# "We are here to evacuate you"



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

On a Facebook prep group, there is a discussion going on about what would you do if a tank (or hummer) and about 10 fully geared milatary/police types came to round you up for your protection. Sorta like after Katrina - but not necessarily a Katrina event with the flooding etc.

Just for some reason, they needed you to get out of your home.
And they would want to take your seen food to help feed you and the 'others' where ever you are being taken.

How would you not do this? practical ideas.

I was thinking of hoping that the people on the road before here would be enough stops to give me a chance to not be at home. Or I did think of how could I make my home look quarantineed so no one would want to come in.

Just some thoughts. What about your thoughts?


----------



## wannabechef (Nov 20, 2012)

That would be a tough one Angie and I'm not sure how it would pan out for myself and my family...I know what I would like to do, and I figure most on here would want to do the same thing...but 3 of us against 10 well armed men would not be very fair.

It's a good thing to think about and I don't believe it to be that far fetched considering gun confiscation that happened during Katrina.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

I wonder if a removable bridge over a ravine might be a discouragement. 
But that would not be a real worry in my area. There are not enough police, military, firemen, etc on the face of the earth to clean out these hills covered in tall trees before the word was out everywhere. I suppose a helicopter might land in a clearing but there are lots of those too.
One fallen redwood tree would keep anyone from driving up this road, another would keep them out of the drive. We are not talking little trees and no driving around without running into more.


----------



## mpillow (Jan 24, 2003)

In my lifetime I've seen a couple of bad floods (over bridges) and an ice storm here in Maine....none of which led to the gov't forcibly moving and or taking people/possessions.

We have only small rare tornados...hurricanes/snowcanes you just stay home....if a tree falls on your house...you jerry rig some tarps and put another log on the fire sooner...

A forest fire might be one occasion I'd be forced out. There again Maine is not a "dry" prone area....and we are very near many lakes that the helicopters can "dip" into quickly. I've seen it done a couple of times when grass/brush burning has gotten away from humans....

My husband swears they'll take his gun after he gives them the bullets...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Being aware is no.1
Having even a little advanced warning is no. 2 that helps.
In our case, I think we could pull off the deserted house, no one here, look.
And since I picked out the location long ago, #1 and #2 are taken care of.
That leaves a little survival training for #3.
I think one or two of our big trees growing next to the drive (and there's plenty more) would take care of the rest.

Locked doors, no sound, lights out and rugged terrain with obstacles. Sounds like a plan.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

> How would you not do this? practical ideas.


If everything is legal and on the up and up you can just refuse and your refusal has to be honoured. If it isn't honoured then the evacuation is not legal, it is renegades doing the evacuation and maybe it would be a lot less bother for the renegades to simply kill you and take whatever goods they want.

There has to be a valid, practical reason for an evacuation. Nobody can be evacuated on a whim.

Let's just use past flooding or fire for example, for the moment.

When flooding or wildfire has happened and people were being evacuated - were any people forced to evacuate by being physically manhandled, picked up and removed from their homes? I ask because I don't recall hearing any stories about people being forcibly removed kicking and screaming under restraints from their homes and nobody had their goods confiscated. People who were helped to evacuate were told to bring only what they could carry because there's just only so much room on the transport and all space needs to be for people, not "goods" or pets. 

I do recall stories about people refusing to evacuate and then being told that was their right but they would be on their own then, and that if they became trapped and their lives in danger nobody would be able to come back again to rescue them. That even if they called for help they would be SOL because nobody would be available to rescue them. Nobody had their food taken away.

The same thing has just happened in one of the towns in Alberta that was/is being evacuated due to extreme flooding. Out of thousands of people being helped to evacuate only 10 individuals in one town have declined to leave (because they're afraid that somebody will mysteriously appear to loot their homes in the midst of raging flood even though military are there to guard the flooded towns). They have been told fine that's their decision but they will be on their own and nobody will be available to come back to help them later if their lives are critically endangered. Nobody is being forced to leave and nobody is having any of their food or other possessions confiscated.

I'm bringing all of this up because it's my understanding that you can't be physically forced to leave your property and nobody legally has the right to confiscate your goods during an evacuation.

Maybe I am wrong about all that as regards what happens in the US though. Maybe the US military or police has a legal right to force people to leave their homes and to confiscate people's goods. 

Has it happened in the past?

As far as I know, if an evacuation of yourself and your goods is being forced upon you then it would have to be for a reason that is much worse than a natural disaster. It would have to be because of an un-natural and extreme man-made disaster, such as bombs being set off for example, or the deliberate release of reservoir waters that will sweep away everything in it's path, or fires being deliberately set to destroy everything, or the release of deadly chemicals that will kill everything.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Angie, the 'seen food' might not be as signicant as you'd think. In Alberta, if someone is in trouble, we bring casseroles and as soon as evacuation centres were set up, hundreds of casseroles started showing up, which resulted in all levels of government issuing statements declinging said casseroles. 

