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.
Actually, there is no such law nor obligation. The government is under no obligation to protect the people in general. Nor can you sue the government (or police ) for failure to protect - except when you are in their custody.
You may have been endowed with the right to life, but the government is not there to guarantee that right. It's your responsibility - unless you've surrendered that responsibility.
True, jetgraphics - but most people do not realize to what extent they have surrendered their autonomy to their elected officials - until they are in a disaster. If you are in the middle of a hurricane or a bad neighborhood, and your wife has a heart attack, or thugs are trying to break down your door, the 911 operator (if you can raise him/her at all) is under no obligation to send you help, and EMS, the FD, and LE are under no obligation to respond.
However, in my previous post I mentioned the Disaster Mitigation plans that were REQUIRED from all municipalities, counties, and states, effectively taking away individual autonomy in the event of a 'disaster' whether natural or manmade. Sadly, a lot of people not only expect this, but demand it. Privately owned, licensed guns were taken from people and property owners after both Katrina and the Iowa floods, as well as some 'hoarded' food that was discovered in some Iowa residences.
When we were learning how to run disaster shelters, we were told that individuals carrying weapons should have their weapons confiscated at the door or gate, for everyone's safety. If they would not volunteer them, they should be taken by force, and it was the shelter director's determination whether the individual could/should be held or turned away. Now, of course you don't want a bunch of armed thugs running around a shelter with weaponry, any more than you want them walking around your devastated neighborhood, right? So an armed citizenry insisting that they are only protecting themselves and their property from thugs will find that their protests fall on deaf ears, and that their weapons will be confiscated 'for their own good'. And of course in a flood situation, it is likely that the 'hoarded' food could become contaminated, and could harm the people who had it - plus it could make them targets for those who didn't have it. And so it goes - everything is so danged sensible, and reasonable, and life-protecting, that most people say, "Well, yeah, that makes sense. I don't trust my crazy neighbor with a gun even in normal times."
People have voted this country into a nanny-state mindset for so many years now that the elected officials talk all the time about their "responsibility" to protect their citizenry - from whatever the next threat is, from the prostitutes to the pit bulls, from the Drug Wars to the War on Terror, to disasters. They help spend billions of dollars of Federal and State money to do it, too. If they DON'T take the Federal monies and DON'T toe the lines that the feds and the States have told them that they must, they get no help if there IS a disaster, so elected officials have to embrace and enforce their "responsibilities". They not only accept the responsibility of protecting their citizenry from harm, they demand it (because it fills their coffers and enhances their bureaucracies). And then, when it turns out that they can't protect people from each other, much less themselves, they are booted for the next crop of politicians who say that they can "protect" the citizens even better! And so it goes... People don't vote on reason or common sense, but on emotion. And for the past 50 years, it has been steadily declining into the emotion of 'I deserve' and "what can you get for me?"not "this is mine because I worked for it" or "No, thanks - we're fine here; we can take care of ourselves". The constiuency of the US for the most part has gladly, eagerly, given away their rights and responsibilities, for a promise of freedom from culpability for their bad choices (or suffering the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune') and to rescue them, time and again, from their inability or unwillingness to plan.
That's why a SHTF scenario will be so devastating and far-reaching - because those who have 'hoarded' everything from seeds and water to guns and ammo won't only have to defend against the "I deserve" people, but from the government entities that are bound and determined to level the playing field so that no one has more than anyone else - for their own safety. After all, they're here to "protect you" and "save you" - whether you need it, or want it, or not. (Remembering that it is at their discretion whether they will actually help you - or not.) Isn't that why you elected them, after all?
No matter how many Emergency Management directors emphasize that their actions are meant to be "a lifeboat, not a cruise ship", politicians insist that they are omniscient and omnipotent - and the electorate prefers to believe the latter, and throw away their freedoms and responsibilities with both hands. No wonder the politicians are so willing to portray independently-minded, responsible, and reasonable people as suspect or even abnormal...
I don't know where you're getting your information from but it's not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny
Of course the people in Nawlins didn't leave. They weren't told to - early enough, forcefully enough, and accomodations were made for those who decided to stay, so why should they?
Local officials told people to be repaired to get out several 4-5 days before the storm hit. Friday the national weather service told everyone that the storm was going to hit the Florida Alabama coast and that New Orleans was going to be spared.
