Humanity makes me sick. This is what would happen within days of being nuked.

[Condyle]

This is why the instant the mushroom cloud clears, you get the *fuk* away from the places people are. You get somewhere with water, and you sort out food but you do it the places people aren't. The places people are won't have food, they will have people so unless the food is resupplied, what they have is an excellent chance of violent death beginning 48hrs max after the event and continuing for a few hundred years into the future.

This is much easier in Australia, where I'm in a capital city now and can think of a few ways to find myself absolutely alone within three hours max.

[Tomohokk]

The pictures of looter all seem to have something in common....



I just can't quite place it...

They dwell in urban areas, and they are also delinquent looking youths...

[MNGA1]

Look, my point was simply that in order of preferred scenarios it goes like this

1) You have a gun and none or very few other people have one.

2) You dont have a gun but neither does 99% of the rest of the population.

3) You have a gun and so does almost everyone else.

I am not disputing that guns are a tremendous advantage when chit goes down. However, I would prefer to be unarmed in the UK vs being armed in the USA, simply because killing people with guns is so ridicolously easy compared to with blunt trauma or a knife=greater chance of dying before being able to evacuate out of a hot zone/when getting supplies or whatever.

So in that regard European gun laws are better, however I understand the point you US brahs are making. When every thug is armed you need to be as well. Vicious cycle and I suspect there are simply too many guns in circulation in the US atm. Disarming the law abiding population is not feasible.

[iifymbro]

Here's a (partial) family photo. LOL if you think ghetto looters are going to be pillaging the American middle class.




Not sure if serious. Society has collapsed to such a degree that people are killing other people for food and you think that the normal "self-defense" shooting rules are going to apply? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Sure, New York, DC, Chicago, LA, and San Fran are all going to look like Mad Max, but you're drunk if that's how you think the burbs and rural areas would be.

Can confirm, ghetto looters moving out into rural 'murica looking for easy pickings will get wiped out

[pogioli4]

No, you'd just get murdered even quicker by a gang of thugs with guns.

gang of looters better come with a tank then cuz we've got an arsenal large enough to keep our whole block safe for life which includes a .308 custom made "Sniper Rifle" that's good out to 1,000yds for any half-decent shot

[ZenBowman]

Read first and second page.... wtf kind of logic is:

You're better off without a gun vs. looters

Absolutely wrong. Humans are predatory animals and are proven to go after what they perceive to be the easiest targets. A dude strapped to the hilt is not an easier target than rot-n-crotch feminist anti-gun SJWs. Simply walking down the street with your shoulders back and head up makes you far less likely to be assaulted than someone with slumped shoulders moping around.

People refuse to learn the lessons of history.

Socialism and crime go hand in hand.

Self-reliance & an attitude of protective manhood prevent crime.

[ZenBowman]

Look, my point was simply that in order of preferred scenarios it goes like this

1) You have a gun and none or very few other people have one.

2) You dont have a gun but neither does 99% of the rest of the population.

3) You have a gun and so does almost everyone else.

No. Without a gun, a mob of riotous looters can easily sack your house, even if they are unarmed.

When you are armed, you can reasonably fight back. Look at what Korean shopkeepers did during the LA Riots.

I am not disputing that guns are a tremendous advantage when chit goes down. However, I would prefer to be unarmed in the UK vs being armed in the USA, simply because killing people with guns is so ridicolously easy compared to with blunt trauma or a knife=greater chance of dying before being able to evacuate out of a hot zone/when getting supplies or whatever.

So in that regard European gun laws are better, however I understand the point you US brahs are making. When every thug is armed you need to be as well. Vicious cycle and I suspect there are simply too many guns in circulation in the US atm. Disarming the law abiding population is not feasible.

Wrong again. If any thug is armed, you are in trouble.

LOL @ thinking criminals in Europe don't have arms, just LOL. The mafia in Europe is just as well or better armed than any street gang in the United States. So are the thousands of Jihadis in every European city.

[Ikeman83]

Look, my point was simply that in order of preferred scenarios it goes like this

1) You have a gun and none or very few other people have one.

2) You dont have a gun but neither does 99% of the rest of the population.

3) You have a gun and so does almost everyone else.

I am not disputing that guns are a tremendous advantage when chit goes down. However, I would prefer to be unarmed in the UK vs being armed in the USA, simply because killing people with guns is so ridicolously easy compared to with blunt trauma or a knife=greater chance of dying before being able to evacuate out of a hot zone/when getting supplies or whatever.

So in that regard European gun laws are better, however I understand the point you US brahs are making. When every thug is armed you need to be as well. Vicious cycle and I suspect there are simply too many guns in circulation in the US atm. Disarming the law abiding population is not feasible.

Here's the problem with your reasoning. You keep imagining that you're up against one guy with a knife or club. You're not. You're up against five guys with knives and clubs.

I'd rather be in the US with rifles against criminal gangs armed almost certainly with handguns than in the UK armed with a stick against criminal gangs armed with sticks.

