they shouldn’t stockpile ammo lol they should already know that it’s pretty obvious
I have never heard anyone in a gunfight say “ I have too much ammo!” . Stockpiling is smart especially when it’s cheap and available. All that is needed to have another panic buy is one election away. I would always rather have more, than not enough any day.
There's a lot wrong with this video... If you look at self defense shooting statistics, yes the average comes out somewhere between 3-4 shots before the situation has ended. Be that somebody runs away, somebody dies, or etc. By this logic, most 5 shot revolvers are adequate for self defense. But obviously more rounds available means better chances. The statistics you used talk about number of rounds fired to kill, but not total rounds fired as a whole. But what you also displayed was simply that... a statistic based on other statistics and then averaged. It does not represent the actual average. Just the average of the averages you selected. As people say.. statistics can be used to reflect whatever you want if you put the numbers in the right places.
Just like when you mentioned hunting... I do know a lot of hunters who only fire maybe 5 or 6 shots in a given season. I also know plenty of use their weapon year long for various game and fire hundreds between target practice and taking game. It will be much harder as you mentioned because yes... you'll have everyone and their mom trying to hunt out there. Game will be killed off very quickly, a lot will go to waste. But you have to consider a few factors... are you hunting for just you? Got a family? Close friends? Etc... Because a sizable deer will easily feed a whole family for a while IF they exorcise portion control and you know how to cook/clean the deer. So harvesting 5 would be an extreme waste in so many ways. Even then, you may want more than just 30 bullets because you never know when you're gonna have to shoot back at somebody trying to take your meal. So those numbers and averages again represent the outcome under current ideal circumstances.
While it may be true that for militia use we dont stand a chance against armor and air support but they gotta land sometime, got to refuel and resupply... You hit them there and you hit them hard. It worked in Afghanistan. And sure... the Afghan fighters only killed 14 or so... But we spend almost a million rounds of ammo and such for one guy. SO in the war of economics we are losing HARD. Vietnam, Korea, and other places around the world would have taught us that. Guerilla warfare can be done QUITE successfully. Look at Joseph Savimbi for example. Major military powers have often failed to end guerilla wars that have lasted DECADES or longer. Chechnya comes to mind..Georgia(the country not the state), several African nations, Afghanistan, and etc. So its proven we CAN stand up to armed force like that and win. More importantly in just about EVERY single conflict where an ill equipped force faces an armed nation... it draws other nations in to support sides. Somebody will be willing to supply arms, armor, and vehicles to the opposing side so to think if it was an all out war or whatever we wouldnt get some kind of help is absurd. Lastly.. its no longer that kind of world where we stand on open battlefields. We have urban warfare, cyber warfare, and etc. It doesnt have to be at the end of a rifle to do some damage anymore.
Also the idea that ammo wont be used as a currency is also dumb...You dont think prepper types wont band together to pool resources which will likely mean trading ammo for food or vice versa? It wont just be preppers either. Now will it be the most common practice? I doubt it.. But it most certainly would be likely at some point depending on the severity of the conflict, the length, and how long it may be before one could resupply.
At the end of the day... yeah how much you need IS up to you entirely. I often feel one needs less than many project but more than one might suspect. It should be based on your survival plan if you have one at all. My plan calls for maybe 500 rounds tops. Thats what works for me personally. But this video is full of a lot of disinformation be it intentional or otherwise.
Better have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
EXACTLY!
Plus, it's not like its going down in price, ammo, some nearly doubled. Like 357 Sig. Plus you can pawn em or trade for 100% what you paid value, unless you overpaid.
@@fbomb2077 facts
Completely worthless video. Lets flip the question this way. Statistically you only need 800 Kcal a day to survive on a starvation diet. So by that statistic you should never stock pile more food and water then you need at a bare minimum to sustain your own life and ignore all the food needs of others who you may have to feed in your family.
Right. Bare minimum numbers based on current recreational hunting, and applying that to a potential grid down survival situation is more than a little absurd.
Dude probably has had the same 20 round box of .45 acp carry ammo since 2006
Lol this video feels like a really really obvious anti gun argument at best. And at worst some kinda of 2nd grader level reverse psychology attempt to get all the ammo for himself.
Literally the last point was, and I'm paraphrasing here "criminals will need lots of guns and ammo when they come to murder you for your guns and ammo. If you dont have guns and ammo they might not murder you." Fucking brilliant..