I got up Saturday morning at 3am and put on the weather and they were still saying that it would not hit here. I picked up my brother and two nephews and headed out to Hopedale to go fishing. About 2pm the coast guard stopped us and told us that we needed to get back to the dock because they were closing the flood walls and that we would be stuck outside of the flood protection. They said that around 11am the storm did not take the turn they thought it would and was most likely going to hit closer to the Mississippi Alabama coast.
Sunday morning the national weather service said that the storm was going to hit Mississippi and that New Orleans should evacuate. This information was giving to local officials less then 24hrs before the storm was going to hit. Most people who could got out. The ones who stayed could not be made to leave, it's against the law. The police and fire department did go through the neighborhoods telling people to get out and the ones who stayed were told that they would most likely die but by law they couldn't force them out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny
The EmerMan folks told the elected officials for YEARS that the levees needed to be fixed and upgraded; instead they spent their money on pretty parks, buildings, and statues downtown.
This is also not true. Yes we were told that we needed better levees and they should be upgraded but local officials did not spend money allocated for this on other things. It's not up to local officials to fix, repair, or upgrade levees. That's the sole responsibility of the corps which is a federal responsibility and local officials complained for years that the feds were not putting money into flood protection like they should.
We are still fighting the corps to give us better protection. After Katrina congress allocated millions of dollars to upgrade our levees and two years later congress tried to strip that money and funnel it into pork belly projects throughout there districts. Local officials raised all kinds hell about this and the money was not touched.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny
The hospitals should have been shut down and evacuated, the Saints' stadium should never have been opened, as it gave people a false sense of security. EmerMan had a plan in place for this, in co-ordination with other inland EmerMan facilities and directors - in enough time to get folks out. Everyone should have been told, on TV, on the radio, even by cops and firefighters driving thru the streets on their loudspeakers, to either get out or expect NOTHING, not even rescue. There are ways to make people realize their own mortality - even if it is handing out Sharpie markers and telling them to write their Social Security numbers on their arms, so that their bodies could be identified afterwards.
Believe it or not. Hospitals here are built to withstand hurricane force winds and is one of the best places to be during one. They are built to run completely without power. The problem is that they placed the generators on the ground floor and were flooded out. If the generators were on the roof they would have been able to stay operable.
The Saint's stadium was opened along with the Convention Center because they were the few places that were still high and dry. Where did you think they should have told people to go, stay in their flooded homes?
Like I said, everyone was told to get out but they were told to late by the national weather service, not local officials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny
EmerMan KNEW all of this; they kept insisting that the plans be implemented, the elected officials refused to do it - until it was too late. They gambled and they lost - and so did thousands of people who believed that nothing could ever happen to them. Everyone saw how law enforcement behaved - were allowed to behave - by the elected officials who governed them, employed them, and who were responsible for them and their behaviors. True leadership comes from recognizing the problems and addressing them before they become disasters. The leaders in Nawlins were not leaders - they were politicians, playing the odds, smiling and shaking everyones' hands - right up until the winds picked up. Alfred E. Neuman would have felt right at home.
I had friends there who were smart enough to watch the hurricane maps and forecasts, and saw the progression across the gulf. They got out three days ahead of time, under their own power, because they knew that their elected officials were sitting on their hands. So while, yes, the people expected the Federal government to save and protect them, their local leadership did nothing to change that attitude - in fact, by their inaction leading up to Katrina and during it, they encouraged it. It may have been the peoples' fault - but it was their elected representatives' responsibility.
The elected officials did not refuse to tell people to get out, they were told that the storm wasn't going to hit until 24 hours before it did. No one gambled with people's lives, do you really think they did?
Law enforcement behaved they way they did because of the looting and no one has every been in this position before. Local officials did not approve of it nor did they tell them to act that way.
Me and my family road the storm out in Baton Rouge along with my cousin who was and still is a Louisiana Senator and can tell you that you don't have a clue as to what local officials did and didn't do. I know first hand that it was not as you say. People were told to get out but they refused to go. Local and state government officials can not make them go. We were told only 24 hours before the storm hit to get out and I think they did damn good job getting millions of people out that they did.
People like you who stand on the outside pointing fingers at what should and should not have been done don't have a clue as to what really went on.
True, jetgraphics - but most people do not realize to what extent they have surrendered their autonomy to their elected officials - until they are in a disaster. If you are in the middle of a hurricane or a bad neighborhood, and your wife has a heart attack, or thugs are trying to break down your door, the 911 operator (if you can raise him/her at all) is under no obligation to send you help, and EMS, the FD, and LE are under no obligation to respond.
