|
Post by celticwarrior on Jun 26, 2012 9:38:48 GMT -7
When you watch the original Dawn of the Dead, the survivors are holed up with all the supplies they need and safe from the zombies in a mall. However, it only takes a biker gang of about three dozen with a decent amount of weapons, some logistical support vehicles, the desire to get into the mall and willingness to take the losses to do it, to get into the place and take whatever they wanted. Thirty or forty adults who are used to a violent lifestyle, have little regard for human life (their own or others) and have access to enough weapons and ammo to sustain a siege is a formidable force to be reckoned with and should not be discounted. This guy and his crew might be a joke, but not every group would be like that. In LA, you might get 100 Crips or Bloods that tie together, or a whole chapter of Hell's Angels or Mongols, or you might have mass escapes from prisons in some disasters that let out murderers, rapists and burglers en masse onto the streets, including large clans of skinheads, neo-nazis, and other prison gangs. There is also the possibility of rogue members or ex-members of law enforcement or military that might band together and become a raider group. With enough trained members and ammo, they could take pretty much any site you can imagine, and trying to defend against those kinds of odds would be dangerous to your family and group at the very least, possibly even fatal to many members. It is something to consider, at least.
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Jun 26, 2012 16:20:17 GMT -7
Hmmm I think he speaks too well to be a gang member. He uses 'normal' words when if he was 'rappin witchyall' he wouldn't use that verbiage. I think he's trying to make a point as if he is coming from a gang background. I think he's an educated man that has formulated a plan to 'teach' about prepping and not telling everyone what you have. Most urban gangs aren't going to leave their 'turf', what they know and feel comfortable in to head out to rural America.. First off they'd think about those crazy gun totin rednecks out there would be way to trigger happy. I'd be more worried about some biker gang/ some criminal element gang/ some redneck gang vs. some ghetto posse. Out in rural America there are those who live off the government teat and don't have two nickels to rub together. But they do have a 'gang'.. Not everyone who lives in rural America has a garden, a chicken coop, or raises rabbits (or can kill them like Dink does). Not everyone in Rural America are good folks.. lots of meth labs out there in rural America and they are NOT prepping.. they may have guns but they don't have flour sugar salt or tea. I could be way off base here but that's just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by celticwarrior on Jun 26, 2012 17:15:03 GMT -7
The other thing rural America has is Hatfield-McCoy kinds of family ties, where a single extended family might own a majority of the businesses in a small town, or have a monopoly on the positions of power like Judges, Sheriffs, Postmasters, merchants, and so forth. Someone who was on the outs with such a family, or who was a stranger to the townspeople there, in a case where social order outside the town has broken down, might find that they are unable to buy things they need, or be mistreated by the local law or are at the very least not protected by it. When I was down in places like Georgia and Tennessee, I found a lot of little burghs that had the same name on half of the businesses on Main Street. While that might mean those locals might be tight knit enough to be self-sufficient in a crisis, it doesn't bode well for any visitor or stranger unlucky enough to be caught there when such an emergency arises.
|
|
Freedom57
Learning the ropes
Have Fun!
Posts: 22
|
Post by Freedom57 on Jun 26, 2012 17:47:32 GMT -7
No one really knows until it hits the fan. April 27th 2011 and March 2nd 2012 left my area devastated by tornados. One quickly learns not everyone who offers help wants to really help you. Some stop by to see what is scattered all over your yard that they can help themselves to. On the other side of the coin, there were a lot of decent people that worked hard to help others and we all came out of it better people. Survival mentality will win the day over survival gear. In a blink of an eye one's gear can be gone. As the song states, "freedoms just another word for nothing left to lose..."
|
|
|
Post by WILL on Jun 26, 2012 18:14:40 GMT -7
Youtube guy assumes that a marauding group will be able to successfully over-run and kill prepers for their supplies. In my case, he's right to a degree. It's just me and my immediate family. OP-SEC and the fact that I can't provide for a larger group keeps me from trying to put together such a group. I’m hoping that after the disaster I can work with my neighbors on a security plan, but that’s a big ? right now. Just like him though, I am planning on trying to work with my neighbors to provide for our needs, but there’s no guarantee they will have the time, energy or ambition to co-operate with me.
