The Spread of the Undead

Author: Kain - ZAC Weapon Consultant
Submitted: 10 Jan 2011
Filed under: General &Mobile Defense &Press Releases &Research

85 Responses to “The Spread of the Undead”

1. big bear29 on 11 Jan 2011 at 1:11 am #

   1. Most of the human race lives in the cities , so if the outbreak happens there it can in fact spread fairly fast depending on the amount of time the virus has for its incubation cycle . Those cities contain the airports , train stations , sea ports and they are all connected by highways . That would give an infected person fleeing for their life the oppurtunity to flee to another area and continue the spread of the disease . It only takes about an hour to travel a few hundred miles in a small twin prop plane and trains can continue on their way even without the conductor present all the time and some ships have their own version of auto-pilot and can get to their destination with little or no human supervision .

   2. I happen to agree with you on your second about technology and that news travels fast , but the media would likely be very sceptical about the existence of zombies and simply pass them off as being infected with some form of mass hysteria or dementia . Or they would severly down play the situation to avoid a mass panic . Very few if any people would come on tv and stick their face right in the camera and scream ” The zombies are coming run for your lives . Their eating anybody the can catch . ”

   3. I agree with you that resourceful people will likely survive where as the average joe might just give up and die . But the number of resourceful and inventive people are far outnumbered by the average joe’s and jane’s of the human race .

   4. I agree that the zombies are not invincible . However Joseph Stalin once said ” Quantity has a quality all of its own ” . If you throw enough bodies at an armies defenses they will either run out of ammo or you will get lucky and breach their defenses , this is what the russians did against the germans at Stalingrad . Since most people on this site seem to agree that the only way to kill a zombie is a head shot , the zombies would likely breach your defenses before you could snipe them all , if you where by yourself . There are a lot of people out there that would simply give up or expect others to come to their rescue . This would result in a hell of a lot of zombies in very little time and while some people would be ready for an outbreak you likely wouldn’t have enough ammo on hand to take care of every single zombie . You would either have to flee the city , if you live in one or you could stay where you are and get buried under a mountain of corpses .

   5. I agree with you whole heartedly on the last one . But I would be extra careful about communications , because the greatest threat to the people in isolated areas won’t be the zombies at first , it would be the people fleeing the cities that are desperate to survive . They would be scared and agitated and likely paranoid and more than a few would likely try to take what they need to survive from other survivors . This is how you would see the start of a lot of raiding parties .

   I believe that if there is a large scale outbreak it will spread far and fast until the goverments start locking down their borders until they fall apart . Even then there will be people willing to smuggle refugees out of an infected country and into a clean one in exchange for goods or money and this will likely further the spread of the virus . I believe that the survivors will likely make safe zones or fortified communities to keep the zombies and raiders at a distance and this could likely start the development of city states like how it used to be in ancient greece . Like Athens , Sparta and Thebes .

2. Splint Chesthair on 11 Jan 2011 at 8:31 am #

   I often think about the rate of spread of the virus an it’s communicability mode(s) and incubation periods. Transmission via bite or infected saliva/blood would probably not be very successful, even with very short incubatio periods (even the fastest bacteria take several hours to one day before symptoms show).

   I think the worst infection would take place with a air-transmission and an incubation period similar to mononucleousis of 28-42 days. That would give the infected at least a month to interact with others and spread the disease which would be disatrous. Best hope would be that ground zero happens overseas which would give you time to recognize and react.

   Of course, it’s possible the virus has an incubation period of years, like Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and everyone has already been exposed.

3. EchoVirus on 11 Jan 2011 at 9:13 am #

   I think it depends on how the Virus is spread. If it is trough bites and zombie inflicted wounds that the disease is spreading, then it’s more likely that it will spread slower than people think. But if the virus is travelling through the air, then I think we’re screwed.

   But maybe if the authorities acknowledge the problem fast enough, they can try to isolate the apocalypse on one continent. By shutting down air traffic in the whole of that continent for instance. Shure there would be infected people that have flown over to other parts of the world. But maybe by then the problem is allready known in the world, and effect on other continents would be minimal.

   I wonder if there are people who would be immune to the virus. People who at first show symptoms, but get better after that.

4. Beth on 11 Jan 2011 at 10:59 am #

   @ big bear29: I agree with your point #2. The media downplay every disease that is seriously dangerous because they think we can’t handle the truth. The media downplayed AIDS after arsonists burned down an HIV-infected family’s home in Florida. The media also downplayed Mad Cow disease so that people would continue to buy and eat beef.

   @ Splint Chesthair: Your analysis of transmission/incubation is so hilarious! But everyone agrees that zombies are caused by virus rather than bacteria. Also, the Noro virus’s incubation can be as low as 10 hours. Of course, the Noro virus is a stomach bug that causes vomiting and diarrhea, not zombies.

5. Angryvikingman on 11 Jan 2011 at 4:02 pm #

   Personally I think that what eventually causes “Zombies” will be a lab grown and altered version of Rabies. Causes violent behavior and is transmitted via bites and scratches. As of now it causes the infected to die in about two weeks.

