Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

[Mo0man]

Same stuff that you would have in a regular emergency situation

[wst]

I disagree. If it can kill a human via a headshot, it can kill a zombie the same way.

And only a head shot. Imagine if the wind makes the .22 hit the zombie in the shoulder.

If the wind is going to move your actual hit more than 6 inches, you're far enough away to not bother shooting it.

Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel, have you any experience of shooting? Real-world experience, that is. (While game zombies cannot be compared with real life ones, game shooting can be and it's completely different, hence why I mention the real-world aspect of it here)

Shooting, to finalise my points, and to address the 'training' one, is not a 'pick up and instant winnage' sport. Pistol especially- it relies heavily on muscle memory. Rifle, while requiring less as far as muscle memory is concerned, still requires lots of training. You would not believe how many people I've seen shooting rifle and not looking through the backsight. They miss every shot, despite being supported with a sandbag (so they should just be able to point and click). When they get the hang of aiming, they're upgraded to shooting with a sling, still prone(the form we use in competition). Suddenly their groups triple in size. It takes a few weeks (depending on eyesight, heartrate, etc) to bring those down to pre-sling levels.

The main problem anyone would face while shooting in a Zompocalypse is terror. You get scared, your pulse goes way up. You're fighting with your instinct to run away, as zombies run/walk/shamble towards you. You flinch at any sound behind you. You're not trained to be tough enough psychologically, to shoot zombies. The military is the only real way to get such training, at this time. Though they're not fighting zombies.

[OmegaLord]

Same stuff that you would have in a regular emergency situation

But this would need to be modified. Hurricanes (to name an example) go away. Zombies are poopy-heads and do not. They will knock at your door until it's down. Then they will eat you and your family. You and family will proceed to eat someone else's family. Band-aids and bottle water are only gonna get you so far.

[EdgarJPublius]

I disagree. If it can kill a human via a headshot, it can kill a zombie the same way.

.22LR might penetrate the skull at close range, if you're lucky and if it's not very windy out.

Pretty much any other .22 load will bounce off unless you stick the barrel of your gun in the zombies eye.

Did someone really say Desert Eagle? Really?

Let me tell you about the desert eage, because clearly all you know of it is from vidogames.

First, it's heavy, really heavy, "Surely," you protest, "It is not that heavy" But in fact, it is, a loaded Desert Eagle .50 is on par with a rifle such as an M-16 in weight.

Second, it's complicated, due to it's gas-powered action which enables the gun to fires it's compensatory load, even if you are a skilled hand-gun armourer, you likely would be stumped trying to repair this gun if something goes wrong.

Thirdly, something WILL go wrong. The Desert Eagles are notoriously unreliable, the complicated and heavy mechanism shoved into a handgun frame would likely be enough for any other handgun, but not for Magnum Research or IMI, the initial designers/manufacturers who decided that what the Desert Eagle really needed to set itself apart from other guns was an almost total lack of quality control. And the companies that later took up the mantle of producing the worlds most recognizable penile replacement device decided to keep the streak alive with poor manufacturing conditions and low standards for quality control.

And fourthly, by now I suspect you're thinking 'wow, I really just didn't know, but does a pretend weapon this egregiously terrible at killing zombies really need a fourthly?" to which I respond, Of course it does.
If you manage to successfully fire a Desert Eagle at a zombie, having lugged it through whatever zombie infested terrain you happen to be in and having somehow, unbelievably, maintained it to a degree that it can be fired at all. Then you best be prepared to face an invisible, silent, zombie hoard. Only they won't be invisible or silent, you'll just be blinded by the enormous muzzle flash and deafened by the even more enormous report, both of which have summoned a zombie menace you are woefully unprepared to deal with.

And, to pile insult upon insult and injury, the Desert Eagle is more expensive than many AR model weapons, and rare in pretty much every market to which they were exported.

If you were buying your zompocalypse weapons (instead of looting them) you could buy an AR-15, a .38 revolver and some ammo for both and it would cost and weigh less than a Desert Eagle.

If you're really into penile enhancement in firearms, at least get a Smith and Wesson model .500 which, while still ridiculously heavy, is at least slightly less expensive and is ages more reliable. The only reason to get a Desert Eagle is too shoot a movie with or put it up on the mantle.

[wst]

I disagree. If it can kill a human via a headshot, it can kill a zombie the same way.

.22LR might penetrate the skull at close range, if you're lucky and if it's not very windy out.

Define close range.

I'd heard there was something wrong with the Des. Eagle but I didn't know what, but thanks for confirming my silent suspicions.

[ArchangelShrike]

Take supplies for three days - whatever you'll think you'll need. There are a bunch of earlier posts on what you should take, but as for what you shouldn't probably runs along these lines:
-No more than two sets of extra clothes. Maybe a second pair of jeans/flannel shirt for keeping you protected when you have to duck into a forest for a bit.
-Electronical Devices, other than a radio.
-Hygiene Goods - Okay, maybe some deodorant/toothbrush so the zombies don't smell you.
-Anything gas/electric powered

What you should take:
-2-5 Kg(4-11 lb) of rocks - think of that as the ammunition you'll be carrying (Then figure out how much ammunition it would be in your favorite caliber)
-A wooden pole/staff - Your rifle (Figure out how heavy it should be to be favorite rifle)
-Maps
-Machete

Somewhere around 7-10 Kg(15-22 lb) of supplies for your first foray in your pack, plus whatever you're carrying in your hands. 7-10 Kg should give you plenty of space to pack for at least 3 days, probably hitting up a week with the right selection.

