Preparedness for when

craigywv

good evening all been away in rl for few days just been reading all your posts good to see your all keeping wee and dandy. well my garden is waking up nicely potatoes peeking through and scallions too! been doing spring cleaning here also nothing beats emptying cupboards out, been t the dump every day this week, stillprepping away with bits and pieces adding to the store cupboard. finished doing a fiscal fast for a while so got freezers down to a better level.....in case electric went out , its more manageable now. that's a gorgeous baby picture and a lovely name too! I waiting on my sister she due any day soon its her first and I cant wait. well have a lovely weekend all. kids off school so its an eating fest here now manchild has put his orders in for buns, jelly, and cake ...........................and that's for breakfast! I shall do a bit of baking in morning but he can help too! night all xxx

Frugalsod

nuatha wrote: »

Thank you for the heads up.
I tried Googling info on this a few months back in relation to WW2 hoarding charges, without a lot of success. Anyone have information about what was considered hoarding then? I'm presuming that would be the model that any action is based on.

I agree that other people's choices on how they spend their money shouldn't impinge on my prudence - however we already have substantial examples of that prudence doesn't pay. Loss your job when you've serious savings, until the savings are reduced state help is restricted, need care due to illness, means tested based on savings, need to go into a home, ditto - and how you spend those savings can be questioned and if disapproved of then benefits restricted.

There's no reason to think the government would use any different form of logic regarding food stashes.
It may be due to a lack of imagination on my part, but I can imaging more SHTF scenarios that involve or are the result of government action that I can where government is not a factor. In a true EOTWAWKI, government won't have the resources to worry many folk at all - however those scenarios are a lot less likely to occur

(Wondering if I can pass large jars of beans and pulses off as decorative items )

I vaguely remember that the FBI regard more than a weeks supply of food at home as suspect. Though who knows what they will deem to be an illegal level? Though if you have a big enough garden you could consider burying food barrels under the azaleas and daffodils, just remember where it is. Though I suspect the governments first priority will be to stop looting, though if that was a serious problem the police will be armed by then. Public order will be widespread if there are widespread shortages. Though if you have been prepping for years your food spend will not attract attention. Though I think if you tried selling food you during a crisis that might be regarded as a criminal act.

As to causes I can think of many SHTF situations which do not involve government incompetence such as pandemic, asteroid impact, a referendum on exiting the EU, which will have so many repercussions that we barely know what to expect. What I do think are more likely are disruptions to gas and electricity. I can already cope with a total shut off of gas but electricity will be another matter.
Cooking will be difficult for many but wood burning stoves might be one solution.

nuatha

dandy-candy wrote: »

I have read about this a while ago. A woman was prosecuted for having something like 30lbs of sugar, hard to pass that off as your average use. I believe there were other things too, maybe tea?

Anything home bottled wouldn't be a problem as that's just preserving your own produce.

That would be me prosecuted.
I could go through that in a weekends jam making,

calicocat wrote: »

How do they know if you have a stock of stuff?....do they go round people's houses S'S style searching for it?

It depends on how and where you shop - it wouldn't be difficult to correlate loyalty card or online spends.

Frugalsod wrote: »

I vaguely remember that the FBI regard more than a weeks supply of food at home as suspect. Though who knows what they will deem to be an illegal level?

I suspect that a month would be considered the norm in the UK - though what would be thought of as excess is open to guess.

Though if you have a big enough garden you could consider burying food barrels under the azaleas and daffodils, just remember where it is. Though I suspect the governments first priority will be to stop looting, though if that was a serious problem the police will be armed by then. Public order will be widespread if there are widespread shortages. Though if you have been prepping for years your food spend will not attract attention. Though I think if you tried selling food you during a crisis that might be regarded as a criminal act.

Armed or not is not likely to make much difference.
Given relatively recent public disorder situations, looting has not been a priority for the police.
Selling food in a rationing situation is black marketing/profiteering and is usually considered a serious crime.

As to causes I can think of many SHTF situations which do not involve government incompetence such as pandemic, asteroid impact, a referendum on exiting the EU, which will have so many repercussions that we barely know what to expect. What I do think are more likely are disruptions to gas and electricity. I can already cope with a total shut off of gas but electricity will be another matter.
Cooking will be difficult for many but wood burning stoves might be one solution.