Lol i clicked on this because I thought this was a video on storage tips. How has this gotten this many up votes?
I like to keep plenty of ammo so that i can shoot at the range for the rest of my life. You seem to have not thought of target shooting as a reason for having ammo. Btw... my fishing pole has killed more things than any of my guns.
I guess I should consider it flattering that you removed my comment. All I did was point out that you'll be no threat to anyone in a bad situation since you apparently don't practice and stay in good form. Riflery and pistol craft are perishable skills. The omission of that glaringly obvious part of your thinking is pretty egregious, and no serious person should take what you're suggesting here seriously.
I guess you'll delete that comment too... :/
You only need one bullet per gun fight per opponent.
But it takes 20,000 rounds of practice to get to that point. And thousands of rounds per year to maintain that level of proficiency.
“Civilians can’t fight modern militaries.” Ask some Vietnamese rice farmers
Yeah, he lives in a nation that was literally founded by civilians who defeated their own government's military, which was arguably the most powerful in the world at that point, and still insists that it can't be done. Not to mention the fact that we are FAR better off than the Founders were. We have a nation full of veterans, contractors and active service, who are patriots. If the government turned on the population, we are already inside the wire, trained in the tactics, operating the machinery, preparing the food, supplying the fuel and power, wearing the uniforms, speaking the language, and we are at every level of command.
It will not play out as he imagines in his defeatist fantasy.
Or the terrorists we've been fighting for 18 years now.
Modern gun control is a real life SHTF situation... Sincerely: An Oregonian.
Dee-Bee Kooper you merely adopted gun control. I was born into gun control, molded by it.
Signed,
A Californian.
Your real data forgot to mention the CDC report that up to 3 million guns were used to stop a crime. Sometimes just the threat of lethal force is enough to stop a criminal.
Strangely enough, TH-cam videos of police shootouts seem to overwhelmingly show cops going through all 17 rounds of their Glock mag and even firing a few rounds from a second mag.
I agree. If you have magazine fed firearms I think it is wise to have at least five to seven magazines per long gun and four magazines per pistol. Full capacity twenty to thirty-two round magazines can get lost or broken and tyrant politicians are continually trying to ban them. Possession is 90% of the law. Most States where they have banned full capacity magazines allow their citizens to keep the magazines they already had. New Jersey is one of the exceptions but that is a tyrant crap hole State.
So the number is around 10,000 rounds per gun. Thanks Rational Soy. I will continue to never take advice from faceless nobodies on youtube.
Coming from a former Marine, current rifle and bow hunter, and a gun collector your statistics are just plain wrong.
I simply don't agree with this fella. Most people are not stockpiling ammunition for the reasons stated in this video. Most people are stockpiling ammunition over fear of availability or outright banning in the United States. Before you give some song and dance about how that cannot happen and they're not coming after everybody's guns, Take 5 minutes and look at the new law going into affect here in California July 1st. It is a new way to monitor what you buy and also forces you to register rifles and shotguns that were never part of the registry in California in the past. For instance. That old 22 that's been handed down for Generations that sits in a closet. Or that shotgun that your dad bought you when you were a teenager 40 years ago.
It's a bullshit law that intrude into our personal lives by monitoring how much ammunition people will buy. It will do nothing to stop crime. All it does is rightfully cause more concern about government intervention into our personal freedoms.
Reality is that if you want to stockpile ammo you got to buy as much as you want on each caliber you own without destabilizing your economy… you have to buy ammo depending on your budget … if you make good money per check then you can buy more ammo stockpile. Just don’t compare with so many guys that have 20000 for each of their guns, don’t be obsessed with stockpiling.. do your thing according to WHERE you live and make your plan according to possibilities !!!
How about keeping enough ammo so that I never need to buy another round if the prices go through the damn roof again.
My thoughts exactly. Even if it never hits the fan (hopefully it never will) shooting is a fun sport which I never want to be denied due to it being cost prohibitive. Even now Im kicking myself for not scooping up great deals of years prior. And it will only continue to rise in price.
