# Looting or foraging??



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Most post disaster scenarios plan for the looting of stores by the criminal element and possible home protection in case it gets that far.
But one of the questions that is often overlooked is that of " is it looting or foraging?"
Let's set the stage. You have emerged from "hunkering down" for two weeks. There are at least some other decent law abiding people in your area that also have made it. You work together to reestablish some form of order.
Down the road is a looted Wal Mart. But there are also items left that can be of help to your group's survival, such as fertilizer, tools, plants, clothing etc. which may rot or go to the bad with exposure to the elements before any higher authority ( county, state, federal) can reestablish their control.
So, do you as a law abiding person, respect Wal Mart's property, or do you seize it as means for support, with the rational that the Wal Mart "owners" are either dead or will be covered by disaster insurance anyway. And if you seize it, is it looting, or foraging?
I am not going to post my opinion here, as I do not want to influance any responses.* NOTE* I am *NOT* talking about any form of luxury item, such as jewerly, etc, but items to help the new community that has formed.


----------



## sss3 (Jul 15, 2007)

I would have to be really desperate to do that. But, I don't think WM would rebuild in that kind of situation. Guess I would do that if I knew I or family would be hungry or hurt.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

If it's a major even like Katrina was, I'd there trying to get water, flashlights, rope, ammo.. things I am going to need to survive... If I know no help will be coming soon, I'm going to do what I have to do to take care of myself.

Now if it was a minor thing, and I know I could go somewhere else, then no...


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

simi-steading said:


> If it's a major even like Katrina was, I'd there trying to get water, flashlights, rope, ammo.. things I am going to need to survive... If I know no help will be coming soon, I'm going to do what I have to do to take care of myself.
> 
> Now if it was a minor thing, and I know I could go somewhere else, then no...


No problem there. This is *NOT* about a temporary situation but a major league level event such as epidemic ( man made or otherwise) limited nukes on major cities/ terrorism, emp/solar flare, or any other event you could see where the effects will be at least 6 months and for all intents and purposes , you are on your own.


----------



## longshot38 (Dec 19, 2006)

given the conditions that you outline i would salvage the things that would help my family and friends make it. i might even hit some luxury items for trade later but if the WM is looted prior to my arrival i doubt any jewelry et al would be left. but clothing, boots/foot ware, tools, food, etc. i would get all i can to tell the truth.

dean


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Salvage is a good term, perhaps I should have used that instead of foraging.
I agree with you, any high dollar value items will probably be gone, including, as crazy as it sounds, HDTV's etc. The looters have no idea of post disaster value or that things will not be back to normal, even if they survive to be around. As to food, they will grab canned food, but may leave flour , salt, lard and such. 
Looters for the most part operate in the now, with fast or microwave food. Cooking or baking will not be in their skill set. They'll have enough problems without an electric can opener. But there may be one or two among them who will have enough brain cells to actually try to take any kind of food item. It will depend on a number of factors. But I highly doubt they will take clothing, tools, or gardening supplies.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

barefootboy said:


> Down the road is a looted Wal Mart. But there are also items left that can be of help to your group's survival, such as fertilizer, tools, plants, clothing etc. which may rot or go to the bad with exposure to the elements before any higher authority ( county, state, federal) can reestablish their control.
> *So, do you as a law abiding person, respect Wal Mart's property, or do you seize it as means for support, with the rational that the Wal Mart "owners" are either dead or will be covered by disaster insurance anyway. And if you seize it, is it looting, or foraging?*
> I am not going to post my opinion here, as I do not want to influance any responses.* NOTE* I am *NOT* talking about any form of luxury item, such as jewerly, etc, but items to help the new community that has formed.


IMHO?
Looting.
Yes, I will respect Wal-Marts property.
No, I will not take what I have not paid for.

Fact: It was purchased by walmart to sell to the public.
Fact: It is belongs to walmart until a cash or credit transaction takes place.
Fact: Removing anything from walmarts property, for ANY reason, without this cash or credit transaction taking place, is theft.

I do not want others to steal from me, therefore I will not steal from others.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

if you cant stay hunkered down longer than 2 weeks without needing something your not ready one bit......sorry not trying to be mean or smarty pants.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Not at all. I wanted* all* opinions. I know this is a difficult aspect to address. For clarifcation, I did *NOT* mean you had only 2 wks of supplies. I mean you could come out now and start on the road to recovery for you and your group.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I'm good for a month or two, but if I see that it's going to be a 6 month or longer kind of SHTF, then everyone is going to be on their own... and Walmart won't have employees in the store. They will be taking all their money and going to live some place safe with all their fatcat friends.. By the time I get there, most stuff would be gone, because I wouldn't get in the fray with everyone else. I'd be looking to survive, and by that time, wallyworld won't care what happens with their stores.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

ok....well.......i think i will just stay put for a good while then.if something real bad has happened 2 weeks is to soon to reveal yourself to the world around you.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Perhaps I should have said, once you feel it's time to come out.
*Simi* That's a valid point about not getting in the fray. This would be after the store has been picked over, but not picked clean. Looters don't want sponges or clorox, or pet food, or a hundred other small items that may help your group.


----------



## B2bKen (Aug 12, 2002)

It might just be that hoards of people needing to survive and get away from criminals (gangs, thugs) and maybe even gangs/thugs themeselves would probably take up residence in these places (stores). It might be a little dangerous to go there and not be killed.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

here in the mtns there were tons of isolated villages even after ww2.people really didnt go to town but a few times a year.growing up i seen the tail end of the old timers and how they lived and made do.

every area had a mill and a general store.people just didnt go places like we do now as a society.they walked to neighbors.bartered and traded for things.most produced all they used.having a pig was very important it provided meat and lard .you didnt buy cooking oil.

you should read foxfire books.thats how it is here or was.

sorry i am rambling on


----------



## Malamute (Sep 15, 2011)

Guess it depends on how likely you feel such a level of event is likely to happen. After looking at this sort of thing for 30-some years, I dont feel its very likely. Takiing things that arent yours is still stealing. If you're truly worried about having to be completely on your own for that long then have what you need to make it and stealing/"foraging"/"salvaging" isn't an issue.

If a truly cataclysmic level event happens, where the majority of the world is non functional, and no end is in sight, then things may look different. I just dont see such a thing as happening realistically. Maybe its a failure of imagination on my part, but I think "imagination" is running rampant in too many "scenarios" people come up with.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

If the people who owned/operated the store hadn't returned to protect their goods after a couple of weeks since SHTF then I think it's a given that they have abandoned the property, they won't be returning and that they're anticipating that survivors will salvage the goods in the store. If walmart or whatever other store it is has abandoned their store and shows no signs of returning, then yes, I would "rescue" everything in the store that I could. What I can't use for myself I can use for barter. 

