Who Will Die First when SHTF

I like the 4 wheelers idea.....and moose, I'm figuring out a way to get to your group :D
 
I think that the information in the video is really of mixed quality. For every bit of insight, there is a veiled political dig, sweeping generalization, or unfounded assumption.

The information about health-related factors in a SHTF context is worthwhile. Serious health complications can make everyday life a struggle for survival, so it stands to reason that an emergency would exacerbate the situation. Still, worth thinking about and planning for (if possible).

The business about the 'neo-hippies' and 'yuppies' is less insightful and probably wildly inaccurate.

The video makes a number of unspoken assumptions about the nature of a 'crisis' - it seems that the person behind it assumes that SHTF = TEOTWAWKI, with a total breakdown of society, and fend-for-yourself consequences. This is one possible scenario among many, and certainly not the most likely. It is far more likely that crises will be of the 'localized emergency' nature or, alternatively, the sort of slow-burn social upheaval that comes with a major economic depression. In both of those situations, the ability to cooperate, organize, offer - and receive - help, and work hard will make all the difference. Is there a place in such situations for people who are focused on how many rounds of 9mm are required to take down a drug-crazed morlock? Maybe. I dunno. In a long-term context, there's definitely room for someone who knows how to effectively set up and manage an 'urban garden', though. And the more people who are doing that before a crisis, the better.

Self-sufficiency is, of course, of paramount importance. But I find the overall attitude and discourse in this sort of video to be unhelpful. I find myself wondering if the creator of the video might be a tad too invested in 'societal collapse and death waves' as a fantasy future. Hopeful pessimism? Not for me, thanks. There are people in my city who have been working on converting unused urban space into producing community gardens. I'd rather talk about survival with them.

All the best,

- Mike
 
The first people to die will be the ones who don't have $350 folders in their pockets.
Everbody knows that you cannot make it without a Sebenza. It would be foolish to even try.
 
I'd like to post a different perspective from somebody who lives in the "country"; a small rural old-time farm community.

First of all, the idea of running off to the country to live off the land is a fantasy. It can't be done. Those of us who live here can't do it. Yes, we can shoot a few deer and squirrels, but how long will that resource last? Especially when everybody around you is doing it.

Most everything we depend on, food and fuel, is trucked in. I worry most about a breakdown in truck transportation. When the electric grid fails, we can't pump water out of our wells and we can't run our oil furnaces for heat (well yes we do have generators, those will last a few days until we run out of gas). And of course most of us have wood stoves, but harvesting wood over the long haul and drying it is another story.

The myth of the self sufficient farm in the country is long gone. ln my neighborhood, we do have a few people raising chickens, and honey bees, and a few dairy farms, and potato farms, but they couldn't begin to support the local community.

Those of us who are smart keep food reserves. We do have the advantage of plenty of local streams, rivers and lakes for water supplies. Drawing from them requires a lot of work.

What will the masses streaming north from New York City encounter? Blockades. We won't want you to come in because we can't support you.

What we will do is tighten up as a community. What we can't get from without, we will look to get from within. Maintaining community is what I think will be most important.

And of course we all have guns of some type, defense of the homestead will not really be an issue.

Somebody mentioned that only 10% of the military are efficient with firearms and have the mindset to use them effectively. Probably true, I've been in the army. It reminds me of an old quotation:

"Of every 100 men in battle, 10 should not even be here; 80 are nothing more than targets; 9 of them are fighters, we are lucky to have them, they the battle make. Ah, but the one. One of them is a warrior...and he will bring the others back.”
Heraclitus, 500 BC.
*
 
This high strung chick will probably be in panic mode and SHITE herself if she found herself in a real situation. Something about her really rubbed me the wrong way. She seems to know it all for a nurse. The last time I checked there wasn't a survival block of teaching in a doomsday scenario in nursing school.

There is something to be said of overall health for longterm survival but I have a little saying of my own.

"When times get rough and times get hard, the fat get skinny and the skinny die!"

Having a little built in survival kit of stored fat should not be underestimated. Being obese obviously does not count, too much of a good thing is bad like vitamins. Realistically vegans and vegetarians are screwed. That's ok since corn fed meat tastes better anyway if it comes to that. :)
 
Coldwood said:
Somebody mentioned that only 10% of the military are efficient with firearms and have the mindset to use them effectively. Probably true, I've been in the army. It reminds me of an old quotation:

"Of every 100 men in battle, 10 should not even be here; 80 are nothing more than targets; 9 of them are fighters, we are lucky to have them, they the battle make. Ah, but the one. One of them is a warrior...and he will bring the others back.”
Heraclitus, 500 BC.
*
Click to expand...

