TEOTWAWKI Are You Better Off Shooting a Stranger then Letting them into Your Shelter?

Like some african tribes providing bodies and bones at the entrances to their village ,good warning not to pass.

 

See your all looking at this wrong....

Invite them in... then shoot them...

Youll eat well for at least a couple days (depending on your storage solutions) BBQ, Tangine, grill, stew...
and make sure to keep lots of salt on hand, "Long Pig" Prosciutto should last for ages so unless people realize everyone that visits you "disapears", you should have a steady supply

 

Let me just say this before you lock it:

One of the absolute worst things you can do in all this take human life. Forget the moral and ethical qualms. Let's be practical: If the S really does HTF, it probably won't be an absolute thing or a permanent thing. You'll have to contend with whatever law enforcement is still around. Two years after the fact, you might find yourself in a situation of restored order with a restored crime investigation capability.

If the vic or vics are local, you may end up with family or friends. The last thing you want to do is create a vendetta situation where you're looking over your back for the next decade.

Cannibalism is a cute idea, but remember that if your neighbors catch wind of it, they'll be coming at you with torches and pitchforks. Cannibals have never been tolerated except in extreme privation scenarios.

My suggestion in all this is this: act lawfully in all circumstances even in the absence of law unless absolutely necessary.

 

You were onto a valid alternative though...rather than being limited only the choices of shooting your wannabe visitors or letting them in, giving them a good reason to change their mind and NOT want to visit you at all seems like a win-win for everyone.

Using a creative initial greeting might just do the trick. Something like; "Hello my children...I would be happy to have you, as long as you have heard the word of the Lord, accept ME as your god and savior and pledge all of your virgins, male and female, to me."

or maybe; "Maudie, we have company...did the doctor mention if your leprosy was contagious or not?"

or even; "Ethel, we gots company...can you fry up some of them three-headed fish we caught down yonder at the nuclear plant? "

and of course; "Well we've been out of water for the last three days, can I offer ya'll some luke warm pee?"

 

Now yur thinkin!

 

That one is a tried and tested stratagem....with many variations on that theme. I believe golden tablets were involved with one such scheme....One may find that instead of deterring visitors, it may result in additional "family" members....but that's ok, one'll have a pool of mind slaves to repopulate the world with....one's genes will figure prominently in the gene pool of course.

 

Actually IF things go south there will already be a lot of dead to deal with and knowing how to correctly deal with those dead bodies is going to take some discipline .
Moving them to a location away from any living space is imperative .
Having a pit or a furnas for disposal is no picnic and fuel for performing this task will be hard come by but necessary to reduce the possibility of spread of decease . Rats flourish in these environments .
Seems to me too that a serious load of large trash bags might well be in order as well as disposable gloves and masks .
An LEO friend of mine smokes a cigar while dealing with corpses on a crime scene just to cover the stench , some guys use Vicks.
Not to derail but we are talking about death .
I would not out right kill any one unless that are a direct threat to those I care for .
Survailance should be well away from home base,
Ideally no one should see your place , or recognize it as a safe haven.
Lighted and fortified is more threatening than dark and empty, according to those having been in that situation .
All the more important to have electronic surveillance available .
Those standing guard are sitting ducks .
Scouts with solid communications, randomly roaming the perimeter are a better defense.
A scout can have the authority to speak for the group when intercepting those looking for help .
Also can be a filter if peradventure some one with needed talents is met .Even then a protocol for acceptance needs to be established , a distant house for surveillance for a season (Bugged), a job at a listening post in exchange for food/med . these are not introduced to the main camp till as such time their worth is proved. Also ,If they are carrying a decease they do not infect the home group .

 

I think this is a really good post. @shaman is correct. If SHTF, you have no way of knowing how long things will remain broken. I just watched a movie about the lights going out. It showed society breaking down, people doing bad things but the electricity only stayed off for few weeks. I think that is one thing we do not talk about is if services are restored quickly. If one takes extremes immediately, one will be held accountable.

 

One is accountable for what one does (unless mentally incompetent of course)....regardless of whether times are civilised and peaceful, or whether the world is going to hell in a handbasket in the throes of a TEOTWAWKI cataclysm...the issue is whether one will be called to account, and how. Even in a TEOTWAWKI environment, there will be pockets of rudimentary law making and law enforcement....even if it is only of the Old West, Judge Roy Bean kind, with locally appointed sherrifs and judges. Gallows and public executions may make something of a comeback....there being no electricity to power up old sparky...hmmmm....seems like an opportunity for inventing a solar powered old sparky....

 

The consequences for our actions shouldn't deter us - right and wrong should be our guide. If I take a life to protect my family I do not fear my personal consequences as my family is safe. We all die, the question is how we live.

