3 ms·
The value of the stockpile comes from the fact that being armed is useful. You may be saying that whoever is coming for you has enough firepower and training t
by quantified 4y ago
The value of the stockpile comes from the fact that being armed is useful.
You may be saying that whoever is coming for you has enough firepower and training to make your arms irrelevant. In which case your stockpile is just trade goods?
- Retric 4y agoIt’s not about skills, let’s take two people of equal training. A is living his life in a fortified location with a huge stoke pile of guns and tons of ammunition. B has a rifle, time, and the element of surprise. Who do you think has better odds? How about if B has friends who also want what A has? Don’t get me wrong defensive positions are useful, they are simply less useful than groups of people working together. The best prep is a few supplies and a community of people ready and able to support each other think walled town not fortified nuclear bunkers unless you’re actually willing to live underground and have a lifetime of supplies at which point hiding is more effective than guns.
- kazinator 4y agoI would agree that a single person defending a fortification probably not benefit from more than, say, two or three guns. One gun that has a decent automatic magazine size, and fast reloading, plus lots and lots of ammo. You need backup equipment in the face of possible failure.
- quantified 4y agoA group or community that has some arms is definitely in a better position than a loner with an arsenal. A group with an arsenal and good social skills to make alliances with other groups, and the tactical abilities to acquire whatever they lack and defend themselves from others, will be in the best position. There's probably an ideal minimum of ammo to go with the guns. But more ammo is better.