What Would You Look For In A Target?

[Capteddie]

In the event of a moderate to long term SHTF situation (more than a couple of days) a large part of my survival strategy for my family and myself involves concealing the fact that we were prepared and have the supplies and tools to survive on our own. While we have taken the steps necessary to defend ourselves, I would find it much safer and easier to avoid conflict unless absolutely necessary. I have been putting quite a bit of thought into this since Katrina and have what I feel are some fairly sound ideas about how to conceal the fact that we would be ‘Haves’ rather than ‘Have-Nots’

My question to you is … If YOU were one of the unprepared masses who thought the gov’t would always be there to take care of you and suddenly you found your electricity off, phone out of service, and no groceries to be had at the market, what would YOU look for as a place to target to take those things you weren’t responsible enough to stock for yourself? I AM NOT IMPLYING THAT ANY OF YOU WOULD DO THIS. I am only asking if you were so inclined what you would look for in a target. We may all be able to better prepare for a scenario like this if we know what cues would lead other’s to see us as potential targets.

Under most circumstances I would be inclined to bug-in rather than bug-out as we live in a fairly well situated location as far as my SHTF survival plan goes, but this could apply to either stay at home or bugging out.

Some examples I might look for if I were a BG…

1. Sound of a running generator
2. Freshly discarded food containers
3. Lights burning in windows at night
4. Freshly killed game / carcass in the area
5. Loud radio broadcast / music
6. Smoke from fire place / camp fire
7. Well fed dogs / animals in yard

Capteddie

 

[The_Antibubba]

All of those are good indicators, IF I were one of the unprepared masses. IF I were one of those, though, I'm not sure if it would occur to me that someone who had the wherewithal to prepare would also be prepared to defend it as well, nor would I think he had me at a disadvantage. Frankly, it would be easier pickings for me to start preying on my fellow stragglers, even if there is less to gain.

 

[Jeff White]

I would look for someone who looked like a victim, just like the criminals do. Why do you think people in the affected areas put out warning signs about being armed?

Things are going to have to get pretty bad before these types are going to brave enough to attack someone who looks like they will fight back. There are much easier ways to survive. For the most part they will prey on each other and the weaker around them, just like they do any other time.

Jeff

 

[Capteddie]

So far it seems we are giving a lot of credit for sound decision making to people who have not prepared. Just because they don't have food or water doesn't mean they don't have guns. The ones that concern me in such a situation are the same people who will murder each other over a pair of tennis shoes when both parties are armed, who will shoot into crowds from moving cars, or get into a knife fight over a 2 dollar dice game, and this is when they have food and shelter.

In the first week I wouldn't be that concerned. I don't live in an area frequented by these types. But how long will it take them to wipe out the resources in their own area? If few are prepared there is therefore little to take.

Maybe a well placed "Looters will be shot." sign would be a deterrent in the beginning, but what happens in a week or two if the cavalry doesn't arrive to hand out food and water. These people aren't going to have the sense to ration what supplies they can steal or loot, and if, as it has been suggested, the only people they are going to try and victimize are those that are unprepared as well, I don't see their supplies lasting for any extended period of time.

The ones I'm concerned about don't put much value on life, their's or other's. So how long will it take before "we're going to take your stuff or die trying" begins to sound like a good idea to them? Now that sign may start to look more like an invitation to watch and wait till your guard is down (ya gotta sleep sometime) and then charge in blasting away. To them it may seem like a better option than to suffer another day without McDonalds.

 

[Mannlicher]

I would look for a target that can't shoot back. I think this is a top criteria for the bad guys too

 

[nfl1990]

I would look for a target that can't shoot back.

Definatly, it is a lot easier to steal from someone who is defensless. So a few warning shots may well scare off some of the BGs.

 

[JamisJockey]

Firstly, I'm going after a big corporation like Wallworld or SuperKmart or a grocery store. While the stupid are looting shoes and electronics, I will get food, guns and ammo if I can.
There is going to have to be no hope for society to recover before I steal directly from another person.

 

[Kharn]

The ones I'm concerned about don't put much value on life, their's or other's. So how long will it take before "we're going to take your stuff or die trying" begins to sound like a good idea to them?

If it got really, really bad and I was forced to shoot someone to defend my family and our means of survival during a SHTF event, I'd strongly consider putting their body on a pike to show others the "looters will be shot" sign wasnt a bluff.

Kharn

 

[Lupinus]

Likly I would look for someone who prepared themselves but didnt protect themselve's. But of course, Id be both prepared and protected.

I wonder how big a pot hole a 50 cal would make in the road when fired from a rooftop. That could be a pretty good move along warning

Not that I have a 50....ah the thing's I'd do if I were rich

 

[MaterDei]

Initially the bad people will start looting for items that they just want or that will make them more comfortable. Gasoline and generators would be high on the list based for comfort items. We lost power for 4 days when Rita hit and with 100 degree days people were pretty desperate to have ice and fans.

Initially, those would be the prime targets. In time, however, water and then food will top generators and gasoline. When people are desperate for water and food then signs won't do much good. Anything that suggests that you have water and food would draw attention. Water is pretty easy to hide, a garden though it not.

 

[TallPine]

Don't you all ever shoot any cans at the "range" ....?

Just save a few well-ventilated cans (the big 3# coffee cans work nice) and set them up on a fencepost or something near the corners of your property as a polite warning

 

[Capteddie]

I'd strongly consider putting their body on a pike to show others the "looters will be shot" sign wasnt a bluff.

Now that, to me would be a deterrent that even the sociopaths wouldn't be able to ignore... I LIKE IT

a few well-ventilated cans... on a fencepost or something near the corners of your property

Not bad either gives a warning without giving too much away.

I would look for someone who prepared themselves but didnt protect themselve's

Its seems to me that one cannot be 'prepared' without being 'protected'. Maybe there are some people out there who would prepare for basic needs without having a way to protect them, it seems unlikely that they would be prepared for more than a few days though, since they are obviously depending on some form of authority to come to their rescue before things get bad.

a few warning shots may well scare off some of the BGs.

I wonder how big a pot hole a 50 cal would make in the road

First, let me be clear that my family and I are well armed to defend our territory and would have no moral qualms about the use of said guns against those attempting to interfere with our home, supplies, way of life etc... It does seem to me, however, that there may be better ways to deal with a scenario like this than 'putting pot holes in the road' with a 50. (which to me, unless of course you live on the top of a mountain and are being attacked by the third cavalry, seems like an absolutely ridiculous weapon for home defense, give me my 12ga. any day) I would in no way have a problem using my guns to defend my family, myself, and our stuff, however the best way to get out of a bad situation is to avoid getting into it in the first place.

Second, it amazes me that very few ideas have been expressed as to how to avoid getting into a situation where I would have to fire shots to defend myself. Not that I have any compunction about defending myself, it would just be more expedient to avoid the situation rather than deal with potential complications.

Last, I'm sure many of us have thought beyond 'Hole up and shoot or shoot at anything that moves', if not, it might be a good time to do so. It is always easier to come up with a rational plan of action before it is needed. Having thought about potential problems and solutions is as much a part of being properly prepared as having enough food or ammo.

 

[CAnnoneer]

It is clear looters will hit the soft targets first, e.g. department stores and supermarkets. In a while, there will be nothing left there, so they will move to private residences. Warning signs will divert them initially to the neighbours without such.

Later they will bolden up and try to hit properties with signs, either due to hunger or substances, or both. A shot or two will drive them away to properties with signs but without shots. Once those are plundered too, the looters will be back to the armed-response properties, probably at night and/or with long arms.

Every residence will be hit eventually, even if there are corpses in on the front lawn. The goal is to delay that time as much as possible by projecting the maximum of deterrent.

The above is the overt strategy pathway.

The covert strategy pathway is to have a shelter that is well camouflaged, e.g. as an already looted residence without signs etc. Chances are nobody will waste time with such while choicier targets abound. This pathway though requires more discipline, e.g. no smoke, noise, light, heat, fresh trash, or food smell.

The problem is that eventually somebody will stop by and the cover may be blown. In that case, you will need a suppressor and a streak of coldbloodedness, as well as a constant vigil with rotating shifts.

 

[Sam]

Only the head goes on the pike. The rest needs to be composted in my all organic garden

If I were a nogoodnick, Id hit Wallyworld first. After that things get funny.
I do not forsee problems with many of the locals here. Folks from El Paso with a full tank could be a problem, likewise Cruces. I think they can be stopped well out of town though and are unlikely to find my place anyway.

Sam

 

[Capteddie]

The covert strategy

This is exactly what I have been trying to say...

No problem with discipline, absolutely no problem with the cold-bloodedness when it comes to defense of myself and my own. In a non-urban environment the suppressor could be replaced by a carefully aim .22lr round to the temple, a broad-head arrow through the chest, or a slit throat from behind.

Neither my theory is nor that the covert strategy will avoid conflict altogether, as you say sooner or latter someone will chance upon out lair. The idea is to avoid detection as long as possible, and in as many cases as possible. And once detected eliminate those intruders who have stumbled upon you. It would be much easier to eliminate an intruder who thinks they are entering an abandon building with little if anything of value inside, than one who is knows there are resource inside and has made up his mind to get them at all costs.

At any rate, by the time my family and I are detected many of the miscreants may have already starved, killed each other, or been eliminated by the ‘overt strategists’ among us. As I have tried to express I am not necessarily looking to avoid the fight so much as to have the fight on my terms against a weakened, diminished, and unprepared enemy. Every round an ‘overt strategist’ uses to defend his territory is one less that I will have to use to defend mine.

 

[Jeff White]

First off, I sincerely hope that the chest thumping about putting heads on pikes is in jest. Unless you're only preparing for a true doomsday scenario, massive nuclear attack, Yellowstone blowing into a super-volcano etc. you need to realize that within days the authorites will be in doing recovery and restoring law and order. Anyone with the head of a looter on a pike on his property line will most likely find himself locked up with the very people he's trying to protect himself from.

It's pretty easy to sit at your computer while the power is on and you've got a beverage of your choice right there and the climate control is keeping you nice and comfy and post about how you have no problems being cold blooded enough to kill your adversary with a suppressed weapon or a compund bow. It's another thing altogether to actually do that.

I think that if this thread is to remain open, that it needs to go back to responses that are not skirting the edges of THR's mission of promoting responsible firearms ownership. Everyone understand?

Jeff

 

[Capteddie]

if this thread is to remain open... promoting responsible firearms ownership

My sincere apologies Jeff. The pike thing on my part was in jest.
Killing some one for no reason, or even to defend un-necessary luxuries would be 'cold blooded' and unconscionable to me, the whole basis of my theory is avoiding conflict. That being said, I would find it morally defensible, to my personal code, to kill someone threatening my self or my family’s continued existence, I wouldn't find it pleasant, or a thrill, but it would be necessary.

I would love nothing more out of the thread than some answers to my original question...

what would YOU look for as a place to target to take those things

Capteddie

 

[Capteddie]

After further thought, maybe my question needs to be stated differently...

Does anyone have any ideas as to what concrete, physical factors a perpetrator might look for in a potential residential target in a sub-urban, or rural environment in a week or longer SHTF situation??? Not what might deter said perps., only what might attract them and please only things that can be altered or concealed.

Thanks for your time and thought.

Capteddie

 

[itgoesboom]

Good target indicators?

Volvos, Subarus, and VW Bugs parked in front of a house. Granola crunchers would be the easy targets.

I.G.B.

 

[The_Antibubba]

Places to stay away from

Assuming something longer than a few days, after the initial rioting/looting/ arson that occurred, i would put up "QUARANTINE" warnings, asking people to stay away, as something very contagious was floating around inside. Dying right away is something some will risk, but a horrific slow death by disease is something few people will risk. Any mention of "bleeding out of orifices" is a bonus.

 

[Moonclip]

You might want to keep out of sight young women and kids if possible. There is a lot of sicko sexual predators out there,don't give them any ideas. If you appear armed and vigilant though and you will be ok most of the time even in a mob situation as there is usually easier prey like your anti gun neighbor down the street

 

[justashooter]

soft targets are first on the list. non targets are last.

be a non target. if you are not seen, you are not a temptation.

 

[doc jake]

If i have to move out of my house i intend to leave all my military gear in the loft, camouflage myself to look like all the other "Im hungry / unwashed" people. Try to blend in with the crowd by appering to wander aimlessly etc.

If i give off the "i have nothing worth taking" look i should get by. If not hopefuly i will have gained myself an edge and suprise the attacker.

 

[Borachon]

I'd try to see who was stocking up. Or who went hunting every year and always seemed to have guns. Guns would be real important in a disaster, and I'd want me one. And I might not be able to steal one from a pawnshop, so I might need a neighbors.

If I had a group of people, I'd have us wait until one of your family members got careless and went outside for a smoke, or to star gaze or any other innocent activity and I'd try to capture them. Send a flunky back to shout to your house that we had your wife, son, daughter and threaten to kill them if you didn't give me access to your house and your goods.

Taking me hostage or killing me probably wouldn't do you much good because the people I'd be running with wouldn't give a fig about me in the first place...so you can't use me or my flunkies as "reverse hostages".

So I guess I wouldn't target a "place" so much as I'd target a mindset. The mindset that you care about you and yours.

Otherwise, I'd suggest just trying to blend in. If everyone else is outside upset about the water being turned off, then be out there with them. Worst thing you could do would be to ignore what the other neighbors are doing and give them the impression that you are better off...even if you ARE better off. If they moan about lack of supplies, moan with them.

 

[Borachon]

Unless you're only preparing for a true doomsday scenario, massive nuclear attack, Yellowstone blowing into a super-volcano etc. you need to realize that within days the authorites will be in doing recovery and restoring law and order.

How will you know the difference when you are living it? A massive nuclear attack might seem like just a severe power failure to me if I'm 900 miles away from it...but the grid got taken down. Is what I'm living through a temporary thing...or is this the "big one"?

Tough question.

There is really only a few times when killing someone is justifiable to me(I don't claim to say that it's RIGHT...a being Higher than me has that job). One is if they were trying to kill you. And secondly is if they have something that you or a family member need to IMMEDIATELY SURVIVE and they refuse to give it to you and you have NO OTHER METHOD of obtaining what is needed.

I don't think hanging someone's head on a pole is ever right.