Therefore, it probably wouldn't be all that hard for some organized raiders to stake out my home and pick me and my family off or kidnap one of my kids, leading to a successful raid. They better do their homework and not screw it up, because I fight very well. If I can, I'll make them pay for trying to take my family. Hopefully in the end the motto, “Live by the sword, die by the sword” will ring true for them.
Bottom line, I do think he’s right that you should try to work with your neighbors to meet needs. It's just that he's planning on doing evil and I'm not.
PS- I agree that some serious disaster scenarios could relegate most roads as impassible to vehicle travel. We're talking about traffic snarls in all available vehicle paths, debris or other natural road blocks preventing passing in a vehicle, damaged roads, road-blocks or martial law, gas shortages, violence, NBC, ect. Pulling off a long distance bug-out under those conditions would be a worst case scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on Jun 26, 2012 21:01:47 GMT -7
The other thing rural America has is Hatfield-McCoy kinds of family ties, where a single extended family might own a majority of the businesses in a small town, or have a monopoly on the positions of power like Judges, Sheriffs, Postmasters, merchants, and so forth. Someone who was on the outs with such a family, or who was a stranger to the townspeople there, in a case where social order outside the town has broken down, might find that they are unable to buy things they need, or be mistreated by the local law or are at the very least not protected by it. When I was down in places like Georgia and Tennessee, I found a lot of little burghs that had the same name on half of the businesses on Main Street. While that might mean those locals might be tight knit enough to be self-sufficient in a crisis, it doesn't bode well for any visitor or stranger unlucky enough to be caught there when such an emergency arises. There are places like that everywhere, not just around here. In any rural setting it is wise to stay Apolitical openly.
|
|
|
Post by huntinguy on Jun 26, 2012 21:20:40 GMT -7
I won't dare try to stay and protect, provide and care for my family alone. I'll return home ( it's not a long drive) and bug out with family and friends. I'll risk the trouble from within over the trouble from without.
|
|
|
Post by WILL on Jul 1, 2012 9:38:37 GMT -7
Part 1 of 4. UMMMMMMM. Think we might have this covered. But some may want to think on this. Dude just might be right As I thought about this issue more, I realized that the gangs are basically starting on an even playing field with the survivalists; thus, their survival odds could remain equal or skew one way or another depending on their ability to adapt to the changing survival environment. Right now, gangs are fairly good at being criminals and survivalists are fairly good at protecting themselves and their families. In other words, some super navy seal like raider gang isn't going to simply materialize out of nowhere. They will start as a regular gang or group of people just like the survivalists. Both groups will develop and hone their particular skills as the disaster develops. Neither group operates in a bubble, so both will be reacting to each others developments. Survivalists will harden their defenses as the situation deteriorates and gangs will refine their attacks as they gain experience. In the beginning, I could see gangs victimizing "soft" targets inside their immediate AO. Word of elevated crime levels will have survivalists battening down the hatches and mobilizing with others to fill their security and other needs. Since raiders only have one skill, raiding, they will rapidly refine their combat skills or die trying. The survivors will be very tough combatants. The survivalists won't be as combat oriented, but they have the home field advantage which is huge. My point is that as a survivalist, you won’t be living, acting and thinking like you do now when a highly trained group of raiders descends on your area. You'll have evolved, and be ready for it.