[aion7]

I greatly suggest strapping at least one knife to your personage.

It won't help against zombies, but knives are extremely useful. Carrying more than one makes you not screwed if you loose one.

[Nifar]

Also, survival shovels/entrenchment tools/collapsible shovels/whatever they call them around you are extremely useful things, in several survival/camping situations, not just zombie invasions.

[Surgery]

I think the issue with a .50 is that most .50 caliber weapons have such a strong kick that if you aren't trained to deal with it it will hurt quite a lot. And if a zombie is at such a distance that you can't reach out and touch it with a .22 or even a .308, most people won't be able to make a headshot or even a center mass shot from that distance. Hell, marine sniper teams train for months to be able to hit man-sized targets at 1000 yards.

If it was the only thing available to me for some reason, I might empty it, keep the bullets in another pocket, and use it as a bludgeoning tool or last resort firearm, but all that is if I can afford the extra weight (they aren't very light, I've never fired one, but I've held one)

To be clear, I talking here about a .50 caliber rifle, such as the .50 BMG Barret. Not a .50 handgun.

And Phrozt:
re: scoped shotguns. I don't think your link supports you in the way you think it does. The last sentence is

Your best bet is to put a shotgun scope on your shotgun, and keep your rifle scope on your rifle.

I know people who take at least one deer a year with a scoped .410. As long as you have the right scope for the right gun, and know how to use it, you're golden (at least in that regard).

[Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel]

I expected to be able to use the computer earlier than this, but my mum was using it to watch a DVD.

Also, I'd like to point out that no, I haven't fired a gun. I have fired my pistol crossbow meny times. I have fired my dads BB gun meny times. I have fired my cousins (more powerful) BB gun a couple times. But not a firearm. And I have been honest about that from the start.

Ok, Desert Eagles aren't as good as movies and video games make it out to be.

[from what you guys have recommended and what I actually have access to] I have decided what is going in the bag:
[*]2 or 3 bricks (to count as ammo)
[*]A change of clothes (but two changes of underwear lol) and a rain coat.
[*]First aid kit. (with a small bottle of iodine which might be useful if a zombie scratches me and I use the iodine within seconds of getting scratched (It kills all the germs on the skin and in the cut (I don't know if it would ever work, but its worth the try, don't you agree?)))
[*]My pistol crossbow and bolts for it.
[*]A hatchet and a couple hammers (just because they would be heavy and I could substitute them for other tools that might be useful (Also good weapons if they need to be))
[*]Pocket knife, Swiss army knife and survival knife (pocket knife in my pocket, Swiss army and survival knives on my belt (the Swiss army knife has a little picket thing that can attack to belts))
[*]My dads metal baseball bat (If I can fit it in)
[*]Enough food and water for 2 or 3 days (a couple bottles of water that I can refill if I find a stream or something)
[*]Comb, chap stick and toilet paper. People always forget toilet paper.
[*]A small radio but no cell phone (because once I learn that its the IZA, I will just txt everyone telling them to come to Stratford and soon after that, the power will go out and the cell phone tower will be useless)
[*]and I will carry my axe which can be substituted for a rifle or something else because its heavy and bulky.

Is there anything vitally important that I have missed?

(I will go pack it now and come back just before I leave to see if anyone thinks I should have something else/remove something. I hope it all fits)

[EdgarJPublius]

]Define close range.

Closer than you want to get to a zombie.

[aion7]

Bandages are always good to have in an emergency situation. Also, something to write messages on walls to other survivors. EX: Ruthless raiders hideout in X City AVOID

[Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel]

It was difficult. But doable. I took a couple more things than I mentioned, like my lighter, tooth-brush, more tools, a sleeping bag, some rope. (I took them in a duffel bag, which would also be good for storing weapons/ammo in because it's at my side rather than on my back)

I climbed up quite a few hills. (I lost count) and after that, I took a short trip through some bush land looking for the farm track, then I got to the farm track and went the long way home. (The track, which is gravel, goes around the farm for about 4 or 5 km) . . . this trek was enough to tire me out. It took a couple hours. Note to everyone; hills are very bad! I'm in beter shape than I expected myself to be in. Although I took short breaks at the top of each hills. (anyone who lives in NZ knows exactly what hills are. These hills are what hills everywhere strive to be. Very huge hills) When on flat land, the best thing is to keep moving . . . when on the hills, it is best to simply go around them. It takes a bit to climb hills around here and I don't think a zombie could easily do it. A zombie would most likely fall over a couple times. I was exhausted when I got home and had a long, relaxing shower.

Then I remembered that the guy who owns the farm (my family rent the place) has a gator tractor (atleast, that's what I think its technically called) its a 6 wheel off-road vehicle (I think it runs on diesel) . . . its small, has an ok top speed, you can pile stuff in the back or on a trailer, it is built for off-road and it can pretty much go anywhere but vertical. It would be perfect for using when the zombie invade (and you don't have a 4-wheel drive, although a 4-wheel drive would be better for the road. I don't recommend using a gator in the road. its simply not built for that) . . . seriously, if you don't know what these are, you should google them and get one if you live on a farm. They are more stable than 4 wheel motor bikes, but drive slower than them, they use much less fuel and they can carry a lot more than a 4 wheel motor bike can. Also, get a small trailer with a cage on it, it would be much more useful than an open trailer. They would be perfect if you want to make your base at the back of a farm, where other survivors are unlikely to look.