The reasoning was quite valid. Home prepared food isn't always safely prepared and ecoli or other forms of food poisoning would magnify a disaster and with emergency services and hospitals already pushed to their limites, allergic reactions to unknown ingredients is not a risk that can be taken so I would think that things would have to be incredibly dire before one would have their food taken.


----------



## Mike in Ohio (Oct 29, 2002)

Just to point out, if the government really is capturing internet traffic (or simply reading this site) then saying one would do this or that may have them knocking on your door.

I'm just sayin....


----------



## Wildfire_Jewel (Nov 5, 2006)

Paumon said:


> Maybe I am wrong about all that as regards what happens in the US though. Maybe the US military or police has a legal right to force people to leave their homes and to confiscate people's goods.
> 
> Has it happened in the past?


 
WWII - Ask the Asian US citizens that were rounded up and placed in camps. Many lost all of their property.


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

Calgary Alberta and surrounded areas flooded with more floods tonight coming down stream. Thousands of people were asked to evacuate and more tonight in down stream communities. So far as of tonight's news only 20 people or families refused to leave. They were told if they stayed and later wanted help it possibly wouldn't be available to them.
Unless you live on a high hill why would anyone refuse to evacuate knowing a flood is coming? I have a family member in Calgary who lives 500 meters from the river and another 100 meters up a hill in an apartment building. She and others were allowed to stay in their apartments but told to stay indoors. Today they could go out and the few stores for food that were open had two hour lineups at cashiers and were sold out of many items.
I have three thoughts about this. When choosing a house or apartment to live in; pick one high above a flood plain . Store unparishable food items and water even if you live in an apartment. Also if asked to evacuate ; do so as it is for your own good and safety.
People in Calgary are handling this disaster very good and the public should co-operate.
Responders should be commended for all they are doing to keep everyone safe.


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

Sorry! My above post double posted for some reason!


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

On rare occasion because of wildfire we have asked people to evacuate, but it's only a request. I don't think law enforcement can force an evacuation either. Generally we go door to door and warn folks. A lot of people here in fire country have their own contingency plans for dealing with fire from grabbing the cat and getting out of dodge to turning on elaborate sprinkler systems, starting a pump and manning a hose. Of course theirs always the few with no plan.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Wildfire_Jewel said:


> WWII - Ask the Asian US citizens that were rounded up and placed in camps. Many lost all of their property.


Okay, I knew about that but can internment camps in times of war be considered the same kind of circumstances as what Angie is posting about? During WWII that didn't only happen in USA, it happened in Canada too with Japanese and Germans and it's happened in many other countries. See list of how many countries and circumstances: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_concentration_and_internment_camps

I'm not condoning it but I understand that during times of war that can happen in any country with any persons deemed foreign national enemies or whose lives are endangered by other citizenry (lynch mobs) or deemed to be a potential threat to national security. In other countries during WWI and WWII all the citizenry were put on food rationing and were required to grow food and livestock for the war efforts and women had to go work in ammunitions plants. I don't know if y'all had to do that in the States but people had to do that in Canada, Britain, Scotland, other countries in Europe. Hoarding food was punishable by law as it went against national security.

Is all that the same thing as what Angie's post is about?


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

AngieM2 said:


> On a Facebook prep group, there is a discussion going on about what would you do if a tank (or hummer) and about 10 fully geared milatary/police types came to round you up for your protection. Sorta like after Katrina - but not necessarily a Katrina event with the flooding etc.
> 
> Just for some reason, they needed you to get out of your home.
> And they would want to take your seen food to help feed you and the 'others' where ever you are being taken.
> ...


Just like in the 2nd amendment thread, there simply isn't enough police & military to do a clean sweep of one major state let alone the whole country. Not much could be done for the folks on the sharp end, but it would spark hostilities.


----------



## ovsfarm (Jan 14, 2003)

In my area, if there is an emergency and LE or local military have to spread the word to evacuate, they are not interested in waiting around to argue with anyone who is hesitant. In a previous flood situation here, they knocked, told residents that the flood waters were rising quickly and to grab ID and emergency meds and hop on the truck or to evacuate as soon as humanly possible on their own. They didn't take time to enter any homes, no looking for guns nor for food stores.

If they were willing to wait around arguing or wanted to come in for a look see, that would tip me off to the fact that there was, in fact, no sense of urgency to their evacuation order. I think I would feign unpreparedness and martyrdom and beg them to go on and save others while I caught my "5 poor kitties" and came along a bit later. 

