I have a Ruger 10/22 and a Mosin Nagant M44.  I got the 10/22 because it was the most recommended .22lr in my research, and because it's extremely upgradeable and customizable.  It's still factory, and I need to do something about the crappy trigger.  I'm one of those people who thinks that everyone should have a .22 in their arsenal.  The ammo is too cheap not to, and they're great for practice.  I bought the Mosin because they are cheap, you can get surplus ammo for a decent price, and they're a hoot to shoot.
On my "to buy list" are: AR15, shotgun, Glock 19, and SKS.  I'm not sure which I'm going to buy in which order.
SKS are pretty cheap and would be an excellent bug-out gun, if I bug out with a gun (more than likely not.  I'm not in a gun-friendly state).
The shotgun would be great for home defense, but I don't think they're as much fun to take to a range and shoot, so it would end up sitting in the corner unused most of the time.
The Glock 19 would also be a good home defense gun, but since I'm in a state that doesn't allow concealed or open carry, a handgun isn't a big priority.
I really want an AR15, but they're out of my price range right now.  I'm worried that my state is going to pass an AWB at some point in the future, so that makes me want to get one now, but I've come to realize that I want one mostly because I think they're awesome, not because I have a really practical use for one.  The gun and the ammo are both expensive, and in my current financial situation, my money is better spent elsewhere.

Illinois.  Thankfully not in Chicago or Cook county (where I live still counts as the suburbs, though.  And pretty much anything in this corner of the state counts as "Chicago" to anyone who doesn't live here).

I suppose it's not fair of me to say that a shotgun would be fun to take to a range since I've never actually shot one.
I went shooting with some friends on Memorial Day weekend.  We were going to do some clay shooting with his Remington 870, but we had to change our plans because all the local campsites were full, so we only got to spend an hour at the range, all of which I spent with my 10/22 and Mosin.

I think if I got an AR with a 20" barrel it would be about all the accuracy I need.  My eyes are crap, so at 300 meters or beyond I'm going to try to avoid.
I forgot about the M1A.  Also a very cool gun that I'd like to get, arguably more useful than the AR or SKS.  The only problem is that they are insanely expensive in my area.  I have a friend in central Illinois who says he has seen them in his local gunstore for less than $1000.  I just need to shop around more.

i go clay shooting every few months, living in the UK its a pain in the ass to get my hands on anything better. Ive got a 32 rimfire revolver, no ammo of course.... cause that would be illegal 

I enjoy spending time at the range.  I'm partial to shotguns and handguns.  Still have not come to enjoy rifles.

You've shot a .30-06 and were more impressed with the .303? 

The .303 is not much more powerful than a .30-30 but the range is about the same. I wouldn't trust either one past 150 yards.

I have shot deer in the neck at 90 yards with my .30-30.

I recently sold my .303, I have a sporterized model from the 1950's.

Don't own any firearms (that will change as soon as i get my firearms license in the mail, but that could be another 2 months    ) however, I am a regular at local firing range (i rent their guns right now)  I mostly fire their .45 1911's they have there, but I think next time i'll rent a revolver of some kind.  Currently, with a double action 1911 I get apx 5" groupings at 50 feet.

Keep in mind i've only been regularily shooting for a couple months, and by regularily i mean 2-3 times a month. It's expensive as hell to be renting guns, and i hope to shoot more after i get my own.

I must respectfully disagree.  The M1A (or M14S depending on which model you're going with), while beautiful, reliable, and in a hard-hitting caliber and more accurate than most humans are capable of shooting...

...it is also heavy, with high weight-per-shot (in comparison with the AR-15 platform), heavy, steel magazines...

See where I'm going with this?  Heavy.

Some of us out here aren't 18-year old soldiers still able to wear a 100-pound ruck all day, finish out with a jog, drink all night, and show up for inspection functional at 0600.

Most of us are old, some of us are terribly out of shape.

That, and the AR is handier in close quarters, especially in the 16" barrelled version.

As I've just posted in another thread, the AR-15 16" carbine is the "jack of all trades" for firearms.  Does nothing particularly well, but does almost everything half-assed.

And in a SHTF scenario, that's really what you need.  One platform infinitely adaptable; not necessarily ideal, just adaptable.  With light weight ammo because remember, you are NOT going to be getting a resupply chopper, so what you're carrying is ALL YOU GET, unless you scrounge.

That, and I can build an AR-15 for half of what you'd pay for a Springfield M1A.

And you can buy in the shop a Kel-Tec SU-16C, complete with built-in fold-down bipod (the handguards) built in scope mount (molded into the upper receiver) and underfolder stock (can be fired from the pistol grip with the stock fully folded) for about a THIRD of the price of that Springfield...and the Kel-Tec takes M16/AR-15 magazines.

Just FYI.


That would be a Winchester 1895, if I recall correctly.  It was indeed chambered in that cartridge at one time.  Worth a pretty penny today if in good condition.

S