Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Survival Vs. Social Instincts - Which Do You Choose?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 06:08 PM
link   
It would depend on the situation. If possible, I'd try to talk and reason with the person, or find a way other than violence. To me, shooting them is a last resort. However, that said, if some guy comes in firing, I'm not going to politely ask him to cease fire, I'm going to blow his head off. If the guy came in, say holding his gun, but not shooting, maybe demanding all my food or something, that is when I'd try to reason or use other nonviolent means, first.

It would also depend if I'd had run-ins with that particular individual before. If some guy comes along that I know has stolen from me in the past or has harmed others or me in the past, he is going to get far less leeway from me. In that kind of situation, I would be more likely to resort to violence, even perhaps to using it before they did, knowing that they cannot be reasoned with or trusted, and therefore not even trying those approaches.




posted on Jun, 2 2007 @ 04:30 PM
link   
If a young person has a firearm and pointing it at a family member, ally or me, they're going to catch a bullet if I'm armed. If I catch them unawares and can safely disarm them,I will unless there's a contagious plague going around. Traditional hospitality will be offered such as water and shelter during storms. Food and other supplies will be traded for.

Despite all the chaos and violence portrayed by the news media in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster, most folks were actually helping each other. The looters were a low percentage of the population and many actually waited for days for some relief before turning to IMHO scavanging for supplies to survive because the slow response from from all 3 levels of govt't.

There's no way the gov't could have coped completely with the Katrina sized disaster, it was simply too big. The same thing has actually happened at least 3 times during the 20th century: The San Francisco Earthquake, The Misissippi Flood of 30's and Hurricane Camille. The Galveston Hurricane of 1900 wiped out today's equivalent of 10,000-15,000 people within a few hours. A true Cat 4 or 5 Hurricane direct strike on any of the major Atlantic or Gulf Coast cities would cause similar death and destruction as happened in NO,La.

The criminal element will always be there but most folks were helping each other out and if we can get rid of FEMA and return to a true Civil Defense program such disaster's effect can be greatly reduced.



posted on Jun, 2 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   
While, I agree that most people are civil, you can't allow your family to be at risk in an effort to be socially correct. In a sit-x, you have to assume that whomever you meet is an adversary, at least until proven otherwise.

I know that such a notion seems abhorrent to most people, but when there is no law except what you can enforce yourself, things are different.

I would not be a "shoot on sight any strangers" advocate, but strangers will get a real close inspection before I assume they are harmless. And this will aplly to anyone old enough to do harm to people in wheelchairs.

That's the way survival is.





new topics
 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join