Is this guy doing more harm than good?
- Thread starter CoyotePhysics
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2010
- Messages
- 330
Thanks for the responses so far. This guy seems to be getting something of a mixed review here, so I'm about to disagree with someone, but I thought that I'd share my thoughts about this guy and explain why I posted this thread.
First of all, I think that this guy owes a refund to anyone who has ever paid to learn how to survive from him. I'm basing this on a number of things that he has posted to the web, not just this video, it just serves as a particularly poignant example of his teachings.
First off, the kit was not designed around sound principles, but a gimic. In my opinion your priorities should be:
Signaling
First Aid
Shelter/Fire
Water
Food
Once you are in a survival situation, you are most likely there untill the cavalry arives, hence the priority on signaling. The remaining priorities are placed in order of what you are likely to die from first.
While the kit had a nod of the hat towards each of these areas, if you break the kit down in terms of weight and cost the highest priorites are given the least in terms of resources.
Next, selection of components. If you want a knife, a flashlight, a survival blanket, ect. What are the essential qualities that they must have? Based on what is availible on the market and within your price range you typically have a number of options. Add to that list, "This item must be able to attach to-or be stuffed inside of a shotgun." Now the list of options has gotten much smaller. In fact, everything you had planned to use is probably gone, and now you are looking at bayonetts and very expesive tactical lights and trying to decide which are the least of the evils. If I really wanted my knife attached to my gun, I would duct-tape the sheath to the sling. I wonder if this guy has ever moved through heavy brush with a firearm before. Snag points on the end of your barrel are a bad idea, not to mention that he is risking damage to his light and knife by swinging them from the end of the barrel. You might say that damage isn't likely to happen, but would you bet your life on it?
Finally, why a "tacticool" shotgun. He has worked hard to make a usable shotgun worse. There are several things I could point to, but the following equation makes my point:
(pistol grip)+(tang safety)=(bad idea)
More to the point, what is he trying to survive? I'm not sure he knows, but I do know that someone who tries to be a jack of all trades is likely to be a master of none. If he plans on combat taking place, a maxim I heard from Vietnam vetrans makes a lot of sense. "Take all the ammo you can carry. Then take more." If combat gets taken off the agenda the gun is likely obsolete in a survival situation unless you're in bear country.
I think someone would do better to create "The Ultimate Survival Fanny-Pack." At least then you could fit in a stainless steel water bottle (full of water) and not be drinking from a condom by the end of the first day.
So... do I think I'm a survival expert? No! Absolutely not. But neither is this guy, and the fact that he is presenting himself as one bothers me. If I knew nothing about survival and paid this guy to teach me the basics I would be worse off than ignorant. I would be ignorant and think I was prepared.
My rating... D- It would have been an F if not for the patriotic bandana.
First of all, I think that this guy owes a refund to anyone who has ever paid to learn how to survive from him. I'm basing this on a number of things that he has posted to the web, not just this video, it just serves as a particularly poignant example of his teachings.
First off, the kit was not designed around sound principles, but a gimic. In my opinion your priorities should be:
Signaling
First Aid
Shelter/Fire
Water
Food
Once you are in a survival situation, you are most likely there untill the cavalry arives, hence the priority on signaling. The remaining priorities are placed in order of what you are likely to die from first.
While the kit had a nod of the hat towards each of these areas, if you break the kit down in terms of weight and cost the highest priorites are given the least in terms of resources.
Next, selection of components. If you want a knife, a flashlight, a survival blanket, ect. What are the essential qualities that they must have? Based on what is availible on the market and within your price range you typically have a number of options. Add to that list, "This item must be able to attach to-or be stuffed inside of a shotgun." Now the list of options has gotten much smaller. In fact, everything you had planned to use is probably gone, and now you are looking at bayonetts and very expesive tactical lights and trying to decide which are the least of the evils. If I really wanted my knife attached to my gun, I would duct-tape the sheath to the sling. I wonder if this guy has ever moved through heavy brush with a firearm before. Snag points on the end of your barrel are a bad idea, not to mention that he is risking damage to his light and knife by swinging them from the end of the barrel. You might say that damage isn't likely to happen, but would you bet your life on it?
