Opinion Question: If there was an Initial Deadly Terrorist Attack in Your City What Would You DoNext

Here's a hypothetical question inspired by a TV series I just saw. In the TV Series there was a deadly terrorist attack killing 100+ people by a bio weapon in one public building. If you lived in the City where the attack took place would you: 1. Leave your City and go out of state right away, 2. Stay in your area but go to what you believe is a more secure location or 3. Stay Home and try not to leave your home and have survival preparations in place? Obviously if you don't live in the City it's not applicable to you but feel free to give your opinion other than "Don't live in the City". This question assumes that you are free to not show up at work. You may also be landlocked trying to leave by amount of people also leaving the State. Added Revision Based on Initial Comments: Assume that no one has guaranteed that additional attacks won't be underway

 

You might post a poll with those choices plus "other" as options. You might also tell us what you would do and why.

Or recite the snowflakes' lament -
When in panic –
when in doubt –
Run in circles –
Scream and shout.

“It’s the white man’s fault –
“without a doubt!!
“I need a safe space –
“please point one out.”

 

Most bio agents are not exceedingly fast-acting, so chances are really good those 100 people spread a biological agent all over town, perhaps even around the world.

To answer your poll...1) I avoid cities and other large gatherings
2) Determine what the agent is and how is it transmitted
3) Probably hole up, since the stupid people will be panicking

Here's a quick little read to help you differentiate between hollywood and reality:

• Fast-acting chemical agents. Individuals exposed to these agents begin displaying symptoms within seconds or minutes. Examples of such agents include the neurotoxic agent sarin, the choking agent chlorine, and the blood agent hydrogen cyanide.
  
  
• Delayed-acting chemical agents and biological toxins. With agents in this category, which includes some chemicals as well as large-molecular-weight toxins produced by certain biological organisms, exposed individuals would not begin exhibiting symptoms for hours or days. Examples of such chemicals include sulfur mustard; biological toxins include ricin and botulinum toxin.
  
  
• Slow-acting, noncontagious biological agents. These agents, which include viruses as well as the bacterial causative agents for anthrax and tularemia, produce no initial symptoms, but cause flu-like symptoms after a few days or weeks. Some, such as Bacillus anthracis, can be disseminated either in the form of spores or as vegetative cells.
  
  
• Slow-acting, contagious biological agents. This category of agents, which includes the virus that causes smallpox and the bacterium that causes pneumonic plague, produces no initial symptoms upon infection but typically causes flu-like symptoms after a few days or weeks. Infected individuals are usually contagious after they are symptomatic.

 

I/we would probably head out of town for a bit taking back roads to BOL. If the city went nuts* might just bug in.
* the city is a liberal bastion so it's already nuts but in this case if the locals were doing the #2 poem

 

Though I live a few miles from town people venture to town all the time not knowing what is going on there . I mean, How would you know ?
It is likely that if there is an biological event ,the military would put the town in isolation for the safety of the nation. To defy this protocol, you could be the carrier getting the disease out. Not that it would be in you but on you or your vehicle .
Knowing the proximity of the attack and that it is to a specific area might be of some comfort on the other hand ,if it takes a while to discover, I believe that once home, stay home , unless you are contaminated , you don't want to spread the problem further contaminating your own house .
Obviously if I hear about something serious like this I'd stay home , I have all the supplies I need for years . turn the radios on and communicate with people you trust .

 

You may be safer staying at home than traveling. Especially if you really don't know where you're going to go to . If you have a BOL , I'd go for it.

 

One thing we need to remember is that local officials will also be thinking on what they want to do to keep people safe. When you say bio-weapon, that could be something that could be spread. If that is the case then neighboring places may block you from traveling through their area. Sadly the best answer I can come up with is to shelter in place. Even if you live next door to the building that was attacked, going outside could be more dangerous then going outside. I do wonder if one could easily learn what the bio-agent was. If one had that truthful info then you could make decisions based on that.

 

Being currently mobility-challenged, and both my properties are just outside town, and generally upwind of town, I would simply hunker down here in place. Got plenty preps to get me through a period of trouble.

 

Thanks for your opinions. It sounds like the best thing to do is Hunker down after the initial incident or look for a place locally to bug out where you have access to and hope that incident was the end not the beginning.

 

Honesty is the issue .
Do you know that Fukushima building 4 is in jeopardy and is leaning and is as much a threat as those that failed ?

 

No I did not. The news rarely reports on anything outside DC. Do you have a link? That is one danger the affected the world.

 

Easy....
Get the F out of D BEFORE the S hits the F!

 

On the OP premise of terrorist attack the RED DAWN approach might be examined.
Wouldn't be the first time the government betrayed it's people.

 

"The chances of being killed in a terrorist attack are about 1 in 20 million. A person is as likely to be killed by his or her own furniture, and more likely to die in a car accident, drown in a bathtub, or in a building fire than from a terrorist attack."[QUOTE="Brokor, post: 582092, member: 139"

Disagree and the reason is Context which many people including myself don't often consider when Posting on Survival Monkey. In this case the statistics are misleading as they include people in remote places that there is almost no likelihood that a terrorist attack will strike. On the other hand if you live in a Major Metropolitan area, New York City for example, the odds increase greatly.

I always assume that a major terrorist attack in a City will likely involve many terrorists and weapons like BioWarfare that can do so much damage. Yes, I agree the chances are against a person getting caught in one single terrorist attack by a few terrorists, but if its a large scale attack, that's what I worry about especially if I live in that City.

I do avoid more so because of nutcases than terrorists, going to Malls, Movie Theaters in the evenings, any places where there are large gatherings of people.