On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:42:24 -0700, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Ignoramus10903" wrote in message
...
Due to the recent media attention, I was thinking about
"preppers". These "preppers", apparently, are a little different from
"survivalists", in that they are mostly hoarding ammunition, food and
comfort items and are not as interested in wilderness, orienteering
etc. I watched a TV program about preppers and luxury bomb shelters
and I thought, this is nonsense. A female version of survivalism.

I was thinking about it and realized that this approach has a fatal
flaw, which is that preppers assume that when the world as we know
ends, they will still be able to live in and use their homes.

The history shows that much of the time, disasters and wars dispossess
people of their homes.

Disaster strikes, bye bye food hoard. Usually bye bye guns also.

Then what would a "prepper" do? Not much. They are ****ed just like
everyone else.

I am not really against hoarding, and I have always been a bit of a
hoarder, but I wanted to show that hoarding has its limitations. There
is some important preparedness that goes beyond hoarding and spending
big $$$ on bulky perishables.

i

In My NOT So Humble Opinion, I believe that a mobile survivalist who roams
around will have a lot to scrounge for several years, and would be at an
advantage of a stationary one. A stationary survivalist would have a target
on their back, and a mobile one could follow the seasons, the natural crops,
the natural fauna, and find plenty of remaining shelter and firewood.

And he would have a target on his back from hundreds of thousands of
other mobile ones.

The mobile ones would generally be either the desperate ones or the
dead...at which point they become less than mobile.


you rather spend the Winter in Minnesota, or in Florida? Just like the
hunter-gathering nomads, I believe those groups and individuals would
survive at a better rate than groups of people who could be seiged.

There is a reason nomads became largely extinct by the 10th century.
If the
**** hit the fan, I'd head south until I found a nice year round climate,
then look for a stable food supply, probably near a seacoast. After that, I
believe that bands would form, just as they did in ancient times, with the
best hunter/gatherers binding together and forming new societies and
affiliations. Still, even if it was a solitary existence, I would prefer it
to a social group, as society would insist on self-esteem clubs, equality of
the distribution of food (even to the fatties who didn't hunt), and the
Leave-No-Lazy Fat Asses Behind cliques, and other liberal ideas that have
been proven failures, but would come out even in a new world order.

So the 7 tribes of Native Americans were self esteem clubs?
fascinating!!

I'll take my chances with myself and my little band, if you don't mind. Or
just raid and terrorize the liberal social groups for their stores. After
all, they will not be making any weapons, will they?

There will be few liberal ones alive 6 months after things go tits up.
You wont find any food..but stores will still be filled with many good
usable items.


Steve

Perhaps you should review the links and cites I provided Iggy.

Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie