Flintlock muzzleloaders will rule again

[Commodore Swab]

One thing that doesn't seem to have been mentioned, among all the 'wrong political stuff' which could bring about an EMP problem, is Coronal Mass Ejection (although @ETipp touched on it). Unless I missed it in my skim-reading of this thread, no one has mentioned the Carrington Event, or what such an event would do in the modern world.

Far more likely the sun will put out the lights than man. As our magnetic field weakens we are far more vulnerable.

Perhaps. We don’t know what the sun is actually capable of doing, in terms of a natural EMP.

Actually we are getting a better idea and it's more like 2012 than any other film. Just last week . . .

Not to mention the northern lights being seen a record number of times in Southern states

 

[sethwyo]

 

[sethwyo]

 

[sethwyo]

 

[hanshi]

Some years ago, I read that if a large enough EMP bomb was set off over Kansas it could knock out the entire electrical grid over all the US. The essay further proposed that if the electric was out for one year that somewhere between 70% to 90% of the population would be dead within that year.
No gasoline could be pumped. There would be no deliveries of needed supplies such as food, medicine, heating oil, etc. No communications by phone, radio, or computers. Vicious gangs would roam the streets. Looters would ravish and destroy. Choas would reign. (and maybe a great reckoning and restructuring)
Like the old song says; "A country boy will survive."

Hmmm...That thought kinda sucks!

 

[smoothshooter]

https://rockhoundresource.com/wyoming-rockhounding-location-guide-map/

Lots of fancy rocks but it'll be Flint for making spark that people will be interested in.
Possibly looking for lead deposits also.

.22 rimfire rifles will be the guns of choice for general all around usefulness.
All the game and domestic farm animals would be gone in a month.
From then on, humans will be most common mammals targeted.

 

[Sam squanch]

I’ll be driving this…..

 

[Cayman like]

Shoot fire Cayman I remember back in 1980 while stationed at Great Lakes Naval Base for my "A" school we'd run over to your town cause we could by beer legally there considering our age at the time .

I grew up in Zion...I would do the same when home on leave from the 82nd Airborne.

 

[Numlok]

.22 rimfire rifles will be the guns of choice for general all around usefulness.
All the game and domestic farm animals would be gone in a month.
From then on, humans will be most common mammals targeted.

Livestock would certainly go quick, if people are as stupid as I think they might be. Slaughtering them all without any thought of preserving breeding stock to replenish.

Game animals, I'm not so sure about. I think it depends on the area. In areas with a lot of hunters that know what they're doing, populations would certainly dwindle with tag limits being a luxury they can't afford to bother with, and with nobody to enforce them anyway. But in areas with a lot of "city folk", the game animals might be a little better off (Especially since areas with wild game are further from those cities. The mountains around Los Angeles for example. Most people aren't going to have the means to travel 40-80+ miles and live "indawoods"). Smaller populations of hunters, with the rest of the population having no clue how to take wild game even if they know how to shoot and have firearms. And hopefully hunters have enough of a concept of conservation to know better than to wipe out entire populations of game animals, but I guess when it comes to taking an unstustainable amount of game or watching your family starve, you're going to hunt anything you can get in range.

It would certainly be rough on livestock/game initially, since our population numbers are extremely high, and people won't have the means or knowledge to set up agriculture that could sustain themselves and their communities. And even if they could it takes time to grow. But if the estimates that 80-90% of the population would die within months of societal/energy collapse are correct, the balance would return. The 10%-20% of the population remaining would probably establish smaller homestead based communities, return to an agricultural based society, and supplement that agriculture with hunting/gathering.

 

[William Sublette]

What size flintlock would be the most practical?
Figure one around 30 caliber and one around 50 caliber or a bit bigger,

The rifles that went west from st Louis avged about 53 cal.

This has all been worked out about 200 years ago.

 

[Kansas Jake]

True on livestock maybe going quickly but remember, most farmers and ranchers are likely to shoot back when their livestock are threatened.

 

[jdw276]

Texas will survive with their hog problem. Not sure if this kind of event will even put a dent in those numbers.

 

[Numlok]

Texas will survive with their hog problem. Not sure if this kind of event will even put a dent in those numbers.

That's a good point. I remember hearing stories about pirates and other sailors introducing wild hogs to islands so they could be sure they'd have a food source if they needed it. Not sure how true the stories are, but seems like wild hogs might be the most sustainable food source around

 

[smoothshooter]

Livestock would certainly go quick, if people are as stupid as I think they might be. Slaughtering them all without any thought of preserving breeding stock to replenish.

