The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable - Line: 864 - File: showthread.php PHP 7.4.10 (Linux)
File Line Function
/showthread.php 864 errorHandler->error




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets'
6 November 2012, 19:05,
#1
Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets'
Okay everyone, here's a deep one for you all.

I've been thinking (and we know that's dangerous) about the issues of WROL and how to figure if someone is hostile or not.

Granted, people like BP suggests to treat everyone as though they were hostile. I'm not going to agree or disagree. I'm just going to voice my thoughts.

I'm now a husband. If I was a father, this thought process would still apply; would I want people to treat my wife [and kids, if you have any] as being a hostile target, when she's heading down the road?

Obviously, the answer to that is a resounding NO! But that would be the situation. What about when you see a small child walking alone down the road towards your home. Do you also treat them as hostile, do you ignore them, knowing they'll die or be kidnapped? Do you take them in and look after them, either until their parents come for them, or until you're unable to sustain care for them? What would you hope people would do for your child, brother, sister, wife, husband?

Clearly there are no right or wrong answers. Merely opinion and thought. However, as preppers, people that are ready for this occurrence, do we not have a moral obligation to protect the weak of society?

UKS said about helping the old people when his area had huge blackouts one winter. He spoke about a house full of people. He opened his home and probably saved lives by acting in a compassionate way.

In society we have sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. As preppers, are we to become the wolf, or the sheepdog?

Don't forget, that once everything calms down, maybe a few months, maybe a few years, maybe never. But in all likelihood, it will calm down and 'order' will be restored. People will go back to an existence like before the event. They will have rules, families, property, laws, governing bodies, law enforcers, and the alike. So, when that happens, how will you feel, if you were to take another's life, from 50-100 yards (it's a damn hard shot at 100 yards, on a moving target! I was North Hampshire Junior archery champion for 1 year back when I lived in Basingstoke, and we shot to a max of 60 yards, but practiced to 90 yards).

In a WROL situation, it is likely you'll be spotted first. Unless you're out hunting, you won't be walking around patrolling by yourself all day long. You'll be farming, sewing, butchering, chopping logs, or something like that. It's just as likely you'll be heard before you're seen. Which presents an issue. If the person coming towards you views you as a threat, they're likely to observe you first, assess your level of threat to them, then behave accordingly. Which could well mean, they attack you, in which case, you have to take action and yes, probably kill in self defence. However, what if they approach your wife, not knowing you're about, in a purely innocent and friendly manner. Will you shoot first, ask questions later? Will you call your wife over to you, then take action? Will you greet them with a smile, distance your loved ones, then ask questions, or what?

I think the idea of saying "Shoot first" is a very dangerous scenario. If we're passing through, and someone shot at a member of my team, you're damn right we'd go after them. We'd leave the area, then come back for them, gorilla warfare style. Sneak attack, then disappear off, and repeat the process. So, having a shoot first mentality could lead to revenge attacks.

As well as that, if someone approached your position, they may have a message "The situation has been resolved. Order is restored. It's okay" But you shoot at them first, before hearing what they have to say, you're inviting swift retribution. Most likely, they'll want to come closer to you to talk to you. But you're unlikely to want them too close.

I've come to think that in all situations, unless your crossbow is in your hand, loaded, or your bow and arrow are in your hand, loaded, you're not going to be engaging them until they're about 50 yards from you. Then, you have an issue. One shot to take them out. Otherwise they'll be on you, and their team might pop out. Or you may have killed an innocent person.


I'd love to know people's views and opinions on the above.
Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism - Thomas Jefferson
Those who sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither - Benjamin Franklin
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by Scythe13 - 6 November 2012, 19:05
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by uks - 6 November 2012, 19:13
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by uks - 6 November 2012, 19:58
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by IB1 - 6 November 2012, 20:23
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by BDG - 6 November 2012, 20:33
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by IB1 - 6 November 2012, 21:23
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by uks - 7 November 2012, 09:17
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by uks - 7 November 2012, 12:43
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by IB1 - 7 November 2012, 20:20
RE: Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets' - by BDG - 9 November 2012, 01:03

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)