However, in my previous post I mentioned the Disaster Mitigation plans that were REQUIRED from all municipalities, counties, and states, effectively taking away individual autonomy in the event of a 'disaster' whether natural or manmade. Sadly, a lot of people not only expect this, but demand it. Privately owned, licensed guns were taken from people and property owners after both Katrina and the Iowa floods, as well as some 'hoarded' food that was discovered in some Iowa residences.
When we were learning how to run disaster shelters, we were told that individuals carrying weapons should have their weapons confiscated at the door or gate, for everyone's safety. If they would not volunteer them, they should be taken by force, and it was the shelter director's determination whether the individual could/should be held or turned away. Now, of course you don't want a bunch of armed thugs running around a shelter with weaponry, any more than you want them walking around your devastated neighborhood, right? So an armed citizenry insisting that they are only protecting themselves and their property from thugs will find that their protests fall on deaf ears, and that their weapons will be confiscated 'for their own good'. And of course in a flood situation, it is likely that the 'hoarded' food could become contaminated, and could harm the people who had it - plus it could make them targets for those who didn't have it. And so it goes - everything is so danged sensible, and reasonable, and life-protecting, that most people say, "Well, yeah, that makes sense. I don't trust my crazy neighbor with a gun even in normal times."
People have voted this country into a nanny-state mindset for so many years now that the elected officials talk all the time about their "responsibility" to protect their citizenry - from whatever the next threat is, from the prostitutes to the pit bulls, from the Drug Wars to the War on Terror, to disasters. They help spend billions of dollars of Federal and State money to do it, too. If they DON'T take the Federal monies and DON'T toe the lines that the feds and the States have told them that they must, they get no help if there IS a disaster, so elected officials have to embrace and enforce their "responsibilities". They not only accept the responsibility of protecting their citizenry from harm, they demand it (because it fills their coffers and enhances their bureaucracies). And then, when it turns out that they can't protect people from each other, much less themselves, they are booted for the next crop of politicians who say that they can "protect" the citizens even better! And so it goes... People don't vote on reason or common sense, but on emotion. And for the past 50 years, it has been steadily declining into the emotion of 'I deserve' and "what can you get for me?"not "this is mine because I worked for it" or "No, thanks - we're fine here; we can take care of ourselves". The constiuency of the US for the most part has gladly, eagerly, given away their rights and responsibilities, for a promise of freedom from culpability for their bad choices (or suffering the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune') and to rescue them, time and again, from their inability or unwillingness to plan.
That's why a SHTF scenario will be so devastating and far-reaching - because those who have 'hoarded' everything from seeds and water to guns and ammo won't only have to defend against the "I deserve" people, but from the government entities that are bound and determined to level the playing field so that no one has more than anyone else - for their own safety. After all, they're here to "protect you" and "save you" - whether you need it, or want it, or not. (Remembering that it is at their discretion whether they will actually help you - or not.) Isn't that why you elected them, after all?
No matter how many Emergency Management directors emphasize that their actions are meant to be "a lifeboat, not a cruise ship", politicians insist that they are omniscient and omnipotent - and the electorate prefers to believe the latter, and throw away their freedoms and responsibilities with both hands. No wonder the politicians are so willing to portray independently-minded, responsible, and reasonable people as suspect or even abnormal...
What you describe is typical of the socialist democracy that America has become. But that is not what was promised in the USCON.
Since consent was the mechanism to empower the socialist revolution (via FICA), withdrawing consent is a prerequisite to restoring one's status at law.
What you describe is typical of the socialist democracy that America has become. But that is not what was promised in the USCON.
Since consent was the mechanism to empower the socialist revolution (via FICA), withdrawing consent is a prerequisite to restoring one's status at law.
True. But not enough are willing to give up their governmental security blanket to reach a tipping point back to the Constitution. Tea Partiers? Libertarians? Too much infighting, too much emotionalism, too much gullibility. You can blame the Democrats, the RINOs, the Republicrats and Demopublicans, you can demonize whomever, but the bottom line is that people have been trained to do what they are told - by the MSM (which includes FOX), by their "leadership", by their talking heads, trained to react emotionally instead of with reason, trained to sit and wait for help and to be taken care of. The promulgation of faked 'reality' shows are nothing more than lions and gladiators in a vast coliseum of mind-numbing entertainment - people fiddling, FaceBooking, and tweeting their angst and ennui, while Rome burns around them. Most can't even smell the smoke. <shrugs>
I wonder what would happen if someone said, "no thanks its not for sale..."
