Well, I have just read this thread from start to finish, and gone back over it to reread many of the posts again. It has taken over 3 hours. I have decided none of you will survive for too long because you will be attacked and killed in your homes by mobs from the towns with even bigger and better guns than you have. It seems everyone in the US owns several guns, and whilst you might kill the first 20 or so that attack, sheer numbers will overpower you. Sure they will take out your weaker neighbours first, and those on the road to your place, but they will find you. Maybe even your neighbours will turn on you before the mob finds you. It will happen. I consider myself a good shot, but I know I would have no hope against more than a few attackers with even similar weapons, and against big stuff the end would come quicker.
Most of us who live in the country, and have done for decades, know how to survive without power, even when our own power making equipment fails us. Naturally we all have stores of food and fuel, and water is not usually too much of a problem. My wife and I have been snowed in for about 7 weeks (not here) and survived, many of our sheep did not. It takes a lot of snow to be melted to make a couple of cups of coffee. We would survive short-term again if it was a local disaster. Long term, I am sure nobody knows.
There was an undercurrent of animosity in the thread from an early point. People who disagreed with somebody else痴 suggestions or point of view were often too ready to simply put down the idea. The rot really started with #149 by Grumpy. It begins and ends: 添our all talking??.see how long you last before your trading the wife for a burger! Now this upset a few people as one would expect. I read it the same way as several others that he says we would all do it, including himself of course. He then tells us he was not including himself, so is it just every other man? Or was he addressing some individual posters? Later he tells us to lighten up and that it is all supposed to be funny. It seemed to be a serious thread to me. By this stage people appear to have begun to find reasons to disagree with somebody else and it worsens. As is usual on these forums people do not properly read the whole post that someone makes and they jump to conclusions about a phrase within the post. I know at times I do it myself, but try not to do so.
I found it interesting to find the point where I think the main "argument" started. #234 in my opinion - by Grumpy. An unnecessary attack on Rob-D I thought. And I have no idea who either of them are. The last two days have been particularly bad with threats of violence today, and yesterday Grumpy telling Rob-D that his opinion is worthless. The man started the thread asking for opinions, Rob-D gave some, complimented other people on suggestions they had made, including Grumpy twice and as for his opinions being worthless read his posts 57,66,74,88,106,142/3,157,208 (the one about Maslow) etc. They are valuable lessons in how and why he takes a particular view of what he would do.
Unlike others, I disagree that the references to operating first as a group, family, commune or whatever is irrelevant. It is very, very relevant if we are going beyond "the week as it was". Again some posters misread Rob-D in his remarks on communism. The way I read it, and he tried to explain this again later, is that the African tribe he referred to was operating a basic communism system not a political communism, but an idealistic communal way of living as a group.
What have the last three paragraphs got to do with the thread? They show people (humankind in general, not the posters on the thread) for what they are and why, as has already been pointed out by others, that in disaster situations anarchy takes over. We can make all the plans we like, but surviving anarchy will be the biggest problem. You have crops in your garden, they will be stolen, as will your fuel, anything moveable and mobs or individuals will not think twice about killing for it. Maslow was right my needs first.