That’s what many in CA did when our enlightened state leaders outlawed online purchases. They simply stockpiled like crazy leading up to it and won’t ever have to buy certain calibers ever again
5:58 you say that there's no way that people could stand up to a modern military, but you forget many things in this. First, Afghanistan is doing just that. Maybe not to the level of victory you might deem enough to make it worth it but it's still our reality. Then, there's the fact that if our government decided to used said tanks and bombs, they would instantly lose a vast amount of their support from the people. How exactly will they explain their decision to deploy heavy ordinance on American soil against American citizens? That would more than likely include non-combatants. Then there's the fact that the military isn't a bunch of robots. They are people too. People with families, ideals, and morals. The military wouldn't turn their might against the people. The government wouldn't command the vast numbers and ordinance that we do overseas. You cannot just observe the situation as if what is acceptable overseas is going to be acceptable here.
Also, your numbers are bunk. You cannot judge how many rounds an individual needs solely based on how many hits on average it takes to end a threat. You are forgetting missed shots, suppression shots, and even faulty rounds. Numbers are easy to organize, yet surprisingly difficult to properly evaluate. You failed to do so properly.
KG Not to mention TRAINING, so that one can actually have a hope in hell of actually hitting what one aims at. Shooting is a perishable skill, just like piano playing and languages: use it or lose it.
Also, killing tax payers is really really stupid.
Unsubscribed....... This tells me, you don't shoot your gun. You don't practice. You sit and look at your gun, play with it, read info online and make videos. I bet you never even killed a deer for the freezer, do you even know how to field dress a deer? Do you even know what that is without having to google it?
This whole video stinks of propaganda.
100% agree, this data is referring to is BS
Reality hitting your ego button? This video is about as factual as it gets
You stockpile ammo so you can continue to train/practice after: 1. It becomes unavailable due to supply issues (could hardly find .380, 308, .357 mag, 22 lr anywhere at points during covid) 2. It becomes so expensive that it is cost prohibitive to buy (prices hit $5 per round for .357 mag last year) 3. It becomes unavailable due to changing federal or state laws (like California’s ban on the sale of hollow points). People that are just getting into shooting do not have adequate skills with rifles and pistols and shouldn’t “hope” that supply, legality and prices continue to allow them to buy their ammo just-in-time when they go to the range to train. I typically use about 150-200 rounds of 9mm or 5.56 each time I visit the range (about every other month) and I usually go through 1200-1500 rounds per year which honestly isn’t enough practice. Even now we are still seeing limits on the number of boxes you can buy at a time. If you think buying your first gun and a few boxes of ammo to put under the bed is “good enough” to prepare you to defend yourself, you might as well just save your money. You will be a lot safer without a weapon and untrained gun owners in the house. A+ for video production quality, D on the narrative. I’m starting to wonder if this is just thinly vailed anti-gun propaganda.
200 rounds ant nothing if you practice regularly at different positions, unfortunately my ar hasn't collected dust since buying it 2 years ago. May not be a sniper but I do intend to hit what I aim at .head shot no walking away
Well said
Wow, a liberal posing as an authority and telling me I don't need ammo.
Well if your home is being threatened by a group of 20 raiders following an economic collapse in a world without law you are going to need more than 2 rounds.
Tell me you're a fudd without telling me you're a fudd....
So the most powerful military in the world, got sent home by guys using mostly 7.62x39 small arms, and tactics.
But militias, according to this guy are ineffective for the most part against mechanized military. OK you keep your ideas close, they just might keep you warm one day.
This video is anti-gun propaganda.
"Look, heres a picture of a small bullet and a big bullet! You can't fight The Man"
You nailed it. This stinks of propaganda.
Hurr durr you dont stand a chance against modern military. Tell that to vietnamese farmers. Also as a prepper you should know its better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it
@@corneredfox im talking about the guerrilla fighters that kept up a fight with the us till we eventually gave up and left. Same with the towl heads. I dont like em but we shouldnt forget about how much shit a group of determined people can stir when they have weapons. Also we gotta remember if america has a civil war the military will likely be fractured so it wouldnt he near the strength of the military that faced the vietnamese. Also itd be stupid to try and fight straight up against the american military straight up. Guerrilla tactics would be used like ieds and hit and run attacks. Remember the japanese wouldnt even consider a land invasion because "there would be a gun behind every blade of grass"
@@corneredfox even so im still not gonna be convinced americans should just roll over to a tyrannical government without a fight.
