Making the rounds of the survival, survivalist, preper, sites I keep running across certain assumptions. A lot of people who have a long laundry list of worse-case situations that they tacitly assume to be nearly inevitable. I'm constantly reading about, know a few people, who have bought into one or more potential threats and take it as read that they are coming.

A friend a few years back read a bunch of articles on dirty bombs and has, since then, assumed that one going off near him is inevitable. So he went out and spent a good part of his savings on gear to deal with the potential situation. He spent thousands dollars for a fancy HEPA filtration system to pressurize the house and safe room, three suits per person, booties and spares, respirators and spare filters, special detergent and dedicated brushes to get nucleotides off of skin, and radiation meters.

Sounds good. It will come in mighty handy if/when such an event goes down in his neighborhood. Fair enough, except for one small issue. He lives in a very small town better than twenty miles away from any likely target. Realistic chances his home will see a dirty bomb or be downwind of one are slim to none.

He hollowed out a good portion of his savings and investments and is now facing a considerable amount of financial pain. Those thousands would be handier right now than all that gear. But he can't sell it and get his money back. Worse still, some of it will have to be replaced if it is to be depended on. Plastics, rubber and especially the filters, all have limited lifespans.

I think he has become a victim of Worst-Case Thinking:
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/05/worst-case_thin.html

Preparation involving expensive gear is not all up-side. Every dollar you spend on it comes from something else. Not all potential scenarios are as likely as all others. Not all gear and provision are universally applicable. More is not always better in all categories. Preparing for the worse possible situation is not always the best way to go.