Thoughts on WROL and engaging 'targets'

[Scythe13]

(7 November 2012, 13:56)Prepper1 Wrote: I think the choice to trust a stranger is deeply personal, problematic set of circumstances.
Whats right now may not be right then or the next day.
That guy, girl or child could be the best thing to happen to your group or the worst.

I completely agree. But that's where the original question is posed. Do we, as those that are prepared, have a moral obligation to help those we can?

Those we help, are more likely to join the group and work with us, as they are to turn against us. The average person (aside from NR's neighbours) is good and will be looking for guidance, routine, support, and help. That is the start of the resurgence of community. Which is what is required to happen for 'civilisation' to be reestablished.

If in a rural area, it would make sense to give them a plot, near by, but within watchable distance. Have them fed, but also guarded, and see how they get on with things. I'd give them a place to live (away from the main group) and I'd have them watched by 2 people in the group. With that in mind, over time they'll learn skills like farming, wood cutting, and the alike. That means....you have a neighbour, and the Amish style community has begun. Over time, you'll trust them more, and they'll not become dependent on you and what you have. If they're not dependent on you, they're much more likely to become a team member and appreciate the things you're working towards. The reestablishment of civilisation, lifestyle, and the alike.

I genuinely believe this to be the situation and our obligation. However, each person that comes across us will be viewed separately and taken how they are. Some will be sent away, some may well be killed, but some will be looked after and cared for....from a distance.