Apocalyptic Reminder

Because of a storm that tore through I just went 18 hours without electricity. That's good though; you need to be reminded occasionally that the world is going to suck after the lights go out.

People with guns collection # 47

"RIOTS CHICAGO - APRIL - 1968 - Private policeman standing behind gate in front of a store he was hired to protect. He said he stood guard all night with his .38 cal. pistol in hand and chased away several attempts by people to loot store."

This photo brings up an interesting question, one that certainly doesn't have any easy answer. I believe that an overwhelming majority of my fellow citizens would agree that you have the right to defend your life with deadly force. But do you have any such right when defending your property? Please note I'm speaking here of ethics, not the law, which would vary greatly depending where you live. Do you have a right to defend your property? Always. Never. Maybe, depending on the circumstances. This is where the lines get blurry. I suspect that if you asked ten different people, even ten different gun owners, you would get as many varied answers. It's a tough question that many people don't even want to consider. I've thought about it and I don't really have a definitive answer myself. I'm sure many would say no, never, under any circumstances. You don't have any right to kill someone over "stuff." I would imagine that most people wouldn't shoot someone trying to steal their TV or car. But what about someone trying to burn down your house? Could you watch and do nothing as somebody destroyed everything that you spent a lifetime working for? Could you stand by while you were made penniless and homeless? Like I said, there are no easy answers here. I only bring it up because I believe it's a question that every American needs to ask themselves. It's better to think about it now, when you can do it calmly and rationally, rather than later when you might not have that luxury.

Flip the switch!

Yesterday a storm came through my region of the country leaving numerous downed trees and communities without power before it was quickly gone again. In Indiana some people even lost their lives when a concert stage collapsed. But for me and my neighborhood it was nothing more than an annoyance, 23 hours without modern conveniences just as a reminder that life after electricity is really going to suck.

Good Reading

Well, not "good" but you might want to read THIS if you're worried about the future of this nation. Thanks to SurvivalBlog for the link.

Movie Reviews - Testament

It's been over twenty five years since I watched Testament (1983) so when I picked it up recently on DVD I had forgot just how truly awful this movie is, not awful bad, awful dreadful. Testament is actually a great film and you will find yourself deeply moved by its simple story. The story of a loving mother (Jane Alexander) and her efforts to keep her family together and alive after a nuclear war. In the film her small community is downwind of a large city that was hit with the bomb. The father leaves for work the morning of the attack and never returns and the mother is left to care for her family alone. Their small town was "lucky" in that they didn't experience the immediate effects of a nuclear detonation. But very soon the residents discover that they weren't as fortunate as they thought. Now instead of a quick death they all face a slow one through radiation poisoning and starvation. This is the apocalypse in all its horrible reality without Hollywood gloss. No explosions, no exciting action, no dramatic finale, no big hero or villain, just normal people, people slowly dying and knowing that there's nothing that they can do about it but try to survive another day. This is a difficult movie to watch but it does pull off an amazing feat. This is a film that somehow manages to be both beautiful and ugly at the same time, something you wouldn't think possible. No, Testament is not a "fun" movie, but it is a movie that should be seen.

Movie Reviews - Carriers

The next movie on my Apocalyptic must see list was Carriers and I thought it was a very good one, not perfect but entertaining, and even thought provoking at times. Carriers is about four twenty somethings (2 brothers and their girlfriends) trying to survive during a massive viral outbreak that has killed most of the population. The group is trying to make their way to a safe area (an old childhood haunt of the brothers) while avoiding close contact with anyone they meet. You see the virus that has wiped out most of the nation is very contagious, special steps or "the rules" must be strictly followed if a person is to survive. Within minutes of telling the audience these rules the group starts breaking them all while knowing that doing so could kill them all. And that story point brings up a very good question for anyone wanting to really think about it. Could you follow "the rules" strictly in a situation like this, where breaking them and having any kind of human compassion or empathy could get you or your entire group killed? Could you condemn innocent people to death to save yourself? I think I know how the average person would answer but would it be a truthful answer or just self-delusion? It is a good plot point and it makes for some interesting contemplation if you're up to it. I won't really go much into the story; I'll let you discover that on your own. I think that most viewers would like Carriers simply as entertainment and you might even find yourself asking serious questions about how "civilized" we would be once the facade of civilization comes off.

Books - How To Survive The End Of The World As We Know It

After reading How To Survive The End Of The World As We Know It by author and founder of survivalblog.com James Wesley, Rawles I must say that this book is very informative and scary. Scary when you realize just how under prepared you are if something really bad does happen...