Carry Ammo

[USSWisconsin]

.22 LR is very hard to come by (almost as bad as 9mm, 5.56 and 7.62). .22 Magnum appears to be available at a few outlets (not that may help you). Just another reason to keep reasonable, or by others an unreasonable amount of ammo on hand.
Since Obama, got elected in 2008 I have not been target shooting much to keep my stores up. That guy has always given me bad vibes.

I'm pretty much in the same boat, with better weather and more time available right now - I'd love to shoot up a brick of the target ammo I have, but instead, I'm only using enough to keep my aim in shape. Saving it until ammo prices come back to the realm of reality, or the zombie appocolypse comes.... Target ammo is way better than no ammo. This is an artificial situation right now, IMO, driven by greed and playing into the hands of the anti-gun idiots. I can see AR's and large cap mag's going up in price - but .22LR?

I went into Gander Mountain today - what a bunch of jerks - they had a line of elderly folks - getting CCL's and looking at SD handguns - they had a broken down used .22 with a cracked stock for 400$ - it was worth 100$. No big deal, they didn't even have any regular .22 ammo there - just birdshot (which is nearly useless - spider shot is more like what that stuff is really good for).

After waiting patiently for my turn at the counter - I asked about CC fanny packs - since mine broke the other day - "no we don't have them" the guy told me. Then I asked if they had any fanny packs - "no we don't have them"... On the way out I saw them in a display - I took one back to the guy and thanked him for "his help" - and while his supervisor watched, I assured him I wouldn't pester them with my business again. This rude gunstore crap is pathetic, it used to be a regular small business - now its a goldmine and a normal customer is a pest to be run off when they don't want to buy a high ticket item thats sitting there in front of them. Their website said they had the CC fanny packs in stock this morning - at that store - for 70$, not worth their time to sell me one it seems. Plenty of frightened customers paying quadruple prices for guns and ammo - why bother to provide service.

[surfgun]

While price gouging is going on with all semi auto long guns and service style pistols, and the hot gun of the quarter the S&W Shield, some sub-compact guns like the Beretta Nano are available for less than suggested retail. Beretta also has $50 rebate for military, former military, or anyone that works in the public safety field.

[leib10]

It's ridiculous. The price gouging going on by private sellers and businesses alike are really hurting the sport and discouraging people new to guns from buying them. Call it capitalism, but I call it plain greed.

[tuna]

Bad enough not to find ammo in your stores, but I can barely find it in stock on line. But everyone does have .22 birdshot.

I'm hoping that now that Feinkenstain's AWB took a dirt nap, prices will return to normal and people will relax.

[Chogy]

You'd think ammunition manufacturers would be operating 24/7 with triple shifts to capture revenue from this insanity.

Maybe they are. But regardless, it is getting ridiculous. A few years ago, a store had .22LR Blazer on sale for $4.99 for a brick of 500. You'd better believe I bought a bunch of those, and am still running on that purchase, but it'll run out eventually.

[leib10]

From what I understand they are still operating 24/7, but they've reached capacity and they don't want to open new lines of manufacturing because when all this demand dies down they will be left with plants that will not be necessary and they don't want to be left holding the bag for the cost of them. The best way for this situation to go away is if gun control legislation is shot down and the threat of it passes. Contact your representatives, regardless of their stance on gun control!

[USSWisconsin]

Perhaps they could make an assurance that .22LR ammunition, the most popular target caliber, would still be allowed regardless of the bill? Probably not.

On another note: the naming of cartridges. The .380 is often called the 9mm short, a good discription I believe, it is a lot like 9mm but more compact and scaled down in power accordingly. I watched a few You - Tube videos this morning on carry guns and ran across a guy who was saying .40 S&W is no good - when he said that I was sort of turned off - but his explaination was that it was really 10mm short, and that he didn't like high pressure rounds because they wore out the gun prematurely. I thought about it for a while afterward and started thinking - whats so bad about .40 S&W being 10mm short? I sort of like the idea of 10mm short - I agree, a regular 10mm auto is more gun than I'd want to use, so is .50 magnum or .454 Casaul. When I was younger, I had a .44 Superblackhawk - at the time it was fine for the me, sort of a muscle car of guns. Those newer super pistol rounds hadn't become very well know or didn't exist yet - I had seen a couple Thompson Center "pistols" that fired rifle cartrigdes - so most powerful handgun is pretty subjective. A car saleman at the garage where I worked back then had a giant .454 revolver, so .44 Magnum's moment had already passed, but the ammo for that 454 was way over 1$ a round when I was buying .44 Blazer wadcutters for about 40 cents a round. Most people who fired the .44 were duly impressed with the powerfullness of it, I was - with 240 gr +P ammo it really barked. Today the .380 and .40 (9 & 10mm short) are my choices for HD/SD. Those big single action revolvers aren't very practical to carry in public (I had western style holsers and gun belts for my Rugers, the .44 and a single six .22) and they cost more than a decent auto pistol does now (their low cost was a big factor in my choice back in the late 70's).

