Urban Advantages?

[jerry9491 10]

Okay, I'm just a hick from the sticks, so excuse my ignorance. I was wondering what advantages there are to living in a heavily populated area if you are concerned about a SHTF event, and what advantages there are to living in an urban area after such an event...

[Gilla 10]

Good neighbors may be close by for shared defense. More 'livestock' available... Ha Ha Ha.

[excoastie 12]

After the weak are gone you’ll have a lot of gas, fuel and other stores to grab. However, the people remaining will probably be the type that shoots first and asks question later. Also, if those around you know you are prepared and they are not, you are the target of many more zombies. I’d be in the sticks with you if I could.

[jerry9491 10]

I've been to your part of the country, I can see why you'd like it there, under normal circumstances.

[William Tell 16]

The only "advantage" that really comes to my mine is that the larger urban areas will get government assistance. Far sooner than any rural areas, that includes thihngs like fod shipments via semi truck etc.

[Shawn 10]

After the "government assistance" Ive seen after events like hurricane katrina Im not sure Id consider that an advantage. I would avoid any large urban areas unless absolutely nessasary. I think the disadvantages far outway any advantages. I think in a TEOTWAWKI scenario big citys will turn into war zones

[NavyVet_77 13]

Advantages to Urbania ? None i know of... im tryin to get out. Good for looting...err umm.,, scavenging. but to live there No.

[Malcolm 10]

We raised our family in southern California and I am a NorCal native. We had/developed some close friends with whom we shared some similar preparedness goals. Realistically trying to get OUT of SoCal on a weekend with normal traffic is dang near impossible, in an emergency, forget it. So we made plans to hunker down with like minded long term friends. Trying to move through millions of people in a SigAlert, some of you know what this fiasco are, is bad enough. There were/are only five arteries o out of southern California, not including the Pacific. UNLESS your boat and you are on the water, you won't get close enough to use that to evacuate. Benefits, more friends to stand together, cons, almost too numerous to contemplate.

[NavyVet_77 13]

Just comparing the 2 as they are. Removing all the if, ands or buts.

 

Being outside the city and confusion, murders n raids, riots blablahblah... whether govt shows up to 'help' or not. Id feel MUCH better about things just being out on my own (with wife), away from 'govt assistance' and the mindless mobs of sheeple.

[ricksconnected 11]

please folks, make no mistake. it wont take but a couple days for folks to figure out

that the burbs is where everything is and they will come in great numbers. it will only be

a matter of time, and i mean days before they figure things out. please dont mistake the burbs or the country as being safe cause it wont be.

[awake 10]

my humble opinion is more people -- more problems.

people will migrate from the large population areas to the suburbs onto the less populated areas. The Golden Horde refers to the mass exodus of the unprepared from the cities to the suburbs and rural areas after a disaster has ocurred.

Those that reach the less populated areas will be in two categories. The first will be weak from the challenges they have faced. The second group will be strengthened by the same challenges.

I believe that state and national parks will be the main destination for many. For some reason people believe that these areas are good locations to survive. There will be hard lessons in the wilderness that most will not survive.

Really there is no 100% safe place, prepare for each possible location you may find yourself in. Practice those different skill sets.

So i will stand on my first point where too many people equal too many problems.

Edited September 21, 2012 by awake

[Capt Bart 113]

The main advantage the Urban survivalist has is the much higher level of awareness of the 'real world' that the survivalist posses. Many, I dare say most, city dwellers don't consider themselves as being subject to nature. They live in protected enclaves where 911 works, food is delivered and environments are controlled. If the government tells them to report to someplace (Superdome, NOLA, Katrina) they go because 'they' have our best interest at heart.

 

The Urban environment is not likely suitable for long term survival. Yes, I'm in the suburbs and I face most of the same problems with only a little moderation in severity. Growing your own food, living off the grid, securing a defensible position IS doable in a city but it is tougher, takes more thought, better preps and eventually everything comes back to near normal or you must leave. That is ground truth for cities of medium to large sizes. New York, Houston, Chicago, LA etc. are killing grounds unless you are REALLY prepared. Cities of 50,000 or so have a little more time but not much more room. The only advantage is they are probably easier to get out of than the major cities. Small towns may actually be good survival spots if the folks there have the right mindset.

 

If TEOTWAWKI involves disruption of supply lines for over a year, cities become unlivable foraging fields, not places to survive. If you must survive in an Urban environment recognize that at some point, either things will begin to come back or you must bug out. The plan for the Urban survivalist is to make it long enough to allow for a controlled exit from your location without the need to fight your way out. It is doable but it takes planning and a HARD look at your situation. E&E from Houston is easier than from New York or LA or any other one way in/one way out city for example. Phoenix has water issues. Denver has weather issues during the winter. Look at your own location and make a no BS call on how long you can hunker down in that location. Once that time limit is up, your only option is to bug out. Make sure you have the supplies and plans to get to the plan B site when it is time to go.

 

Just my not so humble opinion.

Edited September 21, 2012 by Capt Bart

[Malcolm 10]

URrban or metropolitan areas, including suburbia, can offer a lot more opportunities to be "grey" or as invisible as you can make yourself. Next time you visit one, look and see how many people are NOT looking ahead, or UP at others coming at them. The vast majority seem to be looking where they place their feet, have ear buds in, and in general are oblivious to their immediate surroundings or activities near them, This creates excellent opportunities for YOU, and yours, to melt into the "crowd" always stay on the OUTSIDE edges of any crowd, helps you to avoid the mass lemming crushes and tramplings crowds produce as well. I've done many a foot pursuit (LONG time ago) in urban areas, and there are dozens of hiding spaces you can find in a pinch if you are being pursued, unfortunately, most are also like a corral or dead end tactically. Want to know how 'locals" spot the tourists? Look at how the locals are dressed, from their shoes or foot gear on up. Locals look like they "know" where they are going, tourists never do. Have an up-to-date street map and compass of where you are going through, visiting, etc. GPS most likely won't be working, so compass is a great way to go.

[NavyVet_77 13]

Knowing im a bug-out guy. i asked myself a different question: WHat kind of distaster would i NOT run away from?

 

I have absolutely no intention of stayin in town, given most any distaster. THe ONLY distaster i think I wouldnt leave, would be a serious snow/ice storm. Here i have good shelter, good south exposure. Plenty of supplies for staying right where I am in a storm.

 

Any other disaster and I gotta get out as fast as I can. Whitey in ghetto, apt building is a fire trap, most of the populace is just waiting for a reason to riot and pillage, and the cops are already on strike SO i know they wont make ANY effort to maintain civil conditions. Most would likely just take of the uniform and blend into the crowd or just get out of the way.

[MistiKmaN 10]

IMHO, there are only advantages if you're one of the first to know what's happening. You'll have more places and better chances of looting. You would amass a group of friends, loot and get the hell outta there! Becausd afterwards, there are no advantages.

[Capt Bart 113]

MistiKmaN,

Welcome to the forums. I agree that intel is probably the biggest requirement, especially in the cities. Be careful of any plan that requires you to "amass a group". First off, the bigger the group, the more supplies required to sustain that group. Secondly, a group 'looting' is called a riot; you don't want to get into a firefight. Looting makes you very visible. If you are in bug out mode, then time spent acquiring things is time wasted getting out of Dodge. I'd strongly recommend that if you intend to GOOD, have your supplies prepacked and when you decide TSHTF has occurred, grab your stuff and go.

 

If you want a group, try to form it before TSHTF. If you are going to GOOD together, keep the group small enough to remain inconspicuous. A small group has some advantages over a single individual. A large group has a great many issues that an individual or a small group don't have to deal with. That is why special ops teams are typically small.

[awake 10]

Agree with the small group idea. Three to five people in an E&E appear to be a family unit. Usually not seen as a threat and blend in better. If you have a larger group then split them up into smaller units and meet up at agreed locations. Dont put all your eggs in one basket.

 

Looting invites trouble with competing looters and the authorities. In some cases looters are shot on sight. game end, no do over.

[Regulator5 11]

Agree Capt and Awake, if your prepping plans involve looting to get your supplies; rethink your plans. I'd also try and find People of like mind before the need arises if I was planning a group. Like Capt said, SOF teams are normally small; Army SF (Green Berets) use a 12 man "A-Team" (ODA's) with everyone being a specialist and cross training on the other specialties. Like the LRSU's, Rangers, SF, SEALs, etc, the larger group is broken down into small teams and during your E&E, everyone moves in their teams and if possible, use commo to stay in touch so you can reinforce each other if a major development arises. Tactics are something that takes time and thought, as well as the obvious training. Of course these are based on combative "survival" and while defense is a big necessity, most aren't going to be looking for a firefight (or at least I hope not).

[vonBayern 14]

Food for thought....

 

If you go looking for a fire fight...<unless the group is hunting your group>, you will probably find one. The problem is not everyone around will head away from the shooting. You will probably find some who will move toward it with the thought that even the winners will be weakened and could very well be easy pickings.

[Regulator5 11]

Good point vonBayern. I plan on avoiding them if possible and really don't want to get in a major battle, especially with my family present. If it comes down to my family or someone who thinks they will "just take what they need"; I truly hope they have made peace with their maker because they will get a first hand accounting.

[Capt Bart 113]

Food for thought....

 

If you go looking for a fire fight...<unless the group is hunting your group>, you will probably find one. The problem is not everyone around will head away from the shooting. You will probably find some who will move toward it with the thought that even the winners will be weakened and could very well be easy pickings.

 

VB,

well said, sir. I think most folks who survive will not be in firefights. Either through good planning or good luck or Karma or ?? I just do not think major combat actions are realistic after TSHTF. Good planning on my part should make me not need that option. If I really screw up, then yes, it could happen and I am prepared for that event but it is a rare firefight where BOTH sides do not take causalities. My basic question for folks who talk about combat after TSHTF is which members of your group/family are you willing to lose? The reason the military has the concept of "acceptable losses" is because you WILL have losses. When it comes to my family, the only acceptable loss is none.

 

Just my not so humble opinion.

[vonBayern 14]

The other reason the military has 'acceptable losses' is because 1.) they <as a whole> have no real investment in the people they lose. 2.) they have a steady stream of replacements.

 

I have a lot invested in my family...don't want to lose any of em.

[MistiKmaN 10]

Thanks guys, I understand what you're all saying, though it sounded better in my head. Reading all your comments made me realise what a douche I sounded like LOL. I'd attempt to explain myself, but the same would probably end up happening again. I'm stupid like that, haha.

[DonDon 116]

Thanks guys, I understand what you're all saying, though it sounded better in my head. Reading all your comments made me realise what a douche I sounded like LOL. I'd attempt to explain myself, but the same would probably end up happening again. I'm stupid like that, haha.

 

Be easy on yourself there, its part of the process of getting yourself together to survive, I have to say at one time or several we all have been a little on the "guns ablazing" side of things, but in thinking this thing out we realize the truth, survival means not getting shot, which means not getting shot at, which mean not being where the shooting is..........it's easy to get stuck in the romanticized ideas of TSHTF

Edited October 16, 2012 by DonDon

[Regulator5 11]

Well said Don.