[Phrozt]

First of all, let's start with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.50_caliber_handguns
2 great quotes:

.50 rounds are not inherently 'high power'; they simply use large bullets.

Despite being featured in many video games and action movies as the weapon of choice for some members of elite military and law enforcement units, the .50 caliber pistols' combination of heavy recoil and relatively low magazine capacity make these weapons a poor choice for tactical use.

:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:

I wasn't suggesting that .50 would be the greatest calibre to use. I was just saying that it would have more stopping power and most likely more range. .22 would be the smallest calibre anyone would ever use. Anything smaller just wouldn't do enough damage. .50 would be the largest you could possibly ever use/get. Anything bigger is technically a cannon. Given the choice between the cannon and the pea shooter, I would pick the cannon.

I'm amazed that no one has even mentioned desert eagles (as far as I can remember) . . .

Because a deagle would be a completely retarded idea in this situation, and apparently no one was actually stupid enough to suggest it until now. You know what? Go ahead and pick your .50 handgun. The recoil should do enough head trauma that, after you knock yourself out, you most likely won't even be able to return as one of the enemy.

AR-15s are just civilian M-16s, in fact, most AR's have a civilian semi-auto counterpart that can be bought for $500-$1,500 in any 'free' country (free wrt to firearms anyway)
the PS-90 is a civilian variant of the P-90 with a longer barrel (as civilian weapons with shoulder stocks are limited to no less than a 20in barrel in the states) many other SMGs have similar civilian variants as well.

So... because civilian versions of military grade weapons EXIST, that makes them are plentiful and readily available to anyone who happens to be looting? Like candy bars in a gas station?? You're still missing the point that THEY WON'T BE READILY AVAILABLE!!

They exist? Yes.
They are great guns? Yes.
You can actually get your hands on one if WWZ comes to call? NO!!!!!!

Why would it have ever been created if it damaged the person who fires it so much that it outweighs the actual benefits of using it?

Because someone who is GOOD at using one can actually do a good amount of damage. Also, it's a calibre used in machine guns, and I'm sure at some point, someone with a small penis complex felt the need to have that power in a hand gun. It's also used for sniping, but those applications do not apply in this scenario.

Question: has anyone here ever fired any gun that is .50?

Yes, I have fired a .50 revolver and it was not fun at all.

I'm not saying that .50 is the best, but it does have a hell of a lot more stopping power and range than .22. What about .308? (or whatever it was that was something like that) Ok, less common than .22, more common than .50. Higher stopping power than .22, less stopping power than .50. Heavier ammo than .22, lighter ammo than .50. (from what I gather)

And only a head shot. Imagine if the wind makes the .22 hit the zombie in the shoulder. Its not going to do much. But if the .50 hit it in the shoulder, it would do a lot of damage (possibly even taking off/rendering the arm useless)

Wrong. All wrong. As per the first article I mentioned, it does NOT have more stopping power just because it's bigger. It just makes bigger holes. You're not going to be blowing off appendages because the hole you make the body is bigger.

Also, THINK about what you said: stopping power. WTF does stopping power even matter? Zombies aren't going to STOP because their arm or leg is gone. Stopping power applies to situations where amounts of damage affect the target's motivation and/or ability to keep attacking you. This simply doesn't apply to zombies at all, unless you literally blow away every appendage they have... which you're not going to be doing with ANY gun. In this "game," it's either yes or no... on or off... brain or no brain... not "extra points for more damage!!!"

the .22 vs. .50 nicely ignores the fact that .22 would be absolutely useless against zombies.

.22LR might penetrate the skull at close range, if you're lucky and if it's not very windy out.

Pretty much any other .22 load will bounce off unless you stick the barrel of your gun in the zombies eye.

You honestly have no clue what you're talking about. Lead fired at a high velocity does NOT "bounce off" targets. Also, if you're talking about wind, you're already WAY too far away to even think about engaging in combat. At that distance, it's a simple "keep walking."



At this point, if you're still arguing FOR a .50 and AGAINST a .22 (even if it might not be your favorite, but you insist it's ineffective), not only do you not know what you're talking about, but you're basically refusing to listen to reason. People with real life experience, and/or empirical data about the situation are doing everything they can to explain to you why you're wrong, and you still refuse to use your head.


EDIT: Just read the response from publius a few up from mine. Seems we highlighted several of the same points about the .50 handgun. As for what he was saying about the flash... take a look at that wiki article I posted. They have a still frame of the flash from a deagle.

[Random832]

Also, THINK about what you said: stopping power. WTF does stopping power even matter? Zombies aren't going to STOP because their arm or leg is gone. Stopping power applies to situations where amounts of damage affect the target's motivation and/or ability to keep attacking you. This simply doesn't apply to zombies at all, unless you literally blow away every appendage they have... which you're not going to be doing with ANY gun. In this "game," it's either yes or no... on or off... brain or no brain... not "extra points for more damage!!!"