The best offense is always a good defense - keep the bulk of your food stores well hidden and your home defense systems very unobtrusive. 

I second the comment above that a good, neighborhood grapevine communication system would be very helpful also. If one neighbor saw something odd going on at his neighbor's house, he would call a few of the rest of us to give us a head's up while he was stashing as much as he could. And we would call others. By the time they got to the rest of the homes, there wouldn't be many people to round up or much in the way of goods to be collected. If the phones were down, well...there's plenty of back ways along the ridges where roads just don't go. One fleet of foot kid could spread the alarm rather effectively and never cross an actual road.


----------



## bourbonred (Feb 27, 2008)

Yep, this points out our weaknesses. Communication about what is going on locally--scanners, cb's, ect--would definately be key. Grabbing your go bag and doing a short term evac would be necessary. We're still working on the basics and have done nothing on communication, short of every family member has and keeps charged a cell phone. It's so frustrating...you just can't cover all the bases as fast as you want to.


----------



## Pearl B (Sep 27, 2008)

Paumon,


> Maybe the US military or police has a legal right to force people to leave their homes and to confiscate people's goods.


 Yes they do through Executive Presidential orders. Commonly called E.O's. Been on the books for years.


----------



## mpillow (Jan 24, 2003)

Mike in Ohio said:


> Just to point out, if the government really is capturing internet traffic (or simply reading this site) then saying one would do this or that may have them knocking on your door.
> 
> I'm just sayin....


I'm okay with it, and if they've listened to my fone calls I'm surely already on a list. I've got a cavity that needs attn. and I haven't been to a dr in 13 years...I intend to take full advantage:gaptooth:


----------



## Ann-NWIowa (Sep 28, 2002)

I don't think this question was raised about emergency evacuation situations. I believe it was raised because of the way the government is continually taking upon itself rights not granted by the Constitution and forcing citizens to comply. If we are "allowed" to refuse, then we'd refuse. If we aren't, then our response is moot. Fighting against armed soldiers would be equal to suicide which, of course, is an option.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

If they found us at our farm in the middle of nowhere and rounded us up, it would mean they are up to no good and breaking the constitution.... I believe in fighting for my freedom... I'd much rather be dead, then be a political prisoner..


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

The trail of tears did not work well for my paternal granny's ancestors. I would not be willing to go with any forceful removal effort. 

Of course when they drag you out of your house at gunpoint then burn your house while holding you at gunpoint, there isn't much reason to stay.


----------



## Wildfire_Jewel (Nov 5, 2006)

Paumon said:


> Okay, I knew about that but can internment camps in times of war be considered the same kind of circumstances as what Angie is posting about? During WWII that didn't only happen in USA, it happened in Canada too with Japanese and Germans and it's happened in many other countries. See list of how many countries and circumstances: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_concentration_and_internment_camps
> 
> I'm not condoning it but I understand that during times of war that can happen in any country with any persons deemed foreign national enemies or whose lives are endangered by other citizenry (lynch mobs) or deemed to be a potential threat to national security. In other countries during WWI and WWII all the citizenry were put on food rationing and were required to grow food and livestock for the war efforts and women had to go work in ammunitions plants. I don't know if y'all had to do that in the States but people had to do that in Canada, Britain, Scotland, other countries in Europe. Hoarding food was punishable by law as it went against national security.
> 
> Is all that the same thing as what Angie's post is about?


They were US citizens, criminalized (spelled wrong ?) because of their nationality. Very few were ever a threat to national security. That is wrong on so many levels - why have we not rounded up all the Middle Eastern US citizens then - same rules should apply right? What about the Mexicans OR??? NEVER should our government round up a group of people based solely on the nationality with out any due process. As for food and working in the factories, I don't believe anyone was forced to do so, it was just strongly encouraged (and you were looked down on by your peers if you did not grow food).


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Ann-NWIowa said:


> I don't think this question was raised about emergency evacuation situations. I believe it was raised because of the way the government is continually taking upon itself rights not granted by the Constitution and forcing citizens to comply. *If we are "allowed" to refuse, then we'd refuse. If we aren't, then our response is moot. Fighting against armed soldiers would be equal to suicide which, of course, is an option*.


Not having any other information to go by about the reason for the evacuation I think Ann's reply is probably the best response to the topic. Maybe Angie can confirm if being forced to comply was what the Facebook discussion was about.