|
|
|
Post by celticwarrior on Jul 1, 2012 16:27:21 GMT -7
I think you are on target with that assessment, Will. Generally, I see street gangs as tiny feudal lords, vying for control of their environment against all others who could stand in their way. I don't see them exiting their city until and unless they are forced out or run out of resources there. If you are an urban survivalist, that would be bad news. If you live way out in the boonies away from the cities, I don't see the gangs coming out to get you until they absolutely have to. Why leave the place you know for a place you don't, or become a small fish in a big pond when you can be the great white of your little fish tank? Raider groups who form from police, military, mercenaries, or militia groups are a whole different problem. They could and likely will be mobile, well-trained, and actively looking for EXACTLY the kind of place you as a survivalist would be attracted to or live in. The biggest problem with that kind of force is that they are used to combat situations and 'acceptable losses' where you and your family are not. Which of your kids is 'expendable'? What adult could you bear to lose to hold down the fort and provide escape time for the rest of the family? It isn't as easy as a loose group of adult professional combatants to send folks on suicide missions when it is your own flesh and blood that you have to work with.
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on Jul 1, 2012 20:30:02 GMT -7
To my mind, theory is all well and good, but the rubber has met the road already in multiple places, times, and too different degree's around the world.
The typical models will not apply.
The military/spec ops/mercenary etc model will have some application, but not really cover key aspects. The gangland model will have some application, but again, will not cover key aspects.
Gangs would not be what they are without the fear card. Military units would not be military units without the discipline/organizational/rank system.
There is a mixed element of both in places where it has hit the fan, and to the locals of those places, where the end of the world as they knew it has already occurred.
Gangs will definitely nucleate from many of the scenario's survivalist prepare for. They will refine, and get better at raiding in the early going. Militaristic groups will do the same in the early going.
If the event goes on long enough, both will end up in the same place. A militarized gang. The structure of which reflects more the structure of organized crime rather than either outright gangs, or military units.
That structure will run more like the following:
Boss with an adviser Under-boss or two Several lieutenants each with their own specific purpose and AO Foot soldiers
There is one area that differs from that standard model for SHTF. Controllers are inserted either between the under-boss and lieutenants, or between the lieutenants and the foot soldiers as the drug cartels do. Their purpose is much the same as a soviet era 'political officer'. They float between the various levels of the organization keeping an eye on attitudes and business reporting to their 'boss' or the 'advisers'.
Their goal is not to raid. By the time they have formed into a cohesive organization, that level of events has already occurred. They have already went through the stages of in-fighting, fighting each other, and have moved on to guarding and farming specific territories. They will usually attempt to get the people on their side so that they will 'inform' the soldiers and through them the organization. By farming, I don't mean planting beans. I mean collecting 'dues/fees/protection money-supplies' etc.
Raiders of gang or military style groups eventually burn out all the way around sooner than later. Chaos likes to be ordered, and order depends on chaos to exist.
There may in fact be a military rule of the area, but even in that, the organized crime model will hold the true power in a post event world.
|
|
|
Post by celticwarrior on Jul 1, 2012 20:56:36 GMT -7
Power vacuums are like any type of vacuum in nature. They need to be filled. Soviet Russia is a prime example. During the USSR regime, the people did what they needed to do to survive a brutal, invasive and dangerous government, which used terror and excessive punishment to keep the populous under control. The KGB and the gulags were an effective deterrent. But once they were gone and the threat decreased, the country didn't just embrace a free market and democracy and get rid of it's oppressors. Instead, a mafia-like organized crime syndicate formed and used graft, corruption, bribes, threats, extortion and murder to obtain and maintain their control. I think you would see some similar types of organized crime pop up, especially in areas where they have traditionally had some successes, like the New York/New Jersey area. In others, the vacuum will be filled by street gangs, military dictatorships, some sort of 'democratic' group that exercises old style rough-justice to make sure the votes go their way, and religious zealot groups that will control large areas similar to Mormon Utah. After a SHTF scenario, Apocalyptic cults will undoubtably come out of the woodwork trying to convert and proselytize the masses, and perhaps punish or even sacrifice the unfaithful or unworthy. The doomsday cults of the middle ages were a fine example of how things might go in that case.
|
|