6. big bear29 on 12 Jan 2011 at 1:23 am #

   @Angryvikingman

   I happen to agree with you that it would likely be some type of rabies whipped up in a lab . It would likely be some country’s special bioweapon .

   Release this in an enemy country suspected of making bioweapons or that is a threat to your home nation and after the virus has run its course you could send in the military for ” humanitarian reasons ” . Kill off any remaining infected , dispose of the corpses and you would likely be seen as a hero . Thats how I think the virus would initially get released but it would probably be altered to make the host last longer than two weeks .

7. 3-15 INF on 12 Jan 2011 at 2:36 pm #

   if it’s a form of rabies, headshots will be less important, unless your’e using a weapon with insufficient stopping power, like a .22lr, 9mm ball, .223 ball etc.

8. big bear29 on 12 Jan 2011 at 5:37 pm #

   If you want a worst case scenario for what the virus could be like I’ll give you one .

   It would be a form of genetically altered rabies . It would put a person into a hyper agressive state but it would be altered so that it wouldn’t kill them after two weeks . Also it would activate dormant sections of the infected hosts DNA while suppressing the reasoning sections of the brain as well as some bodily functions .

   A part of the DNA that would be activated would be the section that gives people the ability to regenerate , this is different from the simple healing ability that all people possess . There is a gene that is active for a short time after babies are born that allows for the regeneration of damaged tissue , bone and organs . Doctors and scientist actually conducted studies on this to see if there was some way to re-activate it in people that had been badly injured . In one of the experiments a baby managed to regenerate a section of bone that had been accidentally cut off during the c-section when the baby was born . The “zombie” virus would reactivate this gene and amp it up to greatly increase the speed of regeneration to insure that the host would be able to survive otherwise fatal damage so that it can spread the virus .

   The virus would also work to suppress the chemical in the brain that limits our physical strength to one fifth of what it actually is . It does this because we have the ability to lift more weight than our bones could support . There are plenty of documented cases of people getting a major adrenaline rush and overiding the chemical barrier in extreme cases . This would give the infected a serious advantage over normal people as they would be five times stronger , faster and more agile than a normal person .

   So if some one or some country made a bio weapon like this we could end up facing some kind of rage “zombie” that would be five times faster , stronger and more agile and they would have an accelerated reneration ability that would keep them from wearing out their body and it would allow them to survive damage that would put a normal person down . You would probably have to dump half a mag into one infected person in order to insure that they went down and stayed down .

9. Semper Cogitant on 14 Jan 2011 at 1:37 pm #

   This highlights the unlikeliness of a really world wide outbreak happening. Even if an outbreak started rapidly in a huge city it would be controlled before it got to the end of the world stage. Even a deliberate attack causing thousands of zombies in each of the worlds ten largest cities simultaneously would be controlled. Ten of millions of would be killed, but even that would amount not much more than one percent of the world population.

   It would certainly change the world.

   There would always from then on be a possibility of smaller zombie outbreaks, the disease would still be around, as you say you can;t put the genie back in the bottle.

   Many people would avoid living in population centers for a while, but I imagine that wouldn’t last. We humans have gathered together in larger and larger numbers since we gave up the whole hunter-gatherer thing.

   Those nations with the biggest, densest cities, would be devastated. Places like India, China, the Philippines, Mexico and Korea would never be the same. Even America would change drastically having lost much of New York.

   As for the rabies thing, while it is more realistic, I can only think of the Zombie Apocalypse with George Romero style zombies. It just doesn’t seem right. I guess I’m just old.

10. wheelgunner on 14 Jan 2011 at 10:14 pm #

    Any of you ever read the Vampire Earth series? The plot it set largly after this is not longer a problem, but they talk about a basically super strand of rabies that hits at the same time as a global series of natural disasters. Enough chaos, and the warning signs are either ignored or misconstrued, you don’t catch it in time. Add the weakened stake you are already in, who knows?

    It is the best case scenario for the virus in it’s infancy, and it would be at a time when all your preparations have been used up or destroyed. Bad earthquake or two, add in a terrible hurricane season: all you need to kick it off right there.

11. Semper Cogitant on 15 Jan 2011 at 10:37 pm #

    Yes, an outbreak immediately following some global disaster could certainly be apocalyptic. Perhaps that how it starts, a release of such a virus after a series of global nuclear attacks or a limited nuclear war would do it, or perhaps after a real global economic meltdown leading to wars all over the world (it would have to be exponentially great that what people are calling meltdown today).

    OR maybe an asteroid hitting us? Hopefully not in the Pacific Northwest though…

12. wheelgunner on 16 Jan 2011 at 12:16 pm #

    I am really not sure that it would have to be that drastic. Maybe not world encompassing, but my natural disaaster scenario could easily get the better part of a continent wiped out, which would in turn pretty much destroy the world as we know it and pave the way for the others to fall. We depend on the rest of the globe for so many things these days that anything happening to one would affect the others as a whole.