However, I think that B2bKen has brought up an excellent point about other desperate or opportunistic people taking up residence inside such stores. If such has happened (which is actually a very smart thing to do since they can control the goods from where they are) there is little likelihood that other people are going to be able to "take" what they want. They will have to barter for the things they want or else attempt to take them by force (thievery) and that there is a whole different kettle of fish again.

.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

To me since the size of town Wal-Mart builds in, I see the towns authority confiscating and distributing any goods from all the stores in that town.

Or at least if they have a wise town government.


----------



## Cyngbaeld (May 20, 2004)

I might go talk to the local gov about salvaging for the community and suggest that all items taken 'by the community' be recorded so that restitution can be made when possible. I would not consider salvaging any of it on my own.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

barefootboy said:


> Perhaps I should have said, once you feel it's time to come out.
> *Simi* That's a valid point about not getting in the fray. This would be after the store has been picked over, but not picked clean. Looters don't want sponges or clorox, or pet food, or a hundred other small items that may help your group.


Don't underestamate what a looter would take. Dog food is feeding my 80+ chickens (and dogs) right now,clorox has many uses and sponges do too(I use them(small pices on a hook) to fish suckers in the spring for smokeing). Looting is stealing,and I don't want to be anywhere,or travel to anywhere more dangerious than my little ol farm. So I plan to make due with what I have.


----------



## remmettn (Dec 26, 2005)

Before any higher authority ( county, state, federal) can reestablish their control,
The decent law abiding people in your area are the government.
Seize it, is it looting, or foraging? No it is the ACT of the newly form government.
Like as a life boat you do what must be done, openly and to benefit the assemblage.
Clean up the dead (bury, burn ETC) house the people feed and care for the (sick, old, young, ETC.)
Put up communication stating who you are what youâre doing and why.
Or (if need be) as a group /regime conceal what youâre doing to survive.
Communication it also maybe correct to info the higher authorityâs that your group exists.
Or to info the group next door/city.

Notice: We the âneighborhood of XXXXXXXâ have taken control of items XXXXX left here at the Waymart in order to survive. If anyone wishes to contact us send a letter to post master at the city of XXXX whenever they restart the post offices.

:l33t:


----------



## bama (Aug 21, 2011)

if it meant the survival of my children, i would take it, so long as i was not putting them or myself in harms way by being there.

however, due to my personal sense of right and wrong, i WOULD make a list of everything picked up AFTER i got home. if and when the store opened back up, i would take my list and either pay or set up some sort of payment system. if i didn't plan on being honest after the fact, the guilt would weigh at me at a time that i wouldn't need that on my mind.


----------



## Becka03 (Mar 29, 2009)

barefootboy said:


> No problem there. This is *NOT* about a temporary situation but a major league level event such as epidemic ( man made or otherwise) limited nukes on major cities/ terrorism, emp/solar flare, or any other event you could see where the effects will be at least 6 months and for all intents and purposes , you are on your own.


this changes my answer and my thoughts- 
after reading One Second After and Mom's Journal of the Zombie years- I think that it is foraging- 
Looting is when it is like the power is out for 2 days and you think you need a big screen tv LOL
not a all heck has broken loose and you need to plan for the garden cause the stores are not gonna open in the next 12 months


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

I want to thank everyone for their interersting opinions so far.
I must admit a chuckle at the idea of a "wise town government" Wise and government do *NOT* go together.
I also understand those who have a safe haven so far out in the beyond that there are no such stores and you wouldn't be needing to forage. Most of us, however, do not have that option.
As to the idea that things couldn't get that bad, ok, believe that if you wish. I admit, as a part time writer who is working on a series of short stories about survivng an event, I do have an imagination. But it is backed up by my knowledge of nuclear, chemical and biological warfare from my days in Military Intelligence, and my years in lab work.
The "living in the store" idea is not far fetched. I've run that possiblity a few times.
It's good to see people out there who know the value of items for many uses like sponges.
If one survives, I feel they will be faced with a number of moral choices they never thought they'd have to deal with. Killing another human being is the most terrible one, but there are others. I try to address these choices though my characters in my stories.
It's very good to see so many people do plan on holding on to their moral code and "remember who we are." I hope we will never have to find out if that is possible, or if survival will force us to do what we have to.


----------



## Work horse (Apr 7, 2012)

I would take whatever I needed and not give it a second thought. I have no problems trading morals for survival (and no problem admitting same). In your particular hypothetical situation, it sound like it would be a group decision, though. The group dynamic is a game changer and would be unique depending on the individuals and the situation.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Good point Work Horse. Let me say you can base your replies as an individual, a family or as a group. Even in a family there can be differences. ( For those of you who remember the old survival movie Panic in Year Zero- The father's attitude verses the mother's)
*All* viewpoints are welcome here. This thread is not PC or socialy acceptable territory. I've been through enough situations in enough places in the world to know that desperate people in desperate situations will find desperate solutions for desperate problems.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

I'd say thare are probably many here that have thought in their head over and over again about having to kill someone. I'd say most would not do it unless nessassary. I could sure think of many things worse, helplessly watching those I love suffer from disease or nuclear sickness would have to be the worst.


----------



## Malamute (Sep 15, 2011)

barefootboy said:


> ...As to the idea that things couldn't get that bad, ok, believe that if you wish. I admit, as a part time writer who is working on a series of short stories about survivng an event, I do have an imagination. But it is backed up by my knowledge of nuclear, chemical and biological warfare from my days in Military Intelligence, and my years in lab work...



I dont recall anyone saying "couldnt". I did say not likely. 

Most of the scenarios I've seen online and in books haven't held up over time, as to likelyhood, or results of whatever the projected scenario was at the time.

Many have come up with what seem to be well reasoned, well researched ideas on what's going to happen (ever read Paul Ehrlichs book "The End of Affluence, or Mel Tappens, or Hal Lindseys books?), and the results of such scenarios. As I mentioned above, all, so far, have missed the boat. I think it's fine to surmise what could happen, and prepare for reasonably likely events, though many seem to think they know what's _going_ to happen, not what _may remotely, possibly_ happen, but I'm not losing any sleep over cataclysmic scale disasters any more. Thats not to say such things don't cross my mind, but I dont spend much mental energy on them. I prep for the level and duration I think is reasonably likely, and know if need be, I could make it much longer. 

Rather than think about "foraging" or occupying wal-mart, why not stock up more, or move to a more rural location? No, moving to a more rural location can't work for everyone, but is possibly a step towards a more secure lifestyle in many ways, not just disaster preparedness. Most of us have some level of choice in where we live.


----------



## bourbonred (Feb 27, 2008)

For me it would depend on whether it was an eotw scenario or just a regional event. In a situation with a large die-off, I would have no problem gleaning from the abandoned dying buildings in the area or putting my animals on other abandoned properties. But we are talking years later. For the first year or more, it would take all my families time just feeding us and a remnant of the cattle herd and poultry flocks. We live rural because we love the life--we've made large sacrifices to do so. My DH drives 2 hours to work and then 2 hours home everyday, and I took a big cut in pay to work locally. Now is the time to get away from an area large enough to hold a walmart! It's a better plan than risking having to shoot others to protect yourself while you loot walmart to survive intown.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Malamute,
I agree with your basic point as I left the big city for this spot at the foot of the mountain.
As to possible situations, I also agree most ones in books and movies are boarder line impossible. That was one of the faults I found in Jerhico. Loss of the 20 cities would be very disruptive, but the rural areas would come back. 
One of my favorite quotes is "Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again, as if by magic; but destroy our farms and grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country."
On the other side of the coin, I have seen huge warehouses that have 20 large first aid kits, store chains with items ( like mouthwash) that looters would probably not take that could be used, that would be sitting there untouched.
Does the end justify the means? Do we degenerate down to every man for himself? Do you sacrifice your self, your family, your group on a moral principle? A lot of questions and *NO* easy answers.
That's why I've thrown this out for open discussion


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

barefootboy said:


> I must admit a chuckle at the idea of a "wise town government" Wise and government do *NOT* go together.


Okay. Sorry but that sounds like a bit of a jaded comment to me.

I think that depends on where you are. If you're living in a small rural community where everyone knows everyone else and a situation happens where everything suddenly goes tits up for society you can bet your bottom dollar that the people in each small community will try to pull together to form some kind of stability and governance within the smaller communities. Whether it's _all_ wise or not would remain to be seen (there has to be room for error) but it's been my experience that people in small rural communities are practical, honest, salt-of-the-earth types of folks who have the best interests of the community at heart and they mostly want to work co-operatively with each other for the sake of the community as a whole. They all need each other to survive and therefore all will try to govern and contribute wisely and be supportive of each other.

Bigger towns, and cities, there I think there could be problems with governance and with things getting too political and who's trying to be at the top of the pecking order kind of thing - again depending on where you are located - but I think with bigger town and cities you would end up with individual neighbourhood governments and differences in the demographics of each neighbourhood within the city . That is to say that each neighbourhood becomes an entity of governance and demographics unto its own self and each neighbourhood would form certain affiliations and trade alliances with each other adjoining neighbourhood. It would be rather like little communities or towns forming within a larger community/city and each one of those small communities has someone who is the governor and initiatior of policies. Some of them are going to be corrupt and opportunistic while others are not.

.


----------



## WV Farm girl (Nov 26, 2011)

In an EOTW scenario, yes I would take what I needed to assist in my family's survival. No matter how plentiful your preps you will eventually run out. I think a lot of moral and "oh that's stealing" attitudes will fly out the window in a major situation and it will come down to basic survival. 
Those that are willing to do what is necessary to survive, will and those that are squeamish or that try to follow the moral high ground too far, will not.
I will also add that as far as a community government confiscating goods, IMO this is simply theft on a larger level. If it is OK for a group to do it "to survive", then it should be OK for an individual.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

I don't want to get sidetracked on this issue, but take a good look around you.
This is *not* the America my father gave his life for, my brother served in 'Nam for , and I served in the Army for. This mess has been delivered to us by politicians of both sides, from the smallest town to the Federal Government. 
You count on the government to act responsibly? Does the name Katrina sound familiar? As one book put it.,"If they can't handle a budget, they can't handle an emergency."
Politicians are parasites that live off hard working people. They are already *looters.> *I do *NOT* consider myself jaded, only clear eyed and realistic. You are talking about people who won't let you drink a 32 oz soda! Do honestly think they are going to do anything other than seize everything in sight for themselves?
Now that you have defended the politicians out there, I'd like to return the discussion back to the *subject* which is the question of looting or foraging.


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

You're working with others cooperatively so you are effectually creating local governance. So it isn't looting because you are acting lawfully to re-establish a community for their benefit. Walmart won't have anyone to sell to in the future if you all die!


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

barefootboy said:


> ..... Does the end justify the means? *Do we degenerate down to every man for himself?* Do you sacrifice your self, your family, your group on a moral principle? A lot of questions and *NO* easy answers.
> *That's why I've thrown this out for open discussion*





barefootboy said:


> .
> ..... I do NOT consider myself jaded, only clear eyed and realistic. You are talking about people who won't let you drink a 32 oz soda! Do honestly think they are going to do anything other than seize everything in sight for themselves?
> Now that you have defended the politicians out there, I'd like to return the discussion back to the *subject* which is the question of looting or foraging.


Oh well then, so much for an open discussion for as long as it lasted, clearly you are firm about being in control of the discussion as you wish it to go. :hohum: I'm not sure where the connection is between 32 oz. sodas, community governance and looting and foraging ..... but have a nice discussion anyway. Ciao.

.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

I have stated before that I am open to any opinion on looting vs foraging.
It does NOT mean I want to drag politics into it. And I see no reason to get down into name calling.[
*You* brought local politicians into the discussion. Then when I commented on what* YOU* said, *YOU* called me jaded. The when I went on to explain, *YOU* now claim I am no longer allowing an open discussion.
These are typical politician's tricks.
Ross 
You brought up a good point. Someone calls themselves a "government" and then loots because as a "government" they can "legaly" do so. How long would it take before the "leader" of this government decided he has too much to do with governing to raise crops, or forage, so the rest of the group, the "governed" must now give him what he needs to live. Then it will be maybe a 10% tax for "administrative " purposes. As WVfarmgirl pointed out, it's still stealing.
I'll use a line here from the movie I mentioned before ( Panic in Year Zero). The son tells the daughter," All laws are gone, we're on our own". But the father replied," Don't write off the law. it will return. I just want us to be alive when it does." 
So there is the question. To live, but break the codes, morals and laws? Or to stand by what you hold to unto death?
I don't think there is an easy answer here, but I do know that trusting a politician with you life is a sure way to buy yourself a grave, if they even bury you.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I am stay away from people--sorry but I live away from people --most of the year it is not wise to travel by foot. So, why set out during maybe 4 hours of daylight a day so that is a many day trip to get what maybe left and what maybe guarded and at the same time leave what I know I have and risk losing my home while someone comes a knocking finding goats to eat and chickens to eat and buckets to hold water. No, make do where I am at. So, I would not have a moral issue to deal with, just a logical one.


----------



## DryHeat (Nov 11, 2010)

Here's a resource that one of the initiators has linked to a different site for discussion: Home Page See in particular its "Governance" section at http://www.catastrophicresponse.org/Portals/6/PDF/AnnexA.pdf where there are these comments in particular:



> 3. Anything owned by an individual for their own use is their property and must not be confiscated, even for a perceived âgreater goodâ. Local government control of individual/family assets is only available under voluntary agreement with the owner(s).
> 4. Depending on federal directives received, local government may appropriate resources in the private sector (wholesale/retail supplies). Expected broad directives must be implemented locally with common sense and respect for affected merchants:
> Â· Only essential items that are likely to be used will be controlled. In a
> hardware store, for example, gardening supplies would likely be essential,
> ...


 This entire draft plan and outlined discussion was developed by citizens of a rather small city (or large town), Lewiston Idaho, population around 30,000. It's hardly the result of a power grab by politicians, rather is an attempt to wargame circumstances pretty similar to what the OP was presenting here. Essentially, they're hoping to have their local government ready to beat any actual looters to useful supplies, but also make certain such supplies are inventoried for compensation to original owners AND distributed and used for local community survival and rebuilding.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> *Looters don't want* sponges or clorox, or pet food, or a hundred other small items that may help your group.


You would be a "looter" and you want it. 

Don't think others "don't want" the SAME things as you.
They are out to help THEIR groups too


----------



## Diggin-it (Apr 4, 2012)

In a senario like stated there will be no rule of law. If you want to survive you will HAVE to do things that you would otherwise never consider...if you don't...you will perish!!!


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Thanks to all who have commented.
The replies seem to fall into 4 groups
1. Live far enough away and with enough supplies so the question doesn't matter
2. Form or act under a local government so that your taking of goods is not looting by your standards, avoiding the moral question.
3. Any taking of anyone elses goods is looting
4. You do what you have to in order to survive.
There may be even more possiblities out there, and I welcome all opinions. It doesn't mean I have to agree with them.
Why ask this question to begin with? Because in a worst case scenario if you do survive you may be a part of rebuilding your area and your children may rebuild this nation. What kind of bedrock will we anchor the new America on? One of morals, values, and decency, or will we not learn from the mistakes of the past, and have an anything goes, ends justifies the means kind of country as we have now. Survival is more than food, water and guns, it's the values that must survive any disaster.


----------



## Pink_Carnation (Apr 21, 2006)

I wouldn't look at it as stealing if I kept a list to repay them when they returned. If I was out of town and a quake destroyed many of the buildings I would understand if some of my neighbors were able to salvage stuff for food and shelter from my house. I figure if I plan on paying for it when the way to do so becomes available it is better for the store than the stuff just rotting there.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Not being a lawyer I can't say why, when and how property can be declared abandoned and the rights of salvage take over. Also, what if the group is able over time to move a good portion of the items to a more secure and safe location, later returning what they did not use. Could what they used be considered the fee for the recovery and secured storage of the rest?
The "inventory and pay later if the situation ever allows" looks like the most reasonable option. It doesn't matter if no one ever collects. The clear moral lession would be passed on to the young, and it preserves the morals, ethics and principles that make up the bedrock of the society, and does not require a formal "goverment" to do so.
What do you think , ladies and gentleman? Do we have a winner here?
Is this the middle ground?


----------



## DryHeat (Nov 11, 2010)

> Is this the middle ground?


I would think it would be a pretty good compromise. I can't see that it would be sensible, or even moral, for citizens that *could* organize record keeping and redistribution from commercial storage to turn aside and allow helpless and blameless survivors of some disaster who don't have any immediate resources to exchange to do without basics like medicines, infant formula, water and food, and such. 

In the extreme collapse situations, there'd be some sort of triage prioritization put in place, or extralegal groups might develop into gangs whose warlords used principles of charity with survival goods and services like education to secure their power. IIRC, the Palestinian group Hamas functions that way in Gaza right now, or at least did so in the recent past.


----------



## Sanza (Sep 8, 2008)

To me foraging is gleening something from nature, whether it's on unoccupied lands or on obviously deserted overgrown property - something like wild berries, mushrooms and plants, fish or other aquatic creatures and any other wild animals.

Ramsacking a store or other property even if it has been picked over is theft.

The people that have the knowledge and location to forage will obviously survive better then the ones that are stealing in a dog eat dog situation. 
The good thing is the people that would resort to theft would not want to travel to the remote areas where some of us live, and that gives us the advantage.


----------



## longshot38 (Dec 19, 2006)

barefootboy said:


> Not being a lawyer I can't say why, when and how property can be declared abandoned and the rights of salvage take over. Also, what if the group is able over time to move a good portion of the items to a more secure and safe location, later returning what they did not use. Could what they used be considered the fee for the recovery and secured storage of the rest?
> The "inventory and pay later if the situation ever allows" looks like the most reasonable option. It doesn't matter if no one ever collects. The clear lession that would be passed on to the young, and preserves the morals and principles that make up the bedrock of the society, and does not require a formal "goverment" to do so.
> What do you think , ladies and gentleman? Do we have a winner here?
> Is this the middle ground?


this seems like a reasoned middle ground approach.

dean


----------



## uhcrandy (Sep 16, 2010)

When I was in school, we had a convience store. I remember once the power was out for about a day. My family went to the store, just to watch over things. We were armed and sure we would defend our property. I doubt you would ever find a store with supplies for the taking. First I would imaging the owners/staff would remove supplies for themselves. Second it would be open to a free-for-all, and would be cleaned out in hours. Look to Hurricane Katrina. I can tell you that, anything I have, will not ge given up easily.


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

If a disaster such as an enemy attack happened and if Wal-mart or any store was wrecked and abandoned and I had no food or supplies for children and self; I would scrounge even in an abandoned stores unless there was a threat of safety. I would not intentionally allow us to be in such a state of unpreparedness though as an adult knowing the things that go on in this world.I believe in preparing for the worse scenario as much as possible within my means.