Game animals, I'm not so sure about. I think it depends on the area. In areas with a lot of hunters that know what they're doing, populations would certainly dwindle with tag limits being a luxury they can't afford to bother with, and with nobody to enforce them anyway. But in areas with a lot of "city folk", the game animals might be a little better off (Especially since areas with wild game are further from those cities. The mountains around Los Angeles for example. Most people aren't going to have the means to travel 40-80+ miles and live "indawoods"). Smaller populations of hunters, with the rest of the population having no clue how to take wild game even if they know how to shoot and have firearms. And hopefully hunters have enough of a concept of conservation to know better than to wipe out entire populations of game animals, but I guess when it comes to taking an unstustainable amount of game or watching your family starve, you're going to hunt anything you can get in range.

It would certainly be rough on livestock/game initially, since our population numbers are extremely high, and people won't have the means or knowledge to set up agriculture that could sustain themselves and their communities. And even if they could it takes time to grow. But if the estimates that 80-90% of the population would die within months of societal/energy collapse are correct, the balance would return. The 10%-20% of the population remaining would probably establish smaller homestead based communities, return to an agricultural based society, and supplement that agriculture with hunting/gathering.

Livestock would certainly go quick, if people are as stupid as I think they might be. Slaughtering them all without any thought of preserving breeding stock to replenish.

Game animals, I'm not so sure about. I think it depends on the area. In areas with a lot of hunters that know what they're doing, populations would certainly dwindle with tag limits being a luxury they can't afford to bother with, and with nobody to enforce them anyway. But in areas with a lot of "city folk", the game animals might be a little better off (Especially since areas with wild game are further from those cities. The mountains around Los Angeles for example. Most people aren't going to have the means to travel 40-80+ miles and live "indawoods"). Smaller populations of hunters, with the rest of the population having no clue how to take wild game even if they know how to shoot and have firearms. And hopefully hunters have enough of a concept of conservation to know better than to wipe out entire populations of game animals, but I guess when it comes to taking an unstustainable amount of game or watching your family starve, you're going to hunt anything you can get in range.

It would certainly be rough on livestock/game initially, since our population numbers are extremely high, and people won't have the means or knowledge to set up agriculture that could sustain themselves and their communities. And even if they could it takes time to grow. But if the estimates that 80-90% of the population would die within months of societal/energy collapse are correct, the balance would return. The 10%-20% of the population remaining would probably establish smaller homestead based communities, return to an agricultural based society, and supplement that agriculture with hunting/gathering.

Spotlighting alone would wipe out nearly all big game within a few weeks.

 

[smoothshooter]

True on livestock maybe going quickly but remember, most farmers and ranchers are likely to shoot back when their livestock are threatened.

One or two farmers won’t hold out long against 20 to 100 looters.
Most of the land on farms can’t be seen and protected from only 2 or 3 vantage points.

 

[Kansas Jake]

Depends on where you are at. Many parts of the Great Plains are flat and sparsely populated except for the numbers of livestock. You can see someone coming for miles unless they know the terrain.

 

[sethwyo]

Read this book, or watch the movie.

" Be prepared" is a double edged sword. Yes, have food sources, water, a plan etc. but also be prepared to watch your loved ones suffer and die, one by one; mainly children , elderly, and the sick.

Living like "the 1800's" is NOT the same as a total collapse of society. You can't boy scout or country boy your way out of a hoard of desperate starving worst of the worst humans. You may last much longer than 95% of the people but your day will come sooner or later.

Didn't like the book didn't like the movie too much either,
Father in the movie as well as a mother were both a couple of nitwits that didn't have any weapons stashed away, much less any food water or emergency equipment.

one little 38 revolver an one round of ammunition

 

[Jedidiah]

Spotlighting alone would wipe out nearly all big game within a few weeks.

LOL, "hopefully hunters have enough of a concept of conservation to know better than to wipe out entire populations of game animals, " if you think you can depend on this happening you are truly delusional. Too many wannabes, rednecks, "it's my land" idiots doing just the opposite today! There is a reason there are Game Wardens. We find poachers and those hunting beyond lawful limits,protected species, etc every year. Just one mans opinion.

 

[smoothshooter]

Depends on where you are at. Many parts of the Great Plains are flat and sparsely populated except for the numbers of livestock. You can see someone coming for miles unless they know the terrain.

What if they come at night?

 

[smoothshooter]

Living like our great great grandfathers did in the year 1800 will not be fun?

Not A Bit.