[Ikeman83]

Can confirm, ghetto looters moving out into rural 'murica looking for easy pickings will get wiped out

You can't blame the UK guys for not understanding the wide disparity of force between your average middle class homeowner compared to the average street gang. These guys are picturing Fudds with pump shotguns shooting at hordes of criminals armed with Uzis, when in reality it's middle-class families with AR15s and scoped bolt-guns against criminals with $200 hi-points.

[CalmWind]

these idiots don't know how to fish?

they are a freaking island surrounded by water. there is so much seafood to eat......

[BetaNerd]

and then they may spare your life.

Sometimes I forget how stupid some people are.

Guys guys, there are laws against guns in the UK. Even law breaking thugs and gangsters abide by these laws. You have nothing to fear.

[MNGA1]

No. Without a gun, a mob of riotous looters can easily sack your house, even if they are unarmed.

When you are armed, you can reasonably fight back. Look at what Korean shopkeepers did during the LA Riots.

Right, that is why my nr 1 preferred scenario was to have a gun, while none or few other had one. I would rather be confronted with a mob of unarmed riotous looters with neither of us having guns than have a gun myself but be confronted with 10+ people also having one. In the former case escape is at least more of an option.

Wrong again. If any thug is armed, you are in trouble.

LOL @ thinking criminals in Europe don't have arms, just LOL. The mafia in Europe is just as well or better armed than any street gang in the United States. So are the thousands of Jihadis in every European city.

No Jihadis in Europe are apparently not well armed since the most recent attacks in Britain were carried out with knives and vehicles. You dont think they would use guns if they had access to them?

Dont doubt that many of the criminal networks posess guns, but I stand by my argument. The chance of running into a russian mobster with an AK-74 in Britain after a doomsday scenario is alot less likely than being confronted with someone carrying a gun in the US.

[mikebadg3]

logic doesnt exist in this thread

except for the last few posts

[CalmWind]

Zenbowman mod negged me for saying the island looters should learn how to fish and go catch some seafood.

Or is it because I called the looters idiots?


Who knows! Zenbowman only does. He can use his mod negs as he feels like apparently.

[EmmaW4tson]

ITT posters from 'murica are posting their set ups and 1 guy posts his wifes' builder kit.

And heres me in the UK with a simple combat knife hidden away, that if used in self defence would get me 15-20 if the criminal fuk dies. I wonder which countries are going to be taken by Islam and criminal cartels in the coming decades?

[MNGA1]

Here's the problem with your reasoning. You keep imagining that you're up against one guy with a knife or club. You're not. You're up against five guys with knives and clubs.

I'd rather be in the US with rifles against criminal gangs armed almost certainly with handguns than in the UK armed with a stick against criminal gangs armed with sticks.

In my mind both of those situations are messed up, but atleast with clubs and knives you could outrun them and hide.

Also, you are not in the US up against only criminals with handguns, it is equally like you'd be confronted by people armed with assault rifles or submachine guns such as yourself. That is the point I am trying to make here. Less guns in the population as a whole=less chance of getting shot when chit goes down.

[BustaCapp]

A group of 6 will be sufficient for the modern United Kingdom.

LMFAO you must never have been to the United Kingdom.

There are so little guns here it's unbelievable. Criminals literally struggle to get hold of them and when they do, they are usually re-activated, rusty old WW2 revolvers or sawn off shotguns.

Unlike the USA where M60's and miniguns can be bought on a street corner by ANYONE.

I would hate to live in a post apocalyptic USA. It would be an absolute bloodbath.

[Bulkytheboot]

In my mind both of those situations are messed up, but atleast with clubs and knives you could outrun them and hide.

Also, you are not in the US up against only criminals with handguns, it is equally like you'd be confronted by people armed with assault rifles or submachine guns such as yourself. That is the point I am trying to make here. Less guns in the population as a whole=less chance of getting shot when chit goes down.

As seen in this thread, it's too late for that in the U.S., every idiot has a gun.

[mikebadg3]

LMFAO you must never have been to the United Kingdom.

There are so little guns here it's unbelievable. Criminals literally struggle to get hold of them and when they do, they are usually re-activated, rusty old WW2 revolvers or sawn off shotguns.

Unlike the USA where they can be bought on a street corner by ANYONE.

I would hate to live in a post apocalyptic USA. It would be an absolute bloodbath.

your so wrong dude
how old are you? i assume your fully grown, maybe educated and schooling. apparently have a kid too.
You realize you have to be able to pass a NICS background check to be able to purchase a weapon right?
On top of that most states you have to have a CPL to conceal a pistol. So no. there's a process that you have to go through to be able to purchase a weapon
The ignorance is strong in this thread

[iifymbro]

You can't blame the UK guys for not understanding the wide disparity of force between your average middle class homeowner compared to the average street gang. These guys are picturing Fudds with pump shotguns shooting at hordes of criminals armed with Uzis, when in reality it's middle-class families with AR15s and scoped bolt-guns against criminals with $200 hi-points.

Yep, and the law abiding AR-15 owners also have way more experience and skill, most of those inner city thugs haven't even shot a gun before or more then a few times.

