It is not the EMP that would cause us to go to the stone age as much as having almost all infrastructure, organization, government and most of the worlds populace destroyed.Not affected by EMP ...
And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
I guess I should point out... hunting wildlife for food wouldn't exactly be a good idea after a nuclear war... as you wouldn't know if they are contaminate with radiation. Much like the wild boar problem they have near Chernobyl, and the many reindeer that had to be put down recently that contained high levels of radiation.
Chernobyl Disaster Leaves Radioactive Wild Boars Roaming Germany - NBC News
Norway’s radioactive reindeer
And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
I guess I should point out... hunting wildlife for food wouldn't exactly be a good idea after a nuclear war... as you wouldn't know if they are contaminate with radiation. Much like the wild boar problem they have near Chernobyl, and the many reindeer that had to be put down recently that contained high levels of radiation.
Chernobyl Disaster Leaves Radioactive Wild Boars Roaming Germany - NBC News
Norway’s radioactive reindeer
If you can live in the region the critters will be fine. If you are passing through it will be a question, then you have to do inspections to determine the safety of the meat.
Really wouldn't matter. You would also be contaminated, and facing the choice of immediate death from starvation or the possibility of death at a later date from the radiation in the animal and you. Those that survived would invariably choose not to die of hunger.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
I guess I should point out... hunting wildlife for food wouldn't exactly be a good idea after a nuclear war... as you wouldn't know if they are contaminated with radiation. Much like the wild boar problem they have near Chernobyl, and the many reindeer that had to be put down recently that contained high levels of radiation.
Chernobyl Disaster Leaves Radioactive Wild Boars Roaming Germany - NBC News
Norway’s radioactive reindeer
LOL After a full nuclear exchange, there will not be much of the world that is not contaminated to a level that is dangerous. Cancer will become a major killer among the survivors. Yes, the specie will probably survive, but it will be a brutal life, and a short one for most. And that way for at least a couple of generations.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
I guess I should point out... hunting wildlife for food wouldn't exactly be a good idea after a nuclear war... as you wouldn't know if they are contaminate with radiation. Much like the wild boar problem they have near Chernobyl, and the many reindeer that had to be put down recently that contained high levels of radiation.
Chernobyl Disaster Leaves Radioactive Wild Boars Roaming Germany - NBC News
Norway’s radioactive reindeer
If you can live in the region the critters will be fine. If you are passing through it will be a question, then you have to do inspections to determine the safety of the meat.
Having shot one of those, I will take my Savage 250 over any of them. I think I would even prefer my 22 Mag. As for defensive shooting, there might be a little of that, but, in a full nuclear exchange, I think that would be rare.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
Nope. This is a better rifle for deer hunting overall. In the hands of a good marksman they can be as accurate, and if they have been accurized are MORE accurate than a deer rifle. They do less damage to the meat, have a smaller firing signature, can be easily fired by women and teenagers in an emergency, and, in the highly unlikely event of a post apocalyptic scenario are far superior to a deer rifle in a defensive shooting situation.
LOL After a full nuclear exchange, there will not be much of the world that is not contaminated to a level that is dangerous. Cancer will become a major killer among the survivors. Yes, the specie will probably survive, but it will be a brutal life, and a short one for most. And that way for at least a couple of generations.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
I guess I should point out... hunting wildlife for food wouldn't exactly be a good idea after a nuclear war... as you wouldn't know if they are contaminate with radiation. Much like the wild boar problem they have near Chernobyl, and the many reindeer that had to be put down recently that contained high levels of radiation.
Chernobyl Disaster Leaves Radioactive Wild Boars Roaming Germany - NBC News
Norway’s radioactive reindeer
If you can live in the region the critters will be fine. If you are passing through it will be a question, then you have to do inspections to determine the safety of the meat.
Having shot one of those, I will take my Savage 250 over any of them. I think I would even prefer my 22 Mag. As for defensive shooting, there might be a little of that, but, in a full nuclear exchange, I think that would be rare.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
Nope. This is a better rifle for deer hunting overall. In the hands of a good marksman they can be as accurate, and if they have been accurized are MORE accurate than a deer rifle. They do less damage to the meat, have a smaller firing signature, can be easily fired by women and teenagers in an emergency, and, in the highly unlikely event of a post apocalyptic scenario are far superior to a deer rifle in a defensive shooting situation.
