Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So I just got done having an interesting conversation with a neighbor { who also happens to be a realtive } about the looming hypothetical apocolypse. The complete arrogance of this person was quite astounding. The conversation quickly shifted to guns. Now, I suppose my first and biggest mistake was letting this person or any other know that I own my fair share of them. They on the other hand, own maybe one or two, and they are relatively low powered, I think one is a .22....... Anyway, somehow the conversation drifted toward defending the home against moraders. This guy actually had the GULL to make the statement that if such a situation were to arise, he would expect me to give him my AR so that he could defend ME and his kids. Heres how it went
ME: " well, I only have one rifle that would be useful for any kind of combat situation
HIM: "yeah, and you know who would be using that one right?"
ME: uhhhhhh...... me
HIM: "you would be handing that over to me since I can shoot better and at further distances"
ME: "you would have to kill me to take it from me"
HIM: "I would do what I had to do in order to defend my family and if you would hold out on me your just a greedy bastard since I can defend you better than you can"
ME: " Well I guess at that point you would go from being a freind and a partner to being my enemy now wouldn't you"
Needless to say, tempers got pretty flared. The discussion went from a silly hypothetical to something that turned very serious in a matter of seconds. We went on to discuss how predators will prey on those who were prepared while THEY weren't. I told him he would pretty much be that predator. He said he can't afford to prepare because of all the sacrifice he makes for his children financialy and blah blah blah.
This was just one more wake up call that those who live like the lazy grass hopper will most certainly expect the prepared ant who hunted and gathered all summer to carry them through the winter should the S ever HTF.
I'd let him take my gun, then I'd pull my 9 and take it back.
One things for sure, if the S ever does HTF, I'll be DAMNED if ANYONE is taking my supplies or my gun, let alone my best gun, while I sit on the sidelines.
You guys ever had this happen to you where someone expects you to prepare for them or expects you to hand over supplies and/or weapons?
Rather, I EXPECT. To take care of my neighbors... Might be only beans and rice, but when someone has SOMETHING to eat they are unlikely to risk getting shot by the guy who helped them.
And beans are cheap.
I'd rather put up a couple hundred bucks of beans than shoot my neighbors.
I also don't let people know what I have.
When I met the neighbors they told me that they shot in the backyard (seeing if I had a problem with it I expect) I told the that I also had a S&W (I have over 30... I collect them, but they don't need to know that!)
Opsec for a reason, and you can't stay awake 24/7
As far as what is 'Useful' in combat.... Both lever actions and bolt actions were once the panicle of a combat rifle. They ARE useful!
One things for sure, if the S ever does HTF, I'll be DAMNED if ANYONE is taking my supplies or my gun, let alone my best gun, while I sit on the sidelines.
Fact of the matter is, in 95% of all scenarios where we examined, the individuals have little chance of surviving as they prepared. All too often, people assume that weapons and ammo alone will result in defending their premise. Having another body defending the premise, even if they are mooching your weapons, increases your chances of survival.
A recent television survival program clearly showed how easy it was for a small group to overrun and capture an armed family, trained in protecting their home. Bottom line was there were not enough defenders available to protect that compound even though they knew those simulated attackers were coming.
Just take a look at the US's CoG system. Its ability to protect the occupants is not based solely on the physical construction of the facility. It's not based on the number of weapons or ammo inside. It's not based on the sophisticated surveillance and anti-intrusion devices in use, No, it's based on as many as 20 to 1 armed defenders to occupants in constant readiness surrounding and defending the facility.
We had the privilege of being asked to stage a scenario to show how well bunkers (and its welled armed occupants) are safe in their bunker. Just 2 of our instructors were able to cripple the bunker and that resulted in the simulated slaughter of the occupants within 72 hours of the start. Now imagine if we played for real and for keeps. The producers of the show (who decide not to air the exercise) asked us what were the main mistakes they made. The answer was too much emphasis on the physical premise being protection, too much belief in the weapons defending the occupants and not enough bodies to be able to maintain a defendable position. That family of four was dead meat. Two families of four make it harder. Four families of four can maintain vigilance. Five families of four are an organized opposition. The more defenders the less gaps in the defenses.
Don’t for a second thing weapons, ammo and fortification will save you without defenders to man the walls!
I always love how a lot of "preppers" make themselves out to be such huge targets themselves. Where do you think most people would go first if they knew where to find the guns/ammo/supplies and all they had to do was ask/beg/cheat/backstab/murder them to ensure their own survival?
And if you sincerely think you can keep other people at bay, you are seriously underestimating the average person when they become afraid, hungry and desperate.
The answer was too much emphasis on the physical premise being protection, too much belief in the weapons defending the occupants and not enough bodies to be able to maintain a defendable position. That family of four was dead meat. Two families of four make it harder. Four families of four can maintain vigilance. Five families of four are an organized opposition. The more defenders the less gaps in the defenses.
Don’t for a second thing weapons, ammo and fortification will save you without defenders to man the walls!
While I appreciate and agree with the other points you make in your post... this particular section brings up a major point of failure in the "join forces" argument. While the more people you have in your group may increase your odds against an outside invading force, it also drastically increases the odds of an inside invading force.
