+- Survival UK Forums (http://forum.survivaluk.net)
+-- Forum: Discussion Area (http://forum.survivaluk.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Forum: An Open Box (http://forum.survivaluk.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=78)
+--- Thread: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' (/showthread.php?tid=3198)
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - Scythe13 - 6 November 2012
(6 November 2012, 19:59)NorthernRaider Wrote: Scythe 13 are YOU willing to risk your families safety or even their lives because you have a soft spot in your heart?
To answer this question, NO, I wouldn't risk my family. At the same time, I wouldn't needlessly take a life 'just in case'. If I told someone to stop moving, and they kept moving, I'd shoot towards them. If they still kept on coming, I'd shoot at them to cause injury and pain. If they kept coming, I'd take their life. But that's not a case of shoot first, like so many people have said.
Sometimes, taking the risk can pay off. What if they turn out to be honourable? Yes they could turn out to be otherwise, but there's a chance they are a good person, with good intentions, and could help the group out.
NR, it sounds like you have REALLY s**t neighbours!!! No offence mate, but I see why you'd shoot first, given your experiences.
Just because someone might be a threat, doesn't mean they will be.
If I came across a group, I would certainly consider trying to join with them. I'd offer WAY more benefit than I would cost them. What if the person coming towards you was a person like me? NR, I know you'd shoot at me mate, so it's all good haha.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - NorthernRaider - 6 November 2012
If I have multiple children from Preppers families to care for, and multiple preppers, and there is hungry sheeple about and limited food supplies the preppers children get fed first, anything left the prepper women get fed, after that the prepper menfolk, then me.
If any of the prepper adults or sheeple dont like that order or priority TOUGH and if they challenge that protocol...... well we find out if I can draw as fast as I used to!!!
(6 November 2012, 20:48)Scythe13 Wrote:(6 November 2012, 19:59)NorthernRaider Wrote: Scythe 13 are YOU willing to risk your families safety or even their lives because you have a soft spot in your heart?
To answer this question, NO, I wouldn't risk my family. At the same time, I wouldn't needlessly take a life 'just in case'. If I told someone to stop moving, and they kept moving, I'd shoot towards them.
Thats where we differ tactically, I would verbally warn them, I would not play my hand by firing weapons, WHY because the sheeple could be being herded by armed nasty people ordering them forward and hiding behind them looking for my peoples positions. If they kept coming and our main retreat was not exposed I would rather retreat before them leading them away from the retreat. If my retreat was spotted I would engage them from the side not the front and again try to drive them off or lead them away, I would desperately scan them for combatants and target them first. Only if it was a tsunami of starving humanity I would order a bug out, I'm not getting into a gorefest with large numbers of opponants, run away life to fight another day, thats what caches are for and secondary locations.
I'm not into gun fights unless forced and the numbers are low.
(6 November 2012, 20:48)Scythe13 Wrote: NR, it sounds like you have REALLY s**t neighbours!!! No offence mate, but I see why you'd shoot first, given your experiences.
NR, I know you'd shoot at me mate, so it's all good haha.
No just bog standard typically modern British estate dwellers, Kitchen fitter, garage manager, hair dresser, nurses, two prison screws, NHS pen pusher, chinese reteraunt owners. All living in splendid ignorance of each other.
No you should be on the same side of the fence as me if thing worked out right with our preps.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - Scythe13 - 6 November 2012
That's a fairly concise answer. I don't disagree at all.
Leading people away is usually very difficult. Mainly because most houses have roads leading to them.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - IB1 - 6 November 2012
Another thing to consider with being open to strangers approaching is that you have no idea if they are carrying disease. They may be well intentioned and mean you no harm but if they are carrying a disease then you and your family could be screwed. If the world is that shot to bits that shooting people is an viable option then you can guarantee that disease will be rife too
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - Paul - 6 November 2012
(6 November 2012, 20:48)Scythe13 Wrote: If I told someone to stop moving, and they kept moving, I'd shoot towards them. If they still kept on coming, I'd shoot at them to cause injury and pain. If they kept coming, I'd take their life. But that's not a case of shoot first, like so many people have said.
You're comment about shooting towards them causes me thought Scythe 13.
Shooting to warn does nothing except make them aware of what you've got.
It also tells them two things.
1. You're probably a bad shot
2. You don't want to shoot them.
You shoot to miss and even the most half ars@d inexperienced person will retreat to cover and engage you if they are armed.
Shoot to wound?
What if they go down.
What's your plan then?
Sit and let them die or take them in and care for them?
What if they are contaminated?
Half measures will get you and your own killed my friend.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - ICRCC - 6 November 2012
An interesting thread Scythe13 that poses some tough choices. I truly believe that because we live in a society we have a moral obligation to help others when we can. That is now, that is during a weather or other short lived disaster but that is not a WROL situation. Then the rules completely change. Take the example in the first post of a child, maybe starving child, coming your way. Do you take them in? Probably. What if there were two children? Maybe. What if there were 20 children? Absolutely not! You get the point, so if you would not take in 20 don't take in 1. I'm with NR 100%. Also tactically NR it right on. Sometimes it is better remain hidden or even bug out in extreme situations. The aim is survival and without the right mindset, no matter what supplies or equipment you have, you will not succeed.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - Mandlaka - 7 November 2012
NR et al just answered this question for me!
I thought along those general lines but they confirmed it for me.
To be honest, I don't like the answer but I completely understand it. I will certainly not risk my sons' lives in such fashion and would certainly look to stay quiet if possible.
Hopefully we will not need to face that scenario but it is certainly very wise to prepare for it.
So my kukri will remain sharp and my bow ready.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - uks - 7 November 2012
S13 hope youve change your mind once it gets around that you are suppling food or what ever you will become a target for any and evert toe rag.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - NorthernRaider - 7 November 2012
(7 November 2012, 00:02)Mandlaka Wrote: NR et al just answered this question for me!
I thought along those general lines but they confirmed it for me.
To be honest, I don't like the answer but I completely understand it.
We dont like the answer any more than you do mon ami, but our duty is to care for, feed and protect OUR families first and formost, even meal you give a sheeple is a meal less for your littler generals.
Ayo Gurkali.
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - bigpaul - 7 November 2012
my responsibility is to me and mine.....nobody else, if they are stupid enough not to (at least) store a decent amount of food then that is not my problem. if it all goes "to hell in a handcart", WROL etc.etc. then we are bugging out and going for TOTAL isolation in a remote and isolated location, any stranger/ ex neighbour coming near my location(doubtful) will be treated with extreme provocation.