![]() |
Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Do you feel there will be more or less safety in holding out with a group of like-minded and prepared individuals after SHTF? I suppose it depends on the individuals, but in general, what do you think?
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
If the people around you are of like mind you should have no problem. Otherwise, watch out.
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Agreed, it depends on the quality of the numbers, not the quantity
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
If you're in position to form a small group when TSHTF, that's great. There really is safety in numbers, as well as division of work, etc. However, I would think you would know NOW who would be in that group. Don't be picking teams after the game has started. Everybody will want to play at that point.
Get your draft choices early. That last kid left on the bench is there for a reason. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Yep.....because try as you may, at SOME point, you have to sleep.
Personally, I'd like to have a group of like minded folks that would come to my valley in such a situation. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Its common sense. Even if your supplying all the food it may be well worth it.
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Quote:
:wavey: |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
There is safety in numbers to a point, but at somepoint, the numbers become to great, and safety can start going the other direction.
I think the maximum size you might want for a SHTF community is a couple of hundred people. That group size is big enough to allow for a lot of specialization, but small enough to allow everyone in the community to know each other. Beyond that safety could likely be further increased by maintaining good relatioins with other nearby communities. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Given the level of division of labor required to live any better than in a mud hut with a dirt floor, you'll need whatever social network you can get. That Austrian ice man from 5200 years ago had implements containing 17 sorts of wood -- he didn't make them himself, but traded for them. Adam Smith speculated that 5000 people contributed labor toward the manufacture of his coat. Eric Robert Rudolph lived off the land, if by lived off the land you mean that he bummed/stole food and supplies from people in remote towns.
You are your social network. We have a member here who buries metals in his yard, stores gasoline by the tanker, stores food with armageddon in mind, and runs a multi-camera surveillance system on his property. When his septic system died the other day, he had no idea how to deal with it and almost got taken for $18K, nine times more than necessary, and was reduced to asking this forum for help. Nothing wrong with asking; just don't kid yourself by thinking that you're an island of self-sufficiency when you're not. Dmitry Orlov wrote about surviving the collapse of the Soviet system, and touched on topics such as division of labor and social networks. I think his analysis is relevant to the future of the United States. Part One Part Two Part Three I agree with the above poster that a couple of hundred is optimal, in the case that we are fractured into small communities. But you had better pray that something larger economic activity persists as well, because the history of small, self-contained communities is not pretty: consider Biosphere II, and various experimental utopian communes which always end up begging for outside money, running into difficulties using humanure, and dealing with their members' realization that living small will not be luxurious. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Drill ? is ok to say my name, I don't mind......what you forgot to mention is that that night I hit the WWW in order to learn how the septic tank works and the next day told the guy exactly what was wrong after I went out there and poked around for a while......total final cost? $750.00 plus $40.00 tip for the two labor guys.
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Well a farm is a long term plan, a stock pile of food is short term. In the short term going it alone might be a good idea, but in the long term you will want numbers.
I don't remeber where but I thought I remeber hearing that a person can live in a group of up to a 1000 while still knowing everyone in the group. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
No Aric the ideal number is 250 and anything over 250 you open another village that will work with the first one......and over again.
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Now the challenge is finding like minded responsible people near by. :chat:
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Quote:
It's not about resources, stashes and preparations. It's about relations. All of it. How do we relate and cooperate with eachother? Guess it's old Charles 'Big Chuck' Darwin who will have the last word. Those who manage to adapt to given circumstances will be at an advantafe over those who who dont manage. Simple as that. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Quote:
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
http://www.naute.com/funimages/fly.gif The Fairly Intelligent Fly! One day a fairly intelligent fly buzzed around the web so long without lighting that the spider appeared and said, "Come on down." But the fly was too clever for him and said, "I never light where I don't see other flies and I don't see other flies in your house." So he flew away until he came to a place where there were a great many other flies. He was about to settle down among them when a bee buzzed up and said, "Hold it stupid, that's flypaper. All those flies are trapped." "Don't be silly," said the fly, "they're dancing." So he settled down and became stuck to the flypaper with all the other flies. Moral: There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else. James Thurber |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Quote:
I myself prefer a small retreat with somewhere between 1 and 2 dozen combat ready persons, anicillary personel not included like grandparents to help cook, clean, wash garden, child care ect. ect.... some of these 'extras' may also be able to shoot from a static position, but aren't considered part of the 'combat ready' group that will pull gaurd duty and recon and any 'out side of the main house' offense/defense. A group of a couple hundred in a nice comunity would be nice, but it's difficult to come up with that many people pre-shtf... atleast in respect to too many cheifs and not enough indians.... they almost inevitably turn into power struggle if they aren't set up as a cult... and who wants to live in a cult? |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Definetly must be closely trusted, but numbers will help.