    Heck, maybe somebody shuts down the internet for a week and all the trolls get bored. I’d beleive it.

13. HangMan on 16 Jan 2011 at 2:26 pm #

    Say a country (lets say the United States) becomes ground zero for a undead infection. If I was the rest of the world, I’d nuke it. IT would cleanse the virus, yet also created adverse effects (Nuclear winter, radiation clouds, etc.) that would travel all over the world. Yet in our weakened state, Russia, China, perhaps even Pakistan could take advantage of it. People are ruling out global politics.

14. wheelgunner on 16 Jan 2011 at 3:04 pm #

    All the more reason to “stockpile”, no?

15. big bear29 on 17 Jan 2011 at 2:41 am #

    If anybody tried to nuke the U.S. , russia , china or any other nuclear power , the attacking country would wind up as a glowing crater real quick . The U.S. alone has enough nukes to wipe out nearly all life on the planet three times over and its about the same for russia , I don’t know how many nukes china has but I bet its enough to jack up anybody trying to ” cleanse ” their country of the hoard . Also the the people in control of the nukes would likely be safe from the outbreak as most nukes are either in underground silos or loaded onto ships and subs .

    However one nuclear power might decide to preemptively strike the other nuclear powers to prevent them from trying to cleanse their country and this could result in world war three during the outbreak which would just make things so much worse . In the anime show ” High school of the dead ” the U.S. launched some of its nukes into the atmosphere in an attempt to cause a H.A.N.E. ( High altitude nuclear explosion ) to stop other nations from nuking it . With the nukes detonating in the upper atmosphere people where safe from the explosion but the E.M.P. fried all the electronics .

16. CompShooter on 17 Jan 2011 at 8:02 pm #

    Lots of good thoughts I see here. I still cling to the fast acting virus that incubates/ decimates and reanimates in relative short time theory. In today’s society people can be to the far reaches of the planet by air in 24 hrs or less and perhaps act as a carrier all along the way. Or once John smallville Doe reaches his smallville home and if he manages to get to his smallville clinic I doubt if they would understand it before having to send for a CDC equivalent. Where I live I would see a clinic before having to travel 45 min- 1 hr to a actual hospital, I can imagine much longer, under staffed or non existant in other counties. Again, more time passes, perhaps they may get the word out to other country’s CDC but they would have to crunch the numbers all the while zack is crunching on arms legs and faces. Repeat this scenario to any village, town or metropolis all at the same time all around the world. 3rd world countries without sophisticated disease research facilities would fester longer without help and quickly add to the ranks of the undead to me that’s a lot of outbreaks and I would say that there would be many more unreported before it has a serious toe hold.
    As a man said, When we kill one of them it’s a corpse. When they kill one of us, they get up and join their ranks. As far as nukes go, under the throes of a global pandemic I wouldn’t fear a particular country that has nukes as much as I would a terrorist biding his time with just one. A country even in the time of chaos would probably be able to back trace the trajectoy and prevent it or return fire but a terrorist would take longer to identify where he came from (big maybe) since much of the focus would be on the “sickness”

17. big bear29 on 19 Jan 2011 at 1:31 pm #

    @CompShooter
    I don’t know about that last part . Most country’s that have a problem with terrorists know which ones have the potential to launch such an attack and where they are located . Plus if the terrorist did try to nuke one of the major players they might just retaliate and vaporize the whole frickin country where the terrorist is hiding , especially if it is one that has been helping them for a long time . I can imagine a few middle eastern nations simply disappearing if the terrorists that they harbor and train where to attack the U.S. during the outbreak . The people in charge might try and pass it off as chaos in the chain of command or they might say that the nuked nation was over run with infected and they were trying to stop the spread .

18. bioengineering guy on 20 Jan 2011 at 11:44 am #

    So how fast will the zombie plague spread. Lets assume it is a virus and transmitted by contact with human fluid delivered through a bite (saliva, blood, etc). So you need human to human contact to spread it and once you get bit you don’t get eaten. Next once you get bit there are there are different ways the human body can reacts to an infection. First positive reactions to an infectious agent (ie you live and don’t infect others). One way is that the person will get the disease, get mildly sick, and then their immune system will fight it off, ie the person will run a fever but will not turn into a zombie and get better. This will occur to a percentage of the population. A less common reaction will be the person gets the sick but are naturally immune to it since they lack the pathway the infecting agent uses for infection. An example of this is the CCR5-Δ32 mutation in humans which may prevent infection by the HIV R5 virus. In this case the infectious agent cannot live in the person since it cannot harvest energy to reproduce. Another possible outcome is that the immune system could already have an antigen or already have a method to destroy the infectious agent already. This could be due to the similarity of the infectious agent to something that has already made you sick or due to your body already producing the antigen as a precursor to make other antigens (your body “randomly” makes antigens in hope they will be useful later in life).

