Okay, let's remove some of the gray area now. Since the original premise was "bug out or seek public shelter", let's assume that we are already prepared for an emergency where the normal conveniences are no longer available. That means no municpal water, no electricity, no natural gas, no gas at the pumps, and limited consumable supplies. Okay, most of us can plan for that kind of event, and assuming TEOTWAWKI hasn't occured, we can expect that within two weeks relief will be available. So the "temporary isolation" scenario is not a factor.

But let's suppose something happens that generates a persistent, chronic threat. It could be some exotic disease, or some form of contamination, or maybe just a regional civil unrest or (gulp) invasion. Now this presents conditions that make sheltering in place less desirable. We can, of course prepare for these more dramatic but less likely possibilities, though at considerably greater expense. Nonetheless, these are real risks, which would make normal survival efforts much more complicated if we remain in the area of effect. So the question then will be just how effective is going to a public shelter within or near the area of effect, as opposed to migrating far enough away from the affected area to eliminate significant risk. To my way of thinking, staying near the risk zone is not advisable, no matter what municipal support may be present. Sheltering in place under these conditions doesn't make much sense either. The only logical conclusion is to move somewhere away from the threat.

So now that we've clarified under what conditions we should take flight, the idea of going to a public shelter is only for those who are truly unprepared for life's more mundane hardships, like floods, fires, storms, earthquakes, and such. Sure, these events can lead to bigger problems such as I pointed out earlier, but for situations where the only threat is the loss of utility service or supplies for a limited time, there's just no reason to leave home for that sort of problem. If things ever get bad enough that home is no longer safe, then likely no public shelter nearby is going to be any better.

For instance, when Katrina hit, people fled their homes for public shelter to escape a significant threat. Anyone remember what happened to the superdome during the storm? That was supposed to be a public shelter, right? It sure didn't look very secure to me when the storm came in through the top.

The impression I got from Katrina is that people were advised to evacuate if they could, and the shelters were provided mainly for people who couldn't. The shelter is really the last resort, if you don't think you can make it on your own.

I was just highlighting the "What if you can't get to a Car, etc", angle of it.

And while a large purpose of Kit and Gear *is* to get oneself to a higher Level of Civilization / Preparation, -"Back to the World"!, so to speak, -It is also to keep one Alive and hopefully Well, -*Until* one can get back to such Normal World. "Until and Unless", regarding that. For Until such time, -*that* is your World! This Wild and Natural World, -is of course the Natural, -or Default state, -of Man and Things in Life. take Away any or all of our 20th and 21st century Technology and Conveniences, -and *thats* what we've got! On a Global Time Scale, -it *wasn't* long ago at all!, that we were back in 1600s / 1700s, and earlier times! All the way back to Caveman Days! *Thats* the Far Longer Stretch! Thats the Natural Default and State of Man!, and his World! The Current State and "Progress" of Developed Civilization as we now Stand, -is in many ways a Fine Platform! But its nevertheless just that!, -a Platform, -an Artificial Platform! Pull that rug out from under us, -on which we Rely and Stand, -and we're left with the oftentimes Hard Floor, -of Natural, Wilderness Survival! Yes, -Lets ultimately and preferentially get back to the Rug, Platform, and World, -Gear and Preps can be a Great Assist here. But *Until* this is so achieved, -things more akin to the Stone Age, -rather than the Space Age, -*is* our Default and World in which we find ourselves! I Agree that equipment is to get back to your Higher World and Purpose. But Differ that that is as much as its only purpose. What Counts at least as much, -is in how it Serves you, -*Before* you "Get Back to the World"!

*No* Hard Feelings, Disrespect, or Inaccuracy intended! Please don't so worry!, -and if I've Riled or Offended in any way, -I Fully and Duly Apologize. Such was Not my intention.

Be it either Stay in Place, Bug Out to the other side of the World, or a middle ground of "Going to Grandma's House (however one can or does do it), -These are personal preferences and choices. My own tilts considerably to greatly to the Hills, or some other part of the Country / World. Your's is far more to the Stay Put / Go to other familiar locations, -sort of thing. Just Different personal evaluations and preferences.That's all.