It is likely that is what I would say... What happens next is up to the takers.... To just movin in and threaten me would be a mistake, but I can only bleed and die once, so the takers would have some critical tinking to do, on if they want to eat dinner at home later that night.
I made the soil, I pay for the water in terms of electricity, it's my broken back, and I'll be dammned if a desk jocky with a paper in his hand will just come take. Theft is theft and I don't care if it's the Govt who is the thief, which it surely is much of the time these days.
True, jetgraphics - but most people do not realize to what extent they have surrendered their autonomy to their elected officials - until they are in a disaster. If you are in the middle of a hurricane or a bad neighborhood, and your wife has a heart attack, or thugs are trying to break down your door, the 911 operator (if you can raise him/her at all) is under no obligation to send you help, and EMS, the FD, and LE are under no obligation to respond.
However, in my previous post I mentioned the Disaster Mitigation plans that were REQUIRED from all municipalities, counties, and states, effectively taking away individual autonomy in the event of a 'disaster' whether natural or manmade. Sadly, a lot of people not only expect this, but demand it. Privately owned, licensed guns were taken from people and property owners after both Katrina and the Iowa floods, as well as some 'hoarded' food that was discovered in some Iowa residences.
When we were learning how to run disaster shelters, we were told that individuals carrying weapons should have their weapons confiscated at the door or gate, for everyone's safety. If they would not volunteer them, they should be taken by force, and it was the shelter director's determination whether the individual could/should be held or turned away. Now, of course you don't want a bunch of armed thugs running around a shelter with weaponry, any more than you want them walking around your devastated neighborhood, right? So an armed citizenry insisting that they are only protecting themselves and their property from thugs will find that their protests fall on deaf ears, and that their weapons will be confiscated 'for their own good'. And of course in a flood situation, it is likely that the 'hoarded' food could become contaminated, and could harm the people who had it - plus it could make them targets for those who didn't have it. And so it goes - everything is so danged sensible, and reasonable, and life-protecting, that most people say, "Well, yeah, that makes sense. I don't trust my crazy neighbor with a gun even in normal times."
People have voted this country into a nanny-state mindset for so many years now that the elected officials talk all the time about their "responsibility" to protect their citizenry - from whatever the next threat is, from the prostitutes to the pit bulls, from the Drug Wars to the War on Terror, to disasters. They help spend billions of dollars of Federal and State money to do it, too. If they DON'T take the Federal monies and DON'T toe the lines that the feds and the States have told them that they must, they get no help if there IS a disaster, so elected officials have to embrace and enforce their "responsibilities". They not only accept the responsibility of protecting their citizenry from harm, they demand it (because it fills their coffers and enhances their bureaucracies). And then, when it turns out that they can't protect people from each other, much less themselves, they are booted for the next crop of politicians who say that they can "protect" the citizens even better! And so it goes... People don't vote on reason or common sense, but on emotion. And for the past 50 years, it has been steadily declining into the emotion of 'I deserve' and "what can you get for me?"not "this is mine because I worked for it" or "No, thanks - we're fine here; we can take care of ourselves". The constiuency of the US for the most part has gladly, eagerly, given away their rights and responsibilities, for a promise of freedom from culpability for their bad choices (or suffering the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune') and to rescue them, time and again, from their inability or unwillingness to plan.
That's why a SHTF scenario will be so devastating and far-reaching - because those who have 'hoarded' everything from seeds and water to guns and ammo won't only have to defend against the "I deserve" people, but from the government entities that are bound and determined to level the playing field so that no one has more than anyone else - for their own safety. After all, they're here to "protect you" and "save you" - whether you need it, or want it, or not. (Remembering that it is at their discretion whether they will actually help you - or not.) Isn't that why you elected them, after all?
