Storm Rider Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 I feel really out of it. I don't even know what preppers means, much less have ever heard the term in any context. Regardless, having skimmed some of the edits here I gather that there are those who not only have stored various amounts of food stuffs, but have also stored guns and ammunition. I have never considered that our food supply was to be used solely by my family or even my extended family. I have always considered that it will be available to those in need. It is not feasible to me to consider that I would stand in defense of my own food supply when my neighbors are hungry much less starving. Part of our food supply includes seeds of various vegetables. Our supply is to assist until such time as we can grow additional food stuffs. My immediate family is not big into guns though almost all of us have some guns - rifles, shotguns, and such. More distant relatives have a great number of guns, but they are also more avid outdoors men and women than most of us. I think some of our distant relatives are NRA members, but none of my family is. I haven't taken my guns out of the gun case except to clean them in well over ten years. Most of them belonged to my father and I have purchased guns for my son who enjoys hunting with his cousins. I guess we are out of the loop on this.
Calm Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 (edited) Doomsday preparation...preppers. At least the extreme ones. I know a guy who was into prepping big time...probably the biggest one I know in actually doing it (I know a couple of 'preachers' of end times but never been in their basements so can't compare), but just because he was afraid of losing his job, not for any disaster. He was a hunter so had some guns and bows around the house, but wasn't stockpiling save to save money on ammo. Edited January 10, 2016 by Calm
Zakuska Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 Storm Rider, You really must be out of the loop. http://www.tbo.com/news/crime/world-has-a-long-history-of-doomsday-preppers-20140620/ http://www.amc.com/shows/the-walking-dead
thesometimesaint Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 If you want to have a gun have a gun. But don't expect to go all back woods John Wayne. The only thing keeping the about 300,000,000 of the about 310,000,000 Americans alive is is the industrial scale agriculture, and livestock practices of today. 2
The Nehor Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 20 hours ago, PeterPear said: Even better, Preppers should stock up on bags of gold coins. Then when their Suburban's 30-gal gas tank runs dry and their pantry runs out of food, they'll be forced to walk to their favorite Convience Store which will gladly sell you a gallon of milk for $5.oo for your 1-ounce gold coin. Even better the Convience Store will give you $995.oo in change. Yes, stocking up on physical gold is better than stocking up on food. In a situation of severe food scarcity gold will be as useless as a rock collection.
Anijen Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 I haven't read all the posts on this topic, but I feel most are against guns and ammo. I admit I own guns and ammo, food storage, water storage, hygiene stuff, medical stuff, and money. I am NOT fanatical in anyway about my prepping. I have about a two year supply of everything, except for money (much more difficult). I would like to share another reason for more ammo than one might think is needful. Growing up on a farm you have a daily battle with animals that sneak, steal, and generally use your crops as their own food supply. Most of our varmint enemies were rodents namely mice and rats. It is pretty easy to go through hundreds of 22LR on a nightly basis to get rid of this problem (even thousands of rounds in one harvest season). I am against those militia which encourage what the Bundy's are doing. However I do believe in the end days having your food storage will invite those desperate people to steal your food, (desperate people take desperate measures). I have no problem sharing with my family, friends, neighbors, ward family, but I believe the Lord wants us to protect ourselves as well as have faith. Being prepared is not having a lack of faith, but shows your faith. Not a crazy militia, but a prepared people can be the solution to helping others who did not prepare. I like to think that my lamps are full of oil, but unlike the parable we will have enough to share too. 3
Zakuska Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 52 minutes ago, Anijen said: I haven't read all the posts on this topic, but I feel most are against guns and ammo. I admit I own guns and ammo, food storage, water storage, hygiene stuff, medical stuff, and money. I am NOT fanatical in anyway about my prepping. I have about a two year supply of everything, except for money (much more difficult). I would like to share another reason for more ammo than one might think is needful. Growing up on a farm you have a daily battle with animals that sneak, steal, and generally use your crops as their own food supply. Most of our varmint enemies were rodents namely mice and rats. It is pretty easy to go through hundreds of 22LR on a nightly basis to get rid of this problem (even thousands of rounds in one harvest season). I am against those militia which encourage what the Bundy's are doing. However I do believe in the end days having your food storage will invite those desperate people to steal your food, (desperate people take desperate measures). I have no problem sharing with my family, friends, neighbors, ward family, but I believe the Lord wants us to protect ourselves as well as have faith. Being prepared is not having a lack of faith, but shows your faith. Not a crazy militia, but a prepared people can be the solution to helping others who did not prepare. I like to think that my lamps are full of oil, but unlike the parable we will have enough to share too. Did the 5 wise virgins share with the 5 foolish ones?