But while you more likely wing it in Place, -I'll more likely be Winging it, -should Due Need ever arise, -in the Hills!

I'm a Country Boy anyway! And like the saying goes, -"You can take the boy out of the Country, -but you Can't take the Country out of the boy!" Urbanized for many years now, -this certainly applies to me! I'm IN the Urban World, -but very much NOT *of* it! I Fondly Remember of "Back Where I Come From!" So "Take me Home Country Roads!", and "Thank God I'm a Country Boy!". Your Roots are probably a lot more Urban than mine. Entirely OK!, -To Each their Own! [color:"black"] [/color] [email]gulliamo[/email]

As good as or better than Lucky Ned Pepper said it in True Grit! <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> [color:"black"] [/color] [email]romania[/email]

Survival *is* first and foremost, -very much about Looking Out for One's Self! Reliance on others, as you speak of, (and such *does* have its Advantages and Points, -some of which you mention), -can run directly Inconsistant and Counter to this! Going it Alone, "Every Person for Themself", -has many an Advantage and Point to it as well!

This being so, -I much Agree with the Spirit and Content, -which people like Tom so mention here. I'm a "give the Shirt Off my Back!", -to one without a shirt, -kind of guy. Very Warmly, Sincerely, and Gladly so! So long as I *have* a shirt to give! So long as I can feasably spare such. To cite the "Comfortably Up on the Mountaintop" example which someone in this thread has given, -I'd feel self consciously Not Right, -if I had, could give, but didn't give, -*to such Worthily Accepting (in Spirit and Manner) of Recipients* But (*...'s*) the Key Benchmark and Criterion here. If on the other hand, -they are a Covetous Mob down there in the Valley, -then Heck, -I wouldn't lose a moment's Sleep or Sweat! While I have it Good! / They Suffer to Heck, -down there! That is a Key Qualification that I would add to the "Fellow Man(kind)" / "We're all in this Together!", -view of you, Tom, and others. Even within a Group, -when it really gets down to some Pinches, -Guess who many group members are going to Look Out for first! Here it will largely to entirely NOT be the Larger Interests and Common Good of the Group!.....!

To your preference, -my Heart is Always There! My Head is or is Not,-depending on the overall Reception and Situation!

Its the Christmas Holiday Season now! Everyone's for the *Reformed* Scrooge Warmly, Sincerely, and Enthusiastically shouting out "Merry Christmas!", -on Christmas morning!

But what if the *Townsfolk* greeted him in the streets below, -with only a Cold, Blank Stare!? Being actually Scrooges themselves! Can even a Reformed Scrooge be here Blamed?!, -if he gets Second Thoughts of "Why do I Bother?!" And considers going back to his Old Self?! See, -the Townsfolk have got their Role and Part to play here too! its *not* all on Scrooge! If the Townsfolk of our Society want to Grab and Grub up all my Stores and Gear! And as much as be willing to kill me to get it, -then I have no Moral Compunction or Misgivings, -about sitting comfortably up on the Mountaintop, -while they suffer and all down below! I'd still *like* to Help! But they've got to play their requisite part in this too. [color:"black"] [/color] [email]Susan[/email]

Gotta agree with ya on that one.

Troy

Please forgive me if this assessment is inaccurate-

It seems that many see disaster scenarios as an excuse for an extended camping trip without the ground’s fees. Do some people see survival scenarios as a chance to run out and test out all their cool, new gear? Possibly a reason to say, "I told you so" while justifying future purchases of even more fancy schwag?

Can someone please describe a disaster scenario that has happened within the past 100 years where I wouldn't be better off (meaning more comfortable and able to contribute to society) at a distant friend's house rather than out camping?

Again, I am not trying to stir the coals but merely to learn and understand.

As you can see from my post above, I can't see one either.

It seems to me that people who think in terms of wilderness survival do not necessarily have the answers when it become a "survivalist" scenario.

The problem is getting to that friends house... <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Is it more difficult than getting to "the hills" or whatever destination is deemed remote enough to provide significant distance between you and said disaster?