No matter how many Emergency Management directors emphasize that their actions are meant to be "a lifeboat, not a cruise ship", politicians insist that they are omniscient and omnipotent - and the electorate prefers to believe the latter, and throw away their freedoms and responsibilities with both hands. No wonder the politicians are so willing to portray independently-minded, responsible, and reasonable people as suspect or even abnormal...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny
True. But not enough are willing to give up their governmental security blanket to reach a tipping point back to the Constitution. Tea Partiers? Libertarians? Too much infighting, too much emotionalism, too much gullibility. You can blame the Democrats, the RINOs, the Republicrats and Demopublicans, you can demonize whomever, but the bottom line is that people have been trained to do what they are told - by the MSM (which includes FOX), by their "leadership", by their talking heads, trained to react emotionally instead of with reason, trained to sit and wait for help and to be taken care of. The promulgation of faked 'reality' shows are nothing more than lions and gladiators in a vast coliseum of mind-numbing entertainment - people fiddling, FaceBooking, and tweeting their angst and ennui, while Rome burns around them. Most can't even smell the smoke. <shrugs>
Another great pair of posts. I really don't see many people "waking up," either. I, too, was asleep for most of my life. It hasn't been all that long ago that I realized I'd been born into a nation that had already made half the trek to some mutant form of socialism/collectivism. We continue on that course. I only realized this as I saw the profound changes in the country from my younger years--a time that was already half socialized, but damn sure better than what we have now. Some see it. Most don't for some reason. Nobody seems to notice or care about the chains dangling from those entitlements and the leg irons at the end of the chains being clamped around our ankles by Big Momma Washington. We accept nearly any shackle or chain as long as we are able to continue to suckle. We've gone from a national ideal of never even hearing from Washington except for in times of war or a dire situation, to having the very act of wiping our butts being regulated and subsidized by Washington.
I feel like my view is from the deck of the Titanic. I know we are in trouble, but the captain, crew, and 90% of the passengers believe that hitting the looming iceberg is actually a good thing. So on this Titanic, we won't even reverse the motors because we are too stupid to know what hitting that iceberg means. Problem is, as everyone is running around rearranging the Titanic's deck chairs and dinking around with their smartphones, there really isn't anywhere to run. Nothing to be done except try to prepare for that cold plunge. But as you point out, there will probably be a crew member there sooner or later (as the Titanic begins to sink) with an ax, demanding that my lifeboat be chopped to pieces and distributed among those who refused to acknowledge or prepare for the calamity in the first place. The blind blinding everyone. The Ten Wise Virgins ridiculed for their open eyes before the fact, and then fleeced and raped after the fact.
Of course, I don't know the future. Maybe we'll blow up like a volcano or maybe we'll just continue to fizzle out like a dud firecracker. Problem is, even the fizzle doesn't bode well for any man or woman who embraces liberty and wants to set their own course through life.
SC Granny. All I can add is that in a real SHTF event a really big one likely man made no poly tics will be found. They will be in a well prepped bunker somewhere with their heads in a real dark place if you get the drift! I am sure you get the drift.
Well, people seem to think my OP scenario is largely bunk. I guess only time will tell. However, there seems to be enough on guerrilla gardening on the survival forums and blogs to give it some consideration. Perhaps plant some fruit trees in unexpected places as well as berries and place mushroom fungi innoculated logs in the woods near creeks.
Obviously the critters will get to these but perhaps with enough different areas scattered about the odds will be evened up a bit. Just something to think about during this planting season..... YMMV
Nah, I don't think it's bunk. I think anything's possible, and discount nothing. We've had discussions on here before about peoples' families' experiences with the FedGov during the Depression; mass slaughtering of farm animals (and not because they were diseased), confiscation of grown food, etc. The closer you are to a transportation hub or large city, the more likely some bureaucrat will get the bright idea of "They have it, and they have plenty of it (land for refugees, food, whatever) - they won't mind giving it up "for the common good"! Believe it or don't, anything's possible. And the hungrier and more desperate people are, and the more they demand of their bureaucrats, the more likely it is.
Well, people seem to think my OP scenario is largely bunk. I guess only time will tell. However, there seems to be enough on guerrilla gardening on the survival forums and blogs to give it some consideration. Perhaps plant some fruit trees in unexpected places as well as berries and place mushroom fungi innoculated logs in the woods near creeks.
Obviously the critters will get to these but perhaps with enough different areas scattered about the odds will be evened up a bit. Just something to think about during this planting season..... YMMV
I never take your posts as bunk.....
On the other hand if FEMA wants what I grow, it's gonna pay what ever I say, and if I don't want to sell they will have problem. I might take 2 grand for a white potatoe... I might trade it for a full auto fire arm and a hell of a lot of ammo..
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.
(Remembering that it is at their discretion whether they will actually help you - or not.) Isn't that why you elected them, after all?
I am sure you get the drift.