    Now the bad things that can happen (you get sick or pass it on to others). One method is the person gets infected but does not get sick but is rather a carrier of the infectious agent, they can pass it to others. Also, the person could get infected but the infectious agent lies dormant for years before the victim starts showing signs, during this time they can pass the infection to others.

    Now the really bad things. You get infected, get sick, and die before passing it to others. This is what will happen with most people who get a really deadly fast acting disease (ie a zombie virus that turns you in a few hours). A disease that kills is host quickly is bad evolutionarily since the host dies before more of the infectious agent can be produced. However, these diseases are the deadliest since they kill the patient relatively quickly and most people don’t have the immune defenses needed to fight them off quickly, an example of this is Ebola. Traditional zombie viruses should act like this. Only a very small percentage of the population would turn into actual zombies. Finally we get to the part where you get infected, you get sick, you turn into a zombie and you can pass the sickness to others. This will happen to a small subset of the population since the traditional zombie plague is fast acting and must be “fatal” in order for someone to turn into a zombie.

    If the zombie plague is non-traditional and slow acting a larger amount will get infected and turn into zombies, however more people will be able to mount and successful immune response and not turn. If it is a rage type virus then it would be more infectious since the individual doesn’t die and the virus can keep reproducing (viruses need living tissue to reproduce). So depending on how the zombie plague acts upon its host is how fast it will spread.

    I personally believe if you survive the initial 2 months after widespread infection than things would be looking very good for the survivors especially if the infectious agent has to passed on by human fluids transmitted by a bite.

19. CompShooter on 20 Jan 2011 at 9:21 pm #

    I agree with the intel aspect. (I have to add that the intel may be old, communications are severed or sparse due to the chaos and or the operatives are among the undead). I also agree that I would find it difficult to believe that the rules of engagement would stay the same under these conditions. Historically, only the offending site/ city would be targeted such as the sam site that shot down the U2 plane over Cuba during the missile crisis though Kennedy cancelled it (Graduated response). There is no defined battle line or country with terrorists even though they are identified in whichever country at a given time, the problem is that the same group(s) are in several countries, Syria, Iran, Angola, Philippines etc that’s why I added the big maybe in my last post, and each said host country of course would play the deny game. If the useless UN is still functional at this point my opinion is that any nuke attack under the guise of clearing the infected would be seen as transparent and draw retaliation. I doubt that Iran for example would be ok with us infidels blowing up Syria or most of the middle east without retaliation just because of who we are and since many other countries such as Russia has economic interests with one or more, Iran for sure that I know of. Plus fallout doesn’t stop at the borders, this too may have a negative effect on fence sitting countries. I remember when Chernobyl blew, the fallout went extensively through parts Europe and we had trace amounts in northern Michigan. If it were me I would use sub launched tomahawk tactical nuke(s) on the best presentable intel I could bring forth since the Navy would be less encumbered from the undead. This of course assuming that the UN is still around. If not then well..make the best call you can and hope the world sees it the same way during the chaos while deploying anti missile defenses in hardened areas while I still could. I also would make it crystal clear to the world that any nuke traced in flight towards the US is an attack regardless of the excuse. If they want to use nukes on their own soil so be it but would urge against it. I would not use nukes on our soil, sooner or later the virus would burn itself out or at least stabilize into zones either by geographical or military means while a nuked city is uninhabitable pretty much forever depending on yield and may make some sort of super mutated zack that lasts longer and or harder to defeat. I would like to rephrase a statement from my last post by saying that I wouldn’t fear so much from a Nato allied country with a nuke as I would a terrorist cell that exists in several countries. see yall later I recorded The walking dead encore special and going to warm up the reloading press.

20. 3-15 INF on 21 Jan 2011 at 2:41 pm #

    Wev’e got weapons now that have a huge yield similar to that of the first nukes but of conventional sort (fuel air). Why not use those if the political and radiation fallout is less( or no radiation at all)? Nukes are a doomsday weapon.

21. CompShooter on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:43 pm #

    This is true

22. CompShooter on 22 Jan 2011 at 12:07 am #

    Another thought on the subject air fuel weapons are the next generation of area denial / shock weapons of the new age but nukes are what most of the major and upstarts of the world has or workjing towards. I question how much restraint they would have in such a volatile situation of an undead threat within and the fear of a neighboring country’s confidence to contain the onslaught. its all at best a educated guess but a guess none the less… as far as living in a rual area goes, HELLS YEAH!….. IMHO

23. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 28 Jan 2011 at 4:34 pm #

    You guys should write about staying healthy after Z-day. How to not get sick, not infected, but just the flu and stuff like that.

    I’m pretty sick today and I was thinking what I would do if a zombie started attacking me. I’m pretty weak, dizzy and tired, and I’m in pajamas so I don’t have my knife on me. What do you think I should do?

    And stuff about how long vitamins last, what to keep in your bag, etc. That would be informative.

24. big bear29 on 01 Feb 2011 at 7:11 am #

    Its so damn cold where I’m at that even the zombies would flee to a warmer climate .

25. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 01 Feb 2011 at 4:24 pm #

    Hangman, that’s pretty much the coolest shotgun I’ve ever seen. I guess I’ve just gotta deal with my dad’s old 20 gauge for awhile if that thing’s gonna be $800.

    Yeah, AngryVikingMan should totally invest in that!

26. HangMan on 02 Feb 2011 at 11:52 am #

    For a tactical 12 gauge, that’s pretty cheap. A lot of the better ones are pretty pricey.

27. Angryvikingman on 04 Feb 2011 at 5:28 am #

    I’m going to stick with my original decision and get a Saiga 12 as my 3rd shotgun. As soon as the Wife OKs the funds. Pretty big tax return this year. YAY!

28. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 04 Feb 2011 at 3:58 pm #

    Well, Wouldn’t that be EXACLTY what we need in a shotgun? Small, compact, holds ALOT of rounds with a shorter barrel. Think about it, have your main semi-auto rifle with the little shotgun as your secondary and maybe even a little glock-like pistol for close encounters and you’d be set on firearms.

    If I had to choose between this and the Saiga 12, I’d have to get the kel-tec thing.
    Not like I’m getting either one with me being underage and broke and all.

29. big bear29 on 04 Feb 2011 at 5:56 pm #

    A modded saiga 12 would be the better choice . That keltec shotgun may look cool but I would take a saiga over it any day .

    With the keltec shotgun you have to pull the gun away from your shoulder to flip the selector switch that changes you from using one barrel to the other . You don’t have to do this with a saiga , just put the mag or drum in and fire .

    The ksg has two seperate tubes that have to be loaded seperately and in the time it takes you to reload the ksg you could have reloaded and fired off all the rounds in two or three 20 round drums for the saiga .

    The ksg is a pump action and the saiga isn’t , all you have to do is pull the trigger . That means you will be able to fire it slightly faster .

    I could add a lot of other little reasons why the saiga is a better choice but that would take a bit more time than I have right now .

30. HangMan on 04 Feb 2011 at 5:57 pm #

    I’m in colorado and gun laws are INCREDIBLY loose here. You cannot buy a handgun under the age of 21, but you CAN recieve one as a gift or hand-me-down so I’ve got a decently sized arsenal.

31. Angryvikingman on 04 Feb 2011 at 8:10 pm #

    You can get a saiga with a 10 inch barrel and folding stock. Then it’ll be about the same size as the kel-tec.

32. HangMan on 04 Feb 2011 at 11:29 pm #

    Hey it’s all about prefferance. Different strokes for different folks.

33. specially equipped guardsman on 05 Feb 2011 at 11:25 am #

    Can you switch between the two tubes before one runs empty? Say tube one has Buckshot and tube two has Breecher rounds. That could come in handy.

34. HangMan on 05 Feb 2011 at 12:31 pm #

    I’m not too terribly sure. They just recently released photos and a little information on it. If they don’t do it now, I’m sure they’ll do it in models further down the line. Assuming we aren’t all zombieifed by then.

35. HangMan on 05 Feb 2011 at 12:37 pm #

    If you havn’t already; also take a peak at the SR-556 made by ruger, those are pretty solid firearms. Buddy of mine has one and I’m steadily setting funds aside to purchase one. It’s either going to be that or a S&W Model M&P15T.

36. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 07 Feb 2011 at 3:30 pm #

    Is the Saiga-12 semi auto? I saw your picture of it in a different thread and it looks like a Kalashinkov, looks pretty functionable. But the Kel Tec shotgun probably wouldn’t be your main shotgun, maybe just a sidearm for close range.

    The Saiga looks pretty bulky, how heavy is it? A magazine-fed semi auto shotgun would be pretty much perfect as a main shotgun for groups, with the Kel Tec shotgun as a secondary for closer range.

    I’m pretty much repeating myself here, so if I was a grown man with plenty of cashola to buy any gun I needed, I’d skip both shotguns and use my back strength to carry an AK-47 or some sort of nice semi auto rifle if I couldn’t get a genuine AK-47. Then I’d get an old break-action shotgun and saw it off for close encounters(good idea? I’m not sure. Feel free to correct me.), and maybe a pistol for EXTREMELY close encounters to shove in a zombie’s forehead. I’d use the rest of the weight that I can carry for supplies and cutlery.
    But that’s if I was alone. If I was in a group, I’d get the shotguns in question here, maybe some rifles or crossbows, hand them out and start moving. No reason to pack so much guns that you can’t run.

    SORRY FOR THE BOOK!!

37. wheelgunner on 09 Feb 2011 at 3:20 pm #

    If you are going to get close enough with sawn off to put it to their head, you should probably just get you a pocket pistol. More rounds per loading, easier to carry, and you can carry more ammo.

    And yes, the Saiga is a semi-auto.

38. McLuvin on 09 Feb 2011 at 8:40 pm #

    Double barrel shotgun is not a good choice unless it’s the only thing available. Only holds two and slow(comparatively) to reload. A short barreled pump would be a much better gun.