Finally, why a "tacticool" shotgun. He has worked hard to make a usable shotgun worse. There are several things I could point to, but the following equation makes my point:
(pistol grip)+(tang safety)=(bad idea)
More to the point, what is he trying to survive? I'm not sure he knows, but I do know that someone who tries to be a jack of all trades is likely to be a master of none. If he plans on combat taking place, a maxim I heard from Vietnam vetrans makes a lot of sense. "Take all the ammo you can carry. Then take more." If combat gets taken off the agenda the gun is likely obsolete in a survival situation unless you're in bear country.
I think someone would do better to create "The Ultimate Survival Fanny-Pack." At least then you could fit in a stainless steel water bottle (full of water) and not be drinking from a condom by the end of the first day.
So... do I think I'm a survival expert? No! Absolutely not. But neither is this guy, and the fact that he is presenting himself as one bothers me. If I knew nothing about survival and paid this guy to teach me the basics I would be worse off than ignorant. I would be ignorant and think I was prepared.
My rating... D- It would have been an F if not for the patriotic bandana.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2008
- Messages
- 977
i give the guy props for thinking outside the box...but id prefer my bag of tricks and a .22 
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,334
I don't see why one would worry about anything in a youtube video. One way or the other.
Watch it or don't.
I dare say that watching one of the TV 'survival' shows is more dangerous than watching this guy's vid.
Watch it or don't.
I dare say that watching one of the TV 'survival' shows is more dangerous than watching this guy's vid.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2006
- Messages
- 8,250
I dare say that watching one of the TV 'survival' shows is more dangerous than watching this guy's vid.
But how am I to know when to drink my pee if I don't watch it on tv?
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2010
- Messages
- 330
I don't see why one would worry about anything in a youtube video. One way or the other.
Watch it or don't.
I dare say that watching one of the TV 'survival' shows is more dangerous than watching this guy's vid.
I agree that you-tube videos are pretty harmless, what bothers me is this guy is making a living teaching survival classes. I'm a high-school teacher and have had to pass a number of state and national requirements to teach a subject that isn't life or death. All of my school's teachers do. With the exception of drivers ed and shop classes no-one is likely to die if a teacher is ineffective. I think this guys students are worse off for having him as a teacher.
My thought is you are better safe than sorry...
Does that mean I should start now?
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 3,334
understood, but then no State is mandating that the viewer watch the video, he makes no claims of expertise, and he gets paid a lot less than teachers do.
oh, and no tests either!
I'm gonna give him a bye............
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,846
ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!
You need to warn me that my brain will melt before letting me watch videos like that.
The ONLY thing in the video that makes any sense is the shotgun as a survival tool. The rest is chaff or worse.
I happen to be a huge promoter of shotguns as the "one firearm" to own for survival (all aspects)
but a firearm is a firearm. crap dangling all over and trying to make a survival kit is just dumb.
1: select a different gauge. 20 gauge is a LOT easier to carry rounds for than 12 ga. I wouldn't argue with .410 though the "2 inch .454 casull" crowd would crucify me. (28 ga, unless you handload, isn't going to work out so well)
2: it's a shotgun. not a flashlight, a tree felling device or any other crap.
3: sidesaddles and butt cuffs for ammo are great things, I use them. on a mossberg 500 20 ga, that's a 4 round sidesaddle and a 5 round butt cuff unless you make your own. BUT- wherever the shotgun is a shoulder bag should be kept. My shoulderbag is a game bag and has a minimal cleaning kit, a couple SMALL matching screwdrivers for the given shotgun, generally 40 rounds of 7.5 shot, 10 slugs, and 10 rounds of #4 pheasant shot. in this case we are talking about the 20ga mossberg 500 that we use for "home defense" (mostly coyotes)- so it has 8 rounds of 3 buck already- 4 in the tube and 4 on the sidesaddle.
