Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #17130
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    Interesting video and perspectives. It all comes down to what scenario you are preparing for. My prepping has been primarily for a major grid down scenario. Living near a hospital would not be of any value in that scenario, and living on a secluded property would be very dangerous for most people. I think living where you and your neighbors can be reasonably self sufficient through mutual aid and assistance would be more valuable than isolation. The other piece is being a good distance away from large cities so as to minimize the number of refugees that might come your way.

    #17134
    Jay
    Jay
    Survivalist
    member3

    Great discussion, lots of good points by everyone. It all comes down to what you prepare for and what fits into your lifestyle. I think some people come to prepping and survival because they are really scared when they realize how fragile the whole system is and then it makes sense to want to know “the best answers”.

    The problem is of course there are no best answers. It all depends. We build our homestead because we like it anyway and that we are able to grow our own food is something we want to do right now and not just for a collapse sometime in the future.

    In terms of security I think the best protection is to be away from areas with many bad guys. What we see in the district where our homestead is, is that there is little to no crime because all criminals go to the next bigger city.

    Im just guessing here, but even in a slow grind / collapse scenario the crime rate should go up in cities first. The criminals would just get back to the countryside if cities lack interesting targets.

    Alea iacta est ("The die has been cast")

    #17140
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    It’s all about numbers and defensive position. What he states about a historical perspective is true but using a much to short a period. All through history it has been the same. Ciity states, walled towns, castles, and early forts in the US all were developed out of the need for protection from hostile forces.

    Early American settlers were targets of indian parties that could not survive without defensible positions. The same thing happens in modern wars with forward bases. It is not about where or how you live, it is about keeping people out and the ability to defend. If you have stuff other people want it will not matter where you are. If you want to keep your stuff you will need a controlled perimeter and the ability to defend the perimeter 24/7.

    #17142
    Profile photo of Kiwi25
    Kiwi25
    Survivalist
    member3

    I agree with Tweva. As one who also already lives on a “homestead” and has 30+ years of having a foot in both worlds. I think I have said before that being VERY remote has problems. Drs and schools, towns and hospitals are very handy. You need them in easy driving distance. While living on a small farm I raised two kids, put them thru College, and they both had jobs in our “medium” size town at one stage. Very much a foot in both worlds. Our small local hospital is very good ( well.. as good as any) for which I am very grateful. My family has used it many times over the years. My son was born there. Years later..he worked there….

    If you are so remote you have no near neighbours… you are vulnerable if discovered.. as occurs in Argentina and Africa. In a SHTF situation neighbours will quickly band together as it is very much in everybodys interest. IMO you don’t want to be near any BIG city . The more targets and resources between you and the urban horde.. the better. To be cynical.. you don’t have to outrun the bear, you just have to outrun your companion. Within my area I am at the end of a dirt road, and my house is not visible from the road. ( Of course everything is visible with Google.. but that requires a degree of technology).

    In the right country, in the right location, a “homestead” is the way to go for LONG TERM survival. In the end you have to eat, ( water and shelter are a given). Also, ideally, several families working/ living together.

    #17156
    Profile photo of freedom
    freedom
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Rural areas have many great thing about there location. It all depends on what SHTF situation happens. If it’s an Financial/Economical Collapse then the rural/farmlands will have big problems since even if the grid goes down cars and trucks still work so the cities will head to the rural areas for food. There would be so many it would overrun all the rural areas.
    If it is an EMP then this would be much harder since they would have to have a pre-1970’s car, truck or bike.

    I see the dollar going down very fast in a collapse and the electric companies turning off the electricity since they can’t pay for the oil they runs them. This would be a large problem for all the rural areas. The cities would be a war zone but since it is a war zone and everyone has one or two cats or trucks at there house that will jump in there cars and drive to rural areas to get away from the cities. That means about 50 to 100 million people going to rural areas looking for food. Not a good thing.

    #17159
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    Good points freedom. Folks in rural areas should think about what options they have for blocking, reducing, or somehow controlling access to their neighborhoods. There are 5 roads that come into the little valley hamlet I live in. Three are dirt roads, two of which come from a more rural area than my neighborhood. All five can be easily blocked off by dropping trees. If electing to drop trees across the roads, a key decision would be where given that delineates which homes are inside the perimeter vs outside.

