Quoted By:
For millenniums the most effective hunting weapon in the world was the bow and arrow. Traditional bow designs were generally accurate enough for small game at 10-15 yards. For larger game like deer, a clean heart shot could be made at 20-25 yards, and if a perfect broadside double lung shot is presented in good conditions, and the hunter is willing to patiently track the animal after the shot, a skilled archer could kill deer at as much as 40-50 yards. Larger game like moose and elk could also be taken, but great care must be made with shot placement, as many follow up shots as possible must be made, and the tracking could be long.
This is the EXACT SAME PERFORMANCE PARAMETER as a modern full size semiautomatic pistol in common calibers. The biggest differences being that the trajectory is virtually flat within it's accurate range, wind drift is negligible, rate of fire is drastically faster, penetration against bone is more reliable, velocity is so high that it's impossible for any animal to dodge the projectile, and the weapon while roughly the same weight as a bow is so compact that it can be worn hands-free on the person and conform to his body and allow him to move with even greater stealth. Hunting with a modern pistol is therefore essentially like hunting with any of your ancestors weapons but with cheat codes turned on.
This concept has been common sense to me for over a decade and it's incredible that this subject isn't discussed more in survival/SHTF circles. Feeling the need for any kind of rifle suggests that you think that having greater target engagement potential than 99.9% of your ancestors is a basic requirement for mere survival. In my opinion that is extremely pessimistic. Personally, there's no way in fucking Hell that I'm adding 5-7 pounds to my load out just to compensate for a lack of training and skill with pistols. If you can't kill game with a modern handgun with optics then, I'm sorry, but you fucking suck BIG time.