    I think a shotgun would be nice to have in a group situation where extra guns are available. I would never choose one as a primary weapon due to size and weight of ammo.

39. HangMan on 09 Feb 2011 at 10:32 pm #

    Indeed, I’ve been tossing around the idea of setting up a 4 man fireteam like the USMC. A heavy fireman such as someone with an M249 SAW or maybe a heavy shotgun with large mag capacity. A pointman equipped with a light assault weapon/rifle and another bringing up the rear. And then a man in a high place covering our backs and giving updates on surrounding areas.

40. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 09 Feb 2011 at 11:11 pm #

    Hey, there’s an idea, HangMan. Down on my end, Mcluvin, single barrel is all I’ve got to choose from. What should I do until I get a more useful gun? Should I saw it off or leave it as-is?
    My sis told me she got a Derringer Single-Shot like hookers used to strap to their thighs in the old days(O_o)but I’ve never seen it, and I doubt she even knows how to use it because she got in an argument about how she thought it uses shotgun shells. How do you load and use one of those Derringers? I think they’d be a pretty bad Zombie Gun, what with the short barrel and all. And the “Single-Shot” right in the title is a little off-putting too.

    So, that’s my “aresenal”. Pffft! Wish my dad wasn’t partially blind so he would go hunting like normal dads from around here. :(

41. McLuvin on 09 Feb 2011 at 11:45 pm #

    Ozzie, sorry about your current arsenal situation. You will be able to improve it someday. As for your single barrel shotgun, I’d leave it alone. You could cut it to 18″ but you will need to get a new bead installed so it will cost you. Under 18 is not worth the felony. The derringer should load like the shotgun. It is possibly the worst possible zombie gun extant.

42. wheelgunner on 10 Feb 2011 at 1:33 am #

    That pride of place should actually go to my pair of 1858 remington percussion revolvers. They never work, only ever fire off half the cylinders, and take ten minutes to load six shots in like twleve steps.

    I personally love my 20 gauge double barrel, 30″ barrels. It’s all in how you use it, and prepare your back ups.

43. McLuvin on 11 Feb 2011 at 8:31 am #

    Over a month without a new topic!

44. Angryvikingman on 11 Feb 2011 at 9:58 pm #

    Sorry guys, I’ve been working a lot of overtime. I’ll get something up soon, I promise.

45. ..desert.. on 12 Feb 2011 at 10:20 pm #

    hey has anyone noticed how in every zombie movie the word zombie never comes up. there always another name like walkers. welll ill tell you when it happens ima gona call them zombies and not ignore all of the warning signs

46. every body holds thier own on 14 Feb 2011 at 1:01 am #

    every man holds their own plain and simple

47. HangMan on 14 Feb 2011 at 1:44 pm #

    Take your time Angry, we’ve all got lives outside of the internet (well some of us).

48. big bear29 on 14 Feb 2011 at 4:16 pm #

    I wonder what would be killing off the most people during the outbreak , zombies or other people who “mistake” others for zombies .

    Every time I think about it I’m reminded of the simpsons tree house of horrors episode where there was a nuclear holocaust and everybody else turned into a zombie . As the simpsons family is running to their car Flanders , their neighbor who is clearly not a zombie , comes up and calls out Homers name and Homer shoots him . Then Lisa tells Homer that Flanders was still human and he responds “No I’m pretty sure he was a zombie” .

    I mean think about it we all know a few people that we would “mistake” for zombies and blast in the event of a serious outbreak . And the people that say they don’t have anybody on their list are either lying or they are on somebody elses list .

49. HangMan on 15 Feb 2011 at 12:07 am #

    Here’s an idea for you all. Go camping. With the exception of those of you in states currently in winter. I’m in Colorado so it’s pretty all over the place. Yesterday it was 61 degrees outside, warm wind, beautiful skies. I’m keeping an eye out, next time the weather gets clear and it’s a weekend.. I’m out.

50. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 17 Feb 2011 at 11:47 am #

    I’d love to go camping right now in Nebraska, the weather is freaking stellar. Pretty sure it got up to like 65 somewhere this week.

    But, still Dad’s blind, still too young to do stuff alone…
    Big Bear, I saw that episode too. Sometimes people just can’t think of anything but past relationships with others when riots break out, hurricanes, tornadoes… Could you imagine the Zombie Apocalypse?

    Oh, and everyone,
    I think my problem for guns has been solved, my neighbors are stupidly rich and have a bunch of guns.(not as many as you guys have. Man, you must have fun with those!)
    I have heard and seen them with shotguns, hunting rifles, and something automatic, not sure what though.

    So, they can either come 500 yards over here to where we’re prepared(they’re not very survival-smart, GPS and all that’s spoiled ‘em.), or I’ll wait for them to run away to somewhere and raid their house and use it for a second safehouse.
    WOOHOO!

51. big bear29 on 17 Feb 2011 at 10:48 pm #

    If they have to flee somewhere they will likely take most or all of their guns with them .