Speaking for myself, if I was forced by military/law enforcement to comply to evacuation and confiscation of foods with no explanation for the evacuation or where I was being taken - I would comply. Going down in a hail of LE bullets for the sake of my stored food is not on my agenda and not something I think is worth dying for. I would go but I would insist on taking my regular go bag with me. One other thing I would insist on taking is my bucket of gardening hand tools and seeds that I keep in my car for my excursions to relocate endangered plant species. That way if it turned out my relocation was to be for an extended period of time at least I would have my tools and be somewhat prepared for putting in a garden at whatever location I was taken to.


----------



## Maura (Jun 6, 2004)

If there was a natural disaster, you would be notified that for your best interest, you needed to leave. This allows you to load your car(s) with whatever you deem important. You may even have enough fore warning to load up a truck with your furniture.

In our retirement home, set in a very large town (pop 2400) we are going to have deep cavitied walls for storage. I plan to make it "not obvious". Also a regular pantry. If someone pops in looking for food when I'm out, they would most likely find the pantry and kitchen cupboards and not figure there is more. I don't plan on ever looking like any kind of prepper. Everyone up here hunts, buys meat on the hoof, has gardens, so we are just like everyone else and there is nothing to make us stand out.

So, let's say for whatever reason the big boys show up and insist that we leave, we'd leave. If possible, we'd load up our cars rather than just go in theirs. After we've left, we could see about coming back. If it is not practical to sneak back home, it would probably be very impractical to stay and think that nobody would notice. I'd have to know why we would come back, though. We could stay with family since we have family in Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Texas, Arizona, and California. I think if we objected, people may think we have something to hide or something of value that we wish to protect.

If it is an evacuation, they are not singling you out. If you refuse, you are singling yourself out.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

About 2005 maybe as late as 2007 Cert training pack included a card --about standard notebook page on one side was safe (or ok) Help. Info with the rest of the pack explained that these cards were to be handed out to neighbors along with the instruction to the neighbors.

the instructions were something like this.

Keep this card safe -we suggest in a safe place under a bed along with a first aid kit and a three day supply of food and water for all members of your household. Note the two bandaids attached to the card these are there to attach the sign to a street facing window of your home in the event of a major catstricg event. If you and everyone in your house hold is safe you are to put the sign up in the street facing window so that the message informing local trained CERT members and other emergency aid workers can read it. Should your house hold need help the sign should read HELP.

Sounds good right but NOW what did the CERT TRAIN MANUAL state in the instructions to the new LOCAL trained CERT people. 

Should event happen in your area and you are called up and involed with a door to door search you are to first wait to be notified to start. Using the map with the homes and the cards for the homes with the name and ages of all members of each home per home---you will most likely be asked to do a first walk making notes of what you see at each of the homes and any un safe issues. It will be very important to note with homes have signs up and if they are safe or need help. Note also with homes have NO SIGNS (this was not bolded it blended in as if it was not important).

After reporting the condistion in your local community to the team leader. 

If you are to be a part of the search team then you will be going out and first checking on the homes that have failed to place a sign and check on the welfare --note taking is critial.
Next priority is to check on the homes signs stating that they are safe.
Finally go to the homes asking for help and see what their needs are.

DOES THIS MAKE YOU FEEL SAFE? Think about. if everyone was in lock down and you first remove the indendent (no signs)
Next remove the ones that prepped 
Leaving the quiet controlable sheep.

That is what I read into it when I first got involed with CERT. It was around the bird flu time --when lock down and quarenteens were of issue in the news.


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Early Warning system,Supplies stored away from residence with as little evidence of activity around storage location, and a safe room with a good view of the residence and surroundings to bug out to. 
The French had towers during ww2 for communication,people have used mirrors for centuries,the Indians smoke along with drums, and today we have Internet and GSM radios.
Plenty of options for early warning. But all depend on someone else to get the warning started.


----------



## justincase (Jul 16, 2011)

look up ndaa bill n what is a terrorist we r all on the list I think that is what angie refers to rounding up people. look into obummers police forceand how local police traingin in your area (even rural areas) are being trained in riot training. also please look into P.E.R.T team in your area, downed tree are not gonna help you. Educate yourself as much as you can do not try and guess how they will do it or if gather info. Knowledge is POWER


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Thats an awful big case of wishful thinking if you think that "those armed 10 guys'" are going to be kept at bay with "a fallen tree" across the drive way.
Inconvient perhaps, but those jackboots do know how to walk threw the "woods".........
And if their *commander* gets pi$$ed off because of 'perceived obstacles' you will only increase his determination to "visit you"......................

Remember out in Kali-forn-a "They" thought that somebody was in the house. For their own safety they called in the "burners"....... (tear gas canisters that cause fire)
When 'they' left they knew there was nobody there to"evacuate".............

1-2 or 3 people against those 10 thugs is a bit more than intimidating......................


