What about everybody else?

[westernsky20]

I not to sure how to word this but here it goes. I have been reading this thread with great interest, and have learn alot thankyou to all. I live in the middle of PDX and I have been trying to prepare for disastor as best I can. If somthing bad happens I am going to have to stay here unless the city tells me I have to move. My question is what about everybody else? If some one comes to my door asks for help I am going to try to help, I cannot turn them away. One of the reasons I became a ham radio operator is community service. I think back about Katrina and how bad it was at the super dome and still seeing people helping people in some of those news clips, not many but some. My hope is that all of you that are preparing to take care of your selves and family might try to to help others that can't help themselves as best as you can.

Read More

 

[Dan-Dee Sales Inc]

I think that most of us would help our neighbors and friends as long as they really want our help and not our goods. Food in one hand and a handgun in the other.

 

[eriknemily]

That's a tough one. If you help the first person that comes to your door (I'm thinking mainly giving them food or other survival goods) then what do you do about the who knows how many people that saw you giving stuff away when the come knocking on your door. Even in a rural area that could be a problem. I tend to be a giving person but I have to think of my wife and four kids first and foremost. Sometimes thinking about all the possible crap that could happen in any type of disastrous situation get overwhelming to me.

 

[usmc0311]

That's a tough question. I'd like to think I would help wherever I could, but I would put me and mine first. You have to draw the line somewhere.

Out of curiosity, why would you have to stay in the city? I'm smack in the middle of Portland as well, but am in the process of developing exit routes from the city that are alternates to main roads/highways, and it seems pretty feasible.

 

[DALE]

In the book "One Second After" the small town was sealed off at each end by the town defenders and travelers were allowed to pass through, escourted. Travelers with special skills were invited to stay. Hopefully none of us will ever be in such a hopeless state that we must deny help to those in serious need. I think much would depend on how we define ourselves, our empathy towards others and the seriousness of the situation. Some would kill for resources while others would give intentionally so that others could live. I would hope I'd make the right decisions in a SHTF scenario. What is right is different for everyone.

 

[treemanx]

This is one of those double edged questions that doesnt have a clear answer. We can sit here and say we'd handle ourselves a certain way in a SHTF situation, but when the rubber meets the road all bets are off. I think this question would need a little clairification before I could say my opinion on it. Is the disaster a local or national one?
If it was something like MT Hood erupting, I would do what I could to help anyone that needed it. If it was a national disaster, like WW3 on US soil, its every man for himself.

You also have to ask yourself how many of the people that came knocking on your door for help would be asking, and how many would try and take.

 

[Mutoman]

Anybody read "Dies the Fire" by S.M.Stirling? A pretty good read which gives thought to this situation.

 

[eldbillbo]

This is one of those double edged questions that doesnt have a clear answer. We can sit here and say we'd handle ourselves a certain way in a SHTF situation, but when the rubber meets the road all bets are off. I think this question would need a little clairification before I could say my opinion on it. Is the disaster a local or national one?
If it was something like MT Hood erupting, I would do what I could to help anyone that needed it. If it was a national disaster, like WW3 on US soil, its every man for himself.

You also have to ask yourself how many of the people that came knocking on your door for help would be asking, and how many would try and take.

on the noes its depends on the situation i think most of us would help who ever we could in most disaster situations of corse family first

every one is talking like they will be loners but trust me communities will form for the sake of protections even liberal tree hugging urban vegetable growers shacking up with conservative gun toting zombie killers exchanging food and protection

 

[timbernet]

I've been thinking about this too... and like most of the answers on here: it depends on the situation.

My primary goal is to protect myself, those that I care for, and important property/assets.

However, if it is flooding/windstorm/etc I am helping those around me if they need help. It happened during the snow storm -- neighbors helped us, we helped them.

On my street there are three houses, we all share a well for water, we all have CHL, and we all have multiple weapons. We each have different skills/equipment that are useful. I am better with communication equipment/tech/etc, one guy has ATVs, boats, big #$@$#% trucks, etc, and the other guy has a fairly nice shop. Two of us have gardens. We have horses for "traditional transportation". We get along well and work well together... so during an emergency helping eachother will likely happen.

That said, one of the three is fairly old... gave me 10 boxes of clay pigeons because his "vision and aim isn't what it was" --- during a natural disaster I would be helping him, but if it is a WW3 scenario, if you can't keep up...........................

This sounds mean, but in a WW3 scenario, I don't want to waste supplies on someone that could die of old age very soon under GOOD conditions.

Of course, I say that now --- if something like that happens I will still likely help them. I can't stand seeing someone or something suffer...

 

[PDXGS]

Floating out of town on the river is always an option.
Heck even a log will end up at the pacific.

I've been through several earthquakes including the 1989 Loma Prieta quake in the SF Bay Area (a 6.9), we were very lucky that more folks werent injured.
It was pretty amazing to see everyone drop what they were doing and help to rescue those who were trapped.
The PNW is likely to see a much larger quake on the order of a 9.0-signficantly larger than what I lived through by a considerable degree.
I'd suggest focussing on preparing a good three week survival kit with water,food, fuel, shelter and meds before considering the "get out of town" scenario.

