How decide how much to help and share?

It is a long-term disaster / emergency as defined by this forum. You have done a good job and you and your family are going to be fine with what you have. You friends, relatives, neighbors, and strangers start showing up to ask you to help them and to share your resources.

Has someone developed a "help-triage" system to aid you in deciding who gets what and how much, if anything?

Do these concerns deserve to be reflected in your plans? if so, how specifically?

This mine field has been waded thru here before. You might try searching for it.

There were definitely varied opinions.

I'd look at from the perspective of helping others unless it limits my ability to help myself/my family.

What search terms would turn it up?

In what long-term disaster scenario can we know the duration precisely enough to know if we have enough supplies?

I can't imagine a "system" that can prepare you for who might ask for help, what they might need, how much they might need, how much you'll need, how long an emergency may last and exactly what that emergency would entail in terms of hardship.

I don't know how to prepare for that scenario other than to stockpile in excess of what seems prudent for your own household. Now I suppose if you had a one year supply of food and water for your family and a storage tank full of gasoline and all kinds of other stuff, that if a tornado, hurricane or earthquake strikes surely you could spare quite a lot to help others.

The possibility -- probability -- that others will be less prepared or for other reasons need help, should certainly be considered. Don't we all expect that few of our friends/neighbors/family will be as prepared as we are?

Do we have a moral obligation to stockpile extra, knowing that others would be needy in an emergency?

People on this forum are so generous with information, I would expect that it would also be the inclination of nearly all of us to help others in an emergency by being generous with supplies.

That said, it's one thing to help, or not help, friends/family/neighbors. Strangers are easier to say no to. Several times a month, sometimes several times a week, I say no to strangers who ask for money. I've never said no to friends or family.

And now I'm tied up in knots. I've posed a similar question before in regard to evacuation. Can't really know what we'll do until something happens. I've thought about it and I can't imagine shutting the door on friends/family/neighbors.

This is one of those questions that you probably aren't going to find the answer you're looking for in a Survival Manual, at a training school, or on the internet.

It comes down to you doing what you think is right. You have to evaluate the situation on a case by case basis, weigh the strengths and weaknesses, and make a decision...hoping you've made the right one.

I will say this though, no matter how self-sufficient you think you are, eventually you will get to a point where you'll need to ask another human being for help with something. It's almost an inevitability. As humans, we must, at the very least, keep that in the back of our mind; or else it might come back to bite us.

This has been discussed in various forums including this one. Almost always there's a subtext to your question Dweste - that someone is comin for your 'excess supplies' simply because you have them and others need them. Confiscation, requisition, eminent domain, what have you - the spectre of local authority showing up and taking away your excess to help others. I have spent time studying a number of severe disasters, and there is no record that I can find of local authorities confiscating excess supplies from survivors, 'for the greater good.' More often there is on record instances of individuals donating what they have to help others, willingly, gladly. I think the concept of having a cache of supplies that others covet enough to come and take them posits a disaster far more severe than anyone actually has experienced.

You can't answer this question in isolation from actual disasters. So put yourself in one - take the American Samoa earthquake and tsunami. By itself its a very dire situation. They are very low on drinking water, there are a fair number of injured, things will get back to normal, but it will be slow. Plop me down in America Samoa, and my family would be well supplied for at least a few weeks. And given the rate of inflow of aid to the area, I could safely share some of what I have on hand with friends and neighbors. It has been hardest for the first 72 hours, with the next 72 hours seeing aid come in, and the next week intended to improve life and begin to get people back to 'normal.' For the first 3-5 days I would expect to expend much of my food and medical supplies for the greater good - that might include giving first aid, and feeding family, friends and neighbors, sharing what I have. 'Normal' for me means being generous with what I have to help others in my community, knowing that I'll have an opportunity to resupply in the near term. Soon after a disaster I would start to inventory and resupply.

Please leave out any government confiscation concerns. This thread is limited to private parties and how to manage your resources.

If your stuff will run out in a couple days or less when shared with others, versus lasting your family a couple weeks if you do not share, and you have no idea when help will arrive, what do you do?

My primary focus is not so much to clooect various theories on what to do, but to find if anyone is aware of a thought -through / formalized / developed way of handling the issues.

