Every few years there's one of these stories in the British press, and every time the tone and the punchline are the same. Look at the foolish Americans, guns are bad, prepping is useless, trust the authorities.
Fact of the matter is, most people over here don't prep because there's precious little opportunity. You could build up a cache of food, water, fuel etc. but without the means to defend it, it's not going to last long if things really go bad. You could get a firearms licence (if your local firearms officer likes your face and feels like issuing one) but you'd better be absolutely sure that the government's gone for good before you start actually using those things to defend yourself, otherwise it's premeditated murder in the eyes of the law. You could buy other weapons, but now you're back to muscle power and the biggest thug wins.
So most people over here tend to accept the government line, probably to avoid dealing with the cognitive dissonance that dissenting from the line would incur. Shelter in place. Remain calm. The Government will save you.
Yeah, trusting the authorities, or excuse me the "higher authorities" as the professor of sociology put it. That's why statism of all flavors is so hostile to men of faith, because to such men there is always an authority higher than the state. But I digress.
You only need to look at the plentiful examples of what happens when there is even a temporary disruption in civil order to have valid concerns over the prospects of a larger and more long lasting disruption. It could be like Hurricane Katrina, or something smaller like a sports championship game aftermath. Barbarians have never left us, they've always been there just under the surface. The immediately seize any opportunity that presents itself.
I am sure the article appeals to British and European sensibilities, and by extension coastal urbanites in America. To me they sound as caged birds crowing and cooing over how nice the gold plating is on their bars.
It's tragically funny how people such as that professor in the article like to point out how you need "higher authority" to accomplish this or that. Never do they acknowledge that "higher authority" has also been necessary for every act of organized, systemic murder of entire populations. Yeah, governments are great at such things. They've got the monopoly on it.
To the commenter from Britain -- I would actually be more nervous about a collapse of civil order over there than here. As you say, the means of self-defense are very limited there, but you also have the disadvantage of being a comparatively small and densely populated country with a large amount of hostile imported barbarians who are sure to be a major problem with or without a collapse in public order.
Not IF but WHEN something happens, those Unprepared Brits are going to be Screwed. No matter where one lives, it is wise to be prepared for anything, whether it be a weather event or civil unrest. Better safe than sorry is my motto.
3 comments:
Every few years there's one of these stories in the British press, and every time the tone and the punchline are the same. Look at the foolish Americans, guns are bad, prepping is useless, trust the authorities.
Fact of the matter is, most people over here don't prep because there's precious little opportunity. You could build up a cache of food, water, fuel etc. but without the means to defend it, it's not going to last long if things really go bad. You could get a firearms licence (if your local firearms officer likes your face and feels like issuing one) but you'd better be absolutely sure that the government's gone for good before you start actually using those things to defend yourself, otherwise it's premeditated murder in the eyes of the law. You could buy other weapons, but now you're back to muscle power and the biggest thug wins.
So most people over here tend to accept the government line, probably to avoid dealing with the cognitive dissonance that dissenting from the line would incur. Shelter in place. Remain calm. The Government will save you.
Needless to say, not all of us agree.
Yeah, trusting the authorities, or excuse me the "higher authorities" as the professor of sociology put it. That's why statism of all flavors is so hostile to men of faith, because to such men there is always an authority higher than the state. But I digress.
You only need to look at the plentiful examples of what happens when there is even a temporary disruption in civil order to have valid concerns over the prospects of a larger and more long lasting disruption. It could be like Hurricane Katrina, or something smaller like a sports championship game aftermath. Barbarians have never left us, they've always been there just under the surface. The immediately seize any opportunity that presents itself.
I am sure the article appeals to British and European sensibilities, and by extension coastal urbanites in America. To me they sound as caged birds crowing and cooing over how nice the gold plating is on their bars.
It's tragically funny how people such as that professor in the article like to point out how you need "higher authority" to accomplish this or that. Never do they acknowledge that "higher authority" has also been necessary for every act of organized, systemic murder of entire populations. Yeah, governments are great at such things. They've got the monopoly on it.
To the commenter from Britain -- I would actually be more nervous about a collapse of civil order over there than here. As you say, the means of self-defense are very limited there, but you also have the disadvantage of being a comparatively small and densely populated country with a large amount of hostile imported barbarians who are sure to be a major problem with or without a collapse in public order.
Not IF but WHEN something happens, those Unprepared Brits are going to be Screwed. No matter where one lives, it is wise to be prepared for anything, whether it be a weather event or civil unrest. Better safe than sorry is my motto.
Post a Comment