3 ms·
I totally get the draw here but I think it is irrational depending on your goals: 1. Having enough supplies to get through a few months of uncertainty w/o need
by shawnb576 5y ago
I totally get the draw here but I think it is irrational depending on your goals:
1. Having enough supplies to get through a few months of uncertainty w/o needing the outside world. This makes sense to me: natural disaster, a bigger-badder pandemic, etc.
2. Ammo, weapons, and food isn't rational to me simply because if things get so bad you need that stuff, you're screwed anyway. Nothing in your house is going to help you when the people who also need that stuff find out you have it. Any violent unrest is going to outgun you very quickly.
Ideally we all work towards a world where that isn't a fear for people. Not to be naive but there are real questions that we face regularly (e.g. at the ballot box) that have a bearing on this that is much bigger than trying to insulate yourself or your family from a broad-based slip into chaos.
- gumby 5y agoI agree, though stockpiling for months is over the top. He lives in a place where it's reasonable to expect the government to mount a successful rescue for some major crisis (extended blackout, amazingly bad winter storm, nuclear attack on DC/NYC, etc). One of the states that handled the pandemic pretty reasonably. If things are so bad that you need six months' of supplies....well presumably the crisis will be longer than six months. As for guns, as I said my buddy has good opsec -- he never talks about this, so unless you're the kind of friend who would end up in his basement for some reason you'd never know. But the preppers I casually run into (mostly at shooting ranges) always seem to be the types whose homes would be worth invading if there were a crisis and you needed firearms!