SHTF

[Punisher84]

Y'all are branding it as murder, but I'm not entirely convinced that's what he's saying.

I recognize a lot of threats around me that I know for a fact are only held in check by rule of law or fear of reprisals by a larger group.

And in the end, that's what everyone here is discussing, and planning on getting away from... the ones that would suddenly be "off the leash". That's what your "bug-out bag is for, after all? Isn't it? To "step outside the circle", more or less?

Well, what if you have to make an opening first? Or simply can't leave? What do you do then? Just lay down and die?

If you look back at what I originally posted I think you'll agree you and I are on the same page. What mahahn was talking about was killing neighbors he DOESN'T LIKE during a BUG-IN situation. These are not the sort of things you say on an open forum. There is a difference between doing what you have to do to survive and seizing the opportunity to take out some neighbors you don't like during a disaster or something.

You know as well as I do people are always looking for more ways to paint us as trigger happy murderers and spin what we say. I'd say to express certain views publically are not only in poor taste, but a violation of forum rules. Just my opinion on it.

[Chucktshoes]

Bad link Chuck.

Trying to post a YouTube video via tapatalk sucks. Let's try this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU4KKXOxirk

[Punisher84]

Trying to post a YouTube video via tapatalk sucks. Let's try this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU4KKXOxirk

I'm gonna help you out buddy. Replace the YouTube tags with Video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU4KKXOxirk

[Guest Jamie]

If you look back at what I originally posted I think you'll agree you and I are on the same page. What mahahn was talking about was killing neighbors he DOESN'T LIKE during a BUG-IN situation. These are not the sort of things you say on an open forum. There is a difference between doing what you have to do to survive and seizing the opportunity to take out some neighbors you don't like during a disaster or something.

You know as well as I do people are always looking for more ways to paint us as trigger happy murderers and spin what we say. I'd say to express certain views publically are not only in poor taste, but a violation of forum rules. Just my opinion on it.

I'm just looking at things from a very practical point of view, and trying to step outside of the mindset of dealing with this stuff from my nice cozy house and my soft comfortable chair.

We all talk about TEOTWAWKI and SHTF, but I don't think most really understand what that would mean, or the choices it would bring.

And unfortunately, depending on where you live, the first order of business, if you want to stay alive, may very well involve killing every living human you encounter, right off the bat.

Is that something to look forward to? No.

Is it something you should prepare for, and be willing to do? I can't answer that one for you. It's an individual decision, and probably not one everybody can even make, even though they may talk about it like they can or have.

There's not a doubt in my mind though that many would/will fall if they're ever put in that position simply because they CAN'T, or don't want to.

It's sort of the same thing as with people who say they won't own a gun because they could never hurt or kill anybody anyway. Okay, fine... your choice. But I'm not going to let you choose for me as well.

[Chucktshoes]

I'm gonna help you out buddy. Replace the YouTube tags with Video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU4KKXOxirk

Thanks. I am having to manually type the tags, couldn't remember them exactly.

Punisher I am in full agreement with you on this one. I see this as an issue of reason for the action. It is one thing to take life out of necessity. It is another thing entirely to talk about the taking of life without justifiable cause. I don't care what the situation is, killing your neighbors because they have been a PITA for 20 years does not qualify.

[Punisher84]

I'm just looking at things from a very practical point of view, and trying to step outside of the mindset of dealing with this stuff from my nice cozy house and my soft comfortable chair.

We all talk about TEOTWAWKI and SHTF, but I don't think most really understand what that would mean, or the choices it would bring.

And unfortunately, depending on where you live, the first order of business, if you want to stay alive, may very well involve killing every living human you encounter, right off the bat.

Is that something to look forward to? No.

Is it something you should prepare for, and be willing to do? I can't answer that one for you. It's an individual decision, and probably not one everybody can even make, even though they may talk about it like they can or have.

There's not a doubt in my mind though that many would/will fall if they're ever put in that position simply because they CAN'T, or don't want to.