Maybe there are just two basic pathways: I choose to equip myself/my household to be relatively autonomous and self-supporting for a finite period of time, within the constraints of location and resources; or I choose to equip a larger group (neighborhood, scout troop, congregation)to do so. The latter is not simply the former writ large. Working with a group adds the human behavior in organizations element. The forum moderators seem todo this-Martin, Blast,-seem to be actively involved in this sort of thing-maybe interest in group survival is that which develops after one develops mastery of personal/family survival, and recognizes its limitations in long-term and widespread survival scenarios.

For me, this is most difficult part of planning. A few years my answer would have been different. I've spent several years trying to convince my neighbors, friends, relatives (and anyone else who will listen) to even think about this stuff. Those that have, have started preparing; if only modestly.

I have several close neighbors who are taking preparedness very seriously. Together, we've started making plans for different scenarios. In the event of on emergency, I'm counting on them. We've talked about making sure none of the neighborhood kids go hungry, but as for the adults... I still don't know.

I don't think I'll have a problem turning out some of those people who have said "I know where I'm going when the SHTF, your house!" but haven't done anything for themselves. Then again if a neighbor showed up at my door hurt or starving, I don't think I could just let them die.

For me, it comes down to community. I believe in the event of a large scale, long term emergency, the people that come together will be better off.

It seems to me that this is one of those purely situational questions. It depends on so many factors that we can't determine in advance: How long will things be stuffed? Exactly HOW are they stuffed? Who's asking? Why do I think they're asking? How much do I have? Etc., etc., etc.

I think it boils down to the exact situation and each person's own morals/ethics. While I might help one person freely in one situation, in a different situation I might tell the exact same person "sorry, I don't have anything." I think it depends on too many unknown factors.

Ha - that describes just about everyone I know who knows I have a lot of camping gear.

Nope.

There can be no clinical, methodical way of "handling" what will ultimately be an issue of humanity -- whether and how much to be selfish when others ask for help.

I do appreciate this thread, though. We should spend more time on this forum discussing what we can do to help others survive and not just ourselves and our own families. The best thing we can do is spread the gospel of preparedness, which is also self-interested as the more people help themselves the less likely we'll be asked for help.

This thread inspires me to talk to more of my friends and neighbors about preparedness. The goal being along the lines of teaching someone to fish so they can feed themselves versus giving them a freeze-dried fish so they can eat for one day.

I have no idea if my neighbors have given a moment's thought to this subject. For all I know, some may be more prepared than I am.

Try this as a conversation starter:
Did you know that there are food lines for farm workers in California who aren't being allowed to irrigate their fields?
If farm workers in California are in food lines, where will our food come from if the dollar gets so weak (due to the over-printing and inevitable inflation) that other nations won't accept it in exchange for food?

The last case of tomatoes we bought came from Yakima, WA rather than CA. They don't grow food all year in WA.

To the extent you can generalize, 'disasters' are predictable - a period of intense need for 24-72 hours, followed by an interim of arriving aid for up to 72 hours. Then a week of gradually returning to 'normal' - access to food, water, heat, medical assistance restored. Preparing for 3 days without assistance is the norm, although most will tell you 5-7 days is the better metric to prepare for being on your own if the disaster is widespread and serious. And 'normal' is relative, your house may be toast and your roads could still be impassable, but when you have access to sustaining food, water and shelter, you're doing pretty good. If that's what a disaster timeline looks like, how should you plan to spend your time, and how should you parse out your supplies?

CERT gives us a way to spend the first 72+ hours of any disaster - take care of your family, assessing damage, triaging injured, mitigating additional harm by turning off gas and water, dealing with mass casualties and mass displacement, hunkering down until help arrives. Whether you are responding as part of an active trained team or you find yourself the only trained person in your zip code, it makes your interactions fairly predictable. You need to work very hard for up to a week applying what you know about responding to disasters, because frankly it isn't common knowledge out there - but repeated evidence is that most people get the fundamentals of disaster response when they are in the middle of one. It's a community focus - you define a neighborhood and assess the damage, treat the wounded, reach out to centers of response (local fire, police, hospitals), and organize self-care for 3-5 days. If its really bad, yes you'll run out of 4x4s and possibly even clean water. If your daughter has a serious wound you may want to keep enough bandages at home in reserve to change dressings regularly, better yet you want to get her to better assistance as soon as possible. Eventually help arrives, experts take over care issues, water is delivered or restored, people begin to feed the community. Even when that happens, I think my inclination will be to get myself and/or my family away from the disaster area.

