EdgarJPublius wrote:The AK-47 is truly great
You are 100% right on that. It is the
gun I would want. (Specifically Saddam Hussein's gold plated AK-47, but that is just a dream (also, I cant find the url where I got the picture of it from)
EdgarJPUblius wrote:repeating crossbows exist, obviating the strength/relaod time problems, such a crossbow would likely be lighter than a rifle and has the advantage that with some fletching skill you can make your own ammo with minimal materials. Though a rifle will have vastly more range and ammunition.
They do? How much would one cost? Would you need a firearms licence to get one? Is it possible to make one? I want one!
A decent submachine gun is not as prone to failure as Max indicates and has a pretty decent range, the average person would likely be able to achieve similar effective range with a good SMG as with a rifle.
Depending on the sub-machine gun, it would be a very good idea. I do not
recommend using a machine pistol because it would use up a lot of ammo (machine pistols most commonly use 9mm ammo and it would be best to use that 9mm ammo on a MP5 or a decent 9mm handgun) . . . If you were using a MP5, it might have the max range of a hunting/sporting rifle, but not any military rifle. If you use a sum-machine gun like a rifle, put it on semi-automatic. There's nothing like accidentally leaving a gun on full auto and trying to snipe something.
Surgery wrote:Range probably, but accuracy? Really doubtful. And if you aren't going to be accurate than what the hell's the point of range.
Shouldn't a rhetorical question have a question mark? Sorry . . . A sub-machine gun would be fairly accurate if you keep it on semi-automatic and attack a mini-scope to it.
Torvaun wrote:Really? Nuking will lead to mutated radioactive zombies? That's why the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki all have three arms and two heads and shit? Life. Is. Not. Fallout. And really, radioactive zombies are going to make it impossible to use melee or short range weapons? You're not actually worried about dying of cancer after the zombie apocalypse, are you? Because that's about how much radiation you're going to get from beating an irradiated zombie with a stick. Tops.
It could. I mean, if zombies can be real, what's to stop them from mutating from radiation? Yeah, it is. It might, if the zombies stay radioactive! Also, they might be able to store up the radiation in their rotting flesh and release it when you try to hit them with your baseball bat. Yes, we have to think of every possibility if we are to survive.
. . . ok, the effects of radiation on zombies might have been a bit much . . . but since we cant currently study the effects of radiation on zombies, we simply don't know.
Toeofdoom wrote:has tent safety been discussed here yet?
1: zombie finds you sleeping in a tent.
2: Zombie calls all his friends to the tent by yelling "arghhh! fooooood!!! arghhhh!"
3: Zombies pile up on your tent
4: your tent falls over
5: you are traped in a mess of rope, fabric and [possibly] tent poles (tent poles might make an ok improv weapon)
6: zombies eventually eat you and part of your tent
7: . . .
8: [zombies] profit!
Toeofdoom wrote:Oh, and boomerangs.
boomerangs are crap. My dad has one. They might be good for someone who realy knows how to use them, but not someone who hasn't had much experience using them.
Xaddak wrote:And then you run out of ammo and get eaten.
That's why we have machete's, baseball bats, knives, the butt of the rifle your using, crowbars, hammers (I cant believe that no one has mentioned using a hammer yet!) and other melee weapons.