It's sort of the same thing as with people who say they won't own a gun because they could never hurt or kill anybody anyway. Okay, fine... your choice. But I'm not going to let you choose for me as well.

One of the reasons I always tell people to read The Road who love all the end of the world/zombie BS is because of the realism and the bleakness. I have no desire to be in any situation like Katrina or worse, but should it happen I'm ready to do what is necessary. HOWEVER, what I say about my plans or my desire/ability to do certain things is for myself or a very private conversation, not on an internet forum.

IMO this is a place for discussion of gear, storage, planning, etc not a place for BS bravado and open discussions of taking lives. I think mahahn showed poor judgement in his statements. Fighting my way to safety is different than "I don't like my neighbors so if I ever get the chance to kill them all I'll do it!"

[Punisher84]

Thanks. I am having to manually type the tags, couldn't remember them exactly.

Punisher I am in full agreement with you on this one. I see this as an issue of reason for the action. It is one thing to take life out of necessity. It is another thing entirely to talk about the taking of life without justifiable cause. I don't care what the situation is, killing your neighbors because they have been a PITA for 20 years does not qualify.

That's my point exactly. If you're idea of survival is "My neighbors might come for my food one day. I have to kill them all first." then I

1. Sure as **** don't want to be your neighbor. and

2. I don't want to be anywhere near you when you are eventually overrun by an angry mob.

[Guest Jamie]

Dammit, I had a nice long post typed up, and the 2:00am server douche washed it away...

Anyway, the gist of what I had said was that "justifiable cause" will change in ways people don't consider. A scrap of food won't be just a bite to eat that you miss out on, it may end up being the difference between you living and you dying. And those people you simply don't like, right this moment, will turn into a very real threat to your survival. ( Imagine their "you owe me" attitude amped up by a factor of, oh... a million? )

If the world changes enough that all the usual laws don't have the usual people enforcing them, then Darwin will be back in full effect, and what will survive will be the meanest, toughest, smartest... and probably coldest... SOBs this planet has to offer. The rest will either be ground into the dirt, out of existence, or enslaved.

And anybody who has a problem with that - or me saying it - had better hope and pray that it never happens, and that they're never forced to deal with it.

These EOTWAWKIT/SHTF scenarios may just be internet amusement for some, but for others, it's something that they understand really is a horror beyond measure, simply due to the cost that's going to come with surviving it.

Edited August 28, 2010 by Jamie
Trying to regain those lost thoughts.

[Punisher84]

Dammit, I had a nice long post typed up, and the 2:00am server douche washed it away...

Anyway, the gist of what I had said was that "justifiable cause" will change in ways people don't consider. A scrap of food won't be just a bite to eat that you miss out on, it may end up being the difference between you living and you dying.

If the world changes enough that all the usual laws don't have the usual people enforcing them, then Darwin will be back in full effect, and what will survive will be the meanest, toughest, smartest... and probably coldest... SOBs this planet has to offer. The rest will either be ground into the dirt, out of existence, or enslaved.

And anybody who has a problem with that - or me saying it - had better hope and pray that it never happens, and that they're never forced to deal with it.

These EOTWAWKIT/SHTF scenarios may just be internet amusement for some, but for others, it's something that they understand really is a horror beyond measure, simply due to the cost that's going to come with surviving it.

That was the point of my "The Road" comment. I think too many people view these threads as an excuse to role play some fantasy zombie scenario where they get to run around like Ving Rhames killing stuff and making witty remarks. Gear, training, planning, etc are all great, but you will NOT survive without the will to do what is necessary to stay alive. On that we agree, my point is certain statements that have been made seem to play into nothing more than that fantasy BS.

I'll leave it be after this, but here's a nice exchange, albeit from a movie, but I think it holds true.

[Guest Jamie]

I guess my point here is not to be too upset with what somebody else says they'll be willing to do, because in all likelihood we'll all be forced to do far worse than anybody can currently think up.