Just give the firearms to the kids who have been playing the killer shooting games day in and day out. They are desensitized to killing and their fat little asses can't run anyway. :eek:
 
Barbarossa said:
Just give the firearms to the kids who have been playing the killer shooting games day in and day out. They are desensitized to killing and their fat little asses can't run anyway. :eek:
Click to expand...

Good point, but video shooting games isn't the same thing as shooting a real firearm at a shooting range...as tame as that might be. Normal people will get the shakes the first time they shoot a real live gun.

These little video gunners just think they're desensitized to killing...unless they're real psychopaths. And we have had plenty of them.
 
Coldwood said:
Good point, but video shooting games isn't the same thing as shooting a real firearm at a shooting range...as tame as that might be. Normal people will get the shakes the first time they shoot a real live gun.

These little video gunners just think they're desensitized to killing...unless they're real psychopaths. And we have had plenty of them.
Click to expand...

When the decision was being made, as to which units would lead the allied D-day invasion, it was decided to use mostly green untested men. By then we had veteran units who had experienced combat in Africa, Sicily, and Italy; but, the generals weren't sure they could be pursuaded to get off the boat.

It is one thing to train, and another to experience war; the funny thing is, that it is hard to predict the outcome. A top soldier, with a great deal of combat experience, can crack while someone with out any of that might stand out and carry the mission.

n2s
 
There was a time in rural America when families had no choice but to have gardens, hunt, work with wood, can/preserve food, make and/or mend their own garments, know about and be able to administer home remedies for ailments and anything else involved in staying alive. Kids were born at home and the dead laid out (waked) on the dining room table so family and friends could pay their last respects before they buried them out back.
Every family member eventually knew how to do just about anything that needed to be done. They were almost self-sufficient.
Technology has slowly changed things.

In a SHTF situation, the elderly may be the ticket to staying alive.

Nothing in that video was shocking. I don't agree with all the generalizations she made but she's probably right on most of it.

Why is her blouse open?
 
I agree with others in that I think alot of poeple have some kind of romantic vision of a doom and gloom scenario . I guess we can thank Hollywood for that. As far as E&E planning ,this is something I do automatically without even thinking . I catch myself looking for routes and any thing that looks useful no matter where I am at.
 
night man said:
And just remember it doesnt matter how much you stock pile, if you dont stockpile any kind of defense the next door neighbor that stockpiled nothing can take it all with one well aimed bullet.
Click to expand...

Even stockpiling all kinds of defensive gear, someone can take it all with one well aimed bullet.

Best defense is to not get noticed. I suspect that people running around town in full battle dress, with magazines hanging off of their chest and black rifles carried openly will make easy targets for anyone with a .22lr or a .30/30 and decent fieldcraft skills :confused:
 
steeljhp said:
I agree with others in that I think alot of poeple have some kind of romantic vision of a doom and gloom scenario
Click to expand...

My question is: where is the romance in this sort of scenario? What makes it attractive? Is there a yearning for a me-against-the-world situation? A thrill associated with the fantasy of societal collapse? A radical individualist's desire to make the threat of deadly force the arbiter of every aspect of life?

These seem like decidedly unromantic scenarios to me.

What fascinates me is that this sort of fatalistic survivalist outlook is often accompanied by a nostalgia for simpler times and 'the way our grandparents did it', despite the fact that the people who persevered in those simpler times were characterized by their rejection of fatalism and their willingness to build something up.

All the best,

- Mike
 
Like I said, hollywood ,for the the most part. For others, maybe just a chance to hit the reset button . From what I understand we are way overdue for some kind of epidemic.If the enemy is looking/planning something to top 9/11's shock and awe factor,my guess is that it will be nasty,whatever it is. All in all i'd say we have a pretty dangerous future to look forward to,and I dont see it gettin any less dangerous.
 
Coldwood said:
I'd like to post a different perspective from somebody who lives in the "country"; a small rural old-time farm community.
Click to expand...

It can be done!

My grandparents went through the depression very nicely with 7 kids, on a farm on the Saskatchewan prairie (had to look up the spelling). They did it the old fashion way....a hand pump on the well, outhouse, chicken coup, a few milk cows, and a huge garden. There was a car and tractors, but they all got parked and the batteries stored behind the wood burning stove in the kitchen. The big thing was that they had horses to work the land (mostly in wheat), something like 100 head which they could sell and trade! They broke their own horses and cut their own firewood for the bitter winters. Dad said hobos would pass by, and grandma never let a single one get away without a hearty meal....

What finally got them was their fourth tornado. After that, they packed up and moved to British Columbia where they started a very successful dairy farm.
 
Last edited:
Mentor said:
I think that the information in the video is really of mixed quality. For every bit of insight, there is a veiled political dig, sweeping generalization, or unfounded assumption.

The information about health-related factors in a SHTF context is worthwhile. Serious health complications can make everyday life a struggle for survival, so it stands to reason that an emergency would exacerbate the situation. Still, worth thinking about and planning for (if possible).

The business about the 'neo-hippies' and 'yuppies' is less insightful and probably wildly inaccurate.

The video makes a number of unspoken assumptions about the nature of a 'crisis' - it seems that the person behind it assumes that SHTF = TEOTWAWKI, with a total breakdown of society, and fend-for-yourself consequences. This is one possible scenario among many, and certainly not the most likely. It is far more likely that crises will be of the 'localized emergency' nature or, alternatively, the sort of slow-burn social upheaval that comes with a major economic depression. In both of those situations, the ability to cooperate, organize, offer - and receive - help, and work hard will make all the difference. Is there a place in such situations for people who are focused on how many rounds of 9mm are required to take down a drug-crazed morlock? Maybe. I dunno. In a long-term context, there's definitely room for someone who knows how to effectively set up and manage an 'urban garden', though. And the more people who are doing that before a crisis, the better.

Self-sufficiency is, of course, of paramount importance. But I find the overall attitude and discourse in this sort of video to be unhelpful. I find myself wondering if the creator of the video might be a tad too invested in 'societal collapse and death waves' as a fantasy future. Hopeful pessimism? Not for me, thanks. There are people in my city who have been working on converting unused urban space into producing community gardens. I'd rather talk about survival with them.

All the best,

- Mike
Click to expand...

Mentor said:
My question is: where is the romance in this sort of scenario? What makes it attractive? Is there a yearning for a me-against-the-world situation? A thrill associated with the fantasy of societal collapse? A radical individualist's desire to make the threat of deadly force the arbiter of every aspect of life?

These seem like decidedly unromantic scenarios to me.

What fascinates me is that this sort of fatalistic survivalist outlook is often accompanied by a nostalgia for simpler times and 'the way our grandparents did it', despite the fact that the people who persevered in those simpler times were characterized by their rejection of fatalism and their willingness to build something up.

All the best,

- Mike
Click to expand...

Mike, your are into some really nice prose tonight. Nice posts! I do appreciate the folks who have chimed in on the community spirit. I think that will be the path I want to be on.

Then again, I always find it funny about when something like the title of this thread gets asked verybody looks around and points at who's going to get it. For me, I always envisioned the SHTF scenario to likely involve a catastrophic event of some type. I'm pretty sure the 'slow burn' situation will be largely stemmed from anarchy by the societal tools of law in order already in place. I actually do welcome marshall law if the end goals are to keep the chaos at bay and civilization civilized.

Now, when it comes to true catastrophe, the kind to thing to throw us into a SHTF situation, I think that will involve mortality/disaster on mass and of a random type. Who knows where the dirty bomb will go, where the earthquake will split, where the metorite will hit. What an irony, when the great random happens to strike the most prepared guy on earth. That or you walk into your fully stalked bomb shelter only to suffer a stroke due to a weak blood vessel in your noggin. Face it folks, when it comes to the catastrophe that is unknown, there is no way to prepare or prevent it. You just gotta hope you survive those first few days and then, maybe then, your survival mentality will pull your rear from the flames.
 
Cass Sunstein's work on 'probability neglect' and the 'availability heuristic' in thinking about crisis events may be of interest to some here. His book 'Laws of Fear' is worth reading.

Ken, thanks for the compliment.

Regarding the 'slow burn' situation, I think that one of the defining characteristics of most SHTF thinking is that it is of a highly 'eventalized' nature. It's about being prepared for That Thing That Might Happen Tomorrow - a single catastrophic rupture that upends what we understand to be normal. And yeah, that thing can and does happen, and we should prepare for it. But we could also define SHTF as the realization that, in the long term, a particular way of life may be unstable, unsustainable, and susceptible to a prolonged - but still catastrophic - rupture at the hands of an economic downturn or a major change in the dominant environment-economy-employment-consumption framework. This would probably manifest as a serious depression, rather than mass disorder and the wholesale collapse of institutions. It would require a different approach to preparedness - one that is suitably long-term - in addition to the forms of event-response preparedness we often discuss. I envision a sort of hybrid scenario in which the current state of normalcy - particularly with regards to the availability of resources, jobs and services - is suspended, but things remain relatively stable otherwise. Society as a whole wouldn't collapse, but we would certainly face some hard times and related lifestyle adjustments. This qualifies as a SHTF scenario - albeit of a different sort - in my books.

In all seriousness, though, it seems likely that a SHTF scenario in the near future will involve zombies.

All the best,

- Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top