Organizing into groups

[jamesneuen]

lol, well DG, if you come down here you wouldn't have to deal with bears. Might be some heroic story about rescuing babies burning in the surf as you fight off a few sharks though.

[Katrina]

I've said it before , Dome, you and the Mrs. and the fur babies are always welcome here.They'll have to deal with my two fur babies. Although,Ms Chloe IS our guard cat. She's really tolerant about other animals in the house as long as they realize she's the queen cat. LOL

[Kesephist]

One point has not been addressed in all this. A hateful one, and I am getting damned tired of being the stupid SOB that keeps kicking this sort of thing up in the several places that I frequent.

But it has to be done.

Levity aside, what do your several groups aim to do to those otherwise unthreatening souls who do not meet your several criteria?

Banish them, with what they were encountered with?

Banish them after stripping them of their things "for the greater good"?

Imprison them?

Execute them?

I'll candidly admit, I do not know what I would do. EE&BE, probably. Damn well will not farm it out, if it becomes needful to be Judge Lynch.

[jamesneuen]

For me it depends on what they know, where you meet them and if they are a threat.

If they're a few miles away when met, know nothing about your living area and are no threat then leave them be.

If they are meet at your area or nearby, have intimate knowledge of your area or are a threat then that's a different story. But it would be a judgement call based on the time and conditions. I believe everyone can be useful, just not always trusted

[Kesephist]

Egalitarianism is one of the first things jettisoned in the face of survival. The ATSHTF-time will be a version of the Spartan agoge, writ large, with the prize not being citizenship, but life. "No quarter, asked or given; no prisoners." Mercy is different... quick and, if possible, painless, is merciful.

Being part of a larger group to be disposable for its central core membership... this is different from those that are being opposed? In what way?

As stated before, my plans are as a solo... difficult and long-shot at best. Avoiding conundrums such as this are one of the few good things about it.

This whole line of discussion, btw, is prepping, too. Mental and ethical prep.

[jamesneuen]

So prepping solo, what would you do when a family of 4 shows up randomly?

[jamesneuen]

The idea of egalitarianism applies to fundamental worth and social worth. When society collapses so does that. Your worth is based on what you can bring to the table. It's up to each individual to ensure they have skills that are useful.

Not sure what you mean about being disposable to the central group. But if someone contributes and has worth, then they are as much an integral part as the originals. The difference then is that the outsiders need your group. You may not need them, which puts you in the position of control.

I agree that being solo I would make far different decisions but I have 3 others to protect and provide for, so things are more difficult. I am willing to blur, cross, or get rid of social morals to do whatever I need for them.

[Stormfeather]

One point has not been addressed in all this. A hateful one, and I am getting damned tired of being the stupid SOB that keeps kicking this sort of thing up in the several places that I frequent.

I, for one, cannot say why you are getting kicked when you bring topics like this one up in other forums, But I can assure you, that wont happen here. I am in agreeance with the others here, you have not said or acted in any way poorly nor do your submissions reflect poorly, so by all means, keep them coming. You DO NOT have to agree to anything I say, but that is because we are 2 different mindsets, with Im sure, similar, but different goals when it comes to prepping. Just because we dont agree, or see eye to eye, doesnt mean we dont listen and respect others opinions.

But it has to be done.

Levity aside, what do your several groups aim to do to those otherwise unthreatening souls who do not meet your several criteria?

Well, our location is pretty secluded, so while it would be pretty unlikely we would have folks like that come into our AO, we still have came up with a protocol for just such circumstances.

Banish them, with what they were encountered with?

By banishing them, that would entail allowing them access to our location, which we do not plan on doing. But our mindset is along the same lines. We wont be allowing them access to our location, and would gently, with visual indicators, suggest that there are other places they should look for a place to bug out to. By that, I mean implied force, we have the weaponry, we have the skillset, and we have the experience of taking on smaller, and oftentimes, larger forces, and have the know-how to ensure our survival. This comes from multiple deployments overseas in combat zones on 3 different continents. By having a show of force with people staged with overwhelming firepower, and one representative explaining to them politely, that there is no place for them here, but offering other avenues for them possibly explore, I think is a great option that many here have thought of as well.

Banish them after stripping them of their things "for the greater good"?

If they are mobile, then its a pretty good (oh boy...) assumption that they are worse off than we are, so No, I would see no reason to strip them of their belongings.

Imprison them?

Extra mouths to feed? No thanks, I have my own to worry about.

Execute them?

Have they performed hostile acts against our group? Do they have the means, abilitys, and inclination to attempt it?

I'll candidly admit, I do not know what I would do. EE&BE, probably. Damn well will not farm it out, if it becomes needful to be Judge Lynch.

You dont have to know what to do, and most people wont know what to do until they are faced with the situation, the best I can offer, is to come up with multiple agreed upon protocols that you can fall back on in case you are faced with the situation, and rely on that as your baseline for accepting/rejecting people into your group or location.

Keep asking your questions, I love the train of thought we have going on here!

[Stormfeather]

One of the more disgusting things about the circumstances that make SHTF so likely is the forced loss of anything resembling softness. Where sentimentality is regarded as a cardinal sin.

I dont believe its the forced loss as you say, but more of the need to harden up, and tighten your personal standards up. Sentimentality will always be there, because we all will wish for the days past where there was no need to be bugging out.

Sir, I understand your point of view, and from a mathematical point of view, agree with it. Nowhere, however, is it written that I have to LIKE it.

Once again, I agree with you, I understand my point of view, I agree with it, and like you, I dont like it either, but I consider it necessary to ensure the survival of myself, my family, and my circle of those close to me. Its a hard decision, but its also my burden to carry if it ever comes to fruition.

And I don't.

I do have the advantage (or handicap) that all planning here has been on my own. No group, no backup. So perhaps I have the 'luxury" of thinking so 'soft'.

As a solo prepper, you have us all at an advantage, you can maintain opsec, persec, and if you plan accordingly, there is no reason you would ever have to worry when you bug out, because you wont have to answer to anyone, and your decisions affect you and you alone.

If stating all that costs me my access here and what camaraderie I have made, so be it.

"You can put me before the Gates of Hell, but I won't back down."

I see no reason why it would, your opinion is just that, yours and yours alone, nobody here is going to slam you for it, unless you start making statements about cooking cats for survival.

[jamesneuen]

I dunno, if he has any good recipes for cat he may be welcome with ST.