After all, someone like me won't survive because of what they can do, no matter how much that may be, but because of what they will do.

( And yes, that does relate to your quote )

Edited August 28, 2010 by Jamie

[Chucktshoes]

Dammit, I had a nice long post typed up, and the 2:00am server douche washed it away...

Anyway, the gist of what I had said was that "justifiable cause" will change in ways people don't consider. A scrap of food won't be just a bite to eat that you miss out on, it may end up being the difference between you living and you dying.

If the world changes enough that all the usual laws don't have the usual people enforcing them, then Darwin will be back in full effect, and what will survive will be the meanest, toughest, smartest... and probably coldest... SOBs this planet has to offer. The rest will either be ground into the dirt, out of existence, or enslaved.

And anybody who has a problem with that - or me saying it - had better hope and pray that it never happens, and that they're never forced to deal with it.

These EOTWAWKIT/SHTF scenarios may just be internet amusement for some, but for others, it's something that really is a horror beyond measure, simply due to the cost that's going to come with surviving it.

The 2am server douche got me too.

I agree with you in that these are personal decisions that we will all be surprised as to discover what we are capable of and what we are willing to do to survive if it comes to pass. However, even without the usual laws and the usual people enforcing them doesn't mean that for anything goes for everyone. For me there are certain lines I won't cross. I may be capable of cold blooded murder, but I am unwilling. I understand that I likely have limited survival potential because I have an internal moral code that I am compelled to live by. For me these discussions are partly about survival, and partly about figuring out where my desire to live is outweighed by what I believe is right. For me the ultimate authority is God. His will and my belief in what He has laid out as acceptable are what draw the line between what I am capable of and what I am willing to do.

I am not trying to restart to religion debates, but one's faith or whatever is the final determiner of their internal moral code is relevent to this subject.

[Guest Jamie]

The 2am server douche got me too.

I agree with you in that these are personal decisions that we will all be surprised as to discover what we are capable of and what we are willing to do to survive if it comes to pass. However, even without the usual laws and the usual people enforcing them doesn't mean that for anything goes for everyone. For me there are certain lines I won't cross. I may be capable of cold blooded murder, but I am unwilling. I understand that I likely have limited survival potential because I have an internal moral code that I am compelled to live by. For me these discussions are partly about survival, and partly about figuring out where my desire to live is outweighed by what I believe is right. For me the ultimate authority is God. His will and my belief in what He has laid out as acceptable are what draw the line between what I am capable of and what I am willing to do.

I am not trying to restart to religion debates, but one's faith or whatever is the final determiner of their internal moral code is relevent to this subject.

All I can tell you, Chuck, is that realistically, the meek will NOT inherit the earth. Not in the kinds of situations we've been discussing here.

And yeah, in all likelihood, it won't be a world many people will be willing to live in anymore, even if they are able.

Edited August 28, 2010 by Jamie

[Punisher84]

All I can tell you, Chuck, is that realistically, the meek will NOT inherit the earth. Not in the kinds of situations we've been discussing here.

And yeah, in all likelihood, it won't be a world many people will be willing to live in anymore, even if they are able.

The meek may not inherit the earth in the sense you speak of, but if the world is inhabited only by people who gave up their core beliefs and "soul", if you will, to stay alive in it then it's not something I would want to be a part of.

Permit me to explain my view like this: If a soldier is forced to shoot a child/teenager who is pointing a gun at him, to stay alive I think we all agree that is a necessity. If a soldier kills a child because he may at some point go get a gun, well then you have some debate. There are things we'd rather not do, but may be forced to choose to do in order to survive. It is something else entirely to do what was brought up in this thread by one person. It may be apples and oranges to you, but to me it's a different thing entirely.

[Guest Jamie]

The meek may not inherit the earth in the sense you speak of, but if the world is inhabited only by people who gave up their core beliefs and "soul", if you will, to stay alive in it then it's not something I would want to be a part of.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure you really understand what I'm saying.