If your like me pick the up when they have nothing to loose. They'll never turn their back on ya. Well, most of the time. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
You could wait untill after TSHTF, that way you won't pick anyone who is likely to get themself killed.
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Security will not be in numbers.Not at the start
Any large group,no matter how well concealed they believe themselves to be,will naturally become a refuge magnet over night. it will not matter how many times your group tells them to go away,they will congregate until they organize and make an attempt to take over. It is the oasis theory. For a chance at survival,you must be able to wait out the thinning of the herd. The thinning of the herd will begin almost before the dust even settles. I believe most here to be survival minded,and humane at the same time.this is not a good combinaton for survival.How many people can you take in and still survive?probably not many.I highly doubt many here have planned thier preps for more than half a dozen people.for every refuge taken in your supplies have diminished by 20%,of what they were.It won't be long before you are out. How many here could turn away a young mother and two 2 year old children,who turn up at thier door after TSHTF? Are you prepared to repel the public that wanders in by the smell of your camp fires? How many cook fires does it take to feed 2 dozen people? If you are starving,how keen do your senses become? This is all just food for thought. But my personal opinion is you prepare for yourself and those immediately with you,and no one else. You wouldn't want to be the one family in town with power and lights on to your house while the rest of the neighborhood for miles around have been without for two or more weeks,would you? |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Sure I would. You just turn off the lights to any rooms with windows in them. No matter how much stuff you have you can always use less or act like your using less.
If your able and your want to theres nothing wrong with stocking up enough for a dozen people. You just need to hide it, and if no one knows you got it, they won't come asking. Of course this is a lot harder if you got a farm or animals. |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
A relevant subject to this thread is the REALITY of Condominium Homeowner's Associations where neighbor suing neighbor is very very common. Read this and weep as you consider your "group" during real hard times:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...ation+lawsuits People won't become better WTSHTF...not when you add firearms to the situation. :smokin: |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Safety in numbers? Yeah, if they're .45ACP, 7.62x39, .223... ;-)
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
:smile: The only like minded people I know of are here on GIM.
My neighbors are like Ponce's. I will have to kill a few of them to hold on to what I have. Support ? Non existant :Sorry: Anything that enters my property is toast. They took their FRNs and bought a $40,000.00 SUV. I took what little I had and bought food and weapons. They can all march down to the welfare office and demand debit cards from FEMA.I really don't give a crap :censored: . Yeah,you got to sleep sometime,but two people can do serious damage to a crowd with a couple of full auto MAC 10's with 100 round clips,and I got plenty. Unless they were my relatives they are off the radar screen and not to be trusted under any circumstances. Sorry,I'll go it alone..........Trust no one.........:thumbs do Best to all, :cool2: RiverRat |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Quote:
:wink: Have gun also, will only travel if the ol 91' can get me to the secret destination:bandit: |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Some of the issues that have been pointed out here were described in the story Ponce posted - I think it was called Lights Out. It is long but what an eye opener about how people and groups of people might behave in a SHTF senario. Wish I wasn't still a corporate slave.
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
Quote:
Anyway, no refugees allowed. Period. If they find us, they get some water a few cups of rice and a 'come back and you'll only find hot lead'... If they seem like trouble rather than a family, well... no sense in letting them walk away only to come back, might as well take care of it then. Thats really the only part of SHTF I'm not looking forward to. Working in the fields and forest, hunting, fishing... The 'mutant canabal looters' are the only real downside. Ah well, I've always wanted to conduct better ballistics tests anyway. :cool2: |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
"Have gun will travel" that was from the tv series by the name of "Paladin".
|
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
It's all been done before.
Study the behavior of the white townies vs the natives, on or off a reservation. If the nearby group appeared slightly functional/viable, they were picked at or crushed with abandon, generally on false charges. If you say that's the old days, same thing happened with communes in the 60's. The system hates competition and they have unlimited resources to throw at your community. The larger and more functional it is, the more they will hate it. Even if you can unite with local government, you go up a level to state/Provincial hazard. What do you think the local police would do if you fired your Mini into a crowd of hungry undesireables? They'd be overjoyed for the excuse to come down, confiscate your goods and auction your land to one of their friends. Don't believe me? Read more history. That story is older than Cain. Oasis effect with a twist. Live humble. Play nice. No matter what scenario you pick it will be years before enough people stop denial and start acting sense. TS |
Re: Safety in numbers after SHTF?
"What do you think the local police would do if you fired your Mini into a crowd of hungry undesireables?"
In a SHTF scenario I believe the police would be overwhelmed / ineffective and not really care even if they knew you killed some intruders. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM