Risk Assessment

[bigpaul]

(2 June 2012, 13:22)Timelord Wrote: Thankyou BP, so you regard them as less of a threat with them being a prepper (unknown to you at the time).
That is what I am looking for.

sorry, i think i got confused by the original question-not unusual for me got there in the end.

[Kenneth Eames]

I will be going for a 10. Due to my age I fear that I could not trust anyone I met. If I got to know them over time I would obviously have time to adjust my decision. Kenneth Eames.

[Timelord]

Hello Kenneth. The question is - do you think that the stranger being a prepper, makes them more or less dangerous in an encounter situation??

[Kenneth Eames]

At 80, I have to consider that I am vulnerable. Until I discover that he is a prepper and not a risk to me, then I can obviously think of him as afriend and ally. It would still take some time. I would like to add this: If I met any of the preppers from this site, I would trust them from the time that I discovered who they are. Many of these people have posted much valuable information that has benefitted me. They have given me much valuable advice, I could not in all honesty not trust them. Kenneth Eames.

[Timelord]

Do you think them being a prepper, could make the person more or less dangerous or no different to them being a non prepper, at the initial encounter? Ta, TL

[Kenneth Eames]

In the first encounter, not knowing that they were preppers, I would consider them to be equally dangerous to me as a non-prepper. Only upon finding that they are a prepper would that make any difference. I would be happy if they were a member of this group. Kenneth Eames.

[Stalker-01]

Prepper, not a prepper... makes no difference. You get assholes in all walks of life.
I'd be cautious but not aggressive unless provoked.

[Bug_out_Bag]

I rated it '7 is not Ok' this is because as we can deduce from another thread on here that when people are stumped for something in a life or death situation they will become raiders.

I will only completely trust those known to me prior to the event. Like Kenneth, I would class myself as 'vulnerable' for reasons other than age. Unlike Kenneth I would not necessarily trust all who are ( sorry, not meaning to cause offence), here because they have posted useful info. How do we know that there are not some whose strategy to survive is by letting others do the hard work of getting prepared, storing the food, the water, the fuel, the meds and the like only to take advantage at a later date when they happen to be passing through your area, or worse, making a bee line straight to you?

Many preppers say they are well armed and play out agressive and blood thirsty strategies in posted, forum scenarios in a world WROL, I won't be taking any chances if I can help it! OPSEC = SURVIVAL. Head down, hiding out, low profile, bugging in the way to go for me.

[bigpaul]

(8 June 2012, 10:43)Bug_out_Bag Wrote: I rated it '7 is not Ok' this is because as we can deduce from another thread on here that when people are stumped for something in a life or death situation they will become raiders.

I will only completely trust those known to me prior to the event. Like Kenneth, I would class myself as 'vulnerable' for reasons other than age. Unlike Kenneth I would not necessarily trust all who are ( sorry, not meaning to cause offence), here because they have posted useful info. How do we know that there are not some whose strategy to survive is by letting others do the hard work of getting prepared, storing the food, the water, the fuel, the meds and the like only to take advantage at a later date when they happen to be passing through your area, or worse, making a bee line straight to you?

Many preppers say they are well armed and play out agressive and blood thirsty strategies in posted, forum scenarios in a world WROL, I won't be taking any chances if I can help it! OPSEC = SURVIVAL. Head down, hiding out, low profile, bugging in the way to go for me.

OPSEC=SURVIVAL. Head down, hiding out,low profile, YES agree,agree,agree. bugging in MAY not be possible, depends on the situation at the time. bugging OUT= plan B

[Timelord]

Here is the way I see it >>>

An unknown quantity is just that > Unknown.

But in the scenario/question I posted, the stranger is not an unknown quantity to you NOW - as I said it was a prepper.

The fact the stranger in the hypothetical scenario is unknown to you inside the scenario is a seperate piece of knowledge. You were asked what you consider the risk was as you know it now - with your present mind outside of the scenario - looking in..

How you react inside the scenario was not the query.
I am sorry if it was confusing and I think only about half of you got it.


My take on it is >> Due to many posts on the forum from some preppers advocating a shoot first/ask questions later policy or even more severe, openly admitting to bumping off others if they had something they desired - then I would view preppers as possibly my most dangerous type of contact!!

I will explain a little further:- It is obvious that all preppers are different from each other and some will be better natured than others to put it lightly. That it to say that some will be great to meet too.

The knowledge base and skill set of a switched on or even half switched on prepper would possibly make them a very clued up adversary AND importantly > one that may not appear to be so on first sight/contact.

Normally, if I was inside the scenario and I met a stranger PSHTF, I would be wary anyway. Obviously if I did not know they were a prepper, then my wariness would not be any different from normal!! > as people have already stated in their posts. **** BUT I think the difference is and what I was driving at, is that if the other person is actually a prepper, then that may make them much more dangerous to my safety than I was aware of. They would understand my strategy and evaluations much better than anyone else and so would have a tactical advantage if they chose to be hostile at some point. If they were clever and did not advertise their prep/kit etc, then I may be unaware of their superior training/mental conditioning that they would have over a non prep civilian. Most civilians, inc dangerous ones, advertise their capabilities or intent in some small way. (there will always be the few who are also clever enough to conceal this). Even military would be less dangerous strategically on first contact due to their predictability.

Therefore I would rate a prepper as possibly having the capability to be the most unpredictable and potentially dangerous sudden encounter to have. Hopefully they would be of the less hostile type and then a beneficial relationship or at least a non harmful encounter can be had.

While going solo may be some preppers initial SHTF & PSHTF survival strategy, it should be recognised that in the longer term than mutually supportive co-operation in a group increases rates of survival dramatically.

Hopefully I have not given anyone future nightmares from this.. lol. TL.

---

Just to add, there will be some other individuals out there who have a similar mindset but do not regard themselves as or have had any exposure to the prepping /survivor community. They could be just as dangerous due to their similar thought processes, more so over time as their mind becomes conditioned to the new reality. They might not have prepped, but they may think along similar expedient lines. These are an unknown quantity and could be many times over more numerous than "preppers". Aside form that, prepper ideology & threat perception is something we can look at seperately.