That's why I carry magnums in the back country. They can be loaded down for snake and small game, and even blanks for safely scaring away that marauding bruin.

Cotton mouths are nasty lil buggers. Here we have rattlers. I don't run into them all that often, and prefer to live and let live, but have been in some situations where I had to terminate them sadly. Good eating though.

Nope. I kill paper. I've used the occasional BB to dispatch or disuade birds from roosting next to my bedroom, but that was 20 years ago.

I do NOT conceal carry, though I've dabbled w/ the idea.

I did not need my weapon in military service, fortunately.

While I subscripe to the artfully described "condom principle," I'm not allowed to carry a firearm onto a base, which pretty much means there's no point in carrying one 75% of the time.

Are you limiting the discussion to gun carry? I ask because an important consideration is having a gun ready for use at home, or at camp, or wherever you are stationed at the moment.

Yes, I know a person who benefited from their gun's presence. My folks live in a secluded area where strange things have happened and where the police arrival time is not anytime soon. I won't go into detail about how the person used their gun, but your imagination and common sense should be just as good.

Another thing to consider is that people tend to assume the gun user is healthy and strong. However, it's more appropriate to assume the gun user is relatively weak.

For example, it's more appropriate to assume a gun user is elderly, sick, injured, handicapped, or skinny/frail. If you're empathetic, you should be able to imagine many likely uses for a firearm. Would this relatively weak person benefit from carrying proper protection that would improve the odds in a fight? Should a grandma in a wheelchair be enabled to defend herself against robbers? Or should she just beg for them to spare her life? Or should we assume that she won't get robbed if she locks her doors and turns on the alarm? If grandma has use for a gun and others do not, then where exactly is that line? Can that line be clearly articulated in a law?

The two times in my life I could have really used a firearm were both in states that don't allow their carry. Thankfully I was lucky, but I could easily see how things might have gone another way.

Having lived in states that don't allow carry most of my life, I'm not one that has to have a firearm everywhere I go. However, I do like having the option to carry. For me it provides a level of comfort.

However, I also recognize that, this isn't the case for all people. Some are simply uncomfortable around firearms and I understand that too.

Either way, I personally enjoy going to the range and doing some target shooting every now and again. So even if I never have to use a firearm to defend myself or someone else, I don't feel that time spent at the range was wasted in any way. Especially if I get to enjoy that time with friends and/or family.

Yes, several times. Attempted mugging at knifepoint once, attempted carjacking another time.

Just like I use my knife almost daily and have used both fire extinguishers in the Jeep, first aid kits, pretty much everything I haul around.

The purpose of my question is exploring the frequency and usages of this survival tool for people who have been prepper minded for some time now. It is, in a way, similar to my question about serrations on a knife. The purpose is mainly further education about the benefits and uses of such a tool. Maybe I discover that it is not as useful as popularly believed, or I may discover that it is more useful than previously belived.

ANY story of any type of usage of the gun is welcome , provided it is within the rules of ETS, and has to do with helping somoene in a tuff situation.

For example, regarding guns in this case, someone here may tell a story about being weak/injured in a survival situation, too weak to cut a branch for a stick ( or maybe lost his knife) and he uses the gun to break the limb by shooting 3-4 rounds through it and then pushing it.

I think you might also, then, collect stories about situations where firearms initiated or complicated a survival situation. I suppose you could and should do the same for virtually every survival tool or technique. It so often comes down to proper usage and technique, whether you are talking about revolvers or rope.

Another proper use of firearms. On one of our most serious operations (seven people drowned in a flash flood) I fired a line gun successfully, getting two ladies stuck on a rock in the middle of the flood successfully secured. According to protocol, only the deputies were to use the gun, not volunteers, but both deputies were on the opposite bank, and not available. I had seen the line gun demonstrated, I had firearms training, and I had a LE commission in another agency, so i decided to take a shot, so to speak.

The line secured the two women until an AF chopper was able to perform a hoist operation. You might say that was a very busy day.

I suppose you might ask about situations where you did not have a gun and wished you did - where the absent gun would have been useful or critical. I was charged by a pig once (on Santa Rosa Island) and I would have shot, had I been carrying my 357 or equivalent. Instead, I kicked him in the snout when he got close enough. That caused Mr. Pig to break off the engagement. The gorgeous woman I was accompanying, now Mrs. Hikermor, was suitably impressed.

Firearms are useful tools, no doubt about it. But they are not so generally useful that they need be carried routinely. They are just too heavy, bulky, and specialized to make the ten essentials list. I do own several, and when deemed appropriate, they come along for the ride. I think the most generally useful weapon I possess is my short barreled Mossberg 500, although my 357 is a close second.