posted on Aug, 5 2007 @ 10:27 PM
I think you could cut the number down by a wide margin.
First of all, a certain number would be non-violent types in for things like petty theft, soft drugs, burglary, white collar crimes, etc.... These
would really be no more, or less violent than the guy next door under sit-x conditions. This is not to say that they would be harmless, but under
sit-x conditions, neither is your next door neighbor in the burbs.
And then you have the long term convicts who are career criminals. Many of them will be out to settle scores with other convicts and selected parties,
so under the "rules" of sit-x, they will kill off a good third (guess here) of there own type.
There will also be the drug crazies who will think of nothing except excessive use of whatever caused them to go down in the first place. These types
are not survival oriented, and they would tend not to last very long under severe conditions and total freedom.
But there would be a core of hardened criminals that would both survive and thrive in an environment of chaos and little or no law. While I doubt that
the number would be much higher than one-fourth of the total prison population, that group would be a serious threat to any and all that they
But the truth is, in a sit-x scenario, a survivor would need to treat every stranger as if they had just gotten out of death row. Unless a person was
known and you had a reason to trust that person, then ANYBODY is capable of the most violent action, even the mild mannered guy that bags your
groceries at the local store.
Sit-x will, by the loosening of moral restrictions that form a society, cause a lot of people, convicts or not, to behave in a barbaric manner.
In the end, a person must trust no stranger until they show good cause to be trusted. I know that sounds harsh, but life will be harsh if such a day