Preparedness article in NY Times

I enjoyed this article in the New York Times. Someone who "...realized that, holy smoke, the cavalry doesn’t always charge in to rescue you" and is acting on it.

Interesting article.

Thanks for the link. I enjoyed this.

Not a mention of killer zombies. What, is the mainstream turning "survivalism" into "self-sufficiency?" Stockpiling cooking oil instead of gun oil? Heresy!

Seriously, I liked the fact the lady of the house drove the whole enterprise. Kinda turns all the chest-beating cliches on their heads.

It sounds like she has been looking through many of the posts that have been made here on this subject.

Very interesting article, I need to get my wife to read it so she can see I'm not the crack-pot she thinks I am

... Waiting for someone to mention that she has no way of protecting her family other than throwing sugar at them...

Hey, sugar in the eyes will slow 'em down long enough for everyone to grab their BOBs.

Hey, sugar in the eyes might be dangerous. After all, it causes an osmotic fluid shift... may dessicate the eyes if you pour enough sugar on, and leave it long enough.

I learned today that you can treat paraphimosis with it (google some pictures)

While she showed more than most of us might have, I want you to seriously wonder if she would have been open enough to show off a couple of shotguns, a .22, few pistols, and a few thousand rounds of ammunition.

Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.

Good point.

She also could have mentioned guns and was mis quoted for the point of the article.

She probably told the reporter she doesn't have a gun and want to shoot anyone... that's what her neighbors are for

If I was her, living in Massachusetts, I would have forgotten to mention that particular part of preparations.

Any of the long term preparedness crowd among us read this book? And what did you think of it?
The Sock

Cool article.

I think it is interesting how people ADVERTISE that they have made alot of preps, have children, and in no way could care less REALLY what happens to their own children as they are not prepared to protect themselves from the wolf's in society.

If you can not protect yourself, you can not protect your children.

Freaking SHEEP.

I saw the part of the article mentioning firearms and knew it would result in some comments.

I personally think there is some good lessons here. I would rather work with my neighbors now to discuss preparation than have to keep them off my property with threat of violence later.

Now, situations vary, some folks probably don't have neighbors they want to talk to, let alone trust in a crisis. Plus if you are worried about roving bands of refugees that is another consideration.

So, Mrs. Harrison has worked with her community, "formed a group with some neighbors to promote self-reliance & trade tips and equipment."

I'm not saying that we shouldn't account for self defense as a personal choice. Seems to me the community aspect of preparedness is discussed less than what caliber of bullet to stockpile. Balance in all things.

Community is key to long term survival. Some members of society carry one load, others carry another. Mrs. Harrison has worked with her community and they know what she has and there are probably members who have much of the same but maybe use Mrs. Harrison's grinder. These others are probably set up to handle interlopers so that those who shun guns don't need to deal with it, nothing is said about teh preps of others in her community. Just because Kathy Harris doesn't own a gun doesn't mean she is an easy target.

Then again, misdirection is always a possibility. It's hard for me to imagine a group that has plans to be very self-sufficient in a crisis not being prepared to deal with the wolves in society at large.

Absolutely.

I think self-defense should in many cases be part of ppreparedness, along with the realization that avoiding threats and altercations is in most cases wiser than trying to win them.

Self-defense can be something that you do within a community, so long as you have decent relationships and a community that can agree on things it cna do to defend itself. In the everyday run of the mill course of events, a community that looks out for its own (that is out and about in the neighborhood, that keeps its eyes on each other's property and welfare, that will help to protect the property and welfare of the members of the community) is probably a safer and, therefore, in some sense a more prepared community.

Of course, in some communities you could be accused of snitching.

I was thinking something similar.

Knuckle-heads are more likely to break into the house to steal guns than sugar/powdered milk...

Call me cynnial, or maybe I've just watched too many reruns of certain Twilight Zone episodes, but it's been my experience that most folks in a community nowadays cannot be trusted to serve the common good. When I look at the sort of people I have living in and around me, and I've lived in several different neighborhoods across the country in the past 6 years, there's no way I am going to ever rely on them to cover my back in a crisis. At best, I consider them to be opportunists, who will waste no time in pilfering my stocks without permission if they think there's little enough chance I might do something about it.

It may be true that no man is an island, but as far as I am concerned, my little chunk of real estate will be scorched earth before I let anyone else infiltrate, no matter how distressed they may appear. The less they know of what I have and am capable of, the better it will be for everyone.

It may be a cold, self defeating mindset I have, but at least I know what to expect this way, and I can better plan accordingly. Leaving any portion of my welfare up to the goodwill of others is just asking to be sorely disappointed. This is not to say I won't extend a helping hand if I truly feel it is warranted, and the recipient deserving, but it will be on my terms and conditions that I do so, to the extent I am allowed by law.

This whole idea of baling other folks out of their most often self-imposed misery using coerced collection from those who've made the effort to take care of themselves galls me, as it did our forefathers. Charity needs to be voluntary, or it isn't charity, but social redistribution of wealth.

"Any of the long term preparedness crowd among us read this book? And what did you think of it?"

I haven't read it yet, but I've just put in a request for an interlibrary loan.

I see that the publisher is Storey. They only seem to publish meaty books that are pertinent to homesteading. If I had money, I would buy it on the fact that they published it alone.

To see their book lists, go to Storey Books

Sue