In reality I don't think I'll have to share my food supplies with the entire neighborhood - you put out a call for people to re-enter safe structures, and come back with whatever food they can find. That should be enough for people to eat until someone can come with more. For those without homes to re-enter, its a matter of digging deep and feeding them. I probably won't be the center of the food universe, simply because there should be enough to go around from community resources for the expected period of time. I'll make a meal for whoever needs one though. Because after the disaster is over, we'll have a community again, and people will remember what you did and who you did it to.

Considering the way things seem to be spiraling downward, we may find out exactly what the answer to this question is, person by person.

But there is a serious difference between wanting to help and being able to help. Unless you're rich and have a warehouse or two filled with useful stuff, you will probably be faced with more people wanting than you can afford to give.

At this point in time, I know there are people who are dipping into their food reserves because they are unemployed. There used to be at least two full pages of Help Wanted ads in the local newspaper. Now there are usually about 15 ads, half for very specific skills and half for sales.

If you divided all the people in the U.S. who have done any preparedness at all (put them on the east coast) and those who haven't (put them on the west coast), the country would tip into the Pacific Ocean.

Sue

I wrestled for a long time with thoughts of what I would give out in an emergency to people who were unprepared. I couldn't resolve the issue of turning people away without helping, especially when those people might be children. I can prepare all I like and believe that everyone else should as well, but children aren't capable of doing so. I couldn't think of completely turning them away without hope even though their parents failed to prepare. So, I had to come up with an idea that would ease my troubled thoughts in these regards.

My first course of action was to donate to local church food drives, pantries and shelters and to be aware of all their locations in 10 mile radius. Then in an emergency I could point the unprepared to places where they might find help and hope should they find me.

My second course of action was to decide that if an extreme emergency should arise, I wouldn't make it easy for people to find either me or my supplies.

A friend of mine told me of a story he heard in Brazil. An American citizen (or someone not from Brazil) was staying at a place that I believe was owned by a rich person. This guest proceeded to help out someone they saw on the street by giving them food. This went on for a few days, and after the owner found out, the guest stopped. However, the word got out about "free food" and new people showed up every day for a week. I believe they were just ignored, and they eventually went away.

Yes, Brazil is obscenely poor ( I hear the top 1% are rich, top 3% are middle-class, and everyone else is dirt poor ), but I would be very hesitant to help anyone, unless like others said, I have a huge supply.

Hey Dweste, can I organize these people into work details and get them to help each other?

The first 5 haul water, the next 5 haul fuel and the rest are divided between scavenging food and scavenging household supplies.

Somebody needs to find food and cooking stuff, somebody needs to find blankets and stuff like that.
We need some sanitation engineers to take care of basic sanitation...
...and by the way, is there a doctor in the house?
Because that pregnant looking lady might be going into labour.

> if anyone is aware of a thought -through / formalized / developed way
> of handling the issues.

It's called game theory or cooperative game theory. Do a search on your favorite search engine and you'll turn up millions of hits, several of them right on point for your query. There's also non-cooperative game theory, which seems to be very big here.

If you want more nearly practical thought through, formalized, developed ways of handling the issues, get your neighbors to take CERT courses with you. You'll learn and train together on supplies, first aid, and search and rescue.

If you want practical experience at cooperative survival, start going to Burning Man for a week every year.

Part of the answer to how people answer the question is their cultural upbringing. I was raised on a couple of farms in Texas. We had neighbors in sight, and everyone helped out when someone had a cow get loose or got injured. I'd say there were a couple of reason. First, it's the moral thing to do. Everyone deserves a helping hand the first time around regardless of fault. We all make mistakes, and you hope the other guy learns from his, just like you did. If the guy keeps needing help, however, it gets to be a burden and help trickles down to a stop. Lots of people need help through no fault of their own. If the cow got out, it took milk off the table for their kids. That's not right.

Another reason was, we're all in the same boat, and we're all going to need a neighborly hand somewhere along the line. You give help, and you know you'll get help.

This brings me to a thought no one has broached: all these supposed emergencies come to an end someday, and we're all back in our homes again with those neighbors. Did they come to you for help? Did you pull your gun out and tell 'em to drop dead because they should have planned like you did? Or did you pull out a box of powdered milk and say sure, I don't have regular milk but here's some powdered milk - will that help your baby?

> I can't imagine shutting the door on friends/family/neighbors.

It's inconceivable to me, but that's how I was raised.