This. A lot of people in this thread (this is the same reason, for instance, why spears are a bad idea, as mentioned waaaay earlier) seem to be forgetting that fighting zombies is fundamentally different from fighting humans because they do not know fear, they do not feel pain, etc.

[ArchangelShrike]

Hiking Stuff

Let's add one more dimension to this. Consider that a zombie won't be able to do anything other than walk such as climb, swim, jump. If you have a nice mountain range or plateau that needs to be rock climbed, and you're fairly sure you could make it there before the zombies get to you, do you pack to survive in your remote location or to kill zombies? A gun would still be needed for hunting, protection considering you'd have to carry your gear almost non-stop, possibly rope climbing or rock climbing, but as long as you reach your location, you should be safe from any zombie due to your natural fortress, at which point it turns into the "Mutalisk vs. Million Zerglings" debate.

tl;dr - Find a defensible place and pack to survive there, not to kill every zombie along the way.

Good job on the hike though.

[wst]

Also, I'd like to point out that no, I haven't fired a gun. I have fired my pistol crossbow meny times. I have fired my dads BB gun meny times. I have fired my cousins (more powerful) BB gun a couple times. But not a firearm. And I have been honest about that from the start.

Ok, Desert Eagles aren't as good as movies and video games make it out to be.

[*]First aid kit. (with a small bottle of iodine which might be useful if a zombie scratches me and I use the iodine within seconds of getting scratched (It kills all the germs on the skin and in the cut (I don't know if it would ever work, but its worth the try, don't you agree?)))

Just keep away from movie/game knowledge in the future

RE: The iodine shiz. I'd be more worried about that zombie that's gnawing my arm than a scratch, at least in the short term.

My shooting coach informed me of 2 useful pieces of information today.
1) Underground groups used .22 for executions for its non-head-escaping ability (tohugh on rare occasions they will escape).
2) He's seen a few katanas in a museum exhibition (quite a few years back now, ofc), that have been tested by swordsmiths and are certified to be able to cut through at least 5 torso's. These katanas were ~800 years old, though, and they can't make as good nowadays But, given the rotten-ness of the zombies, he reckons it would be a decent weapon to have.

[ArchangelShrike]

Stick with the bat instead of the katana. I've gone through a little bit of training with a bokken (wooden training sword) and it's difficult enough to use properly - swinging a katana is nothing like swinging around a pipe/bat/Chinese broadsword, what have you. Not to mention the problems of keeping a long razorblade sharpened in a constant fight for survival.

[wst]

Stick with the bat instead of the katana. I've gone through a little bit of training with a bokken (wooden training sword) and it's difficult enough to use properly - swinging a katana is nothing like swinging around a pipe/bat/Chinese broadsword, what have you. Not to mention the problems of keeping a long razorblade sharpened in a constant fight for survival.

Indeedy, I reckoned that would be the flaw- training.

[EdgarJPublius]

AR-15s are just civilian M-16s, in fact, most AR's have a civilian semi-auto counterpart that can be bought for $500-$1,500 in any 'free' country (free wrt to firearms anyway)
the PS-90 is a civilian variant of the P-90 with a longer barrel (as civilian weapons with shoulder stocks are limited to no less than a 20in barrel in the states) many other SMGs have similar civilian variants as well.

So... because civilian versions of military grade weapons EXIST, that makes them are plentiful and readily available to anyone who happens to be looting? Like candy bars in a gas station?? You're still missing the point that THEY WON'T BE READILY AVAILABLE!!

They exist? Yes.
They are great guns? Yes.
You can actually get your hands on one if WWZ comes to call? NO!!!!!!

I dunno where you live, but pretty much every place of business that sells rifles I've ever entered has AR-15s on stock in plenty. And WW1-WW2 battle-rifles (up to the M-14) are consistently among the most popular and easy to obtain rifles you can legally purchase. I could drive over to Cabelas right now and outfit a small army with SKS's and Mosin Nagants for less than $300 a pop solely with what they have on hand. And I could outfit that same small army with M-14s for less than $600 per weapon, or AR-15's for less than 1500 per. I if I wasn't choosy about standardization there's a few much smaller gunshops with in a few miles of where I live that could equip my army with a combination of these with there stock.
Some stuff, like PS-90s will be a bit harder to find, but if you prepare for the apocalypse instead of waiting for it to happen, it won't be a problem.

the .22 vs. .50 nicely ignores the fact that .22 would be absolutely useless against zombies.

.22LR might penetrate the skull at close range, if you're lucky and if it's not very windy out.

Pretty much any other .22 load will bounce off unless you stick the barrel of your gun in the zombies eye.

You honestly have no clue what you're talking about. Lead fired at a high velocity does NOT "bounce off" targets. Also, if you're talking about wind, you're already WAY too far away to even think about engaging in combat. At that distance, it's a simple "keep walking."