If the store was locked and boarded up after a weather disaster; indicating someone was still in ownership and intended to return I would not loot; steal or borrow from the store. My conscience would not allow it.

That said; I have to say what happed to me when on my own at 14 -16 yrs and abandoned .-I did what I needed to survive. I worked when I could as a car-hop in fast food restaurants until I got fired for being under age. 

At 14 I had shoes that were falling apart. I went into a Payless shoe store and left my old shoes with a note attached saying I would pay for the new shoes I took as soon as I had some money. After I got a job I took money to the store and gave it to a cashier but I didn't tell her I had stolen a pair of shoes. I just said I owed the store money. It was the only time I ever did anything like this and my conscience would not let me rest. Back in those days I didn't know about welfare and such and no one cared what happened to me apparently. The adults just figured I was looked after.

One summer and fall I lived in an old shack in some ones woods and had a meager job a mile away washing dishes in a truck stop. I had to pay $35 a month rent and had little left for food. I foraged [ stoled]out of neighboring farm fields for corn, beans ect.. My conscience bothered me so badly I went to the farmer and told him what I did. He in return gave me permission to take what I wanted from around the edges of his fields.

Desperate people do desperate things.There are many grey areas in life I have learned. Not everything has an either/ or right answer. As for hypothetical questions as was asked regarding the looting, borrowing, stealing or what ever it is called;from Walmart during an emergency; I would think anyone asking such a question would have the capability to prepare ahead as much as possible for emergency eventualities in this life. 

After my early life experience being abandoned and on my own ; I learned as an adult to work; plan ahead, save not spend unnecessarly, prepare for the unexpected and live frugally. Stealing and borrowing are not part of my life plan as a responsible adult.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

IMrose,
First let me say how much I admire your values, and respect you for coming through such times. I understand as my own 14-18 yrs, while no where as bad as yours, were not a picnic either and they taught me values, working for what I got, and how to get a lot out of a little.
Having said that, while I agree with you on the prepping point, you can't have everything that may be of value that may be sitting in an otherwise looted Wal Mart. A plastic shower curtain could be used to catch rainwater. An electric perk coffee maker can give you parts for a still. With some imagination and knowledge, many things ignored by looters can be of value to help rebuild.
I am impressed with the "accounting to pay back " concept, but still would like to hear more opinions. It does please me to see so many people well located and prepared.
Everyone that can do for themselves strengthens our nation, our values and our way of life.


----------



## secretcreek (Jan 24, 2010)

elkhound said:


> ok....well.......i think i will just stay put for a good while then.if something real bad has happened 2 weeks is to soon to reveal yourself to the world around you.


We live rural and could make do easily for two weeks or longer, but...

I think of my relative with 3 kids and another due soon, with diabetic parents and a 96 y.o. grandma. He's just now thinking about prep food. He blew me off a couple years ago when I mentioned it to him. He lives in a very urban area with a shopping mall, Aldi's, Wal-mart, Meijer, and Kroger all within a 1/4 mile -to - 1 mile of his home. YET ...in a defensive "better be on top alert for looters/marauders who would take what you find"...all those stores may as well be 100 miles away if he had to walk and carry items...and forget about not being seen! He can't go out a door without being seen by all the homes that surround his front and back. When he does prep he'll have to do so at night I guess. At least there are a gabillion squirrels as a possible food source. *(I'd use a rat trap on a tree for the quiet factor).

Even if a big box store was ransacked I'd try to tap into the plumbing pipes for potable water.
-scrt


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

There is the problems of distance, and hostle elements out there. I was thinking of a situation where the looters are dead from the effects, or have moved on to find other pickings, and the store and area have been reconned first.
But there are also the possiblities of shopping carts left to move items. Two bicycles could tow a number of carts a reasonable distance while other people acted as security.
Generaly speaking the looters mentality works on the short term, the quick gratifaction of needs and wants, and the attraction to the luxury items. They are not going to be interested in seeds or fertilizer, or a hundred other mundane items that will be of value. They may take all the cookies, but leave corn muffin mix ,take canned ham but leave vienna sausages. Having looted for what they think is valuable, they will move on until they run out of transport, easy pickings, fight and kill each other, be killed off by organized groups, or die from other effects of the event. ( radiation, disease, lack of drugs etc.)
*secretcreek*
I understand your situation. I have a brother like that, but even now he is in denial. He is a sitting duck where he is. At least my other brother is prepped up.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I was thinking of a situation where *the looters are dead* from the effects


You keep forgetting you ARE one of the looters.
Your scenarios are too tightly constructed to be *realistic*


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

ok to you they are unrealistic. No problem. Pity you can't find a copy of the old "How to survive the H-bomb and why" by Pat Frank. He does an entire chapter on the basics of looters and looting and shows how a scenario might unfold. The most interesting part was the strange pattern looters used in stripping bars and liquior stores of alcohol.
As far as my being one of the looters, again I wanted all opinions. Many agree with you, but some don't
I'm curious though, what do you think would happen to looters in a two week or more national emergency ( biowar, bird flu, epidemic, EMP/Solar Flare, limited nuke strike)?What happens while the rest of us are hunkered down in our safe havens? You seem to be a knowledgeable person. I welcome your imput on the subject.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> what do you think would happen to* looters* in a two week or more national emergency ( biowar, bird flu, epidemic, EMP/Solar Flare, limited nuke strike)?
> 
> What happens while *the rest of us* are hunkered down in our safe havens? You seem to be a knowledgeable person. I welcome your imput on the subject.


There is no "rest of us" if you're talking about "salvaging"

There's just US *looters,* some who are getting a later start.

The longer the situation lasts, the more agressive they will ALL be

You aren't going to come out and find Utopia waiting because "all the bad guys are dead by now, and I'm nothing like them anyway".


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

The best I can gather from your post is
1. If it's not yours and you take it , it's looting.
2, You believe that untrained, unprepared people will somehow survive in some kind of numbers no matter how deadly the enviorment.
Fine. I am not here to argue with what you believe.
But for clarification, I am not talking about some Utopia. As Pat Frank put it, "the aftermath wil be tougher than Valley Forge or any other time in our history"
I am talking about the moral question posed, to which you have given your view.
Let's just use an example of what I mean. Sooner or later your fuels will run out. But if someone was a chemist, or had some level of chemical knowledge they could take simple items from a looted Wal Mart and make a crude bio diesel fuel to run a vehical or motor for power, or extract alcohol from mouthwash.
*EVERYONE* is welcome to their view. And I am glad there are people out there with the location and the money to be so stocked up and ready. Not all of us have that luxury, and many of us may have to face this moral dilemma if the worst happens.


----------



## NickyBlade (May 27, 2008)

Let's think of it from the other side. I know everyone always thinks of Wal-mart... but, what I think about is this...

Say I'm out of town when a EMP happens. I have food, medicines, medical supplies at home... but it takes me a month to get home for whatever reason. I get home and my neighbor took and divided up all my supplies with his friends because he "didn't think we'd be back." 

I'd be really upset!

Now say I'm out of town and an EMP happens. I'm with my extended family and it would take weeks to get home. I decide it's not safe and stay put. My neighbor and his friends have hungry children. They enter my home and divide up my supplies.

I'd never know what happened to my home and supplies if I never went back, but I'd hope that someone got some use out of them. 

The neighbor did the exact same thing in both scenarios. Without communication, people can only do what they think best at the time with the information they have at the time. Even in the first scenario, I'd be upset but I guess I wouldn't really fault the neighbor. If it had been a few weeks, I would assume my neighbors either perished or weren't coming back and if I was out of something at that time, maybe I'd go look for what I needed.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

It would take me a minimum of two days to push my wheelbarrow to the nearest Wal-Mart and then another two days to push it back home. I would be away from my castle for 4 to 5 days for a wheelbarrow full of China-made WalMart stuff. I am not willing to invest that amount of time or take that kind of risk for a wheelbarrow full of stuff. Who knows what could happen to my abode while I was gone???? Besides, I believe it would be more productive using those 4 or 5 days gardening, fishing, hunting, canning or harvesting firewood.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> Yes, I will respect Wal-Marts property.


I don't respect Wal-Mart now, but under the situation the OP described (below quote) it would be salvage, not looting.



barefootboy said:


> This is *NOT* about a temporary situation but a major league level event such as epidemic ( man made or otherwise) limited nukes on major cities/ terrorism, emp/solar flare, or any other event you could see where the effects will be at least 6 months and for all intents and purposes , you are on your own.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Thanks to *all* for your comments, keep them coming. Only with an open exchange of ideas can we learn.
*Cabinfever*, you have a good point. That, to me, falls under risk to gain assessment. Time, distance, etc are all factors.
But, again, like having the place and supplies not to even consider it, it takes away having to face the question because of these reasons.
I am also begining to think a Wal Mart was a bad choice, due to distance, and other factors. But I wanted the place *NOT*to be locally owned and have enough items that would be of value but overlooked.
For those of you who remember Jerhico, there were boxcars of goods found on a railroad track. Would that possibly be a better example? Or an overturned semi with clothing, or other items? 
Use any example of items of possible value that you might need that are able to safely being gotten to and do *NOT* belong to any local business or individual.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

2


> , You believe that *untrained, unprepared people will somehow survive* in some kind of numbers no matter how deadly the enviorment.
> 
> Fine. I am not here to argue with what you believe.
> But for clarification, *I am not talking about some Utopia*. As *Pat Frank* put it, "the aftermath wil be tougher than Valley Forge or any other time in our history"


If you're "coming out" after a couple of weeks, and need to go LOOTING for supplies, then yes, UNPREPARED people will survive.

You're talking about coming out and "*working with Govt* to secure supplies for the community"

That's the storyline from Jericho, not realism, and Pat Frank is a Science *FICTION* author.



> But I wanted the place *NOT*
> to be locally owned and have enough *items that would be of value but overlooked*.


That's more fantasy, since if YOU want them, so will OTHERS.



> > For those of you who remember Jerhico,


 
LOL

I didn't even *SEE* that post until *AFTER* I said you were talking about Jericho


----------



## edcopp (Oct 9, 2004)

Here is my rule. 

When you cross my property line (inbound) you give up your rights. Most of them anyway. When you enter my house or other buildings, you gave up the rest of them.

IMHO Wal-Mart and all other stores for that matter, have the same rights as I do to protect their property. It is amazing to me the number of people who are completely convinced that because something is there, that they are entitled to it.

When the government takes over in 72 hours or less they will import muscle. This will be jack booted brownshirts, most likely wearing blue helmets with orders to go to the big box stores and Kill looters. To me it would make more sense to me to be in my cubby hole eating stew, as opposed to getting shot a few times, and left for rat bait in a big store somewhere.

Shop early. Pay cash. It's the right thing to do.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

barefootboy said:


> No problem there. This is *NOT* about a temporary situation but a major league level event such as epidemic ( man made or otherwise) limited nukes on major cities/ terrorism, emp/solar flare, or any other event you could see where the effects will be at least 6 months and for all intents and purposes , you are on your own.


If it's a situation where you NEED something and you know it doesn't belong to someone else, money is worthless, etc. then it would be foraging. Otherwise, it's looting.

After Katrina, there were some stores where people were allowed in to take whatever they wanted with permission of the store management AND law enforcement! They didn't know how long it would be before power was restored, and perishables in particular weren't going to keep, so better have people just take stuff than have to destroy it.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

*Bearfootfarm*
You have made your point that you consider anything taken other than what you own as looting, twice. I respect your opinion.
You also continue to attack this discussion caling it fantasy.
That is also your opinion and you are welcome to it.
But as point of fact, Pat Frank was the pen name of a highly respected journalist of his time who was called upon just prior to his death to work with various groups on the subject of survival after ( what was in his time , earily 60's) a limited nuclear war.
He did much research with people from NORAD, SAC, Civil Defence, and other agencies to put together his *non-fiction* "How to survive the H-bomb and why." as well as his fictional conuterpart, "Alas, Bablyon". 
It is a great pity that the few copies of his non fiction work go for $250. It is one off the easiest to read, clear , to the point, practical guides to basic survival. It was he who introduced me, at age 14, to information about a rotating food supply, basic radiation/fallout and , yes , looting. The chapter , Of mice and men, draws from his experiance as a reporter covering plane crashes and disasters, and the looting afterwards.
As for the Jerhico referance, I wa trying to come up with some situation other than a Wal Mart.
But as you have made it clear, you refuse to accept *ANY* situation that does not fit your guidelines of having everything you'll ever need.
I pray we will never be faced with these situations, but if we are I will also pray that you *DO* have everything you need and will come through it.
I personally believe in having as many aces up my sleeve as I can. While I will prep as much as I possibly can, I also will use every bit of my knowledge and those with me to enhance and add to our surviviblity in the long run and use every possible item to that end that can be morally, ethically and safely gathered. As a taxpayer, I feel I "own" the lab equipment in a high school. If no one else is going to use it, then I see no reason I can't.
It is the moral question that is presented here. And I appreciate your imput as I do any others, but twice I feel is sufficent.