I think Scafool hit on the nearest thing to a solution. It's back to the cardboard sign concept: Work for Food. Trade labor and knowledge for admittance to the survival 'group'.

* That 'old witch' down the street knows wild foods and herbs.

* The engineer and the builder can come up with small new shelters build with materials from damaged homes.

* Gardeners teach and spread out work teams to plant food in every available niche. They save seed to plant more.

* Larger-scale survival is like a farm that depends on manual labor -- the more laborers, the more work gets done.

Sue

I think when push came to shove I would help all I could without compromising the welfare of my family, children and the elderly have top priority and I would sacrifice considerable comfort on their behalf. As Philip said 'We are all in the same boat' and if we can't show some consideration to others why are we trying to continue on?

Just a pitch for pre-planning - do a neighborhood inventory before a disaster strikes. Find out where the doctors, dentists and nurses live, who does construction for a living and has access to heavy equipment (and chain saws, we're heavily wooded), and who the lawyers are, they will need the most help (that's not a joke). As part of my two block survey I talked to about 85% of my neighbors, and located gas and water shutoffs for 70% of them (a few didn't want me tromping on their property or to spend the time). On two of them the water main shutoff was rusted shut, and would be impossible to turn in an emergency. I recommended they contact the utility or a plumber for a fixup, and I happen to know at least one of them did. Then chart the locations (green dot for water, blue dot for gas, N S E or W of house) and keep your neighborhood map handy - I made 3 copies, in the event of a bad shake I hope to hand them out to people in the golden hour after the earthquake and ask them to quickly check for water or gas leaks and turn off those at risk (yes, I also start with 4 giveaway wrenches). The State of Washington actually encourages this inventory using a FEMA grant, it took all of a weekend afternoon and I got out and met people I'd never seen before.

Big advice: don't ask about guns, kids, preparation, or anything too personal - there's no need, and its none of your business. Anyone coming to your door is usually looking for money or for something from you. I always left behind a flier with a description of what I was doing and where I lived, which is right nearby. If I were to do this again further away from my home I would definitely precede my visit with a door hanger that said I would be walking around on x afternoon doing an inventory. And I think this would be a nifty project for a Boy Scout troop doing their emergency preparedness merit badge. But a 2 block radius is about all I could handle in a disaster.

> I would definitely precede my visit with a door hanger that said I would be
> walking around on x afternoon doing an inventory. And I think this would
> be a nifty project for a Boy Scout troop doing their emergency preparedness
> merit badge. But a 2 block radius is about all I could handle in a disaster.

I participated in a county experiment to see if it was feasible to hand out drugs if a terrorist released some communicable agent (think giving out Cipro in an anthrax attack). They'd already tried an experiment where people were to go to a county shelter for pills or shots. Both ideas have problems.

The county had us CERT volunteers in green reflective vests walk around neighborhoods in groups of three and give out pamphlets to whoever was home and leave door hangers for vacant houses and apartments. We had ham radio operators with each group, and I know from the communications that several people called the cops about us. Because it was a county drill, the fire department, police department, and county health department all coordinated, so there were no volunteers tasered or teargassed, but the police rolled a car every time someone called so they could confirm it was us.

I'm not sure whether to advise that you alert the police ahead of time what you're doing or to say go ahead but expect the police. It's easier to get forgiveness than permission, but I have no expectation of forgiveness from the cops.

> check for water or gas leaks and turn off those at risk

I cringe whenever I hear or read this. In California, the law prohibits homeowners from turning the gas back on if it's been turned out outside. You have to get the gas company to send an employee out to inspect and then to confirm that all gas-fed appliances have pilot lights running if there are any and whatever else they check to prevent explosions and fires when they turn the gas back on. One of our firemen said after the Loma Prieta earthquake some knucklehead in his neighborhood did everyone a favor and ran through the neighborhood turning off all the gas. Needlessly, of course, and no one had any heat or cooking for a couple of days. The gas company was checking all its mains and big commercial stuff; homes were on the back burner.

I realize you've said turn off those at risk, but still I cringe. If you don't have a gas leak, don't turn off your gas.

Everybody's mileage varies, and we'll all use our best judgment.

This is a difficult call. There are lots of people who say, "When things go bad, I'm coming to your house" and that's their extent of preparing for the unthinkable. Well, what if there's a quarantine and you can't leave your house for three months? There goes that idea. What if there are roving gangs and the streets are safe?

