Contrary to some, bolt-action rifles are still viable choices for 2A civilian Militia long guns--within limitations, of course. They are certainly better than single- or double-barrelled arms, and are not generally subject to AW bans, save for magazine capacity limitations.
Note the scene below from the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Korean shopkeepers famously took up arms to defend their neighborhoods against Black insurrectionists (an early manifestation of the BLM treason). California gun laws even then were restrictive, which may have contributed to these two men's choices. Readers need to ask themselves which of these men they would prefer to be.
Without denying the value of a good double-barrel, in the context of this situation--neighbors on rooftops keeping back hordes of uncivilized thugs--the choice should be obvious, and its value must not be denied.
Manual-action arms' general exemption from AW feature bans can also make for some quite intense options for stylizing and function--even in California:
All the same rifle, but quite a different perception, especially to the uninitiated. But more about this later.
A quite fascinating--and largely misunderstood by spoiled Western gun enthusiasts--modern use of bolt-action rifles in a military setting has been found in Afghanistan. AK47 frames and furniture have been fashioned by fighters there into manual-action weapons. Certain Westerners, so given to the idea of arms as a hobby and preference, miss the practical reason for this--namely, making the best of what people have.
This article from American Shooting Journal (AK Style Bolt Action Rifle (americanshootingjournal.com) https://americanshootingjournal.com/bolt-action-ak-47-not-exactly-for-deer-hunting/ displays two such arms. The first is one still firing the standard 7.62mm ComBloc round.
The second one, discussed in a video by Ian "Gun Jesus" McCollum (who, for the record, has blocked comments from this writer's main YouTube account from appearing on his videos--apparently because I've pointed out he seemed to oppose President Trump on his Twitter account--but that's another story), is a major refit, firing (apparently) the 7x57mm Mauser round.
Both the article and McCollum seem to embrace the idea that these were the result of preference of style on the part of Afghan fighters. Such is the spoiling of our people. In truth, however, the reasons, no doubt, are primarily functional.
In the former arms' case (the 7.62mm), the likely reason for the bolt-action development would be that the weapon's functioning had failed, and local craftsmen had altered it to keep in it the fight. In the latter weapon's case (the 7mm)--and this would have application to the former as well--a reason for the over-the-top styling would be to give a false impression to the enemy. A fighter armed with that weapon could give the impression at a distance that he is armed with a fully-automatic arm, when in fact it is simply bolt-action. A force-effect multiplier.
We can see this phenomenon quite commonly with the confusion--real or intentional--of semi-automatic AWs with fully-automatic arms in the U.S. and Canada. In addition, we saw this with the Remington 700 graphic above. Many would perceive the bottom variant as something far higher end than the baseline top version. It is also seen in one of this writer's favorite military rifle types by style--the Spanish FR7 and FR8. Both bolt-action arms from the 1950s issues to Spanish internal police forces, they give an impression of being semi-automatic. Note the birdcase flash suppressors and fake gas tubes--which in fact is a bayonet mount and cleaning kit container. Such an arm was a cheap but effective way to provide long gun firepower to police, while giving a false impression of that firepower to opposing elements.
Though slightly off-topic, this writer must note another case of this. The French MAS36 and its semi-automatic derivatives. In the 1930s, French development of a semi-automatic military rifle was lagging, and so they developed the bolt-action MAS36 as a stopgap measure. The idea was that this would suffice until the semi-auto was ready to replace it, and the bolt-actions would be kept in armories for reserve and support troops. World War 2 put a pause to that, but after liberation the plan was resumed. The result was the semi-automatic MAS44 and then the MAS49 and 49/56 (all numbers reflecting their years of introduction). Note the similarity in all of these arms--all fine aesthetics, in this writer's opinion--which would in a combat situation serve to confuse an enemy as to what kind of firepower he was indeed facing.
Go here for a list of McCollum "Forgotten Weapons" videos on the series: "Twentieth-century French MAS rifle series -- probably the most aesthetic rifle series of the century" https://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2020/09/twentieth-century-french-mas-rifle.html
Sporterized versions of military rifles, if they retain sufficient ruggedness, will largely retain their militia usefulness. Below are two sporterized Enfields in 7.62mm NATO, originally produced in India in the late 1960s and early 1970s in a more military configuration for use in the Himalayas, where the cold can interfere with self-functioning arms. And now, even in their neutered state, they retain both military function and appearance. Note the weapon on the right even possesses a "jungle carbine" flash suppressor.
If someone is having to go cross-country alone, over a stretch of days, with enemy all around, a bolt-action might be the better choice than an AR or such. AVOIDING engagement would be the best thing. And if spotted, they would likely be outnumbered anyway and likely lose, even with an AR. HOWEVER, they would need SOME sort of full-power long gun if a minimal engagement did have to occur, and a bolt would be most reliable, especially given lack of repair support, and sufficient firepower given restraint of the operator's mission.
Plus, quite frankly, a person in such a situation armed with a bolt-action would be more careful, and not as psychologically tempted to initiate engagement unless absolutely necessary. There was a controversial line in television series, "Burn Notice": "Guns make people stupid." That is, if one has such power, one can become too likely to use it. (U.S. Air Force pilot Scott O'Grady, shot down over Bosnia in 1995, noted something similar, saying he was glad he was unarmed in hiding from opposing forces. Had he had a weapon, he said, he might have been tempted to use it, and thus reveal himself to the hostiles.) The same is true with money or any other power--which is why smart people are careful to take only a limited amount of money when visiting a casino. See this post from May 2020, which is a response to a video by the aforementioned McCollum about the so-called, "scout rifle" concept. Bolt-action rifles are far from ideal, but don't pass them up if they're the best reasonably available.
Cats, Guns, and National Security: The "Scout Rifle"--a concept with its place, if you can understand it. https://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2020/06/the-scout-rifle-concept-with-its-place.html
So, as we face the current intense gun and ammunition shortages, let no one allow preferences or preconceptions block them from reasonable choices. The Election Steal--which "We the People" and our States have permitted--has set RKBA in a tenuous situation. We may indeed find ourselves effectively stripped of our rights or lawful access to firepower more suited to the intended Militia functions. That is the fault of our people. Our job as individuals and Patriots is to make due with what we can have--and sometimes, that can be quite effective.
As the Stones put it:
"You don't always get what you WANT":
"But if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need":