Anijen Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 7 minutes ago, Zakuska said: Did the 5 wise virgins share with the 5 foolish ones? No, it was for a different reasoning, but you knew that. I just wanted to point out that it is important to be prepared, yet at the same time one can share and not have a militia/fanatical approach. 3
The Nehor Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 58 minutes ago, Zakuska said: Did the 5 wise virgins share with the 5 foolish ones? And if the oil in that parable represented food that would mean something. 1
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 11:21 AM, The Nehor said: No, but primarily because I do not think God's plan for the future saints is to shoot everyone else guarding their horde of food just before the Savior returns. If society collapses my plan is to share my food until it runs out with everyone in need. Then I start praying for manna. If I starve to death then I gave up my life for others and I am good and get to come with Jesus and kill the wicked (probably the mass murderers with the hoarded food). If I do not I have not killed anyone and have saved others. Here's the problem: not everyone will be want you to share with them; some of them will take it by force, and not care at all whether they leave you alive in the process. In fact, since they would expect you to try to get your stuff back, there is great incentive to kill you first and then take your stuff. Reduces the risk of payback. I agree with Brigham Young, that the Lord blesses us with plenty on the condition that we will share it as needed for those who have not. This does not require that we bare our throats to the wolf. In most cases, civilization will rebound, but during the interim, I would like to be able to defend myself and my family and neighbors. Not everyone will do the same. If it becomes necessary for your neighbors to be armed for community defense, and they didn't have the foresight to own at least one usable firearm themselves, your one little single-shot .22 will not be of much use. 1
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 11:50 AM, Sleeper Cell said: The first principle of disaster response is “don’t become a victim, yourself.” In other words, don't put yourself in danger, even if necessary to save others. Why? Because if you were injured, you would not be able to help anyone else, and another responder would have to spend time helping you (time that could have been spent helping other victims). In a mass casualty situation, time is of the essence, and responders often do not have time to try to save everybody. In the event of a future disaster, I would never attempt to enter or even approach this idiot’s home, even if I believed that he or a member of his family were seriously injured. And I am a strong 2nd Amendment supporter and have no problem with those who chose to include guns and a (moderate) supply of ammo in their disaster supplies Question: what is a moderate supply of ammo? 100 rds? 500? Wouldn't it be wise to put aside a large supply of ammo that could be used for barter?
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 11:59 AM, Zakuska said: And if I'm not mistaken... the D&C obligates us to protect our own even to the death if needed. No, you'll find that in the Book of Mormon.
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 0:07 PM, smac97 said: Meanwhile, we have this counsel from Elder Oaks: Thanks, -Smac So, after having amassed a good supply of food and water, we shouldn't store any ammo? Is ammunition forbidden to be stored? I don't believe he said that. He might have thought it.
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 0:56 PM, bluebell said: I'm not sure. The BOM seems to support that violence to protect loved ones is allowable. I already tried the Book of Mormon argument as to protecting one's loved ones even unto bloodshed, but he wasn't buying it.
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 1:54 PM, Zakuska said: Good post Calm. Gun powder also has quite a few other uses as well. Whatever you do, don't get confused between Black Powder and modern smokeless powders!!! They are NOT the same thing. Black powder is carbon, niter and sulfur, and non-poisonous in small quantities when ingested. Smokeless powder may or may not be poisonous, but I for one would not want to make the experiment. All your examples are Black Powder, not modern smokeless powders.