Velocity =/= energy.
.22lr delivers less than 190 joules at muzzle and the extremely low mass means it loses that energy very quickly once it leaves the barrel. In any kind of wind, this loss of energy is compounded drastically as is the natural tendency of small diameter rounds to tumble, which reduces penetration and increases wind resistance, further reducing energy. There's no range beyond which wind is a factor for a round as light as a .22, once it leaves the barrel, wind will have a drastic influence on the flight characteristics of the bullet.
Combined with this, a skull, espescially a brain case, is a very tough target.
Beyond a few meters, a .22lr round will not penetrate the skull, it just won't have enough energy left even if it's still traveling super-sonically, Beyond a few tens of meters, a .22lr round is about as likely to bounce off the tough bone of the skull as not. Past that, the round will break skin and is considered 'dangerous' for body shots out to about 90 meters or less, but not fatal.
According to declassified material from agencies which have issued .22 firearms to operatives, as well as examinations of gunshot victims and other evidence, even a head shot beyond two meters is not considered a definite kill and there have been recorded cases of people shot int he head with .22 bullets from as close as four feet without significant penetration.

I'm not arguing for either round, I'd rather use a 5.56 NATO which is plentiful, powerful, and light (I'd really like to use 6.8SPC, but I'd run out of ammo too fast and wouldn't be able to find any) and a .38 revolver for a sidearm. If the choice was between .50 or .22lr, I'd find a big stick and use that instead.

[SecondTalon]

Beyond a few meters, a .22lr round will not penetrate the skull, it just won't have enough energy left even if it's still traveling super-sonically, Beyond a few tens of meters, a .22lr round is about as likely to bounce off the tough bone of the skull as not. Past that, the round will break skin and is considered 'dangerous' for body shots out to about 90 meters or less, but not fatal.

While your information is informative*, I humbly submit that if you are engaging Zombies at a range beyond Tens of Meters, you are Doing It Wrong.


*Especially the bit about headshots beyond two meters.. can you dig up those documents? I'm not meaning this in a dickish [citation needed] way as it sounds reasonable, I'm just curious.

[EdgarJPublius]

I'll see if I can dig up a source, Admittedly, I read it on another forum (the government operatives thing, a quick search turns up numerous reports of people with nonfatal .22lr wounds from around that range.)

I'd like to further clarify that the assertation that a bullet will not 'bounce off' of anything at any range is fundamentally ridiculous, bullets are not magical video-game katana's that can penetrate anything no matter how little energy they have behind them, every bullet has a range at which it doesn't have enough energy to penetrate anything, for .22lr and human skulls, that range happens to be a few meters (less for reliable penetration, and less in windy conditions which can adversely effect the bullets ballistics.)

[Its Pyroclastic!]

How could you honestly be thinking about zombies when our public government top-security buildings are still completely vulnerable to raptor attacks?

Bullets penetrate raptor skin easily. However, bullets do not faze zombies!

Could this perhaps be exploited to our advantage? Use raptors as vehicles/zombie killing devices. Mobility and power, all in one package. One could tame a raptor and then outfit it with a makeshift saddle, and become a raptor-riding zombie slayer. A katana would be pretty epic to wield on one of these things. A gorilla could come in handy too.

[Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel]

The trek I did was intense . . . seriously, just keep moving if something is following you. But if something isn't, take 10 minutes out of every hour to rest otherwise you will be stuffed. I suggest for people who are going to be going away from town to do what I have done. Just go out into the country and ask a nice farmer if you can go for a trek on his land. I swear that you (unless you are realy into sports and play sports lots, which I highly doubt that a lot of people here are) will be stuffed after it, but it will show you what its like.

I don't ever plan on getting a .22. I like the sound of a Mosin Nagint (or however you spell it) being a gun I would use. Although I like the idea of using a Lee Enfield beter. When (or rather if) I get my gun licence, I want to get a WWII rifle.

[Surgery]

If you want to learn not just to shoot, but to shoot well, I would recommend getting a .22 first. You can get a decent .22 rifle pretty cheap. Besides that, the virtual lack of recoil and very, very cheap ammo means you can shoot/learn/practice all day without breaking the bank or bruising your shoulder. And some ranges allow .22 rifles on their pistol ranges, so you can go there if the rifle range is full.

And also: which Mosin Nagant are you talking about? The M91/30 or the M44? I have an M44 and have shot the M91/30, and both are a lot of fun to shoot. And when you aren't shooting there is a large community of people who collect these firearms and you can discover where and when in Russia it was made by the markings on the receiver and barrel. They have all kinds of neat markings on them. However, the ammunition is hard to find (at least in Western New York), you'll pay more for non-corrosive ammo, and if it's the first gun you've ever shot the recoil might kind of surprising. But I wouldn't put too much weight into that last part, if you're going to learn to shoot a gun you're going to have to learn to handle recoil sometime.

[ArchangelShrike]

Spoiler:

Hiking Stuff

Let's add one more dimension to this. Consider that a zombie won't be able to do anything other than walk such as climb, swim, jump. If you have a nice mountain range or plateau that needs to be rock climbed, and you're fairly sure you could make it there before the zombies get to you, do you pack to survive in your remote location or to kill zombies? A gun would still be needed for hunting, protection considering you'd have to carry your gear almost non-stop, possibly rope climbing or rock climbing, but as long as you reach your location, you should be safe from any zombie due to your natural fortress, at which point it turns into the "Mutalisk vs. Million Zerglings" debate.

tl;dr - Find a defensible place and pack to survive there, not to kill every zombie along the way.

Good job on the hike though.