52. Clifford "Ozzie" Nicolen on 21 Feb 2011 at 4:41 pm #

    Yeah, you’re right. I hate probabilty!

53. big bear29 on 21 Feb 2011 at 10:36 pm #

    Also it might not be to bright an idea to go pounding on their door to have them come over to your place or trying to break in during an outbreak . Because if they are scared and have an arsenal they might just shoot first before they realize who you are . That kind of thing has happened before during riots when the power would go down in large cities .

54. McLuvin on 24 Feb 2011 at 6:44 pm #

    A month and a half?

55. big bear29 on 25 Feb 2011 at 8:00 pm #

    We need some new topics these are pretty much dead .

56. Docwade on 25 Feb 2011 at 9:33 pm #

    Yeah, let’s go back to talking about how the volcanic is a good pistol choice!

57. wheelgunner on 26 Feb 2011 at 2:58 am #

    It’s so bad the owner sold the patent and the company to Oliver Winchester for a pittance because no one would buy the damn thing. Yay!

58. big bear29 on 26 Feb 2011 at 12:34 pm #

    Plus nobody makes the volcanic anymore so you either have to make your own or pay about ten grand to get an original . And you would have to make your own ammo for it as well . Also the muzzle velocity is so pathetic (56 fps ) that this gun would only be useful for annoying squirrels , because it was to weak to use as a hunting weapon or as a man stopper .

    You could probably do more damage with a paintball gun firing steel ball bearings .

59. big bear29 on 26 Feb 2011 at 12:38 pm #

    If you want a small lever action weapon henryrepeating.com sells mare’s leg in .45 and 22 calibers .

60. Angryvikingman on 26 Feb 2011 at 2:18 pm #

    I’m unemployed now, so look for a slew of articles coming down the pike.

61. McLuvin on 26 Feb 2011 at 5:39 pm #

    Sorry to hear about your job.

62. big bear29 on 27 Feb 2011 at 12:33 am #

    @Angryvikingman
    That sucks man , sorry you lost your job . I’m in the same boat .

63. Angryvikingman on 27 Feb 2011 at 3:34 am #

    I hated that place. I worked there for entirely too damn long. I’m glad to see it in the rearview. Gonna cash out the 401k on monday, YIPPIE! That’ll pay all the bills for a few months, and I’ll hopefully be getting unemployment so I won’t be hurting for money. I’m looking forward to the time off.

64. TyrantKiller on 03 Mar 2011 at 3:18 pm #

    To all of you soon to be survivors out there, I’ll just let out an awkward but might possibly could a cure to the situation coming at hand. Marijuana. I know that sounds crazy, but if you guys ever have the time, just analyze and research on it as much as you guys can. think about it. whop in the whole entire planet do you know that died from it? Anyways, straight to the point. I’m not being a jerk off explaining this to you guys because if anything is possible for any problem on the planet, that could 99.9% likely might be a solution. Please tell me if I’m wrong, but remember… just putting it out there.

65. Angryvikingman on 05 Mar 2011 at 6:38 pm #

    Shot a 3 gun match today. My first ever. Results to follow soon with a link.

66. specially equipped guardsman on 06 Mar 2011 at 5:11 am #

    Can’t wait, I’ve been thinking of getting into that for a while.

67. McLuvin on 06 Mar 2011 at 10:37 am #

    3-gun is a fun time. Hope you did well.

68. McLuvin on 07 Mar 2011 at 11:19 am #

    Not too bad for your first time out.
    FYI you are not supposed to see the scoring zones. You are supposed to shoot center mass. Plastic rain covers are a pain, hiding the outline of the target and flapping in the wind.

69. McLuvin on 10 Mar 2011 at 12:43 am #

    2 full months. I’m about to have Docwade call TOD on ZAC.

70. Angryvikingman on 10 Mar 2011 at 8:36 pm #

    No, I’ve got an article about ready, I’m just having trouble finishing it.

71. Andy on 19 Mar 2011 at 10:15 pm #

    Gotta take issue with big bear on this, most of us don’t live in big cities. With 7 or 8 million people living in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago each, what about the rest of the 300 million plus people that live in the U.S. alone? Also, the media LOVE panic. See what they did with the nuclear power plant in Japan? They’d be yelling “zombie apocalypse” every hour on the hour. Your third point? Fight or flight, my man. We are all inventive when we need to be. Your fourth point is a good one, but we’re not talking about individuals, we’re talking about armies. Your 5th point is kind of hard to argue with. By the way, I know most of you aren’t “gamers,” but Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2 would be right up your alley. The reason I bring it up is because they introduce the concept of “carriers.” What if you’re infected, but don’t know it and spread the bad news around without knowing it?

72. big bear29 on 20 Mar 2011 at 7:27 am #

    @Andy

    1. There are 276 cities in the U.S. that have a population of a 100000 or more . The majority of americans do in fact live in the cities and the suburban cities that sprout up around them . I only crunched the numbers on the 60 or 70 highest populated cities and it ended up being over 55 million . Around almost every major city there are small suburbs that sprout up , but they are usually not considered a part of the city itself , some of them are even their own seperate city .