I can think of many such scenarios, but those I consider more likely involve or will be seriously complicated by government action - of those you mention, government action could seriously complicate any of them.

Widespread use of woodburners will bring its own problems, not least of which is insufficient forestry.

siegemode

jk0 wrote: »

I have been watching an interesting Italian 9/11 documentary today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU961SGps8g

Nearly two hours, but worth watching as it gives a slightly different slant on it to our Anglo-centric view.

Watched it today and then discovered another which is worth seeing. Have seen quite a few and they all seem to follow the same end conclusion, but all raise and answer different questions. This is 4 hrs but worth sticking with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dslF-hh90lg

calicocat

nuatha wrote: »

That would be me prosecuted.
I could go through that in a weekends jam making,



It depends on how and where you shop - it wouldn't be difficult to correlate loyalty card or online spends.


I suspect that a month would be considered the norm in the UK - though what would be thought of as excess is open to guess.

Armed or not is not likely to make much difference.
Given relatively recent public disorder situations, looting has not been a priority for the police.
Selling food in a rationing situation is black marketing/profiteering and is usually considered a serious crime.


I can think of many such scenarios, but those I consider more likely involve or will be seriously complicated by government action - of those you mention, government action could seriously complicate any of them.

Widespread use of woodburners will bring its own problems, not least of which is insufficient forestry.

Ah...well I don't do online shopping other than one-off purchases very rarely, and don't have loyalty cards I use often.....i am pretty much untraceable I think, and am about to have my name taken off 192.....if I get raided i'm probably in trouble though.

dandy-candy

calicocat wrote: »

How do they know if you have a stock of stuff?....do they go round people's houses S'S style searching for it?

I expect someone visiting happened to see it and grassed her up. Probably someone who hadn't managed to get hold of any sugar!

Frugalsod

dandy-candy wrote: »

I expect someone visiting happened to see it and grassed her up. Probably someone who hadn't managed to get hold of any sugar!

Many years ago my gran heard about the sugar shortage and the family stocked up on sugar cubes. She must have bought tons. So when the shortage hit the family had the only hotel with sugar and my gran would go out after every sitting and put a few sugar cubes in so that no one could get away with much. In the end the sugar shortage lasted only a few months but we never noticed as we had sugar cubes for years.

nuatha

calicocat wrote: »

Ah...well I don't do online shopping other than one-off purchases very rarely, and don't have loyalty cards I use often.....i am pretty much untraceable I think, and am about to have my name taken off 192.....if I get raided i'm probably in trouble though.

I've never had a loyalty card, much of my bulk purchases are done on a business account (among other things I've involvement in a hotel and a catering business). I tend to collect rather than have stuff delivered.
I was feeling smug until I remembered that I also shop at Costco and occasionally at Approved Foods, both of which specialise in bulks and have computerised tills. If I was in government and looking for preppers, both would be on my research lists.

A raid would be problematic, but as fair as I reasonably can I stay out of obvious notice.

armyknife

jk0 wrote: »

I have been watching an interesting Italian 9/11 documentary today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU961SGps8g

Nearly two hours, but worth watching as it gives a slightly different slant on it to our Anglo-centric view.

Theres seems a lot of intentional distortion in that video, for instance at about 9.40 they have a man saying this:

"We have been told by the very people who designed and built these towers, that they should have resisted the impacts of more than one airplane"

And as he speaks the last part of the sentence, this quote fades up on a black background:

"The building probably could sustain multiply impacts by jetliners"
Frank de Martini WTC construction manager


What impression does the make?

Actually he didn't have anything to do with the design and construction of the towers, he was the ongoing construction manager when the towers were hit, he'd gone to work there around 20 years After they'd been completed.


To my mind there seems a lot of playing fast and loose with quotes/chronologies on that video.

Perplexed_Pineapple

I haven't watched the video and probably won't (too long for me) but that seems to be right about Mr De Martini - I found a brief bio here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/01/national/portraits/POG-01DeMartini.html