While large plateaus like this do exist, and would likely serve swimmingly, you've got a couple issues on your hands. Ideally, to live for any period of time, you'd want to start farming. This can be accomplished with minimal training and some packets of seeds, not difficult if you have this plan in mind. However, sheer cliffs are only typically found in areas where vertical erosion happens: Deserts, recently* glaciated areas, certain kinds of islands, and areas with streams that carry enough water to cut down much faster than their immediate tributaries. In other places, erosion forms slopes. Since you need a cliff all the way around, you have few options to begin with. Glaciers often leave steep but still walkable slopes, and most rivers do not leave islands in their canyons, especially not ones of real size. So you're limited to islands, which are still few and far between, and desert mesas. Deserts pose problems for farming (and living) because of their dryness, and being on a mesa exacerbates that. You will be in a constant fight for survival with the elements. Islands would work, but you still have a water issue unless the island is large and has the right geography. It would work though, if you could find one. You could even bring a number of people, and a rope ladder.

Assuming non-climbing zombies, this would actually make a pretty good fortress. Keep in mind that you can feed, albeit meagerly) one person off of an acre if you're farming intensively (see: Rwanda).

*geologically recently

My problem is that I live in Hawaii*, which has a variety of mountainous areas that would serve swimmingly that I've visited and I could easily carry enough equipment such that I would be able to set up and live with a small group of people for a minimum of a few weeks. This is in no way common across most of the world, but I'd still recommend heading for a mountain range or other geographical feature that's easily defensible, or a nice structure.

*If the infection doesn't start/sneak in Hawaii and zombies can't swim, Hawaii would be completely protected from such a problem. However, the million or so people would quickly be scavenging for food since it's heavily dependent on outside sources for basic goods.

[Zak]

Grand canyon.

Viable? Do zombies suffer from fall damage?

[Upsilon]

Depending on how they land, falls might not KILL zombies (unless their femur goes through their skull), but falls'll certainly break parts of them.

[EdgarJPublius]

The trek I did was intense . . . seriously, just keep moving if something is following you. But if something isn't, take 10 minutes out of every hour to rest otherwise you will be stuffed. I suggest for people who are going to be going away from town to do what I have done. Just go out into the country and ask a nice farmer if you can go for a trek on his land. I swear that you (unless you are realy into sports and play sports lots, which I highly doubt that a lot of people here are) will be stuffed after it, but it will show you what its like.

I don't ever plan on getting a .22. I like the sound of a Mosin Nagint (or however you spell it) being a gun I would use. Although I like the idea of using a Lee Enfield beter. When (or rather if) I get my gun licence, I want to get a WWII rifle.

Mosin Nagant is basically the AK-47 of before 1947, but even more than the AK, it's not for the faint of heart, an SKS or Lee-Enfield would be a better choice if you aren't a middle aged, girizzled gun-nut/veteran. I'd recommend an M-14 or M-1 Garand for a first battle rifle though, much easier to use, much less likely to hurt yourself with etc.

I know a guy witha ltitle more disposable income than me, was so excited when he got his first Battle-rifle, a yugo 8mm battle rifle with a metal butt-plate. After the first time at the range with it he's a afraid to use it again.

Also, this

[Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel]

If you want to learn not just to shoot, but to shoot well, I would recommend getting a .22 first. You can get a decent .22 rifle pretty cheap. Besides that, the virtual lack of recoil and very, very cheap ammo means you can shoot/learn/practice all day without breaking the bank or bruising your shoulder. And some ranges allow .22 rifles on their pistol ranges, so you can go there if the rifle range is full.

And also: which Mosin Nagant are you talking about? The M91/30 or the M44? I have an M44 and have shot the M91/30, and both are a lot of fun to shoot. And when you aren't shooting there is a large community of people who collect these firearms and you can discover where and when in Russia it was made by the markings on the receiver and barrel. They have all kinds of neat markings on them. However, the ammunition is hard to find (at least in Western New York), you'll pay more for non-corrosive ammo, and if it's the first gun you've ever shot the recoil might kind of surprising. But I wouldn't put too much weight into that last part, if you're going to learn to shoot a gun you're going to have to learn to handle recoil sometime.

The thing is, I'm a [relatively] poor 16 year old New Zealander boy. The only way I could get a pistol is if I join a club and go to 12 shoots a year. A rifle would be much easier to get because it only needs a cheeper and easier to get gun licence. (I think there are 4 types you can get in NZ) . . . the thing about me being poor, I would only buy one [or at the most 3] guns. And ammo would be considered expensive in my view. It costs me $10 for 10 bolts for my crossbow pistol, and they are the cheep ones that break easily.

About the recoil, yes! Everyone who fires anything above a .22 is going to have to learn about recoil. Especially if its a shotgun. That's one of the reasons why I wouldn't bother with the .22! If you're going to learn to fire a gun, you might learn about recoil when your learning everything else! Let me compare it to video games: Its like starting a game on easy rather than normal/medium. You are going to be able to do everything easy, but your never going to get the full experience of it and your never going to improve much unless you use something harder.

I wouldn't know. I thought a Mosin Nagant was just a Mosin Nagant. I mean, sure there are going to be other guns in the Mosin Nagant series, but they are all still just Mosin Nagants. Just like all the M-16's are M-16's. And all the AK-47's are all just AK-47's. As I have said, I lack finer detail knowledge on most guns and I lack a lot of practical knowledge on most guns.