    2. At first they would likely down play it either because they don’t know what it is or because they have been ordered to by the goverment . Eventually though they will start freaking out .

    3. You can only run for so long before you have to stop . Just because you can fight individual zombies or small groups of them doesn’t mean you can fight them all . You have to find ways that you can rack up serious kills without getting killed . Also you have to find new ways to survive in the changed world that would be left behind after the outbreak .

    4. The reason I put it the way I did is pretty simple . The zombies are barely as smart as animals and like animals they go where the food is . Like a pride of lions following a herd of gazelle . The only difference is that when a lion kills a gazelle it doesn’t turn into anther lion to hunt the herd . So those zombies will likely start spreading out from the major cities in search of food , so that will be tens of thousands , at least , following the survivors or heading for nearby cities . Do you honestly think anybody could hold off ten or twenty thousand zombies advancing on their stronghold . Its true that you would be facing individual zombies on a regular basis but as thee horde advances into each new area you will face fewer individuals and more groups and the more noise you make the more of them that will be drawn to your position .

73. Andy on 20 Mar 2011 at 8:14 pm #

    Actually, those are pretty reasonable responses. I withdraw, sir. I still believe the media would hype the heck out of it.

74. wheelgunner on 03 Apr 2011 at 11:42 am #

    Then you know nothing about politics, son. Last sign of a country going haywire is to pull the plug on media. I’m talking full blackout. Happens more often than you think. And, anything you get through the media is going to be stretched, made up, wrong, serving their interests, or the governments, and all of it will be against you. Check out “yellow journalism” if you don’t beleive me, and then check the news. See how far we really haven’t come.

75. clancy McClavven on 03 May 2011 at 2:58 pm #

    okay. completely out of curiosity, how on earth do you think this is going to happen? seriously, how is a flesh eating virus suppose to spread across the earth, and how is it supposed to be created in the first place?

76. Angryvikingman on 03 May 2011 at 5:15 pm #

    Evidently you’ve never seen the movie Quarantine. Its the most plausable scenario that I’ve ever seen for a zombie type outbreak. Modified Rabies. Wikipedia it.

77. clancy McClavven on 04 May 2011 at 12:16 pm #

    okay. first off you are talking about a Hollywood movie. they aren’t exactly the source of all truth. And secondly, you really need to get off of your fixation of Wikipedia. Anybody can change the information there! using that as a reference is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard of. you obviously have some issues if you keep using it as the source of all your information.

78. clancy McClavven on 04 May 2011 at 12:21 pm #

    at least google it or something. anything but wikipedia.

79. Angryvikingman on 04 May 2011 at 12:56 pm #

    @clancy
    BTW, I can tell that all those spam comments were coming from the same IP address. So I just marked them all as spam. change your name as many times as you want, the IP number is the same and I just look at that and throw the comments in the spam can. HA HA HA! retard. And trying to comment as me doesn’t work either, I log in to comment, so you can’t fake comments in my name. Nice try for sub par intelligence.

80. wheelgunner on 08 May 2011 at 11:07 pm #

    Google, the new substitute for the rest of the internet, experience, and study.

81. Ronin on 13 May 2011 at 6:27 pm #

    Some people here are clearly waiting for a zombie apocalypse so they can tryout theire newly modified guns etc.
    I enjoy discussing and thinking the What if? But take a break. The chance is many, many, many times larger, even unavoidable that a superinfluenza virus will appear and kill thousands or even millions worldwide. The Swine flu was nothing compared to the Spanish flu, right after WW I.

82. zero on 04 Jun 2011 at 4:17 am #

    over here in california the police is doing a pretty good gob of covering the zombie appocolypse up

    but i have noticed a lot more cops and sirens going off
    even though my friends havent

83. zero on 04 Jun 2011 at 4:22 am #

    but ive also pieced a map together of what i found on youtube,friends, and blogs and it looks like the us and russia are first to go untill it reaches japan or china

    but when it does im betting perso after peson are going to get bit
    it mite look like an avalanch

84. devrin on 23 Jun 2011 at 9:20 am #

    do you really think this will happen, or is it just a joke…… i mean im not insulting you but should this be something i should be worried about or not? because I have really started getting mentaly prepared….

85. Alucard on 07 Feb 2012 at 11:26 am #

    Look people get killed everyday in america and as sone as someone gets killed the virus will take over there body ok ive seen all resident evil movies ive played almost all zombies games ok and what you need to do is gather everyone you love and go somewhere where it is very well barricaded and have canded goods and water and whatever else you what to drink be sure the place has a bathroom check the bathroom and everywhere in the building and be sure to have guns and other weapons and if you have to go get more supplies take 2 people with you and take a melee weapon with you no guns it will attract zombies when shot so no guns trust me

Trackback URL | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply