This is a discussion on A question of ethics within the General Talk forums, part of the General Discussion category; #1. Defending yourself is NOT a halfway endeavor. If you are being assaulted in a survival-oriented environment, in all likelihood your assailant intends to take ...
#1. Defending yourself is NOT a halfway endeavor. If you are being assaulted in a survival-oriented environment, in all likelihood your assailant intends to take your stuff, which could very well mean your eventual death due to starvation or exposure. My defense response would be as immediately lethal as I would be capable of. I would take whatever would directly contribute to my survival. Not killing him for his possessions (an immoral action), but not wasting resources that result from the confrontation (his misdeed). I have no intention of bugging out, but best laid plans…
#2. My wife and I prepare for ourselves and others… more so in the area of food and water than anything else. We currently work with local food banks and homeless shelters. Anticipating a tremendous up-tick in the numbers of needy, we have prepared to put together small one-person/one-meal packets to handout as needed, while directing such people to seek organized and established relief efforts. This gives them food to continue on without exposing or impacting our personal stores… which will be aggressively defended.
Too Soon Old, Too Late Smart
retracted out of respect to a great member of this forum. Mr Slippy.
Last edited by John Galt; 02-15-2017 at 08:45 PM.
Talk is cheap, actions count.
All this face-to-face negotiation with women and children for food or barter seems extremely risky to me in a SHTF world. Think like a criminal. If I were going to rob someone's retreat, I'd send in the decoy woman, then wait for the homeowner to show himself to my scoped rifle. Bang, flop, loot.
You won't see me out in the open in daylight during a SHTF.
Respect everything, fear nothing.
I have balanced being close enough to a city/town but being far enough to not getting overrun during a crisis. Would be better being further out during a crisis but I still have to work. So to get to my rural lane, evacuees would pass thru several suburbs and a few other towns, then they would have to head out into the country, on a road headed to no other big towns. Our lane is a dead end, narrow road that should be defensible & does not scream there are farms & other homes further down. So in picking property, it is a matter of compromise for most & you do the best you can.
Kill him and take his stuff. Sounds harsh, but if he is alive he can pursue me, or tell others how to pursue me, which puts me and my group in peril. I take his stuff because it will go to waste if I don't. No sense in wasting stuff when it is scarce to begin with.
Second scenario depends deeply on the surrounding circumstances. How SHTF is this? Because if the woman has a child, the merciful thing to do might be to kill them both, or kill the mother and raise the child myself (I can provide and she cannot, so why punish the child) Am I in an area where there have been many people traveling in the area? Do I have contact with neighbors at all? Have they reported problems? If the woman and child are truly alone, I may hear their story and decide based on what I see and hear. I may react differently if I know of issues in the area, or recently lost contact with a neighbor. If they return for seconds, I'll kill them all, unless I have reason to begin a colony, but I would let her know before she left that if she returned I would kill her and everyone she was with. If I kill them, yes, I take their stuff.
I would deal with an armed man the same as I deal with any other person. With civil skepticism, and a dash of cynicism. Whether or not I barter them is a function of what they offer, and what I need, as well as being based on the possibility of return business.
I'll take anything someone wants to give me, provided it isn't trouble. Whether or not I answer that radio depends on many things.
Mutual assistance group is fine, as long as it remains mutual. The second I get taken advantage of, it ends.
What I accept in barter depends on what I need first, followed by what I can barter later. If I am doing well, I may accept trade goods. If I need something I may only accept that thing, or goods I can immediately exchange for that thing.
My accommodation of your incompetence does not make you right.