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 1/9/2016 at 10:45 AM, saemo said: The probabilities of me, living in 21st century USA, needing an apocalyptic supply of ANYTHING, are near zero. Going on what you imagine is possible? Well, anything is possible. All that you imagine as possible, is not probable. Imdont think you're crazy. You can prepare for whatever you want. But the answer to my OP question, are all based on fantasizing a future of possibilities, while the future has many other possibilities that are more probable. It is more probable, that I will work until I retire and then die of old age. It is more probable that I will die of disease before then. It is more probable that I could die in a car accident before then. An apocalyptic event is so low in probability that I spend no time worrying about it. Here's what I believe: I believe it is more probable that I will die peacefully in my bed surrounded by my descendants than I will ever need to defend myself from either dogs gone feral or people gone the same. I believe I will never be seriously hurt in an automobile accident. I believe that I will have enough income to live on after I retire. That being said: I have a reasonable selection of firearms along with sufficient ammo for their use, just in case I'm wrong about point 1 I continue to maintain automobile insurance, just in case I am wrong about point 2 I plan to continue to keep myself able to work in my chosen profession (computer programming) by study and practice even after I retire, just in case I'm wrong about point 3. It is better to be prepared for the unlikely but possible than to be unprepared 2
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 (edited) On 1/9/2016 at 2:05 PM, bcuzbcuz said: Love it. Mormons who have the ultimate truth and know the intracacies of the next existence and then they stock up on guns and ammo.......with the underlying understanding that they are prepared to KILL to be able to cling to life for a few minutes more. Absolutely love it!!! Didn't you once post in this forum that you are a pacifist and would not kill or seriously harm an attacker whose actions threatened yourself or your family with death or serious bodily harm? As it turns out, Mormons have the Book of Mormon, which says: Quote Alma 43:47 - And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, and their lands, their country, and their rights, and their religion. And this, from the Doctrine and Covenants: Quote Doctrine and Covenants 134:11 - We believe that men should appeal to the civil law for redress of all wrongs and grievances, where personal abuse is inflicted or the right of property or character infringed, where such laws exist as will protect the same; but we believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded. You go ahead and trumpet how easily you will give up your worthless life if you like. But in my mind, to consent to murder, even your own, is to participate in that murder. And to refuse to defend your life is prima facie evidence of your consent. Edited January 11, 2016 by Stargazer
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 11 hours ago, The Nehor said: In a situation of severe food scarcity gold will be as useless as a rock collection. The primary use of gold in such a situation is to bridge your wealth over into the next period of peace and civilization. You can't eat gold, but after the disaster is over, it will gradually re-acquire its value. Unless the next period of peace and civilization is the Millennium. Gold may not be very valuable then.
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 10 hours ago, Zakuska said: Did the 5 wise virgins share with the 5 foolish ones? You can take an analogy too far. The oil in their lamps was a symbol of their righteousness, not a physical supply of oil On the other hand, those little oil lamps used for the purpose in the scripture likely held only enough oil for the procession to reach the wedding place. If they had shared with those who had not thought to bring their own oil, they would all have likely run out.
saemo Posted January 11, 2016 Author Posted January 11, 2016 On January 9, 2016 at 0:15 PM, bluebell said: CFR on that statistic. I'd like to understand where you are getting it from. I think that you are a bit naive to all the different issues that can create havoc in our lives in a very short amount of time in this day and age. How long do you think the water could be stopped in a community, for example, before things really got bad. Before people got desperate? Depending on the area, the season, and the population, it could be as little as a week. Most statistics suggest that populations without immediate access to a very large river would be out of water in a month. Cities like LA would go do within days in the summer. Have you seen the movie Contagion? It's the realistic portrayal of what would happen to the US under a flu epidemic. It's not pretty. Have you ever considered what would happen if the government had to shut everything down (including food distribution by semi trucks) due to contagious disease, before most areas run out of food? (This is true for those areas that might experience the shutting down of roads to do severe weather.) Depending on the area, it could be as little as 3 days before every grocery store shelf was bare. Have you ever considered how you would feed your family if going to the store suddenly wasn't an option for you or anyone else in your area? Even if you knew that food would show up again in two months, how would you get thru those two months without any kind of previous preparation or government intervention? These aren't apocalyptic issues-there would be a recovery, though it could take months to over a year depending on the problem-but they are still very serious issues that would cause suffering and death depending on how long they went on. And the probabilities of them happening this century in this country are not as near zero as you seem to think they are. Edit to add something since I saw that you added some to your post as well- We are not preppers. We have not stock piled much at all and are woefully unprepared for even meeting our basic food and water needs in my family. We have no hoards of ammo or guns and like you, I don't understand or relate to those people getting ready for us to be back in the Stone Age. The questions that I asked you are just as relevant to myself. Forget about surviving the zombie apocalypse. We would struggle to deal with an earthquake that isolated our area for 2 weeks! Probabilities: http://www.livescience.com/3780-odds-dying.html Violence declining: http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424053111904106704576583203589408180
Sleeper Cell Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 5 hours ago, Stargazer said: Question: what is a moderate supply of ammo? 100 rds? 500? Wouldn't it be wise to put aside a large supply of ammo that could be used for barter? I consider 100-500 rounds “moderate.” I wouldn’t blink if I found out that my next door neighbor had 500 rounds of ammo. (I would be far more concerned if I learned that he had stored 50 gal of gasoline in his garage). If we’re talking .22 ammo, I would consider these amounts “minimal,” as one could easily use that much in one afternoon at a rifle range. To a large extent, my use of the term “moderate” is a function of things like how often someone customarily use his guns, how guns and ammo fit into his personal emergency preparedness plan, and whether he was stinting on other aspects of emergency preparedness. In the case of the idiot referenced in the post to which I was responding (after the earthquake, while others were going door to door checking on the well being of their neighbors, he “sat on his front porch with a shotgun pointed at us [those actually checking on the well being of their neighbors] and wouldn't move from his house for three days.”) his having one (1) round of ammo is excessive. And this nut job was “the president of the homeowner‘s association!“ One would have expected that the president of the homeowner’s association, -- of all people -- would have been more concerned about helping his fellow homeowners than in protecting himself from them. Ammo is just one of many things that could be used for barter.