 

A principal fallacy in this line-of-reasoning is the popular opinion that most civilian fortifications are defensible for extended periods of time. However the harsh reality is that most of them simply are not.

I agree that if you start shooting at or about your outside defensive perimeter (typically 75 to 150 yards) then you’re going to have to keep on shooting; and, I rather doubt that you’ll be getting very much sleep while the engagement continues.

If, on the other hand, you wait to begin shooting until after your inside defensive perimeter is crossed (typically 75 yards to contact distance) then the chance of you ending up, ‘like a dog scratching too many fleas’ is going to be much greater; and you, yourself, will become more susceptible to being damaged.

The closer attackers get to your shelter/larder, the more their numbers and marksmanship will work against you. So, when it comes to most civilian fortifications: You’re going to be damned if you start shooting and damned, again, if you don’t. Neither do I recommend leaving any sort of ‘bad luck talismans’ around the neighborhood. The less overt evidence of a viable survival presence in the community the better!

My best advice? If you’re not part of a larger survival community, then, hide for as long as you are able. If a raiding party is moving through your neighborhood or, maybe, down your road then I would suggest temporarily abandoning your fixed fortification and taking the fight off-property and to 'them', rather than waiting for 'them' to arrive at your door. (Very nearly the same technique used by the always outnumbered LRRP recon units in Vietnam.)

What do I see as our own worst and most immediate survival problem? Ahh, that would be almost anyone who resides within a 1/2 mile of the farm. The best home defense weapon? An AR15; and, preferably, one with a collapsible stock. The most workable survival tactic? A viable defense plan that is backed up to an EXFILTRATION PLAN — One that has high concealability and several resupply caches set up along the route.

Somebody’s already said it; but I’ll say it again: Ultimately all but the very strongest and most sophisticated of fixed fortifications will survive for, possibly, as long as the first 18 months; and even the deepest and most durable shelters will NOT be able to prevent themselves from imploding much beyond the 24 to 30 month mark. ('Why? ' Because people who are severely stressed and forced to live together in confined spaces, historically, don't get along well together!)

In my opinion ‘How ’ will most people survive? I think that only those who are primarily able to live off the land — like, say, the allied infantry troops moving through Nazi-occupied Italy, France, and Germany (et al) during the Second World War — will have the best chance of ‘passing through the fire ’.

In threads like these nobody wants to either talk about or to seriously consider scavenging to survive; but I think that the longer civilization remains down, and the longer someone continues to breathe then the more scavenging the remaining survivors are going to be forced to do.

Marksmen, outdoorsmen, and combat medics will, at least initially, have the most viable chances to survive. Farmers, farming, cattlemen, livestock, and other types of animal husbandry? Forget about it! Simply forget about it. (The starving neighbors will quickly eat all of your livestock up on you!)

My neighbor, one of the county's leading farmers, has had an ongoing problem with cattle rustlers AND equipment thieves for, at least, the past 5 or 6 years, now. I’m sure he and his family have lost a lot of sleep over these problems too; and armed night patrols haven't really helped them much; but, I will say that taking the garbage over to the dumpster at night has become something that we're no longer willing to risk, anymore!

By my best guess our neighbor is presently out between 30 and 40 thousand dollars in livestock and equipment losses. I can only imagine how these losses would increase in a social crisis; and, I suspect that the current level of loss would have to go up significantly over anything that is happening right now. Furthermore as the county’s population continues to rise I think it unlikely that these problems are going to either mitigate themselves, or just go away.

I’ve noticed that his several herds seem to increase in size during times of social unrest and government uncertainty (like the entire Obama administration). Do I think farming and/or animal husbandry is a viable solution to any sudden economic crisis and/or social decay in our somewhat rural area? (Over 617 square miles with a current population of approx. 170,000 and growing. More on weekends, too!) Well, I’ve been watching this situation for a number of years, now; and, in anything other than the SHORT TERM, (3 to 4 months, or less) no I do NOT.

Whenever hard economic times hit the Poconos the very first thing many of these citified families will do is to find a farm, drive by, and briefly slow down while tossing their unwanted cats and dogs out the vehicle's window and onto the road before quickly driving off! (Because, don't you know, farms are magic places where their unwanted and unaffordable household pets will be able to find shelter and more easily fend for themselves.)

There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that if (or when) an economic crisis becomes severe enough, these same people will very quickly start eating their unaffordable pets rather than anonymously donating them to the neighbors like what they are presently doing! Either people will quickly break down into small pockets of social cooperation and/or community interest who are willing to look after one another, or we’re, all, going to be lost, and very well might end up feasting upon, — not only the pets, but — one another too!

In case you are unaware this exact type of situation is presently happening in other areas of the world RIGHT NOW. North Korea, and Kenya immediately come to mind. (Google it, you'll see!) Unfortunately, the realist in me realizes that anywhere in the world where hopeless starvation is currently widespread you can be pretty sure that some form or another of covert cannibalism is also taking place.

Damned sad, I know; but the United Nations has proven to be monstrously ineffective; and eating the neighbors is just one of the brutal realities of twenty-first century life on planet Earth.

(Close your eyes and ignore this reply. Maybe, somehow, it'll all disappear. I only wish the problem were as simple as, 'Should I, or shouldn't I shoot first? ' Regrettably, the problem is much more complex than that!)

 

THINKING ABOUT IT JUST A LITTE MORE .
It seems as though if there is gun fire , it will draw more participants , because ,,
There is the assumption something is worth taking,
and something worth defending.

The more meager ones defenses appear to be, (bullet fire report) , the more interest is generated to overcome it.
Others may join the fight.

The fight may not be over ones things, but over speculated resources (hunting territory )
"Your life by what you need to consume to live, is a threat to my life, and what I/we need to survive"

This is a most sensitive subject,a test of values and morality ,courage and determination.
It seems that IMHO those that choose not to prepare, but expect feed off others, should not be rewarded with survival .
Warnings have been going on for a very long time.

God has watched over me these many years , and should I loose my preps, I can accept that my time is; either due, or that God will see to my survival some other way.
My preps are not for the flesh survival only, but eternal in the Lord and His perfect will.

 

If belief in an after life and the fear of divine retribution for breaking that deity's laws is what's keeping theists (mono, poly, pan...etc etc) from running amok in this life, in this world, then I'm cool with that, and wouldn't disabuse such theists from holding onto, and acting upon those beliefs, as if it were a true fact.

TEOTWAWKI would have been pretty much like business as usual for most of primitive humanity, who managed to get along fine without the kind of big .gov, that has institutional police forces, judiciary, legislative assemblies, senates, presidents, governors, penal institutions, constitutional and statute laws and so forth....law enforcement and justice, such as it was , was dealt with at a more local level, by more unsophisticated, and often, arguably, by more brutal means....it wasn't an every man for himself world then, and it won't be an every man for himself world again, should humanity, for whatever reason, devolve back to those kind of "primitive" times and conditions.

Humanity, is a social species, and has survived to a large extent by "in group" (and sometimes, by "out group" cooperation). Those who fail to play nice and cooperate, were dealt with, often in extreme circumstances, summarily....whether by execution or banishment...personal extinction was pretty much a high probability. So too would it be in a post apocalyptic / TEOTWAWKI world. The protection, (and other social benefits) offered by family...clan...tribe....nation.....requires the price of playing nice with one's fellow humans.....failure to do so, will often lead to living in a world of hurt. So. it won't be a chelloveckian world...it will be a world, as it was, before monotheism.

 

Nothing stops a bad guy, from being a bad guy who wants to do bad things in this world, from actually doing them, other than the perceived probability of being caught and punished in this world.......and even then, for some, the certainty of being caught and punished is no deterrent. Certainly, the fear of divine retribution in an after life may keep, essentially good people from misbehaving...but sociopaths, psychopaths, the mentally incompetent, and folks who are incapable of controlling their criminal impulses: pie in the sky punishments are little, to no deterrent at all.

 

Incorrect. If a bad guy actually tries to do bad things to me or my family, I will stop him by whatever means necessary. If there are consequences afterward, fine...better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 (or worse, being one of those 6 for your loved ones). You will do the same, Chell...we both know it. Anyone who puts society over survival will ultimately realize neither.

 

The first thing anyone approaching us will see is a warning sign. This sign warns that anyone going past it will be fired on. There is a home on each side of the road at this point. It is over a mile from our main position. One of those homes is to be cleared out and turned into a trading center. There is a sign on the house that says trading post. The sign points to a box on a pole. Open the box and there is a cb radio and a small battery. turn on the radio and say break check point 1. Our listening post will answer. At this time they or he or she is already under observation by one of our forward scouts. He is in contact with home base on encrypted coms. At first contact we are looking to determine if they are predators or not. If they try and deceive us our scout will tell us what is really going on. He may snipe that person right there. Or he may call up a team or two or three. He may also fall back to the 1st of 5 defensive positions. This would happen if the force was a large one and deemed dangerous to the group. Check point one is not our first defensive position. It is the trading post and contact area. The post is not manned and no supplies are stored there. We have several electric (solar charged) golf carts with wagons to bring trade goods to the post.

For us determining a persons intent starts with whether or not they lie right from the get go. If they are seeking passage through? they are informed there is no road through and to use an alternate route. If they want to trade they are asked what they need and what they have to offer in trade. All this time they are being watched. If they lie? they die.