Just my $.02


PS Ask yourself if could you get home from work if all of the bridges, including all freeway overpasses, collapse. Could you drive, ride a bike or motorcyle or would you have to walk? Do you have a bug-out bag at work? In the trunk of your car? Should you?!

 

[westernsky20]

That's a tough question. I'd like to think I would help wherever I could, but I would put me and mine first. You have to draw the line somewhere.

Out of curiosity, why would you have to stay in the city? I'm smack in the middle of Portland as well, but am in the process of developing exit routes from the city that are alternates to main roads/highways, and it seems pretty feasible.

Like the others have said I have family near by as well. My parents are quite old and would need my help, and I don't think they would survive very long in a refugee camp situation.

 

[westernsky20]

This is one of those double edged questions that doesnt have a clear answer. We can sit here and say we'd handle ourselves a certain way in a SHTF situation, but when the rubber meets the road all bets are off. I think this question would need a little clairification before I could say my opinion on it. Is the disaster a local or national one?
If it was something like MT Hood erupting, I would do what I could to help anyone that needed it. If it was a national disaster, like WW3 on US soil, its every man for himself.

You also have to ask yourself how many of the people that came knocking on your door for help would be asking, and how many would try and take.

This is a open ended question to make one think, there is no right answer for all situations and poeple. We all have to do what we think is best.

 

[SheepDog223]

This sounds mean, but in a WW3 scenario, I don't want to waste supplies on someone that could die of old age very soon under GOOD conditions.

Of course, I say that now --- if something like that happens I will still likely help them. I can't stand seeing someone or something suffer...

We can't very well place a cascading value on human life. If we start doing that then where does it stop? We can kill the young (abortion.) We can kill the old (assisted suicide) How much closer will it get to trying to meet in the middle? I think when the time comes we will make the right desicions even if it takes a few wrong ones for us to learn.

 

[timbernet]

We can't very well place a cascading value on human life. If we start doing that then where does it stop? We can kill the young (abortion.) We can kill the old (assisted suicide) How much closer will it get to trying to meet in the middle? I think when the time comes we will make the right desicions even if it takes a few wrong ones for us to learn.

I agree with you on that, but situations may arise where one will be using a cascading value of life. If you have three months of supplies for 3 people but then start assisting 9 people... now you have one month of supplies. If it is a smaller natural disaster that can be recovered from in a shorter period of time then cool, no problems - I'll gladly share. But if is something where you need that three month level of supplies, then you are going to start attaching a priority number to those outside. You can't help all of them. You could help none of them, but that is just as hard.

 

[Mutoman]

I think it all depend on where a person is in their spirituality; some of us would rather starve than turn away a brother; some of us would rather turn away a brother than starve.

The reality is, people survive better in groups, especially when they can incorporate the individual skills of each member of the group. Groups or tribes of people will have better defensive capabilities, hunting options, and harvesting options. People have always gathered in groups for security and livability conditions.

 

[dementia]

I think it all depend on where a person is in their spirituality; some of us would rather starve than turn away a brother; some of us would rather turn away a brother than starve.

The reality is, people survive better in groups, especially when they can incorporate the individual skills of each member of the group. Groups or tribes of people will have better defensive capabilities, hunting options, and harvesting options. People have always gathered in groups for security and livability conditions.

i doubt spirituality has anything to do with it i am an athiest and would be more willing to help than most provided my family did not suffer. and it would be foolish to starve to help somebody else then you could help no one

 

[Mutoman]

i doubt spirituality has anything to do with it i am an athiest and would be more willing to help than most provided my family did not suffer. and it would be foolish to starve to help somebody else then you could help no one

Spirituality includes atheism; spirituality is a complex system of personal beliefs; believing that God does not exist is a form of spiritualism. A willingness to help others is a choice played out by your own spiritual beliefs; it has nothing to do with God and everything to do with personal beliefs that may or may not include a God or a belief system. Placing a value of yourself and your family above others is a form of spiritual adjudication; and there is nothing wrong with that. I too place my family above the value of others when it comes down to the wire.

 

[eldbillbo]

we'll know if we are good men or bad men if the time comes

 

[dementia]

Spirituality includes atheism; spirituality is a complex system of personal beliefs; believing that God does not exist is a form of spiritualism. A willingness to help others is a choice played out by your own spiritual beliefs; it has nothing to do with God and everything to do with personal beliefs that may or may not include a God or a belief system. Placing a value of yourself and your family above others is a form of spiritual adjudication; and there is nothing wrong with that. I too place my family above the value of others when it comes down to the wire.

that was an excellent anwser and i cannot argue with you on that

 

[powersbj]

Not so long ago I bought a 1 month supply of food for my wife and I. Mostly for the overdue NW earthquake. I started to think about this very scenario and ended up buying 5, 5 gallon buckets of rice and beans.

I have a theory that people will end up gathering at churches, fire stations and schools... I figure I'll take the buckets to the nearby fire station and give it all away. I personally could not stand living fat while my neighbors starve.