Stargazer Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 13 minutes ago, Sleeper Cell said: I consider 100-500 rounds “moderate.” I wouldn’t blink if I found out that my next door neighbor had 500 rounds of ammo. (I would be far more concerned if I learned that he had stored 50 gal of gasoline in his garage). If we’re talking .22 ammo, I would consider these amounts “minimal,” as one could easily use that much in one afternoon at a rifle range. To a large extent, my use of the term “moderate” is a function of things like how often someone customarily use his guns, how guns and ammo fit into his personal emergency preparedness plan, and whether he was stinting on other aspects of emergency preparedness. In the case of the idiot referenced in the post to which I was responding (after the earthquake, while others were going door to door checking on the well being of their neighbors, he “sat on his front porch with a shotgun pointed at us [those actually checking on the well being of their neighbors] and wouldn't move from his house for three days.”) his having one (1) round of ammo is excessive. And this nut job was “the president of the homeowner‘s association!“ One would have expected that the president of the homeowner’s association, -- of all people -- would have been more concerned about helping his fellow homeowners than in protecting himself from them. Ammo is just one of many things that could be used for barter. Was he still the president after the next election? 1
bcuzbcuz Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 On 10 January 2016 at 6:24 AM, Storm Rider said: I feel really out of it. I don't even know what preppers means, much less have ever heard the term in any context. Regardless, having skimmed some of the edits here I gather that there are those who not only have stored various amounts of food stuffs, but have also stored guns and ammunition. I have never considered that our food supply was to be used solely by my family or even my extended family. I have always considered that it will be available to those in need. It is not feasible to me to consider that I would stand in defense of my own food supply when my neighbors are hungry much less starving. Part of our food supply includes seeds of various vegetables. Our supply is to assist until such time as we can grow additional food stuffs. My immediate family is not big into guns though almost all of us have some guns - rifles, shotguns, and such. More distant relatives have a great number of guns, but they are also more avid outdoors men and women than most of us. I think some of our distant relatives are NRA members, but none of my family is. I haven't taken my guns out of the gun case except to clean them in well over ten years. Most of them belonged to my father and I have purchased guns for my son who enjoys hunting with his cousins. I guess we are out of the loop on this. I consider it a merit to be out of the loop on this question. I´d rather live with the expectation of sharing my resources than live in the fear of strangers and unspecified fears of the unknown. My mother-in-law, from a poor country, always shared what little she had. That is my model and guide for my family. Share until it runs out and let the next day take care of itself. 2
Zakuska Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 6 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said: I consider it a merit to be out of the loop on this question. I´d rather live with the expectation of sharing my resources than live in the fear of strangers and unspecified fears of the unknown. My mother-in-law, from a poor country, always shared what little she had. That is my model and guide for my family. Share until it runs out and let the next day take care of itself. That contradicts the very notion of "being prepared for tomorow" and having food storage to begin with.
The Nehor Posted January 11, 2016 Posted January 11, 2016 13 hours ago, Stargazer said: Here's the problem: not everyone will be want you to share with them; some of them will take it by force, and not care at all whether they leave you alive in the process. In fact, since they would expect you to try to get your stuff back, there is great incentive to kill you first and then take your stuff. Reduces the risk of payback. I agree with Brigham Young, that the Lord blesses us with plenty on the condition that we will share it as needed for those who have not. This does not require that we bare our throats to the wolf. In most cases, civilization will rebound, but during the interim, I would like to be able to defend myself and my family and neighbors. Not everyone will do the same. If it becomes necessary for your neighbors to be armed for community defense, and they didn't have the foresight to own at least one usable firearm themselves, your one little single-shot .22 will not be of much use. I prefer to be one of those who refuses to take up the sword against my neighbor and instead I flee to Zion for safety.
Recommended Posts