Viable? Do zombies suffer from fall damage?

Let's push you off a large cliff onto some sharp rocks and see what happens to you. Even if you survive, we can just smash your head in with a rock. You wont be able to move because you have broken arms and broken legs. Yes, zombies suffer fall damage. (ok, that may have sounded mean but that wasn't the point!)

After the first time at the range with it he's a afraid to use it again

That's like what happened to me after I first fired my pistol crossbow.

Whoever sent the link, I applaud you! I laughed so hard, I woke my dad up*

M-1 Garand? Is it true that the internal mag only comes out when you have fired all the 8 rounds? But then again, Call of Duty 2 was probably lieing because no gun could be that stupid, could it?

*My dad doesn't live in the same house I live in

[hideki101]

I'm not the expert on firearms, so I'll stay out of it. However, the requirements for a good firearm would probably be

>lightweight (allows fast running, carrying of other stuff)
>low-maintenance (unless one of your group/ you are a gunsmith, go for low maintenance guns. also, it'll probably be hard to find repair parts)
>easily found ammo
>low recoil (I don't want my shoulder to be dislocated every time I fire. also, multiple firings of should not tire out your arms)
>high accuracy (headshots are the most effective, but a small portion of the body. I would argue that legshots are also effective in slowing a zombie down enough to walk away)
>accurate to ~20m (any farther, and you would be best off not even shooting, and hope the zombie would pass by)

For the sword vs bat close range argument, I would go for a mace personally. A weighted head would be great at smashing heads and breaking limbs, while the blades on the side would help the cutting of flesh. Zombie or no, you still need connective muscle to make your limbs move.

[SecondTalon]

M-1 Garand? Is it true that the internal mag only comes out when you have fired all the 8 rounds? But then again, Call of Duty 2 was probably lying because no gun could be that stupid, could it?

Define "Stupid."

The clip automatically ejects when it's empty. You can manually eject the clip by manually ejecting the individual rounds. I'm going to assume CoD 2 removed that ability because, generally speaking, in a First Person Shooter you don't want to yank on the bolt (thus losing rounds) when you could just go ahead and take the next two shots before reloading.

[Susy]

Grand canyon. Viable? Do zombies suffer from fall damage?

They could also enter from the headwaters or the downstream areas of the river. I don't think there are waterfalls that would protect you well enough.

No, definitely, falls won´t cause any significant damage to a zombie, UNLESS IT SMASHES IT´S HEAD. We need to focus always in aiming for the head, no matter what. Please don´t lose time in making up any other survival plan that won´t include head damage.

And yes, zombies can easily go through waterfalls so water/lakes/ponds barricades are just not a way to secure a perimeter. If you find yourself trap in tis situation and have no gun (or gum, jajaja) then just run as fast as you can.

Finally, I was doing some research on the wob, because I just can´t believe there are out there people we actually believe zombie outbreaks are just sci-fi. I mean c´mon!!! It is just a matter of time!!! I do worry and I do have a survival plan and I do have a map of secure areas around my corner. I´ve analysed malls and buildings at my city for best runaway routes.

Anyways, for those you think the dead won´t ever walk on Earth - 5 Scientific Reasons It Could Happen

It was difficult. But doable. I took a couple more things than I mentioned, like my lighter, tooth-brush, more tools, a sleeping bag, some rope. (I took them in a duffel bag, which would also be good for storing weapons/ammo in because it's at my side rather than on my back)

I was thinking, do you think we could make a standard zombie attack survival plan?? Because I was reading and you did take a lot with you. Just carrying a backpack is too much we you are on the run. What about those body strap things that cops use, you know? To carry guns (and gums) and stuff like that. Is a sleeping bag really necessary??

I guess I am to do the same but this would be my kit:
-Matches (on a pocket)
-Swiss Army Super Knife (on a pocket)
-2 Guns (on leg straps)
-Some gum
-Shotgun (on the back)
-Binoculars with night vision (on the neck)
-Machete (on the back)
-Water (special drinking back pack, less than 40 cm)
-Ammunitions (all over my body, with straps and belts)

What do you think?? I was thinking about the baseball bat but I don't know how I could carry it.

[SecondTalon]

What about those body strap things that cops use, you know? To carry guns (and gums) and stuff like that.

... Holsters? Or are you meaning the entire utility belt?

[Susy]

What about those body strap things that cops use, you know? To carry guns (and gums) and stuff like that.

... Holsters? Or are you meaning the entire utility belt?

Holsters!! (that was the word!!) With guns at the back, at the sides, at the ankles and at the legs. Should improve velocity since you dont have to stop, take the back pack off, looking for the gun at the bottom, etc...

Utility belt could be replaced by some nice cargo pants.

For the sword vs bat close range argument, I would go for a mace personally. A weighted head would be great at smashing heads and breaking limbs, while the blades on the side would help the cutting of flesh. Zombie or no, you still need connective muscle to make your limbs move.

You have a point there. But the thing is the weight, we need to focus we are on the run, much weight will tire us down. Besides, the mace is a short distance weapon, the bat and the sword are a bit larger thus increasing chance of not getting bitten.

[ArchangelShrike]

I was thinking, do you think we could make a standard zombie attack survival plan??

I thought the point was to survive, not actively engage zombies...

Holsters!! (that was the word!!) With guns at the back, at the sides, at the ankles and at the legs.