As DeltaFiveTwo states "And if you sincerely think you can keep other people at bay, you are seriously underestimating the average person when they become afraid, hungry and desperate." -- That doesn't just apply to the folks outside your walls. People do some seriously bizarre crap when they're under stress and the outlook is bleak... even friends and family who you would normally trust with your life can flip out and become your worst nightmare. At least you're expecting an attack from the outside, it's harder to anticipate Cousin Cliffy going bug-nuts and either selling you out to the marauders or pulling a "Heart of Darkness".
There is no perfect answer, just the best answer for you.
I don't live in a populated area, most of the folks around me are agricultural and already produce a lot of their own supplies. There is a pretty tight knit community already in place that currently helps each other/shares supplies.
We are several hundred miles from population centers, and the trip getting here on foot would be nightmarish for most urbanites. Add to that the extreme weather, dangerous animals, long areas of very dry country with limited water and resources, it is a low risk target area.
That said, I still have a place that is far removed from all population that is extremely difficult to find, and can be protected by boobie traps among other things so a small force can use force multipliers to increase security.
Am I expecting a zombie appocolypse? No. But I also know the human animal and don't trust very many to be anything but human, so if necessary, I plan to be far away from them.
Would I help family and friends? Sure. Would I help others if I had the surplus? Of course.
Do I plan to support an entire community that fails to have planned ahead?
All anyone knows, including online friends, is that we have "some guns." We stock the pantry. We have useful skills like mechanic-ing, welding, smithing, sewing, canning, etc.
This is true of most people in my area.
To what degree, I've never seen a point in discussing.
Would I help out friends and neighbors and even complete strangers? Of course. In my part of the world, "neighbor" is a verb. It's something you do. We always have, why would societal collapse be any different?
If anything, it would be more valuable then, when alliances need to be strong.
More importantly, I'm a Christian. I am my brother's keeper...
Because they've been trained as dependent drones from birth. The drone expects that if it performs its "task" (however substantial or insubstantial that may be) for the collective, then the collective "owes" the drone sustenance. This is the social model that is in vogue these days (until it proves untenable, that is).
When the drone thinks the government (and society in general) owes it everything from retirement, to food, to heatlh care, to a job, to protection, to whatever else, is it so mysterious that the drone thinks YOU owe it any or all of these things in the absence of Mother Government and its soothing collective?
As for defending yourself from the "moraders" (I think they were closely related to the Visigoths), my theory is, it ain't gonna happen. Those who live by the sword die by the sword. Simply put, you're outnumbered. I'm not saying that you can't defend yourself against one or two "moraders," or even ten of them if you're really good. But how about a hundred? Or a thousand? My opinion is that to live through this type of implied scenario, you can't be a viable part of the scenario. You need to be unavailable, unnoticed, and otherwise not worth the "morader's" time.
Your goal: you are a rotted-out, broken-down, burned-out 1974 Chevy Vega hatchback rolled over at the bottom of a deep, massive, foreboding ravine well away from a huge, lush field of brand new, top-of-the-line BMWs, with their doors unlocked, the keys in their ignitions, and a flashing sign on each of their windshields saying, "Free Car." As the burned-out Vega, chances are, you'll never need to even fire your AR-15.
I would have just deflected the conversation, "weapons are such a small part of it." No need to have weapons if you have nothing to defend. Then start on the list of stuff they need to store. If he finds the conversation boring, he'll leave.
When prepping for the Y2K deal, our neighbors casually discussed the "what-ifs." One neighbor explained how their stockpile of food got them through a job layoff. That helped everyone realize that we are one natural disaster or man-made crisis away from hunger. One neighbor had a well with potable water, another had a generator and significant fuel. Other neighbors had fruit trees, etc. It wasn't deliberate planning, until we all started talking.
We were able to have these discussions without sounding like crazed zombie hunters. There is strength in numbers. You may find others are very willing to contribute to a natural disaster plan, if you just approach things logically.
We were able to have these discussions without sounding like crazed zombie hunters. There is strength in numbers. You may find others are very willing to contribute to a natural disaster plan, if you just approach things logically.
I agree with the whole strength in numbers ideology. I think the best thing to do in a scenario like this would be to form a group. However, I don't think the group should allow someone in to it that has nothing to add to it.... You have a stock of food? Ok, your in. You have medical supplies in your garage? Great, your in. You used to be a doctor before all of this? That's a skill set that we most definitely will need. Hey, that guy says he has weapons and munitions, we should let him in to our group.
........ Whats that? You say you don't have anything to contribute? You didn't prepare in any way? You didn't stock food, water, weapons or any other supplies but now you regret it? You see that we are doing good so you want to take advantage and join us? HELL no, get outa dodge.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The complete arrogance of this person was quite astounding. The conversation quickly shifted to guns. Now, I suppose my first and biggest mistake was letting this person or any other know that I own my fair share of them. They on the other hand, own maybe one or two, and they are relatively low powered, I think one is a .22....... Anyway, somehow the conversation drifted toward defending the home against moraders. This guy actually had the GULL to make the statement that if such a situation were to arise, he would expect me to give him my AR so that he could defend ME and his kids. Heres how it went