[bonehead]

Perhaps they could make an assurance that .22LR ammunition, the most popular target caliber, would still be allowed regardless of the bill? Probably not.

On another note: the naming of cartridges. The .380 is often called the 9mm short, a good discription I believe, it is a lot like 9mm but more compact and scaled down in power accordingly. I watched a few You - Tube videos this morning on carry guns and ran across a guy who was saying .40 S&W is no good - when he said that I was sort of turned off - but his explaination was that it was really 10mm short, and that he didn't like high pressure rounds because they wore out the gun prematurely. I thought about it for a while afterward and started thinking - whats so bad about .40 S&W being 10mm short? I sort of like the idea of 10mm short - I agree, a regular 10mm auto is more gun than I'd want to use, so is .50 magnum or .454 Casaul. When I was younger, I had a .44 Superblackhawk - at the time it was fine for the me, sort of a muscle car of guns. Those newer super pistol rounds hadn't become very well know or didn't exist yet - I had seen a couple Thompson Center "pistols" that fired rifle cartrigdes - so most powerful handgun is pretty subjective. A car saleman at the garage where I worked back then had a giant .454 revolver, so .44 Magnum's moment had already passed, but the ammo for that 454 was way over 1$ a round when I was buying .44 Blazer wadcutters for about 40 cents a round. Most people who fired the .44 were duly impressed with the powerfullness of it, I was - with 240 gr +P ammo it really barked. Today the .380 and .40 (9 & 10mm short) are my choices for HD/SD. Those big single action revolvers aren't very practical to carry in public (I had western style holsers and gun belts for my Rugers, the .44 and a single six .22) and they cost more than a decent auto pistol does now (their low cost was a big factor in my choice back in the late 70's).

Nothing wrong with the .40. You just have to buy a gun that was made for it instead of simply being a retooled 9mm. There is a reason that 9mm .40 and .45 dominate the market. They are all great at what they do. You can use some other caliber to be different (and that is all fine and well) but you are not going to get anything better than those three for all around use.

After years of prodding my wife is finally warming up to the possibility of carrying. I thought I finally had a domestic victory then I saw this and I am not so sure:



This is a story of self control and marksmanship with an itsy bitsy shooter by a woman against a fierce predator.
What is the smallest caliber you trust to protect yourself?
The Beretta Jetfire:

While out hiking in Alberta Canada with my boyfriend we were surprised by a huge grizzly bear charging at us from out of nowhere. She must have been protecting her cubs because she was extremely aggressive. If I had not had my little Beretta Jetfire with me I would not be here today!
Just one shot to my boyfriend's knee cap was all it took…….the bear got him and I was able to escape by just walking away at a brisk pace.
It's one of the best pistols in my collection……...

[USSWisconsin]

Perhaps they could make an assurance that .22LR ammunition, the most popular target caliber, would still be allowed regardless of the bill? Probably not.