----------



## backwoods (Sep 12, 2004)

Wildfire_Jewel said:


> WWII - Ask the Asian US citizens that were rounded up and placed in camps. Many lost all of their property.


TRUE. I know a man who's father was actively serving in the US military, he was from Hawaii, his mother was of Japanese descent and she was put in an "encampment" and my friend was actually born while in there. They owned a nice little house, but when they went back to it, it had been ransacked, though they did get their house back. A sad part of history that a lot of American's don't know about. I know I wasn't taught it in school.


----------



## backwoods (Sep 12, 2004)

Just wanted to add, we live on 70 very private wooded acres down a 1/2 mile driveway lined with trees and have a locked gate across it at the road. Two Tennessee Wildlife Resource officers hiked through dense woods, in the summer heat, and popped out of the woods into our yard, just because they "heard" someone had been hunting feral pigs with dogs (which was against the law @ that time, now it's not). I was quite shocked to see them appear suddenly coming up a steep enbankment into my yard! I was really quite PO'd about it. They weren't even suspecting US of doing it, they were "cutting across" our property (they said) to get to where they thought the person might be who was doing it, almost a mile away on a different lane. They passed numerous NO TRESPASSING signs to get here, also. As far as I can tell, they had NO right to cross or be on our property, at all, but they do it in TN all the time. 
Don't think for an instant, that the military can't/won't "get around" any obstacle you can think of, to put in their way. The BEST you could do, would maybe slow them down a bit and forewarn you they were coming...maybe.
IF there were a legitimate reason to evacuate, then I would, but in MY vehicles, never their's, and going where I want to go, not where they say I HAVE to go. "Survival" is about surviving, and nothing "here" is worth dying for, except each other. If we can survive to start all over again somewhere else, then that's what we'll do.


----------



## jbo9 (Oct 30, 2012)

There would be two questions I would ask:

What is prompting the need to evacuate? Fire, flood, etc?
What is the expected time frame? How long until that danger is here?

If they persist in pushing for evacuation:
"Tell you what, give us 20 minutes to get some stuff together, paperwork, stuff like that. There's some more people around, let them know and stop back by."
And after about 5 minutes, pin a note on the door, "We caught a ride, thanks." 
And make yourself scarce.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Mike in Ohio said:


> Just to point out, if the government really is capturing internet traffic (or simply reading this site) then saying one would do this or that may have them knocking on your door.
> 
> I'm just sayin....



Uh huh.
And _maybe_, the gov't isn't the only one that uses misinformation........:grin:


----------



## edcopp (Oct 9, 2004)

FEMA camp, thanks a lot but no thanks.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I can see that many of you went to the natural disaster, and I feel that's due to my Katrina reference.

A few picked up on the Boston reference.

Let say it's more Boston type in your area - maybe a prison break and a couple of really bad guys got out.

Or lets say the group coming to get you out of the home was something like a rouge ex military group.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

if it is a rouge ex-mill group you can pretty well kiss your tush good-by.........
Your going to need to have your own "squad" of darn good rifle people to counter a rouge bunch.

Us singles don't have a chance..


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Frankly I'm offended at the constant accusation that military would be involved. Anyone who thinks the military is going just follow unconstitutional & illegal orders like its cool is seriously out of touch. You need to go take some time and talk to some veterans & some servicemembers and get a better understanding of just where they stand.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Don't be offended Pops, while the rank and file are filled with a lot of good folks, one of the questions given to the high ranking officers the last few years is, "If ordered to take action against American civilians, would you follow those orders?"


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

And if you have paid attention "they" are slowly eliminating the good military officers who more than likely would question and say no to funky 'orders' regarding the military going against the public.

Kept in place and promoted are the not so good "Yes" officers who would not question orders requiring the military to go against the public.....................scary...........

And you should also note that many of these *discharged* military people are now speaking out about the "wrongs" they have in countered. . . Something they of course could not do with the uniform on..........

So when Angie used the term "rogue" I take that to be a bunch of not so very nice guys whose 'code of ethics' would be non existent................. 

They would leave a whole lot of hurt where ever they go..............


----------



## Ohio Rusty (Jan 18, 2008)

FarmrBrown wrote: _"If ordered to take action against American civilians, would you follow those orders?" _

It's funny you should mention that line in your post. A fellow I work with, his son is applying for a police officer position here in Ohio. One of the questions he was asked was that line you quoted. In fact he was asked that question reworded several different ways on the psychological battery test. Then asked that question again in the group interview. I don't know how he answered, but his Dad said that if they answered 'No', they probably wouldn't get the job.
Ohio Rusty ><>

I know I am paranoid ..... but am I paranoid _*enough*_???