I think a lot of you are looking at things like there will be some slight sense of order left, instead of the total anarchy and chaos that it will likely really be.

Look at the behavior you see out of some people right now... people that in a lot of cases we all agree should be immediately put down like a rabid dog. Now really think about this fact: These people are behaving like this right now, when law and order is very much still in place... when people are still supposed to be civilized and accountable for their actions. Now remove that control. All of it. What do you figure those people... those kinds of people... will be like then?

My guess is that the situation and conditions that ensue will make the Rodney King riots look like a day at Disney land. And the aftermath of disasters like Katrina and the tsunami will be a day at the beach by comparison.

There's almost 7 billion people on this planet now, and about 300 million of 'em right here in the U.S. And most of 'em probably can't survive by themselves without the support system that society has created over the years. Take that away, and they'll go into a complete panic, and become far more like wild animals than humans. And the worse the situation gets, the worse they'll get. You won't need zombies or other Hollywood monsters to make the situation a horror story. Your neighbors will do that with no problem at all.

Permit me to explain my view like this: If a soldier is forced to shoot a child/teenager who is pointing a gun at him, to stay alive I think we all agree that is a necessity. If a soldier kills a child because he may at some point go get a gun, well then you have some debate. There are things we'd rather not do, but may be forced to choose to do in order to survive. It is something else entirely to do what was brought up in this thread by one person. It may be apples and oranges to you, but to me it's a different thing entirely.

Again, I don't know if we're talking about the same sorts of things. In the SHTF scenario I see coming, if such a thing does, there won't be any police or soldiers. At least not in the terms we're used to thinking about them in. There won't be any rules - none - and there won't be any civilization to speak of. There'll only be whatever's left over and still standing after whatever disaster causes the break-down. And people will be killing each other to hang on to whatever piece of that they can.

Now what kind of disaster will cause that, and what destruction it brings, I can only guess at. Maybe it'll be some kind of war brought on by economic collapse... EMP or nuclear weapons of some kind... Maybe it'll be some natural catastrophe like a gigantic chunk of rock making a crash landing from space. Who knows? But I do think it'll take something like that to do the job. Anything less than that, that leaves any government or governments able to enforce even the slightest bit of law and order won't leave us in a "grab your gear and head for the mountains" type of situation. At least not right off.

Maybe over a period of time it would evolve into that, and ultimately still end up in that "worst case" category, but it wouldn't be sudden, and your bug-out bags would never get the chance to see any use, I think.

Let me put it this way... I think an economic collapse, or even a governmental break-down would result in a situation where things would go from, in a manner of speaking, an argument, a slap-fight, a shoving match, then to a typical boxing match or MMA match, then to a street fight, and then to a war or a fight for your life.

On the other hand, if all of the things people depend on disappear all at once, overnight... If they lose all communications, all ability to move around freely, if the power suddenly shuts off and just doesn't come back on, and no more shipments of food show up at their local stores... Then you go from that "situation normal" to "fighting for your life" without any middle ground or transitional steps in between. And no, there won't be any rules. At all. No, there won't be any "Inalienable rights". At all.

Those things may come back, eventually... but for some period of time they won't be anywhere to be seen.

So in the end, what it's going to come down to is exactly what kind of SHTF scenario you imagine when you think of the term. Because the exact nature of it is going to play a big part in exactly what you have to do to survive it, or in whether or not you even want to survive it.

And that fact is why I don't even usually bother to get involved in these kinds of threads.

[G27]

I don't mean to take sides here, or condone any particular behavior, but... if worst comes to even worse, and the rules go out the window, you may discover that the only rights you have come from the barrel of a gun, or whatever weapon you're the most familiar and proficient with. What someone else has written, or enforced, previous to that won't mean a thing.

Humans, when it comes right down to it, are just another animal... and far too many will vividly demonstrate that if the right or wrong scenario ever occurs. Count on it, and be prepared to deal with that.