Depending on your geography, it may or may not be a good idea to wear holsters since they could snag on brush, trees, etc. Since a lot of this thread is improvising about what we would do if it hit right now, and I'm not sure that people live their daily lives with holsters around, it might not be a good idea for everyone. Also, holsters give x more handholds for zombies, I'd rather have a pack that I can eject everything at one go rather than all the straps I'd need to carry the gear I wanted to take.

[Susy]

Depending on your geography, it may or may not be a good idea to wear holsters since they could snag on brush, trees, etc. Since a lot of this thread is improvising about what we would do if it hit right now, and I'm not sure that people live their daily lives with holsters around, it might not be a good idea for everyone. Also, holsters give x more handholds for zombies, I'd rather have a pack that I can eject everything at one go rather than all the straps I'd need to carry the gear I wanted to take.

Exactly! That´s the point, but we (all people) should prepare in three ways:on the defense, on the attack and on the run. And you are right, on a sudden zombie outbreak you just focus on the run, grab anything you have near. But let´s take these to a higher level: on the defense. Prepare, have holsters in your house (if geoagraphy allows the use of them).

And I do agree they could become handholds for zombies, but first of all, if you are close enough for a zombie to grab you (with or without holsters) you are pretty much allready screwed.

[EdgarJPublius]

If you want to learn not just to shoot, but to shoot well, I would recommend getting a .22 first. You can get a decent .22 rifle pretty cheap. Besides that, the virtual lack of recoil and very, very cheap ammo means you can shoot/learn/practice all day without breaking the bank or bruising your shoulder. And some ranges allow .22 rifles on their pistol ranges, so you can go there if the rifle range is full.

And also: which Mosin Nagant are you talking about? The M91/30 or the M44? I have an M44 and have shot the M91/30, and both are a lot of fun to shoot. And when you aren't shooting there is a large community of people who collect these firearms and you can discover where and when in Russia it was made by the markings on the receiver and barrel. They have all kinds of neat markings on them. However, the ammunition is hard to find (at least in Western New York), you'll pay more for non-corrosive ammo, and if it's the first gun you've ever shot the recoil might kind of surprising. But I wouldn't put too much weight into that last part, if you're going to learn to shoot a gun you're going to have to learn to handle recoil sometime.

Mosin Nagants are definitely fun guns to own, but they're not exactly beginner weapons, they're more like enthusiast weapons.

A.22 is a great way to learn the basics of shooting (aiming, care, etc.) but to get comfortable shooting, I'd recommend a shotgun as well, such as a .410 or even a 12ga.
With just using a .22 it's really easy to get into bad habits with how you hold the gun, if you start out on a shotgun, you learn pretty much immediately how necessary a proper grip and a snugly seating the butt in the proper place is for weapons with real recoil.

[Random832]

M-1 Garand? Is it true that the internal mag only comes out when you have fired all the 8 rounds? But then again, Call of Duty 2 was probably lying because no gun could be that stupid, could it?

Define "Stupid."

The clip automatically ejects when it's empty. You can manually eject the clip by manually ejecting the individual rounds. I'm going to assume CoD 2 removed that ability because, generally speaking, in a First Person Shooter you don't want to yank on the bolt (thus losing rounds) when you could just go ahead and take the next two shots before reloading.

Yeah, but you have time to reload now, and you might not between your next two shots and the one after that.

Of course, most FPSes don't even keep track of partially full clips anyway.

[Surgery]

Mosin Nagants are definitely fun guns to own, but they're not exactly beginner weapons, they're more like enthusiast weapons.

A.22 is a great way to learn the basics of shooting (aiming, care, etc.) but to get comfortable shooting, I'd recommend a shotgun as well, such as a .410 or even a 12ga.
With just using a .22 it's really easy to get into bad habits with how you hold the gun, if you start out on a shotgun, you learn pretty much immediately how necessary a proper grip and a snugly seating the butt in the proper place is for weapons with real recoil.

I agree on the MN thing. I also agree about the other thing, if he doesn't have someone who already knows how to shoot helping him. However, he did say he didn't have a lot of money, and for the same price as a 12 pack of slugs he can get 50-100 rounds of .22.

I would also recommend maybe a bolt-action instead of a semi-auto. They are much simpler, and for learning the basics of how to shoot and how a gun operates that is a very good thing.

Also, FleshOfTheFallenAngel:
You keep saying "especially if it's a shotgun" in regards to recoil. Shotguns have a comparable range of recoil force to regular rifles. A .410 with a light load won't feel too much stronger than a .22, but a 10 gauge loaded for turkey or 00 buck will have a strong kick. The more you know. Also, the thing I mentioned about the pistol range. I meant that most places allow to take a .22 rifle onto their pistol ranges. If you're serious about learning to shoot feel free to pm me and I can recommend guns, reading material, etc. I know there is at least one person on this board more qualified than me to help out, but I don't feel right telling to you to feel free to PM someone else. Have fun.

Of course, most FPSes don't even keep track of partially full clips anyway.

Yes. I want an FPS where if I have 4 rounds left in my clip and I drop it and leave it on the floor I lose those four rounds. Or maybe I cycle it to the last pocket of my mag carrier and when I get to it there are only four rounds in that clip. (clip == magazine ?)