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I think pre - 2008 police and military may be different than after that year.
Or might be a little bit earlier

I just know I trust the ones of my generation (I'm 60) and maybe even ones that are about 40 - as they get younger I'm not as certain of that trust. (in general, there are exceptions to prove the rule everywhere)


----------



## soulsurvivor (Jul 4, 2004)

If you're discussing who's coming to get you, then you'd have to investigate the possibility that it's a para-military corporation working on a government contract to provide said services. That way there are no country loyalities to worry with as those corporations hire a globally based workforce. There have been rumors for years that the US is full of Russian military that are here to train for just such situations. 

I figure if there's a porch full of gun toting men in full gear then I'm toast. And with all the drones in operation you can forget the hide and seek games too.

I actually think it's more likely that we'll be left to our own saving and it won't be enough. Mass disasters are something that cannot be successfully dealt with and I think gov is going to become overwhelmed with body cleanup. All those areas in the world with huge death tolls have my deepest respect for how they try to handle the impossible of hundreds of thousands dead at the same time in the same location. Every country on earth has had a significant disaster claiming huge numbers of deaths.


----------



## Limon (Aug 25, 2010)

I don't know, if things ever got to that point I don't think "they" are going to go door-to-door to steal a pack of graham crackers and some old cans of tuna from individuals. They know most people don't keep a supply of food in their homes. It would be more logical and efficient to raid the sources - the grocery stores, the warehouses, distribution centers and the like. They'll be food in bulk there, no need wasting time picking up piddly squat.

And while there are some officers who are willing to order an attack against Americans, there are very few soldiers willing to carry out those orders. I'm sure the officers know if they try to give those orders, they'll end up fragged.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Ohio Rusty said:


> FarmrBrown wrote: _"If ordered to take action against American civilians, would you follow those orders?" _
> 
> It's funny you should mention that line in your post. A fellow I work with, his son is applying for a police officer position here in Ohio. One of the questions he was asked was that line you quoted. In fact he was asked that question reworded several different ways on the psychological battery test. Then asked that question again in the group interview. I don't know how he answered, but his Dad said that if they answered 'No', they probably wouldn't get the job.
> Ohio Rusty ><>
> ...




Good to know the info I'm hearing is true.
Some are LEO's, former and present military, and other unmentionables....:nono:


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Paumon said:


> I'm not condoning it but I understand that during times of war that can happen in any country with any persons deemed foreign national enemies or whose lives are endangered by other citizenry (lynch mobs) or deemed to be a potential threat to national security. In other countries during WWI and WWII all the citizenry were put on food rationing and were required to grow food and livestock for the war efforts and women had to go work in ammunitions plants. I don't know if y'all had to do that in the States but people had to do that in Canada, Britain, Scotland, other countries in Europe. Hoarding food was punishable by law as it went against national security.
> 
> Is all that the same thing as what Angie's post is about?


Trouble I have is, our govt. has labeled traditional Americans (pretty much everyone on this site, I'd imagine, would be in that group... those that are pro-constitution, pro-2nd amendment, believe in God, fear the govt) as enemies of the State. We're all on a big list. If your not ON the list, imho, you're pretty much on board with the destruction of traditional American values.

My mother's entire family moved to WA state during WWII to work in the shipyards... they didn't 'have to, or forced to'... they did it because the wages were good, and no local work. Sure there'd've been some gnashing of teeth if they had been forced to labor halfway across the country.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Limon, I read this whole thing as well after when all the warehouses have been looted and TORCHED.

So this "rogue" group is going after anything . . including those graham crackers . . . . .


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Jim-mi said:


> Limon, I read this whole thing as well after when all the warehouses have been looted and TORCHED.
> 
> So this "rogue" group is going after anything . . including those graham crackers . . . . .


If a renegade group is going after crumbs then why bother rounding up people and taking them away somewhere for their so-called "protection" instead of just killing them?

There's only 2 reasons I can think of for why renegades would do something like that - slave trade and/or cannibalism. In which case if the situation was that bad with looting and torching, people would have a lot worse problems to worry about than figuring out how to refuse or avoid being taken away somewhere on the pretext of being evacuated.



> what would you do if *a tank (or hummer) and about 10 fully geared milatary/police types came to round you up for your protection.* Sorta like after Katrina - but not necessarily a Katrina event with the flooding etc.
> 
> Just for some reason, they needed you to get out of your home.
> And *they would want to take your seen food to help feed you and the 'others' where ever you are being taken*.


They aren't real military or law enforcement, and they aren't renegades on the run either. They're a band of imposters who have murdered real military or LE and stolen their uniforms and equipment.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

The real problem isn't correctly identifying who "they" are working for.......it's what you are going to "do" to survive.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Hungry bellies get unscrupulously desperate.