    74,the town where I used to live was on the MA Bay Colony frontier in the 1600’s & early 1700’s and those who lived outside of the village were easier prey when the Indians attacked or hunting parties passed through. The villagers would be alerted when they saw the smoke from a burning homestead, but it was always too late to help.

    #17162
    Whirlibird
    Whirlibird
    Survivalist
    member10

    It all depends on what happens.

    Just having moved from a rural area, 2000 in town and 12,000 in the entire county, a 50 mile one way to Walmart, I can say that even in the good times, it’s hard to impossible, unless you already have your money.

    Jobs? Few and far between. Those that exist, are poorly paying at best.
    Our grocery? Sad when compared to where we moved. The prices were ridiculous, the selection was limited at best, and the hours? We made the 100 mile round trip just to save money and time.

    Acceptance by the locals? Unless you are from there, don’t bet on it.
    I was in the area for 10 years and still wasn’t accepted.
    Heck my hometown of 7000 people would look at me funny after being gone for over 20 years.
    You’re not just moving into a rural area and being accepted, especially after a bad situation, let alone shtf.

    Gents, there have long been accounts of raiders/crooks/murderers headed to the sticks to find easier targets.
    The houses being fewer and farther between is a disadvantage for security purposes and leaves you highly vulnerable.

    Here’s a couple of interesting reads:

    http://www.rhodesia.nl/farmeratwar.html

    http://mg.co.za/tag/farm-invasions

    http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=20958

    Now granted these articles are about Africa, but the invasions, the takeovers, the rape and murders are the same.
    And these places are only in the long drawn out grind phase of shtf, what happens if the .gov completely topples there? In the long run, something better, but short term I doubt there’s going to be anywhere safe, urban or rural.
    Look at the farms and ranches near the border today, is this another look at history for those who haven’t learned from it?

    #17163
    Robin
    Robin
    Survivalist
    member8

    To me it is as Selco says in his course: You can’t do it by yourself.
    Only thing to me is how many!
    Robin

    #17170
    Selco
    Selco
    Survivalist
    member6

    Good points.

    My ideal “world” is small community outside the city, where members are very good connected (relatives or friends) know each other for years, practice stuff together etc.
    Place with natural resources like water ,wild animals, land, fuel etc.

    Being alone in wilderness is impossible for me, maybe there are folks who are capable to survive for years alone in wild, I am not one of them.

    Like MountainBiker mentioned above, we also can easily block few roads that coming in, and defend there.

    Now I find this solution best in case of SHTF. I am not saying it is impossible to survive in the city, I did it, we organized there too, in impossible conditions, and survived.
    I am simply talking about price that we have to pay, it is gonna be probably much higher in city.

    In some events where there still some kind of law, maybe towns gonna have some organization I doubt. In that case being in town under some protection sounds better then being in wilderness without protection. But it only look like that, I have high doubts in “organized protection” (when some kind of authority organize it), I would still like to be out of big center, and taking care about my security and safety with my own means.

    #17191
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Selco, I absolutely agree on all your points. Especially making your own decisions, not being somewhere where the traffic cop trys to run your life.

    #17272
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    Another piece to this are State border crossings in a SHTF scenario. I expect that some States will try to block border crossings so as to keep urban refugees from neighboring States flooding into their State. When I lived in Western MA and my BOL was in VT this was a concern of mine. What I did was study the maps of the VT/MA border and then tested a number of routes so as to familiarize myself with them. Some were just dirt roads going through the woods where I never knew exactly when I crossed the border. except that when I came upon a house the cars would have VT plates. Some of those roads didn’t even have signs identifying them. One in particular had me doubting that I was still on a road at one point. I figured roads of that nature would not be a priority for closing given only local people use them. Now is the time to study lesser traveled routes.

    #17273
    Robin
    Robin
    Survivalist
    member8

    That is so true in this county. You might be following a County Road but then you are led to a cattle gate. The gravel disappears and you drive on a pasture. Come out the other end to a gravel road! Also some County Roads have been closed off but still show extending on both maps and some GPS devices.
    Robin

Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.