- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 14,520
- Reaction score
- 33
HAHAHA... yeah. That hurricane I mentioned that cut us off from the mainland? We lived right in the middle among three military bases -- NAS (Naval Air Station) Pensacola, Hurlburt Field (Air Force + Marines), and Eglin AFB. It was three days before any of them were able to get to us, because they couldn't drive to us, and area had to be cleared before they could so much as land a helicopter. It was a mess. It wasn't their fault... it was just a simple fact that we were cut off and they couldn't get to us.heritage":ycn37998 said:I remember a conversation with an online friend whose husband is in the military - she didn't see the need to have any major plans in place b/c the military/FEMA would be available in X amnt of hours. Not something I want to count on!
Once they did get in, they were awesome! Helping clear roadways and getting to people who needed help. They had triage stations set up in addition to the Red Cross ones that were already there because they were on the peninsula before the storm hit. They had a food and ice drive-through... we went to get a bag of ice, but were going to decline the case of MREs because we had plenty of food and figured someone else needed them more than we did. Turned out, my mom got there, and before she could open her mouth, they got her to pop the trunk, they had a bag of ice and a case of MREs in there, and she was out. :lol: She barely knew what hit her.
We finally used the MREs three years ago when we moved here.
But yeah, anyway, my point was that you can't count on the military/FEMA being there. They may want to be, but it all depends on the situation and the hand they're dealt. In our case, it was a bad hand, and all the intended response times in the world didn't help them get in any faster than they did.
:clap: Five thumbs up! If only I had five thumbs!MaggieJ":ycn37998 said:Hey, Dood! Just a few comments on your post and on the subject of firearms.
Certainly stranger murders are less frequent than murders by family members or friends and acquaintances, but we need to keep in mind that in times of civil unrest, the danger from strangers may become greater.
Twice in my life I have stood guard with a loaded gun in situations where I felt I might have the need to protect myself and my child. Fortunately, neither situation escalated and one turned out to be a false alarm. No harm done. I'm gun savvy enough to exercise extreme caution with firearms, but if necessary I would have shot an intruder in self-defense. And I do believe we should have that option if our home is invaded.
I do think hand-guns need to be controlled because they are so easily concealed by criminals, but the hoops you have to jump through nowadays here in Canada just to have a .22 or shotgun in your home are, I believe, excessive.
The situation in which MamaSheepdog's family and neighbours found themselves this summer, with an armed murdering psycho on the run in their area for two weeks inclines me to feel that guns for self-defense are probably necessary for many.
What does worry me some, however, is the fine line between being prepared for a possible threat and the aggressive attitudes that seem to sometimes accompany this. I'm not talking about here on RT, but on some prepper forums it sometimes seems like there are people just hoping it will happen. And that is scary.
I think, in general, there are cultural and historical differences between how Canadians and Americans regard firearms. Americans believe strongly in their right to bear arms. Canadians, maybe not so much. It's the American "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" versus the Canadian "Peace, Order and Good Government." (Not that our government is good, anymore, but that's another topic.)
Oh, yes, I've seen plenty of them. I was just pointing out that I don't see them here. The one that we had for a while was just a troll, too. His questions became more and more outlandish. Members begrudgingly tried to help him with ideas, but it finally became obvious he was only here to make trouble. We banned him. Also pointing out that they're not all as they seem in those shows. I remember when a casting call for a new one came out, and I saw calls for caution on a blog I follow (not a paranoid blog), because of the way some of the people had been portrayed in these shows already. Apparently, a lot of careful editing had been done, and it made these people look like they were waaaaay out there when they really weren't. Sounded like they could have sued for libel rather easily. But I know there are plenty of people who are waaaaay out there.Susie570":ycn37998 said:The 'prepper world' IS full of crazies though. It's not difficult to find them. Just do some browsing around online. You'll see the forums, the shopping sites catering to paranoid folks (some really cool stuff sometimes though). I was introduced to the whole underbelly of crazy by the experience with the ex, mostly because he wanted to promote the book he was trying to write.
Some of this lingo has been adopted by normal preparedness-minded people, though. They refer to things that the paranoid and non-paranoid alike see to have a strong possibility of actually happening. My husband kept a BOB in his work vehicle, understanding that -- with the demonstrations that were happening and not knowing if they would spread -- it might be a while before he could get home from wherever in the state he happened to be.Susie570":ycn37998 said:I always take it as a big warning flag if people start popping out 'the lingo'. From an article: "Like 12-steppers or model-train enthusiasts, preppers have their own lingo: TSHTF (the **** hits the fan) and TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it) are popular, as are WROL (without rule of law), BOB (a bug-out bag, the backpack full of supplies you keep in case TSHTF and you have to GOOD—get out of Dodge).
I agree that living in a constant state of stress is very bad. I think it's good to be prepared, but bad to allow yourself and your family to be ruled by an air of fear, anger, and suspicion.Susie570":ycn37998 said:These people truly do engage in activities like 'bug out drills' for the family, winch I mean... even that I could understand doing maybe once or twice, calmly talking about what the plan is in case of emergency, etc, but a lot of these folks live (and force their family to live), in a mental state of stress and unease. It's overboard. But hey, even then if it's people who truly enjoy it, who cares what they do? I feel bad for kids though and those subjected to that level of stress unwilling. :/
Yes, it is a heart issue... About Ex 22:2-3, it doesn't mean you can't defend yourself in the daytime, only that in daytime you are able to see whether there is a real threat. At night, you can't tell, everything's dark. The commandment usually rendered, "Thou shalt not kill," is, as you said, much better rendered, "Thou shalt not murder." Murder isn't just ending a life. It's ending a life with intent and malice. There were crimes that carried the death penalty, but these did not violate the command not to murder. The death penalty was the carrying out of the justice called for by the crime, and had nothing to do with malice. Just like killing in self-defense or in defense of your family is not murder.heritage":ycn37998 said:It's funny, I don't believe in coincidences... our Sunday School topic ended up going down a similar path today. We discussed the Biblical standpoint for murder, and some of the discrepancies some people have with "thou shalt not murder" and some of the deaths that do occur. Exodus 22:2 was a good summation. I think it's a heart issue. (This going back to a couple of earlier comments on using guns for self-defense and what the Bible says).
Gracious, Preitler, you sound like you could be writing from here.Preitler":ycn37998 said:Strict gun laws apply only to people who obey the law anyway...