----------



## longshot38 (Dec 19, 2006)

ok, just a twist. it's a half hour drive to the nearest WM. so walking there is out. but, lets say it's a 2 week or 2 month etc time that you come out of your shelter, you realize that this is real and it ain't gonna end soon and do a recce of the area looking for others and what is around like fruit trees etc. you check around and realize that you need vegetables and fish for the coming winter, i live on the ocean so i write what i have some knowledge of. you have no boat and no fish salt ( fish salt is plain salt in large bits like road salt but it is pure salt). well old Joe down the harbour has a boat that can be rowed/sailed and you remember seeing large bags of fish salt at the local grocery, mostly looted. as well Joe and others have vegetable gardens and they should be ready to harvest in a few days or weeks, as well several fruit trees are near ready to harvest. so what to do? you discuss with your family back in your shelter/home. Joe is dead, as are most of the owners of the other gardens or you know they aren't coming back. what to do? for me i would take Joe's boat and harvest the vegs and fruit. as well i would salvage the salt because the fish won't keep with out salt and air/sun drying which takes several weeks. as well any meat that could be harvested from loose domestic animals or game can be preserved with this salt. on top of this heating fuel left in tanks could be used in lamps and stand alone oil heaters to keep warm in the winter or used in diesel engines like trucks etc. this would be salvaged as well. would this make me a looter? probably, survivor would be preferable to me as i prep but i cant to everything it's just not possible so i do what i can and realize that i would have to utilize all available resources and if i had the chance to work over a WM i would and as suggested keep an inventory of items salvaged and where i got them.


----------



## sss3 (Jul 15, 2007)

If I'm dead because of these situations, you can take anything I have. Would hate to see it go to waste. DS is too far away; DD has big big bucks. But neither are survivors in these situations.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

*longshot38*
That was a very good example. I'm sure others can come up with more.
There are probably going to be dead people in our areas with homes , apartments , etc that have useable items. A recon of the area would work outward slowly.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

barefootboy said:


> ..... And I appreciate your *imput* as I do any others, but *twice I feel is sufficent*.


It's your prerogative to _feel_ that way but you need to understand on a public forum that it's not your call to decide whose and how much input is sufficient. 

That's twice now in this topic that you've essentially told a responder to shut up because you disagreed with, didn't fully comprehend or didn't like what they said. You aren't going to get any brownie points or respect if you keep that up after asking for input.

Oh, and it's spelled *input* - not the _imput_ that you've used a few times already - I just figured you'd like to know that since you said somewhere that you're an aspiring writer and a good writer will know there is no such word as imput in the English vocabulary.

.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

I don't know what is with you people. All I wanted was a discussion. 
For the record as to my typing/spelling lapes, I am a disabled vet, and typing is very difficult for me as my hands have numerous problems, as shown in the number of edits I try to do when I do find an error. But you just want to be insulting and make a personal attack.
As to the ones I don't agree with?? The first went off topic to bring in politics, and then came back with a personal jibe. That was not and is NOT the subject. As far as the second, how many ways can you say" I think taking something you don't own is looting." What, you want people to just keep posting the same thing??
Now as far as Browine points or respect, *I COULD CARE LESS* What are you going to do, hate me. Big deal.
As far as I am concened I am done with this thread. I think we did come up with a reasaonable middle ground in the "accountablity and pay back if ever possible" option.
And one last note. It's not flegling writer, it's published author. I didn't mention anything about that because I did *NOT *come on here to get my ego stroked.
I'm not sure if there is a way to shut down this thread or maybe remove it, but I would if I knew how. Perhaps the moderator would be so kind as to do so, as it is obvious that it is no longer dealing with the subject, but becoming an avenue for personal attack.


----------



## longshot38 (Dec 19, 2006)

its sad when a *worthy mental exercise* becomes a moral crusade or such. i find such exercises stimulating even if i venture into areas that are outside my morals, but they are my morals and mine alone. i have found this exercise useful as i went for a walk and looked around noticing resources that are in my immediate AO.

good thread none the less.:cowboy:

dean


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

barefootboy said:


> .....As to the ones I don't agree with?? The first went off topic to bring in politics, and then came back with a personal jibe. That was not and is NOT the subject. .....


This is what I was referring to as regards you not comprehending and disagreeing. Nobody else said anything about politics or politicians except you. You were also the first one to make a personal jibe. The word used by other posters was *governance* with reference to wise governance of resources within a community. Governance of resources by a community for the community is not the same thing as politics and has nothing to do with defending politicians. You misconstrued the intent of the reference to governance and went on a tirade about not wanting to talk about politicians. Okay? If you're still in doubt about that maybe you need to go back and review those posts again.



longshot38 said:


> its sad when a *worthy mental exercise* becomes a moral crusade or such. i find such exercises stimulating even if i venture into areas that are outside my morals, but they are my morals and mine alone. i have found this exercise useful as i went for a walk and looked around noticing resources that are in my immediate AO.
> 
> good thread none the less.:cowboy:
> 
> dean


I agree, it was a good mental exercise but it could have done without the misunderstandings and assumptions about other people's morals or judgements about what are appropriate intents towards resources being brought into the discussion.

.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> You have made your point that you consider anything taken other than what you own as looting, twice. I respect your opinion.
> You also continue to attack this discussion caling it fantasy.


The "discussion" isn't fantasy, but many of the *scenarios* seem to be.

I called it "looting" because you called OTHERS who took things "looters" but somehow see yourself as something different, even though you're doing the *same thing*



> He did much research with people from NORAD, SAC, Civil Defence, and other agencies to put together his *non-fiction* "How to survive the H-bomb and why." as well as his fictional conuterpart, "Alas, Bablyon".


"Non-fiction" doesn't automatically mean "correct"
Much was based on speculation, since there was little real data to work form.

Didn't YOU say earlier "it's not the same world" today? 
He wrote his books *50 years ago*



> you refuse to accept *ANY* situation that does not fit your guidelines of having everything you'll ever need.