@@corneredfox well you can let yourself get caught without ammo if you want id rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it
@@corneredfox im gonna have a few thousand to ensure ill have more than ill ever likely need, if things go tyrannical im gonna move back into the hills and if i see a force i think can win and i agree with ill join if not ill fly under the radar as much as possible
@@corneredfox because you have militaries spraying and praying. A shooter makes shots count. You dont need 50k rounds to kill someone. If so these filthy gang members would get no kills. Law enforcement we have killed no one. Forest for the trees. I was trained to dump a mag into an offender. And in the heat of the moment yes fine motor skills will be rough. I can still tear the shit out of a guy at 15 yards with a pistol. I wont need 50k rounds. Get real.
How long have you worked for FEMA or is it the DHS?
My family used over 2000 rds this week for practice. If you cannot hit your target ( see training/practice ) you may as well be unarmed.
There is NO SUCH THING as too much ammo...smdh
Yet we are still in Afghanistan 18 years later. I disagree whole heatedly on your views of militia.
Gator70 I agree brother. The Vietnam war was lost largely due to the Vietnamese people forming militias to fight against the invading nations. A lot of which were farmers, and common citizens, and they inflicted extremely heavy casualties on invading forces, despite being out gunned. End result, over 58,000 American troop deaths, and the United States leaving Vietnam, having accomplished nothing. This guy is a clown.
The secret is attack a weak or small force and disappear.
I stockpile for my retirement, at that point I won’t be able to afford ammo, and I love to shoot.
Uhhh... clearly the creator/ creators of this video have never, ever been in any war anywhere
This video brought to you by Cletus the Fudd
In a SHTF scenario wouldn’t it make sense to use military applications to analyze how many rounds would be used in a firefight?
I believe that military records-keeping does already identify the amount of ammo that our soldiers use against the hadjis, and they expend just as much ammo as the bad guys, IMHO. In a firefight, I'm pretty sure that at least 4-5 30rd mags are emptied, possibly 6+, depending on the number of opponents engaged. There are times when snipers can eliminate the threat because of their stand-off capability, and there are times when regular ground troops get the job done because they can employ volume fire to kill the enemy. Volume fire, of course, means that the rounds-expended-per-enemy-soldier count is gonna go WAY up... altogether, this is why in a separate post I completely scoff at RP's dismissal of the importance of having a certain amount of ammo on hand. Some people live in such remote areas that they'll never need 1000 rounds ever. But most American preppers either can't or won't live in Alaska or Idaho, so that means we'll need more. Common sense must dictate our decision as to how much one believes is appropriate.
Not the same situation, at least in most cases.
But as I understand it, 7 30 round magazines seems to be standard equipment, rounds fired is inaccurate by the nature of our military. When you're shot at you unload at the guy that shot at you, or the best guess at where he's at from what I've seen.
That's not exactly what's going to happen stateside if things go bad
Robert I was thinking of a time where the military commonly engaged in urban warfare, which was ww2, I don’t expect it to be a free for all where everyone is shooting at one another, I just expect the kind of firefights that happen to be vary different than common defensive gun use because you’re probably never going to be at point blank range, so I would expect a lot more expenditures in ammo due to that fact, like you would see in ww2
lost me at resistance is futile
"How much toilet paper should you stockpile? Well, if the average shit only takes 10 squares to clean your ass...."
In WW2 American soldiers and marines fired 52,000 rounds for every enemy kill. In Vietnam it went up to 525,000 rounds. So yes you need ammo, lots of ammo.
I don't think any single person will ever shoot that many rounds before being killed in one gunfight. WW2 American soldiers were also trained to use a type of fire that lit up a whole area, obviously increase the ammo use.
Its called suppressive fire....and its not always intended to kill...sometimes its intended to create cover or to avoid the enemy getting an opportunity to shoot back. These stats are so skewed and unexplained.
@Mustang .308 Yes, I know. But most preppers wont't be doing that by themselves. Even if Tom's stats were real, it is fallacious to compare military tactics to what a random gun enthusiast/prepper boy would do.
@@lilsyrupshawty My stats are real, that's why the US military took "full auto" selection off combat rifles.
@Mustang .308 It was on AHC. Verified by the Pentagon.
ATF agents making videos now
BRUH FR 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Man says not to stockpile ammo and that the AR-15 Is trash! Bet he's just some FED trying trick us 😂.
You can't have too many bullets.
My friends and I stockpiled probably a literal ton of ammunition over the course of a few years and I was glad we did once the great ammo shortage of 2020 hit. You can't target practice if you can't find ammo.