Okay so I'm going to put it out there and I'm certain I'll get laughed at for my choice, but hear me out and you might decide that I'm not as nuts as my choice for a 'go to' firearm just in case civilization collapses.
Ruger 10/22. Yup...go ahead and laugh, I'll wait...
Alright, now I'll explain myself.
1) Light weight. The carbine version weighs in at a whopping 5lbs.
2) Accurate enough to hit a grapefruit at 100 yards OFF THE SHELF (the round retains a flat trajectory out to 125 yards). Yeah, you read that right - it's a semi-auto .22 that is accurate to 100 yards off the shelf provided your shooting skills are adequate of course. When I was growing up I used to hunt small game with my Ruger 10/22 carbine. Rabbits, grouse and squirrel. I was easily able to get any of those critters within 50 yards with a head shot from my .22 with hardly ever missing. If you're not already aware, a squirrel's head is a bit larger than a $0.50 cent piece and I was easily capable of hitting a target that size every time at 50 yards.
3) Ammo is EASY to find and CHEAP. You can buy a box of 550 rounds (Remington even!) at Walmart for under $25.00. As everyone knows, your firearm becomes a glorified club once you run out of ammo. An AR-15 (.223) is sweet and all but when 500 rounds run about $250.00 for the really crappy dirty-firing-bottom-of-the-barrel stuff, well...you run out of ammo and you're left with a club.
4) Most survivalists I've read say that for such a scenario you want to have about 10,000 rounds of ammo on hand. Refer back to point #3.
5) Again, an AR-15 is a sweet rig right? You bet! But when you're faced with a total collapse of civilization and you're looking for dinner...what are you going to do with that fancy .223 when dinner is sitting next to the road in the form of a rabbit - or turkey - or some other small critter? You blast it with that AR-15 and your dinner just turned into a bloody lump of exploded flesh and bone (unless you're able to just hit the head)...in other words, whatever you're able to salvage equals a minor snack. That doesn't happen with a .22.
6) Quiet. Well, in relation to other firearms like, that aforementioned AR-15 for example. Look, civilization has collapsed right? How much attention do you want to bring to yourself while you're out hunting for dinner? Your chances of being heard while shooting your .22 are a lot less than if shooting your .223.
7) Aside from being cheap, the .22 ammo is also exceptionally light. 500 rnds weighs about 3 lbs. Whereas, 500 rnds of .223 ammo weighs about 15 lbs.
8) Contrary to popular belief, a .22 round can indeed easily kill a person (I'll use a 'person' for the metric for the purpose of illustrating this point and because it's a statistic I know). If you line three people up front to back, the .22 bullet will pass through the first 2 and lodge in the last one - potentially killing all three. As a 17 year-old growing up in Michigan, my Father used to hunt deer with a bolt action .22. He would make head shots at about 50 yards and he'd get his deer - one shot in the head every time.
Not that I advocate this in the least (because the guy doing this is extremely hard core and essentially, one in a million!), but: I've even read a story from the book, 'Bear Tales for the ages' by Larry Kaniut about an Eskimo hunter in Alaska that used to hunt polar bears with a .22. The native in question (can't remember his name now and if I recall correctly the guy was doing his hunting in the 40's) was talking about putting out a seal carcass on the ice and then hiding nearby. When the bear would come in to eat the carcass he'd take aim and shoot the bear in a specific place in the head where the skull is thinnest. He'd killed numerous bears in this manner - one shot to the head with his trusty bolt action .22.
I have pause when considering the use of a .22 against targets wearing body armor as the body armor would stop the bullet completely and the target likely wouldn't even know they'd been shot. But the inherent accuracy of the round is such that you could simply target a non-armored area. Go for the arteries in the legs or for the face, or the armpits, etc. Yeah I know - easy to say when you aren't getting shot at. But the fact of the matter is that the body armor available today is going to stop even that .223 so I don't much see the argument unless you're talking about using a .30/06 or better.
9) Inexpensive. The carbine version goes for about $200.00.
10) If you want to get better accuracy you can zero this thing in enough with after market parts to hit a quarter at 125 yards, every time (assuming you're a good shot mind you!). Don't believe that? Here's a fun link to check out:
http://www.ruger1022.com/docs/israeli_sniper.htm I doubt they'd be used as sniper rifles by the Israeli army if they weren't capable as I've just described.
As for my 10/22 I've tricked it out a bit. I've got a really nice bullpup stock on it. Not that muzzelite thing some of you might be thinking about mind you! That thing's junk! No, I'm talking about this stock here: (
http://www.wix.com/jbunting/bullpup-stock#! ). I've also put a bull barrel on it and a few other accessories. The nice thing about this rifle is that there are a lot of after market accessories you can get and everything is relatively cheap if you compare the upgrades to similar upgrades for higher power firearms. When all was said and done I put about $900.00 (which includes a large stockpile of ammo) into my 10/22. If I'd have done the same amount of upgrading to an AR-15, I'd have spent something more like $2500.00 (without having purchased any ammo yet!).
Now just because I like the Ruger 10/22 as a good all around survival, self defense weapon doesn't mean that I don't see any downside to the choice. Sure, if you are shooting through brush at your target the bullet is so light that it could get deflected by the branches and cause you to miss your target. Sure, you're not going to be shooting through walls and still taking out the enemy. Sure, it doesn't have the raw knock-down power of any of the larger calibers. Sure, you're not going to be taking down wild boar at 600 yards with this firearm. If you go with this option you'd need to be 100% able to use the weapon to it's fullest potential. That means you have to rely upon it's accuracy more than the raw power of the firearm. So you have to be a capable shooter and you have to know where you need to shoot a target in order to win the fight. You need to practice so that you can hit that quarter at 100 yards. Not like using a .223 where the bullet is capable of killing a target with one shot to the center mass. You may need to target the head instead. But one shot from a .22 to the head is going to make that target just as dead as one shot to the head from any other firearm.
Now don't get me wrong, though I'd be the wacko running around with my .22, I do still have other firearms for various reasons. The thing is, the .22 is a perfectly fine weapon in a survivalist situation (after all we aren't talking about needing a combat or battle rifle here for fighting a long term firefight with sustained 1k ammo expenditures in that one engagement or anything). You just need to be aware of its limitations, plan your tactics accordingly and try not to make it perform past its capabilities.
http://www.ruger.com/products/1022Carbine/models.htmlhttp://www.ruger.com/products/1022Target/index.htmlhttp://www.ruger.com/products/1022Compact/models.htmlhttp://www.ruger.com/products/1022Tactical/models.html