This cartridge is much closer in performance to the .223 Remington than the .243 Winchester or .257 Roberts. That said, the .250 Savage does of course duplicate the performance of the .243 and .257 when the latter are used at longer ranges. In like fashion, the 100 grain bullet produces fastest killing when either striking the CNS or to maximize wounding and bleeding, placed to strike the forwards locomotive muscles and bones of the foreleg. Readers are encouraged to read both the .223 and .243 texts in order to gain a thorough understanding of game killing with small calibers.Having shot one of those, I will take my Savage 250 over any of them. I think I would even prefer my 22 Mag. As for defensive shooting, there might be a little of that, but, in a full nuclear exchange, I think that would be rare.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
Nope. This is a better rifle for deer hunting overall. In the hands of a good marksman they can be as accurate, and if they have been accurized are MORE accurate than a deer rifle. They do less damage to the meat, have a smaller firing signature, can be easily fired by women and teenagers in an emergency, and, in the highly unlikely event of a post apocalyptic scenario are far superior to a deer rifle in a defensive shooting situation.
Then you are a fool. Savage 99? or a 110? Your max effective range is 500 yards. The AR is good for 700 yards with standard 62 grain ammo. Up the projectiles to 80 grain VLD's and now you can accurately hit out to 1000 yards. For someone who claims to be all interested in technology you are sure interested in staying with obsolete hardware.
This cartridge is much closer in performance to the .223 Remington than the .243 Winchester or .257 Roberts. That said, the .250 Savage does of course duplicate the performance of the .243 and .257 when the latter are used at longer ranges. In like fashion, the 100 grain bullet produces fastest killing when either striking the CNS or to maximize wounding and bleeding, placed to strike the forwards locomotive muscles and bones of the foreleg. Readers are encouraged to read both the .223 and .243 texts in order to gain a thorough understanding of game killing with small calibers.Having shot one of those, I will take my Savage 250 over any of them. I think I would even prefer my 22 Mag. As for defensive shooting, there might be a little of that, but, in a full nuclear exchange, I think that would be rare.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
Nope. This is a better rifle for deer hunting overall. In the hands of a good marksman they can be as accurate, and if they have been accurized are MORE accurate than a deer rifle. They do less damage to the meat, have a smaller firing signature, can be easily fired by women and teenagers in an emergency, and, in the highly unlikely event of a post apocalyptic scenario are far superior to a deer rifle in a defensive shooting situation.
Then you are a fool. Savage 99? or a 110? Your max effective range is 500 yards. The AR is good for 700 yards with standard 62 grain ammo. Up the projectiles to 80 grain VLD's and now you can accurately hit out to 1000 yards. For someone who claims to be all interested in technology you are sure interested in staying with obsolete hardware.
.250-3000/.250 Savage
Savage 99e, hand loaded with standard powder load, a 117 gr bullet. If your AR is a .223, then it will match or exceed that gun.
I rather doubt that to be honest. A full nuke exchange would be devastating, of course, but it would not outright kill the majority of the population. Without infrastructure you would find a LOT of people fighting over the very little food that would remain.LOL After a full nuclear exchange, there will not be much of the world that is not contaminated to a level that is dangerous. Cancer will become a major killer among the survivors. Yes, the specie will probably survive, but it will be a brutal life, and a short one for most. And that way for at least a couple of generations.And should the US and Russia each throw a thousand nukes, only part of each nations arsenal, just how is that going to be a big help? A regular deer rifle would be much more useful for such game as survived, and there just will not be that many people surviving to fight a war.Not affected by EMP ...
I guess I should point out... hunting wildlife for food wouldn't exactly be a good idea after a nuclear war... as you wouldn't know if they are contaminate with radiation. Much like the wild boar problem they have near Chernobyl, and the many reindeer that had to be put down recently that contained high levels of radiation.
Chernobyl Disaster Leaves Radioactive Wild Boars Roaming Germany - NBC News
Norway’s radioactive reindeer
If you can live in the region the critters will be fine. If you are passing through it will be a question, then you have to do inspections to determine the safety of the meat.