You misunderstand.
What I'm saying is I KNOW if I go out and "forage". "loot", whatever you prefer to *call *it, that* I* *will be* *just like everyone else.*
The "evil Looters" won't be dead, and the "benevolent GOVT" won't be waiting for *me* to help them rebuild.



> As a taxpayer, I feel I "own" the *lab equipment in a high school*. If no one else is going to use it, then I see no reason I can't.


The meth heads will beat you to it
They don't sleep much


----------



## Spinner (Jul 19, 2003)

First of all, WM's are located in populated areas and I'm not. Why would I go to a populated area after TSHTF??? In my opinion, that would be a very ignorant move. 

So in summery, WM's goods are safe from me, I'll keep my stuff and they can keep their stuff.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

I will admit that the creation of this thread was somewhat selfish on my part. As I am currently working on a storyline of a post event situation with the characters dealing with this moral question and since I like to make my writing as realistic as possible, I felt there would be no better place to get real views than here.
I thought I had framed the situation well, but I see that no matter how I put it together, there were problems with it. 
The use of the "Wal-Mart" was to take in the idea of "ownership" by some faceless corporation where there was little local connection, as opposed to a local store. The idea of the owner of a local store, or even farm, house, etc, known to be , or even reasonably considered dead ( went to NYC that day , etc.) would give too clear and clean moral choice.
The responses have been interesting.
1. Dismissing the situation as unrealistic
2. Not having to face the question.
This takes in all the "be so prepared so you don't have to" , "too far away" "responses
3. Looters would have taken everything of value. Also avoids the question.
4. Political responses , that is avoiding the moral question by wrapping a poltical identity on the group of surviors. This is a very interesting one for another discussion one day, how as long as it is done under a "goverment" the individual avoids any moral responsiblity for their action ( I'm only following orders.") But this is *NOT* the question here. The question is looting ( immoral/ clear evil intent) vs foraging , or salvaging ( good intent no personal gain, morally acceptable?)
5. Clear opinion Either "taking anything not owned by you is looting" or "ends justify the means"
6. A very interesting middle choice "Account for and intend to pay back, if the chance ever comes, even if the odds are that will never happen."
The last one has gotten my interest because I can see a story where a list is passed down from generation to generation like some Holy Relic of a forgotten time with the real meaning forgotten, as a shopping list was in an old post holocaust story .
If anyone still wishes to add their opinions, please do. I'm generally going to stay out of the discussion to avoid any further personal clashes. I'll look in from time to time if it keeps going .


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I'm generally going to stay out of the discussion


LOL
That's the *second* time youve said that too 
Good luck with your fiction


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Bearfootfarms,
Thank you for your good wishes and your imputs. Forgive my curiousity, but is Bearfootfarms an actual business. If so, it sounds interesing. do you have a site I could look it up on?


----------



## Work horse (Apr 7, 2012)

Re: those who say they are prepped enough to not have to go there, would your feelings change if you lost all your preps for some reason?


----------



## janetn (Apr 26, 2012)

If I believed that items were truely abandoned by a company [faceless or otherwise] I would take them. But I would keep a list and if the store or whatever opened again I would make restitution. 

Now as someone pointed out this gets a lot stickier if your dealing with someones home. You could mistakenly believe that a house had been abandoned when it had not. I would not take anything from someones home. Their is always the possibility that they or a relative could show up and need those things you thought abandoned. You could then put their survivial in peril. This would not be true for a big business such as WM. You are taking inventory that would just rot if truely abandoned. You would have to have a good reason to believe that that store was never going to reopen. You are not taking someones survivial away from them. If the business did reopen you could always at that point make restitution.

Good luck with the book! Hope you got some good input for your story


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Thank you jantn 
As far as the book, things are in the note taking stage, although the first story "Choices" is at a magazine for review, and if I find an 80 hr day I might even get to typing up Beachfront Property , Haulers of Water, and The Family on the Hill.
Homes are almost sacred in my mind. It has to be a special set of circumstances to allow a home to be touched. Even a locally owned store is very questionable.
I think of the not thought of places, a huge warehouse of things like TV's etc looted but with big industrial first aid kits and fire extingushers still left in different corners of the plant for example, or fertilizer and garden tools in the groundskeeping area of some plant.


----------



## DryHeat (Nov 11, 2010)

> a list is passed down from generation to generation like some Holy Relic of a forgotten time with the real meaning forgotten, as a shopping list was in an old post holocaust story


"A Canticle for Leibowitz," one of the very best of the genre. Really dense in its references and detail. I found the first section the best with the following two a little forced as sequels. Anyway, that's a cool idea... maybe have a holier-than-thou family patriarch constantly admonishing his flock on the importance of repaying debts no matter how painful and referring to a document notebook with such a list as an example of extreme value confiscated from their ancestors. Then a stranger appears with a page in the same handwriting with torn edges matching a missing page in the holy book but which makes it plain the ancestors took those items from the stranger's family's old store, leaving a copy apologizing and promising payback with interest.... which is now so impossibly valuable as to require the family to become slaves to honor it.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Great imput , Dry heat. Do you write also?
I see you caught the reference to that old story.
"When the day came" will be a collection of short stories of how different people in different situations react when the EMP/solar flare strike hits. In "Choices", you see people in a gated community, In "Beachfront Proprerty", a couple on vacation. The time frame will be only the day itself or the months to follow.
As far as the "list kept" idea, for the moment I'll have to file that with the 20 or so other plot lines I have on hand for the day I can get to them. But if you want, feel free to put it together and get it out there for possible publication.
I thank you and all the others for all your imputs, and welcome more.
Again, I pray none of us will ever have to face these kind of decisions.


----------



## uhcrandy (Sep 16, 2010)

One thing about any looting event, is that there is a "flash-point", where everything happens at once. When it happens, it will happen fast. Everyone will be there at once. You will not find anything after the looting ends, everything will be GONE. To get anything you will have to compete with everyone else that is there for the same reason...looting.


----------



## Cande (Feb 5, 2008)

Hey Barefootboy.......

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE FOR MY FREEDOM !!

I wish you the best in your writing......I think this was a very good thread, with most of the post being very interesting.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

Thank you Cande
It was a difficult question for me, as I believe a moral foundation is necessary for a stable society. Once you get into "the ends justify the means" it gets to be a slippery slope. But, I also hate WASTE, especially in a post event situation. 
It is good to see many different opinions. Sometimes even the best of us develope blind spots on various questions, and also with a group of characters in a story there will be many different opinions.


----------