(there's actually a bag for each shotgun, and when I go to the range I pop another 40 rounds of bulk packed 7.5 or 8 shot for practicing with. the loads vary depending on the shotgun- for example my model 11 has no slugs at all, but has #8, #4, a few TT shells, and 00.)
4: ghost ring or rifle sights are great for a survival shotgun, but it depends on the shooter. at ranges I'll be willing to hunt with, I don't need them for a deer, but having them adds a lot to the range I'm willing to take a shot at.
5: flashlights are not great.
6: slings are great. Slings that have anything on them- ammo, bandannas, whatever, are not great.
7: magnum rounds are for steel shot, and only for steel shot.
8: 22 inch barrels threaded for choke tubes are fine. minimum length barrels or licensed SBRS aren't really needed. I have a couple with 20 inch barrels I've done up and they are okay, I'd prefer a 22 inch barrel and choke tubes (full, cylinder) for actual survival. But 20 inches once you find your patterning should get you done with just about any game in north america at the right ranges. 28 inch barrel full choke is for ducks.
9: no pistol grips, no add ons to the pump. NOTHINK! straight wood or synthetic "hunting" stocks. anything else is counterproductive to your shooting and your carry.
Why a shotgun over a .22? Well, with a shotgun I can hunt just about anything. With a .22, I'm not going to try for deer. And head shooting a quail with a field .22 isn't actually all that easy under most conditions. I've done it, but I'd rather use a shotgun.
I often go out into the field with a single shot, and I realize that's a huge mistake because the gangs of los angeles wander the nevada desert and I'm going to get into a running gun battle while having to face down the 11 foot tall internet grizzly- but I do it anyway. Older, functional, single shots are available for $50-$100 constantly. excellent truck guns, easy to have a spare, so on. A single shot shotgun with 5 rounds on the butt and a bag of 45 rounds of ammo should keep you in food longer than most emergencies- and long enough to sort out your next moves based on something more than "GUNS! GUNS!"
You need to warn me that my brain will melt before letting me watch videos like that.
The ONLY thing in the video that makes any sense is the shotgun as a survival tool. The rest is chaff or worse.
I happen to be a huge promoter of shotguns as the "one firearm" to own for survival (all aspects)
but a firearm is a firearm. crap dangling all over and trying to make a survival kit is just dumb.
1: select a different gauge. 20 gauge is a LOT easier to carry rounds for than 12 ga. I wouldn't argue with .410 though the "2 inch .454 casull" crowd would crucify me. (28 ga, unless you handload, isn't going to work out so well)
2: it's a shotgun. not a flashlight, a tree felling device or any other crap.
3: sidesaddles and butt cuffs for ammo are great things, I use them. on a mossberg 500 20 ga, that's a 4 round sidesaddle and a 5 round butt cuff unless you make your own. BUT- wherever the shotgun is a shoulder bag should be kept. My shoulderbag is a game bag and has a minimal cleaning kit, a couple SMALL matching screwdrivers for the given shotgun, generally 40 rounds of 7.5 shot, 10 slugs, and 10 rounds of #4 pheasant shot. in this case we are talking about the 20ga mossberg 500 that we use for "home defense" (mostly coyotes)- so it has 8 rounds of 3 buck already- 4 in the tube and 4 on the sidesaddle.
(there's actually a bag for each shotgun, and when I go to the range I pop another 40 rounds of bulk packed 7.5 or 8 shot for practicing with. the loads vary depending on the shotgun- for example my model 11 has no slugs at all, but has #8, #4, a few TT shells, and 00.)
4: ghost ring or rifle sights are great for a survival shotgun, but it depends on the shooter. at ranges I'll be willing to hunt with, I don't need them for a deer, but having them adds a lot to the range I'm willing to take a shot at.
5: flashlights are not great.
6: slings are great. Slings that have anything on them- ammo, bandannas, whatever, are not great.
7: magnum rounds are for steel shot, and only for steel shot.
8: 22 inch barrels threaded for choke tubes are fine. minimum length barrels or licensed SBRS aren't really needed. I have a couple with 20 inch barrels I've done up and they are okay, I'd prefer a 22 inch barrel and choke tubes (full, cylinder) for actual survival. But 20 inches once you find your patterning should get you done with just about any game in north america at the right ranges. 28 inch barrel full choke is for ducks.
