As a bonus, this gets you half way to a backpacking kit! I've got almost all of this, minus the food and water, always packed and ready in my closet (not for society ending, but as an earthquake kit and convent way to store camping gear). Just add a tent, sleeping bag/pad, and a suitable backpack, and you can head out to the great outdoors!

I don’t care about the overly sensitive downvotes because HN has been turning more into Reddit anyhow but - you left out firearm.

In any “without rule of law” scenario you need a real means of protection. While this may be a shocker to some people if you try and fight with a knife, even if you have edged weapons training, there is a great chance you are going to bleed as well.

I hope people who have had the state tell them they don’t need a firearm never have to figure out that should have been their own choice to make.

And this is the problem with preppers in general. I don't know if it's too much Walking Dead or just a mindset they have to start with, but as someone else pointed out they seem to be far more obsessed with guns than with clean water, sanitation and heating.

Guns aren't very common in my country so I'm not worried about gun-toting locals rampaging around. Sure, a few might raid a military base or a farmer's shotgun cabinet, but statistically I think my family would be under far more threat from hypothermia, cholera or an infected scratch.

No, this is the problem with media representations of preppers. It's a massive overgeneralization to say that preppers "seem to be far more obsessed with guns than with clean water, sanitation, and heating."

With that said, the reality is that clean water, sanitation, and heating are pretty darn boring. It's like prepping 101 to have some available water, a shovel, and a barbecue or a fireplace or a basement to keep warm. If preppers do seem to you (apart from media misrepresentation) to focus more on guns, it's likely because they're long past having basics like food and water taken care of, and guns are more varied than any of the other basic needs.

Every place is different, and maybe guns are less important in your country, but they're very important during collapses in America, whether we want the world to be that way or not. Look back on the social breakdowns in America over the past--the LA riots come to mind--and look at how locals used guns to defend their stores and homes from looting. And those looters were just rioting; they weren't hungry or fighting for survival.

I'll grant you that the media representations are bad. I've never met a real live prepper, only ever seen them on TV, and I guess the ones they interview on TV are the ones who make the best TV.

You're right the basics are boring, but it's the basics you'll spend 24/7 trying to obtain long after your weapons and ammo have gone rusty. And if you think you'll be making your own ammo, I'd say no-one at all will have the luxury of that kind of engineering time when they're trying to get the ground to grow enough food to eat.

What is it you think happens to your police and government guns when there is no rule of law?

I’ll give you a hint, there’s a reason the Taliban was walking around with Soviet era AK-47s, and Isis was walking around with US-made M-16s.

I'm going to post this elsewhere in the thread, but a comment on Metafilter from someone who survived the siege of Sarajevo: https://www.metafilter.com/78669/What-if-things-just-keep-ge...

"Guns and weapons helped no one directly and were even of little to no use in the defense of Sarajevo, since they were toys compared to the shells, bombs and high-powered armaments of the attacking forces."

There's a broad category of social turmoil that is life threatening but not quite the magnitude of "professional military starts attacking citizens." Say bands of political extremists of whatever flavor start attacking towns, or other smaller-scale (in comparison to outright civil war) acts of violence erupt. I don't dispute your anecdotes from the Balkans, but using it as blanket proof to say that firearms won't ever be of benefit in times of civil unrest is not effective.

You are right, but that's not really an apocalypse but a localised civil war. Admittedly, it would be good to be prepared for that, but I think leaving the area altogether would be a more optimal solution than grabbing weapons.

Sure, but leaving the area means abandoning a place of shelter, community, and potentially a decent chunk of supplies. I agree, plenty of disasters wouldn't warrant use of firearms, but having them and not needing them is considerably better than needing them and not having them. Seems like one is strictly better than the other. I suppose possession of unnecessary firarms could risk having them stolen or otherwise ending up in the hands of people doing harm - but seeing as 30-40% of US households possess firearms, this is a moot point.

Well, my 3 weeks of food were not aimed at this "End of world as we know it" scenario and original question was not aimed at one. Just at being better prepared than average.

Guns really are also not "get and forget" kind of think. They can help or get you killed.

They might get you killed by mismanaging them (basically you shoot yourself by accident), by making you overconfident and not escaping in time, by making you a target "to get your guns", by making you suspicious (imagine checkpoints in now occupied parts of Ukraine) and getting killed in interrogation.

Guns are not all advantages in real world situation.

>Guns are not all advantages in real world situation.

I wish I could explain how ridiculous it is to remove an option from yourself before a situation arises... but if you don’t already understand that, how could I explain it?

I also think having a fire extinguisher and jumper cables / jump box is a disadvantage in your bizarro scenario where “you might shoot yourself” comes up.

It’s a little funny low obviously little experience you have with firearms - but absolutely trust agents of your government who have maybe 2-3 weeks training once during accedemy with them. Those agents are the ones not coming to help though.

I did, because I don't own one and focusing on guns discourages people from preparing even for basic service disruption.

Focusing on guns just make it look like prepping is just for "gun-nuts" (as much as I don't share that opinion).

That’s the thing though, it doesn’t matter how much stuff you have, without a way to keep it you won’t keep it.

In a without rule of law scenario there is no one coming to help, say to protect you from someone bigger stronger faster or more clever than you that did not have a prepper foresight.

Que the famous Samuel Colt quote, right?

Having access to a ranged weapon is defenitely a plus. Even if complete absence of law and order is a somewhat unlikely scenario, a ranged weapon will also make things like hunting for food easier.

In many places, there are quite heavy restrictions on firearms, and obtaining one without breaking the law might simply not be legal for everyone. Most such countries don't outlaw the use of bows and arrows though...

My country apparently doesn't outlaw possession of a flame thrower. Not sure if it would be helpful in the case of civilizational collapse, though.

It can be used for heating canned food, which is a plus I guess. :D

There are a wide range of scenarios you can prepare for; not all of them require a firearm. As long as you what you're preparing for, that's fine.

Isn’t an effective means of defense for yourself and your family a high priority in most scenarios?

Wasn't the US right to bear arms mainly aimed to overthrow a government in case it sucks? Well now's the chance.

But for the US, I agree, I don't trust Americans to be civilized when the shit hits the fan - it's every man for himself there. Which is why the country is failing.