Personally, I would be more apt to help someone who has put forth genuine efforts to prepare themselves and their families.

"...some knucklehead in his neighborhood did everyone a favor and ran through the neighborhood turning off all the gas... If you don't have a gas leak, don't turn off your gas."

That's fine in theory, but less so in practice, esp after a major quake. In the CA Northridge earthquake, about half of the mobile homes in the affected area were knocked off their foundations, and many of them ruptured their gas lines and propane tanks. The rate of ignition in mobile homes was especially high because the homes were so unstable.

"City and county building inspectors estimated that 82% of all structures rendered uninhabitable by the earthquake were residential. Of these, 77% were apartments and condominiums, and the remaining 23% were single-family dwellings. A week after the earthquake, approximately 14,600 dwelling units were deemed uninhabitable (red or yellow tagged)."*

[* From a 1994 report on the Northridge Earthquake: City and county building inspectors estimated that 82% of all structures rendered uninhabitable by the earthquake were residential. Of these, 77% were apartments and condominiums, and the remaining 23% were single-family dwellings. A week after the earthquake, approximately 14,600 dwelling units were deemed uninhabitable (red or yellow tagged).]

So, what's the REAL solution? Leave the gas running while all the nervous smokers run outside and light up?

But there is one positive side to the Don't-Turn-Off-the-Gas Theory: Most homes are insured for fire, but few are insured for earthquakes. If your home burns down, you're far more likely to collect.

Sue

Absolutely true, thanks for pointing this out to everyone Phillip. I'm aware of the issues for prematurely turning off gas (turning it back on safely), I would turn off gas only if I smelled it and felt I could safely turn it off at the source to stop a leak. That itself is iffy - I read somewhere recently about the incidence of fire and explosion, that the best course is to run away quickly and simply write off that property, and possibly the people trapped in it. Like you said, everyone's mileage varies - mine doesn't include prematurely turning off any gas without evidence of a leak. Most homes won't be unattended after an earthquake either - if a homeowner is there and gas is leaking, I ask if he/she wants my assistance turning it off. If they don't, and understand the ramifications of not turning off their gas, I move on down the street. For the first hour anyway, I'm not inclined to turn off anyone's water at all, unless there is a visible foundation leak or other running water. As per CERT, the most I'm doing right away is a quick visual run down of the area and possible damage,and preventing more damage by turning off gas where indicated. That's my plan anyway - I live 150 yards from the Seattle Fault, more than likely I will be slammed by my bedroom wall and lying unconscious beneath some rubble.

For my 2 block radius inventory I didn't inform the cops, at least half of my neighbors know me by sight, and the other half were more or less calmed when I pointed to where i lived (at worst, I was a nosy neighbor). I think Boy Scouts (in uniform) could accomplish this inventory task pretty well too without raising suspicions.

The places I've lived had meters with a safety valve that cut off the gas if there's shaking. And they weren't necessarily new so imagine that's how all of them are nowdays.

I would certainly help others in any localised or short term disaster, but in the event of TEOTWAWKI I would think twice about expending supplies that I might need in the long term for myself.

Many on this and similar forums, equip themsevelves with very expensive gear. This has a lot to commend it if your life may depend on a good knife, ot tent, or sleeping bag, or flashlight etc.
Remember though that very cheap gear is better than nothing,and is much less of a concern than good stuff, especialy if lost or given away.

As an example, I purchased a good sleeping bag for any emergency, and a number of expensive, large all wool blankets, in case heating fuel is unavailable.
Except to close family I would be most reluctant to part with these.
But I also purchased 2 dozen very cheap recycled blankets, only about £50 for the lot. These I would consider giving away to those in need.

Likewise I have a number of good flashlights, but also a dozen cheap ones, which I dont mind giving away.
In the recent Great power cut in Dartford, England, I bartered numerous cheap flashlights, each for two pints of beer !

I also keep a dozen homemade disposable battery lights, they are cheaper than chemical light sticks, give more light, for longer, and can be turned off. Worth a pint of beer each.

"I also keep a dozen homemade disposable battery lights, they are cheaper than chemical light sticks, give more light, for longer, and can be turned off."

Please explain.

Sue

Seconded. Google left me empty.

I am not sure if I have his home made light idea right, but I think if you google "Throwies" you might find something.

I suspect you can live without the magnet, but I could see it coming in handy if you want to stick the light some place with a steel surface to attach it to.