Yes a bit of thread drift from "evacuate" but none the less quite possible........


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Mike in Ohio said:


> Just to point out, if the government really is capturing internet traffic (or simply reading this site) then saying one would do this or that may have them knocking on your door.
> 
> I'm just sayin....


 Yes but staying quiet out of fear is exactly what they want. They have been leaking info about their spying for years. They are hoping you will shut up and not encourage others to see the realities. Our reaction should be to get EVEN LOUDER. *Yes we know you are listening, and no we won't cower!* You are the criminals, not us.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

AngieM2 said:


> On a Facebook prep group, there is a discussion going on about what would you do if a tank (or hummer) and about 10 fully geared milatary/police types came to round you up for your protection. Sorta like after Katrina - but not necessarily a Katrina event with the flooding etc.
> 
> Just for some reason, they needed you to get out of your home.
> And they would want to take your seen food to help feed you and the 'others' where ever you are being taken.
> ...


My thoughts are that if they are concerned about my safety, why would they be armed and threatening me with force if I do not comply? "We are here for your protection, so open the door or we will break in and assault you"...that would be my first clue that they are not what they say they are.


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

The police and National Guard evacuate people here quite frequently. What we do is say "thank you".

So the answer depends upon what the evacuation is about and why they are armed.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Why would they be armed if just wanting to kindly help?
(having arms available in case of an attack might be different, but then why would they be going to expect to be attacked?)


----------



## mpillow (Jan 24, 2003)

AngieM2 said:


> Why would they be armed if just wanting to kindly help?
> (having arms available in case of an attack might be different, but then why would they be going to expect to be attacked?)


Lots of kind helpful people are packing....so are lots of nasty folk...chance favors those who are prepared....

Its hard to know until you are in that moment and the story is told with so much spin in so many directions.... think of how loosely the news reports about an armed survivalist....he could just be a hunter with a remote cabin but he'll be portrayed as a paranoid wack job to the gen'l public. There again he could be a terrorist like the unibomber.....


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I wanna know what Lee Eremy would do.. 

I'm sure I'd do the same...


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

AngieM2 said:


> Why would they be armed if just wanting to kindly help?
> (having arms available in case of an attack might be different, but then why would they be going to expect to be attacked?)


Well you could find out if they are packing to defend themselves, or packing to assault and kidnap you by simply refusing to go with them and see what they do next. I personally have never heard of forceful evacuation under threat of violence...it makes no logical sense, so I would be dubious.


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

AngieM2 said:


> Why would they be armed if just wanting to kindly help?
> )


Maybe because the sheriff's deputies always wear guns. They aren't going to take them off and leave them at home just because they mean no harm as they go around and knock on doors, telling folks to head out because the wild fire is getting close and the winds have picked up.

The gun and holster are part of their regular uniform.

If the National Guard comes around packing bazookas and machine pistols, maybe the space aliens aren't friendly.


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

AngieM2 said:


> Why would they be armed if just wanting to kindly help?
> (having arms available in case of an attack might be different, but then why would they be going to expect to be attacked?)


Angie, it goes both ways. Ask yourself this ..... why would they not be armed and why would they not expect to be attacked?


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

Perhaps you should go back and reread about what happened during the 'Katrina' aftermath.

Forcefully taking away a pistol from a little old lady is friendly. . .??. . .
. We are here to help you--now give us your protective gun........

And countless other examples of extreme abuse of the perceived power that those wearing 'badges' pulled on the helpless -Katrina- public....

So what / where is the difference to Angie's scene . . . . . . .?????


----------



## edjewcollins (Jun 20, 2003)

Wildfire_Jewel said:


> WWII - Ask the Asian US citizens that were rounded up and placed in camps. Many lost all of their property.


I was kinda thinking of the Boston Marathon bombing. Law enforcement was going door to door booting people out of their homes to search them for the terrorists. All the sheep just cooperated. I communicated to some people I know that I would have asked to see their warrant or told them to go {edited out} themselves. I was surprised at the push-back! I got a lot of "they were just trying to catch the bombers" and "it was for their safety". I guess it's fine if they asked, but they were not asking they were telling. I would have refused and told them that I would call them to come get the bodies if they came to my home. If they would have tried to force me out, one of us would have ended up at the morgue.


----------



## EasyDay (Aug 28, 2004)

edjewcollins said:


> I was kinda thinking of the Boston Marathon bombing. Law enforcement was going door to door booting people out of their homes to search them for the terrorists. All the sheep just cooperated. I communicated to some people I know that I would have asked to see their warrant or told them to go {edited out} themselves. I was surprised at the push-back! I got a lot of "they were just trying to catch the bombers" and "it was for their safety". I guess it's fine if they asked, but they were not asking they were telling. I would have refused and told them that I would call them to come get the bodies if they came to my home. If they would have tried to force me out, one of us would have ended up at the morgue.