9: no pistol grips, no add ons to the pump. NOTHINK! straight wood or synthetic "hunting" stocks. anything else is counterproductive to your shooting and your carry.
Why a shotgun over a .22? Well, with a shotgun I can hunt just about anything. With a .22, I'm not going to try for deer. And head shooting a quail with a field .22 isn't actually all that easy under most conditions. I've done it, but I'd rather use a shotgun.
I often go out into the field with a single shot, and I realize that's a huge mistake because the gangs of los angeles wander the nevada desert and I'm going to get into a running gun battle while having to face down the 11 foot tall internet grizzly- but I do it anyway. Older, functional, single shots are available for $50-$100 constantly. excellent truck guns, easy to have a spare, so on. A single shot shotgun with 5 rounds on the butt and a bag of 45 rounds of ammo should keep you in food longer than most emergencies- and long enough to sort out your next moves based on something more than "GUNS! GUNS!"
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,846
I'm not terribly religious about shotguns. I have quite a selection- but there's absolutely nothing wrong with the mossberg 500 as a shotgun. The only thing wrong with the 870 is the location of the safety- it's a fine weapon- but there's nothing wrong with the 500 series.
If you are into modding and adding accessories, the 870 is a far better platform since you can mess around with barrels and mag extensions more easily. but that's about it.
I trained with shotguns in the Navy and they were mossberg 590s. I'd probably prefer a 870 since I *do* mess around with modifications- but remington has the safety in a place that my hind brain forgets about. mossberg safety is hardwired in my head.
You can also often get a dual barrel kit 20ga mossberg 500 on sale for well under $300
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 7,035
The problem I have with this, is the same problem I have with EVERY "one thing to survive" kit.
Namely, it takes the One Thing that will be the basis for the kit and essentially kill its usability, then since space is always limited, their kit combines a lot of crap that weighs too much for its capability and provides Not Enough of anything.
If you really want a shotgun=based survival kit, take a backpack, load it with gear that will actually do the job, add one of those gun bearing sheaths that attach to the side of the pack. There, one complete kit based on a shotgun.
Namely, it takes the One Thing that will be the basis for the kit and essentially kill its usability, then since space is always limited, their kit combines a lot of crap that weighs too much for its capability and provides Not Enough of anything.
If you really want a shotgun=based survival kit, take a backpack, load it with gear that will actually do the job, add one of those gun bearing sheaths that attach to the side of the pack. There, one complete kit based on a shotgun.
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,831
That saw idea was pretty crafty but way too short for functionality. Since we are on bladeforums, that knife looks hideous and toyish. Also since we are talking, "run out of the house grab one thing" type of survival I would want a lot more range.....something more like a scoped rifle with sidearm.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,846
Scopes and survival make me twitch. You want a lot of beef and are going to have a lot of expense if you are going to go that route. You also lose 90% of your hunting capability. Yes, on deer at 250 yards is great and if you can process it it should keep you going for a while. But you lose out on bunny, most smaller furbearers (gopher, porcupine, hedgehog, squirrel, racoon, etc.) and you lose out on fowl entirely- except set shots on turkey.
A lot more range than what? With modern slugs you are looking at a solid 150 yards with the possibility of making a 200 yard shot with a 12ga if you are prepared and have practiced it. The main differences here are - 20ga gives you a bit better ballistics at the 100-150 yard range, but 12ga will pack more punch at those ranges. Even with 20ga, we're looking at well over 800 foot pounds at 100 yards with a buckhammer/brennekke style slug load.
Incidentally- brennekke now makes a 28ga slug load, looks suitable for up to mulies with good shot placement at 35-50 yards. Doesn't make the 28ga a lot better for me, but I could see it working out for some.
.410- you go down to 50 yards tops. But this becomes environmental. Back in Northern AZ I would have felt okay with it. Out here in the basin, I'm more likely to get the 100 yard shot opportunity.