I'm prepared to deal with whatever comes my way, but it won't change the character of who I am - I'm not going to murder someone for their supplies or because I don't care for them. Until / unless they give up their rights by threatening or endangering me or mine, they still retain those rights, in my world.

[G27]

Y'all are branding it as murder, but I'm not entirely convinced that's what he's saying.

I recognize a lot of threats around me that I know for a fact are only held in check by rule of law or fear of reprisals by a larger group.

And in the end, that's what everyone here is discussing, and planning on getting away from... the ones that would suddenly be "off the leash". That's what your "bug-out bag is for, after all? Isn't it? To "step outside the circle", more or less?

Well, what if you have to make an opening first? Or simply can't leave? What do you do then? Just lay down and die because of you moral or ethical objections?

I'll bet you won't.

You're really twisting what was initially said here - what started this entire discussion in this thread was the assertion that if TEOTWAWKI happened, he would go shoot his annoying neighbor and kill off those who had supplies he could use in his surrounding area - that's an entirely different situation than 'they won't let you leave' or 'they're threatening you (even vaguely)'.

There's a big difference in doing what needs to be done and being an aggressor - no matter what's going on, killing someone who has not threatened or endangered you is murder, I don't care what laws exist (or don't).

[G27]

So in the end, what it's going to come down to is exactly what kind of SHTF scenario you imagine when you think of the term. Because the exact nature of it is going to play a big part in exactly what you have to do to survive it, or in whether or not you even want to survive it.

Yah, maybe, maybe something like that could happen, but heck, can you find one first world country that has fallen from that position that's crumbled to the point you describe above?

You're talking about the most extreme possible SHTF scenario, one that is highly unlikely to happen, and even then, I guess we agree to disagree that basic human rights don't remain. That doesn't mean I expect to call the police when someone is trespassing - what it means is that time and again history has shown us that when the balloon goes up, most people remain civilized at their core.

Don't read me wrong here - under the scenario you've described above, where individuals or small groups become 'the law' for their area, trials and such are a thing of the past and I won't shy away from doing what is necessary, but that's a far cry from going next door and killing someone just because I don't like them or because I want to drain their water heater...

[Guest Jamie]

You're really twisting what was initially said here - what started this entire discussion in this thread was the assertion that if TEOTWAWKI happened, he would go shoot his annoying neighbor and kill off those who had supplies he could use in his surrounding area - that's an entirely different situation than 'they won't let you leave' or 'they're threatening you (even vaguely)'.

There's a big difference in doing what needs to be done and being an aggressor - no matter what's going on, killing someone who has not threatened or endangered you is murder, I don't care what laws exist (or don't).

Looked like to me he asked a question - maybe seriously, maybe not - and folks over-reacted:

Do I wait for the looting gangs or go on the offensive and take out neighbors I don't like and likely suspects first or just work on a good defense?

Your thoughts?

Remember, the term is "the END of the WORLD as we know it". That includes "your world" too, y'know:

Until / unless they give up their rights by threatening or endangering me or mine, they still retain those rights, in my world.

[G27]

Looked like to me he asked a question - maybe seriously, maybe not - and folks over-reacted:

Well, the very fact he was willing to consider murdering someone for their supplies or because he found them annoying is telling enough, imo.

If his neighbor was a menace, threatening him, etc., then it would be understandable, but 'take out neighbors I don't like'? Seriously?

Remember, the term is "the END of the WORLD as we know it". That includes "your world" too, y'know:

Meh, you missed the point, no need to even duck. My point wasn't that I would somehow be insulated, but rather that a man's character doesn't change with adversity, it shows. I guarantee you I won't murder someone because I don't like them or I'm ill-prepared, regardless of the situation. Not sure how you can seemingly rationalize otherwise, but whatever.

[Guest Jamie]

You're talking about the most extreme possible SHTF scenario, one that is highly unlikely to happen

Hopefully they're ALL highly unlikely to happen.