[Bulkytheboot]

your so wrong dude
how old are you? i assume your fully grown, maybe educated and schooling. apparently have a kid too.
You realize you have to be able to pass a NICS background check to be able to purchase a weapon right?
On top of that most states you have to have a CPL to conceal a pistol. So no. there's a process that you have to go through to be able to purchase a weapon
The ignorance is strong in this thread

Lmao so sheltered.

[Geno]

Very sad.

[CalmWind]

So I call the looters idiots and I wonder why they don't go FISHING FOR FOOD on an ISLAND....




and ZENBOWMAN THE MODERATOR NEGS ME for that. Erases 700 points of reputation from my profile.



This is the 3rd or 4th time he does this to me. The last time, he mod negged me because I said "liberals should be deported to Canada"

[Bulkytheboot]

Yep, and the law abiding AR-15 owners also have way more experience and skill, most of those inner city thugs haven't even shot a gun before or more then a few times.

Would love to see the experience and skill when 10 loaded goons raid your place.

[mikebadg3]

Would love to see the experience and skill when 10 loaded goons raid your place.

criminals hit soft targets. if they encounter staunch opposition they retreat. how's this difficult to comprehend? Even in a life or death situation they will avoid the shepherd so they can target sheep.

What's more important to someone, some food or their life? if they can go the next house over which doesn't have weapons but food which house will they choose, the one with guns or no weapons?

[Ikeman83]

Right, that is why my nr 1 preferred scenario was to have a gun, while none or few other had one. I would rather be confronted with a mob of unarmed riotous looters with neither of us having guns than have a gun myself but be confronted with 10+ people also having one. In the former case escape is at least more of an option.





No Jihadis in Europe are apparently not well armed since the most recent attacks in Britain were carried out with knives and vehicles. You dont think they would use guns if they had access to them?

Dont doubt that many of the criminal networks posess guns, but I stand by my argument. The chance of running into a russian mobster with an AK-74 in Britain after a doomsday scenario is alot less likely than being confronted with someone carrying a gun in the US.

People are starving to death and killing each other over food, and you think they're going to let you live?

I would rather be armed facing a criminal with a gun than unarmed facing a mob with sticks.

I would much rather be armed with a rifle facing criminals armed with handguns than unarmed facing a mob with sticks.

I would much, much rather be armed with a rifle that I've spent years training with and thousands of rounds of ammo facing criminals who turn their pistols sideways for no reason at all than be unarmed facing a mob with sticks.

In my mind both of those situations are messed up, but atleast with clubs and knives you could outrun them and hide.

Also, you are not in the US up against only criminals with handguns, it is equally like you'd be confronted by people armed with assault rifles or submachine guns such as yourself. That is the point I am trying to make here. Less guns in the population as a whole=less chance of getting shot when chit goes down.

The ones with the modern rifles are the ones with a stake in preserving society, because generally speaking, middle class families in the US have children. Preserving/restoring order is going to be number one on the minds of any community based around nuclear families.

Families based around crime, welfare checks, and single mothers, not so much.

LMFAO you must never have been to the United Kingdom.

There are so little guns here it's unbelievable. Criminals literally struggle to get hold of them and when they do, they are usually re-activated, rusty old WW2 revolvers or sawn off shotguns.

Unlike the USA where M60's and miniguns can be bought on a street corner by ANYONE.

I would hate to live in a post apocalyptic USA. It would be an absolute bloodbath.

Holy LOL @ the Bold. That was worth a chuckle. Post-apocalyptic USA would be a bloodbath for sure though, only the ones bleeding would be the criminals.

[Bulkytheboot]

criminals hit soft targets. if they encounter staunch opposition they retreat. how's this difficult to comprehend? Even in a life or death situation they will avoid the shepherd so they can target sheep.

What's more important to someone, some food or their life? if they can go the next house over which doesn't have weapons but food which house will they choose, the one with guns or no weapons?

in this situation food is life. how is that difficult to comprehend?

[Cleveland33]

Yep, and the law abiding AR-15 owners also have way more experience and skill, most of those inner city thugs haven't even shot a gun before or more then a few times.

This again.

I'll have to think about it, but I might actually PREFER that the street gangs arm themselves with fully auto Uzis and even AKs - let them spray and pray.

Meanwhile my cousins and uncles are taking head shots from a few hundred yards away with a 7mm or .30-06.

[Ikeman83]

Would love to see the experience and skill when 10 loaded goons raid your place.

Let's see, which experience is going to be more awful:

1. My wife and I with ARs loaded up with 30-rd mags if they get in the house and scoped .308s before they get to the house vs 10 goons who probably have pistols.
2. My wife and I with a kitchen knife or stick vs 10 goons with sticks and knives.


I'll take situation 1.

[Bulkytheboot]

Let's see, which experience is going to be more awful:

1. My wife and I with ARs loaded up with 30-rd mags if they get in the house and scoped .308s before they get to the house vs 10 goons who probably have pistols.
2. My wife and I with a kitchen knife or stick vs 10 goons with sticks and knives.


I'll take situation 1.

Lmfao if you think "thugs" only have pistols.