These are very simple, some would say crude.

A plastic battery holder for 2D cells, with a 2.4 volt 0.7 amp flashlight bulb.
The bulb is soldered to two short pieces of wire, which are soldered to the terminals of the battery holder.
No switch is needed, insert batteries to light, remove batteries to turn off.

Run time 10 hours continous or about 15 hours total of intermitant use, with alkaline cells

Cost of battery holder about 25 pence, cost of bulb 5 pence, wire and solder ,estimate less than a penny.
Alkaline D cells if bought in bulk are less than £1.00 for two.

Total cost about £1.00/£1.25, glow sticks cost more than that and give a lot less light.

I also made some smaller versions with 2 AA cells and a 0.3 amp bulb, these are smaller and lighter in weight and use cheaper batteries, but the run time and light output are less.

Although very basic, these are reliable due to the small number of potential loose contacts.
They are cheap enough to give away, and I allways keep some to hand.

Great thinking!

Those could easily be upgraded with LED replacements, such as this:
Niteize LED bulb replacement
The manufacturer claims 50 hours on 2 D cell batteries. Unverified, but likely.

The bad news is that the cold white LEDs will not create the atmosphere as a dimmed incan bulb when the family huddles up for noodles in the living room...

The use of an LED retrofit would certainly greatly extend the run time, but a cost of $10/£6 would no longer be a throwaway item.

I also suspect that an LED retrofit bulb would be destroyed by the heat of soldering wires to it.

For my own use, not for giveaways I have some lights that use 4D cells and a miniture screw base bulb holder.
These use either a 5 volt 0.5 amp incandescent bulb for a run time of 20/30 hours or an screwbase LED lamp for 100+ hours.

Slick. VERY slick.

Adam2 hits a good point about expensive gear vs. cheaper items. I actually go with cheaper gear on about 85% of my kit. Some items you just can't get away from b/c of bias. I invested in a RSK Mk1 but Moras are great too and 10% of the cost. But the bulk of my EDC and packs are very basic.

I destroy a lot of gear. When was the last time most people bought a magnesium block and used it down to the mishmash starter? Me, all the time. If I bought something b/c it's 'cool', and didn't put it through hardcore testing to see if it holds up, I might as well not have it at all.

Consequently, I have become a raving fan of some brands and will push people away from others. Its one thing to tell someone you own 'X' item, its another to say, I put that thing through the ringer and did great.

Neat idea. But if you wanted to store the light with the batteries inside could you put a removable plastic spacer between the batteries?

I approach the topic of the thread with the mindset that I always want a little something in reserve for myself and those closest to me.

I put the easiest to get to stuff in what I call modules or kits which in their smallest form are contained in sealed plastic freezer bags. I bundle a day's food per bag for example. Other bundles are complete personal toiletry sets probably good for 4-5 days. Water is primarily a purchased in individual plastic bottles.

I have bulk supplies in waterproof plastic tubs; almost all of which contain only large individually sealed containers. I have a lot of water in multi-gallon containers.

If pressed I would admit to a discrete duplicate stash of everything kept nearby but not readily visible or as easily accesible. I hope that not even looters or well-meaning do-gooders would find this stuff.

I have taken the same approach to my tools, hardware, lubricants, batteries, and everything else.

So, strangers or those passing through might get a plastic freezer bag or two, and some bottles of water. Closer family and friends might get aa bulk package or two plus several freezer bag kits, and a case or two of water in bottles.

This does not take into account my EDC or BOB which remain with me or under my control, nor does it include my vehicle "kit."

Yes you could, and this might be a good idea if space was short.

I keep the batteries seperatly though.
I keep large battery stocks, and prefer to keep these in the suppliers packs.
It is easier to rotate stocks that way, and keep an eye on the dates.

I subscribe to the golden rule when it comes to providing surplus aid to others.

"Surplus" being the key.

Precisely. I would not ask someone to share what they can't afford to do without, and I would not be able to share what I need to survive with others just because they failed to plan adequately for themselves. That just makes victims of us both, which is irresponsible on my part.

Yeah, better that way. If an alkaline battery decides to leak it won't ruin the light or your other gear.

I've found it helpful to keep a couple extra snow shovels in the garage, as there always seems to be a neighbor that needs one when the first big snowstorm hits. That, and an extra small first aid kit to give away when someone's kid has a scrape and they don't have any band-aids/plasters.