But if they're not, I'm positive the definition of exactly what constitutes murder will change drastically, in some of 'em.

[G27]

Hopefully they're ALL highly unlikely to happen.

But if they're not, I'm positive the definition of exactly what constitutes murder will change drastically, in some of 'em.

Yah, agree 100%, though as I stated above, killing someone like we've been discussing (don't like them or to rob them) has, throughout all of history, been considered murder. That's my point, and that's definition is unlikely to change, even in a Mad Max scenario.

The difference is what the repercussions are to murder in that scenario - they would be drastically different, obviously...

[Guest Jamie]

Well, the very fact he was willing to consider murdering someone for their supplies or because he found them annoying is telling enough, imo.

If his neighbor was a menace, threatening him, etc., then it would be understandable, but 'take out neighbors I don't like'? Seriously?

Man, for all we know his neighbors are already a threat and if we knew them we might not think ill of him if he started bumping them off right this minute.

One way or the other, I think you're getting all indignant over nothing.

Meh, you missed the point, no need to even duck. My point wasn't that I would somehow be insulated, but rather that a man's character doesn't change with adversity, it shows. I guarantee you I won't murder someone because I don't like them or I'm ill-prepared, regardless of the situation. Not sure how you can seemingly rationalize otherwise, but whatever.

None of us have any idea how certain situations will change us.

I can tell you though that I have a close relative that spent 2 years in S.E. Asia, and who certainly wasn't the same person when he came back as he was when he left. And I know a few others who ended up the same way.

So I wouldn't get too comfortable on that high horse, concerning character, if I were you. 'Cause it could end up being a very long fall, if the wrong thing happens.

[Mechanic_X]

Obama has followed through with a lot of what he promised. So I am waiting on his "civilian army" to come looking for all of us. I am not a trained survivalist but I think I could be an asset to a group for my other skills. I can fix things. SHTF and I am headed to a friends working horse farm, and try to get used to horse meat. Protecting the assets of the farm will be a job left to those who will. I think I can help there too.

[Punisher84]

Jamie I think you are actually the one who is blowing this way out of proportion or you're not reading my posts in their entirety.. That or you're not the person I thought you have always been from your posts.

I'll say it as blunt as I can. If everything went belly up tomorrow and life as we all knew it ceased to exist I'd do what I had to do. If you sit in your house across the street and bear me no ill will I'll leave you be, but the second you become a threat I would put a bullet between your eyes and take everything you had to feed my family, load my guns, burn for fuel, etc.

I wouldn't kill you just because you didn't mow your ****ing lawn.

[G27]

Man, for all we know his neighbors are already a threat and if we knew them we might not think ill of him if he started bumping them off right this minute.

One way or the other, I think you're getting all indignant over nothing.

OK, well, maybe he needs be more careful regarding how he presents things, as for most folks it's a big leap from "i don't like them" to "they're a threat to me and mine".

You know, being that we're communicating here and all...

None of us have any idea how certain situations will change us.

I can tell you though that I have a close relative that spent 2 years in S.E. Asia, and who certainly wasn't the same person when he came back as he was when he left. And I know a few others who ended up the same way.

Of course not, and my experiences are similar, but none of the guys I know who have come back from terrible situations came back with a hair trigger ready to cross lines they wouldn't have crossed before their experiences, such as those we're discussing here. The world is a lot less black-and-white to them than it was before, but their character remains.

Perhaps your experiences are different.

So I wouldn't get too comfortable on that high horse, concerning character, if I were you. 'Cause it could end up being a very long fall, if the wrong thing happens.

Whatever.

There have always been people ready to take advantage of situations in society, such as looters during most any civil break down. I guarantee I won't be one of them, but you seem to have already determined that it's OK to throw everything out the window and do what you want as long as you can get away with it. Whatever floats your boat.

I'm done with this one, you can have the floor, feel free to attack my 'high horse' all you wish.