If you are absolutely relying on > 150 yard shots, and will hunt nothing in the small game category, break out the .308, 3.75, .30-06, or similar and a big scope and go to town. I'm going to be a lot more comfortable with a shotgun.
Yes, you said sidearm. Again- shooting quail or tree rat with a .22 pistol (use a .38 and there's no point) is possible, but not that easy. I'll happily give myself a max range of about 35 yards, braced, slow shot, with my .22 revolver. but I'll get a lot more out of the shotgun in that type of hunting, by far.
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,831
He said run out of the house and grab one thing. To me that doesn't mean hunting/trapping small game, sounds more like civil unrest/bug out. I'm trying to take the video in that perspective. Thanks for the lengthy reply though.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2010
- Messages
- 330
How many guns do you need for civil war Koyote? Don't you only have something like ten neighbors?
understood, but then no State is mandating that the viewer watch the video, he makes no claims of expertise, and he gets paid a lot less than teachers do.
Ok, I'll grant you that one.:thumbup:
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2007
- Messages
- 5,846
How many guns do you need for civil war Koyote? Don't you only have something like ten neighbors?
Yah, but we all have to defend our regional water flow. Best to have the extra sks and 308 here and there
Really, I didn't see this video as preparing for an urban combat scenario as a primary. If survival to you means combat and sniping, all good. Food and close range defense seem to fit better for me.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 7,035
See, we're back to arguing Not Enough again.
Can't rely on trapping and snaring. . .why? Because you don't have space to ram it up in your butt(stock). Carry a decent kit, and having trap and snare equipment is not a problem.
Why are you limited to turkey with a rifle? Keep in mind we're talking survival: "Game laws don't allow it" need not apply. If they do, you're not really talking survival.
Now, to be completely honest, the shotgun really is the most versatile tool to center around. Much as people (especially on the internet) don't like to admit it, the vast majority of game kills occur at less than 100 yards, closer to 50 yards being the norm. Yes, even out west. People don't HAVE to take 300 yard shots, they do it because they can. These same game animals are taken each year with traditional archery equipment -- 40 yards being LONG shot.
Furthermore, if you are worried about defense, the majority (over 93%) of infantry combat occurs under 100 meters, much of it under 50. A shotgun with rifled slugs will do just fine for the vast majority of hunting and defense use.
Now 200 yards with slugs? If you are going for such shots, you need sabot slugs and a rifled barrel. This means you either carry an extra barrel, or you give up pretty much all of your ability to use shot, and truly might as well carry a rifle.
The real detriment to a shotgun is the weight and bulk of the ammo. However, I don't think anyone is dumb enough to think they are going to survive very long with just this shotgun and buttstock survival kit, so the need to carry large amounts of animals really isn't there.
Can't rely on trapping and snaring. . .why? Because you don't have space to ram it up in your butt(stock). Carry a decent kit, and having trap and snare equipment is not a problem.
Why are you limited to turkey with a rifle? Keep in mind we're talking survival: "Game laws don't allow it" need not apply. If they do, you're not really talking survival.
Now, to be completely honest, the shotgun really is the most versatile tool to center around. Much as people (especially on the internet) don't like to admit it, the vast majority of game kills occur at less than 100 yards, closer to 50 yards being the norm. Yes, even out west. People don't HAVE to take 300 yard shots, they do it because they can. These same game animals are taken each year with traditional archery equipment -- 40 yards being LONG shot.
Furthermore, if you are worried about defense, the majority (over 93%) of infantry combat occurs under 100 meters, much of it under 50. A shotgun with rifled slugs will do just fine for the vast majority of hunting and defense use.
Now 200 yards with slugs? If you are going for such shots, you need sabot slugs and a rifled barrel. This means you either carry an extra barrel, or you give up pretty much all of your ability to use shot, and truly might as well carry a rifle.
The real detriment to a shotgun is the weight and bulk of the ammo. However, I don't think anyone is dumb enough to think they are going to survive very long with just this shotgun and buttstock survival kit, so the need to carry large amounts of animals really isn't there.