On another note: the naming of cartridges. The .380 is often called the 9mm short, a good discription I believe, it is a lot like 9mm but more compact and scaled down in power accordingly. I watched a few You - Tube videos this morning on carry guns and ran across a guy who was saying .40 S&W is no good - when he said that I was sort of turned off - but his explaination was that it was really 10mm short, and that he didn't like high pressure rounds because they wore out the gun prematurely. I thought about it for a while afterward and started thinking - whats so bad about .40 S&W being 10mm short? I sort of like the idea of 10mm short - I agree, a regular 10mm auto is more gun than I'd want to use, so is .50 magnum or .454 Casaul. When I was younger, I had a .44 Superblackhawk - at the time it was fine for the me, sort of a muscle car of guns. Those newer super pistol rounds hadn't become very well know or didn't exist yet - I had seen a couple Thompson Center "pistols" that fired rifle cartrigdes - so most powerful handgun is pretty subjective. A car saleman at the garage where I worked back then had a giant .454 revolver, so .44 Magnum's moment had already passed, but the ammo for that 454 was way over 1$ a round when I was buying .44 Blazer wadcutters for about 40 cents a round. Most people who fired the .44 were duly impressed with the powerfullness of it, I was - with 240 gr +P ammo it really barked. Today the .380 and .40 (9 & 10mm short) are my choices for HD/SD. Those big single action revolvers aren't very practical to carry in public (I had western style holsers and gun belts for my Rugers, the .44 and a single six .22) and they cost more than a decent auto pistol does now (their low cost was a big factor in my choice back in the late 70's).

I was thinking back, on those single action revolvers: the stainless Ruger Single Six with two cylinders (.22 and .22 mag) and 6.5" barrel ran about $225 and the Superblackhawk .44 single action with a 9" barrel was about $259. This was about 1978 or 1979, I bought both new (not at the same time) in the box at Coast to Coast hardware in my home town. Perhaps they weren't really any less expensive then than they are now in terms of the purchasing value of a dollar? They were major investments for me back then for sure, I had cars back then that cost less.

Both were too big for CC, I had a little .22 LR Jennings pocket auto for CC back then (CC was practically illegal back then, I know, but I was driving big trucks full of valuable construction gear all over the midwest for my employer. I needed a gun for protection a few times, and the Jennings was enough - thankfully I never had to fire it). I used Federal copper plated .22 LR - 40 gr solids, because they fed reliably and had good accuracy and consistant penetration through a 3" telephone book at about 5 yards. For the Single six, I had .22 magnum hollow points. I kept 180 gr, JHP and 240 gr JHP for HD in my .44., the first three rounds were 180 and the last three were 240 grain, I could control the 180's better, but those 240's were sure to stop anyone (as if the 180's weren't :) ) . All of them were sold when I was in school, needed the money and didn't feel the same need for protection. I did keep my Ruger 10/22 for plinking and emergency home defense (with a 25 round mag full of hollow points) all through those years, I still have it. I guess I really like Ruger, I still do, but I picked S&W over it for my .40, primarily due to hand fit and grip/shooting comfort (another factor; I'd never owned a S&W before either, I like them and I like to experience new things).

[bonehead]

I was thinking back, on those single action revolvers: the stainless Ruger Single Six with two cylinders (.22 and .22 mag) and 6.5" barrel ran about $225 and the Superblackhawk .44 single action with a 9" barrel was about $259. This was about 1978 or 1979, I bought both new (not at the same time) in the box at Coast to Coast hardware in my home town. Perhaps they weren't really any less expensive then than they are now in terms of the purchasing value of a dollar? They were major investments for me back then for sure, I had cars back then that cost less.

Both were too big for CC, I had a little .22 LR Jennings pocket auto for CC back then (CC was practically illegal back then, I know, but I was driving big trucks full of valuable construction gear all over the midwest for my employer. I needed a gun for protection a few times, and the Jennings was enough - thankfully I never had to fire it). I used Federal copper plated .22 LR - 40 gr solids, because they fed reliably and had good accuracy and consistant penetration through a 3" telephone book at about 5 yards. For the Single six, I had .22 magnum hollow points. I kept 180 gr, JHP and 240 gr JHP for HD in my .44., the first three rounds were 180 and the last three were 240 grain, I could control the 180's better, but those 240's were sure to stop anyone (as if the 180's weren't :) ) . All of them were sold when I was in school, needed the money and didn't feel the same need for protection. I did keep my Ruger 10/22 for plinking and emergency home defense (with a 25 round mag full of hollow points) all through those years, I still have it. I guess I really like Ruger, I still do, but I picked S&W over it for my .40, primarily due to hand fit and grip/shooting comfort (another factor; I'd never owned a S&W before either, I like them and I like to experience new things).

"Coast to coast hardware". That brings back some old memories. I bought my first .22 there around 1980. Marlin model 60. I nearly went insane when I put the scope on it. After 10 shots you would think I was using a shotgun. Never could tighten the pattern. Years later I got a ruger 10-22. OMG the difference. 10 shots in one ragged hole. The local squirrels no longer mock me.