Exactly! My first reaction to Martial Law being enacted in Boston, and all of the actions by LEO that you describe above, was to watch the reaction of the people who had their doors kicked in and were manhandled. Their SILENCE spoke louder to me than any words could say. 

BUT it gave me hope! ... hope that humanity's instinctual draw to "taking the path of least resistance" will keep the LEO busy with the "easy to intimidate" crowds, allowing the rest of us time to bug out or load all available magazines!


----------



## Joe Prepper (Jul 25, 2011)

My long rambling (forewarned) rant on this thought provoking subject:

If LE is "lawfully" dispatched to your residence with the orders to do "X", beyond simple reasoning, I believe your ability to individually physically resist (one family group etc) would be dangerously futile, and in unrighteous situations, maybe even what those giving the orders would want to happen. 

A few "I told you so's" by leaders to LEO's coupled with some real life experiences of public resistance resulting in physical danger can harden even the most reasonable constitutional mind. Just ask any Vietnam Veteran that saw ground action. It takes one old lady or 10 year old kid with an AK shooting at you to make you do things you would otherwise never do. Things change. Doesn't matter why you were there or who was right or wrong until the shooting stops. Until then, it usually matters only that "you" survived. Later though, you would see some thinning loyalties which leads me to my next part. 

Bending the OP's question a bit to discuss how LE or officials in power would bend civilians to do their will ...door to door and direct force by LEO's would not continue long term for many reasons only one of which I just discussed above. IMO, most LEo's and even military forces would only be willing to handle the most unruly rioting situations with moral clarity. If you want "a people" to do your will, you get their neighbors to make them...for their own good of course.

Example to think about: If you wanted the National ID Cards (that are currently a topic of hot debate) in almost every American's hands while things are still reasonably under control you have to, at least in the beginning, sell the idea of a better world with them. In this case.....the old "security" ruse. 

You put the threat out there in front of the masses, and then sell the idea of everyone having the ID's for their own security. Most of us on this forum know deep down it would not take much really. Terrorism, pandemic threat...heck most are unwittingly willing to let go of their freedoms to keep Mexicans on their side of the border. 

To guarantee compliance you require ID's for Job's,travel and monetary transactions (already a part of the proposed plan). Social security already requires electronic banking. There's your elders biggest reason for compliance. Same thing for Food assistance. In a Rule of Law time, but with a big enough real or perceivable threat you could reasonably get popular support to shut off municipal power and water supplies to communities until everyone registered on census, or on any county lists in that grid area has a registered ID. 

Even in rural areas I think many would have concerns. When your registered and ID'd neighbor has no power or water and you are the hold up......could you trust him or her not to come get you or at least turn you in. If they have kids that need medication or food, could you feed and medicate them...or blame them? Who would not take the ID to keep things moving along. If whole communities resisted...well, then they would likely to be painted as a potential threat for non compliance and dealt with since there is no obvious reason to resist. Federal funds cut off, travel into and out of non compliant areas restricted etc.

The bottom line is this. All you have to do is sell the idea of security (food,water, medical, physical) to the fearful masses and they will, in good conscious, act in ways that take away their own freedoms and yours. The sad truth is, just the idea of having those things in short supply might be enough to bend the will of our good nation. History shows us that goods that were in short supply and "rationed" were usually (and suspiciously) the things that particular region would be most upset about. Russia(tea Vodka), Ukraine(tomato paste fpr Borshch), Middle East(food scarce after Ramadan fast), Egypt(bread and beer), ...the US(fuel)..all lost their most "wanted" commodities during the times of rationing, ..usually due to delivery and not scarcity. This seems to fuel people resolve to do things and take notice of the politics of the day. I wonder what we would lose today to get our attention....internet probably. :happy2: 

*AND TO GET BACK ON TOPIC.... Here in the hurricane district a small local area was at first voluntarily evacuated. Those that wanted to evacuate had everyone else forced out (by vote) to insure their place would not be looted by those choosing to stay behind. As I recall, the idea was teased into the minds of locals by "officials concerned for the safety of all affected". So if officials came to relocate your family and your neighbors were already on the truck.... the officials would likely have public support to back their agenda. That's if anyone resisted....

Always lead the hungriest pig on the truck with the bucket first...the rest will follow expecting to get their share...even if they just ate. *









We have to hope that it never comes to that.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Good reasoning there Joe.


----------

