House as fortress

First @ seenmyshare, great link! Very informative. A little off topic, but I love the Dane in your avatar. I have a Great Dane, and they are the best dog on earth. Truly the "apollo" of dogs. As such they would make an awesome asset to any survival plan. Gentle as a lamb with the family, but brutal as hell to a violent intruder. Just as feared as a 12 guage. Mine is 42" at the withers 155#, and could take down a grown man little effort. Yet be gentle, and nanny-like with my small children. God I love my Dane.

Second point: The 12 guage would be a must have if you plan to stay home, and defend from goblins. I would purchase the shot gun first, and a .22 second. The 12 guage is unbelievabley versatile. You can buy slugs that will go through a motor block, or bird shot that will leave meat on small game. Their are even shells designed to take out door hinges. Rubber less-than-lethals if you just don't want to make a huge mess, and want the perp to leave you alone long enough to bug out etc.... They can be purchased at very reasonable prices. $300 will get you a decent 7 shot pump, a good choice for home defense. The shells are affordable, and even when ammo got scarce last year you could still get shot gun shells. A shot gun's operation is simple, and straight forward, but I would get very familiar with it at a range anyway. Plus the intimidation factor. A shot from a 9mm, or even .45 ACP might be survivable, or you might miss. A 12 guage with heavy shot, or buck shot is most likely not going to miss, or be survivable. It's pretty much gauranteed death, and goblins know it. That's why just the sound of the action loading a shell stops most in their tracks, and makes the blood run cold. If you could only have, or afford 1 gun make it a pump action 12 guage with a minimum 5 round capacity more is better.

The .22 would be for hunting primarily, and defense only as a last resort. I like the Remington 597 from personal experience, but the Ruger 10-22 is probably just as good. The good points have already been made.

I know a lot of people like handguns. So do I, and I own many. They do what they are designed to do well. They are designed to provide portable light weight protection. However, even a .44 magnum doesn't have the stopping power of a .243, or 7.62x39 rifle. My third purchase as far as firearms would be one of the affore mentioned calibres. Probably the soviet 7.62 since budget is an issue. You don't see infantry marching into battle pistol in hand. It's always a long gun. A marine buddy of mine said his side arm was to use on himself when his rifle ran out of ammo.

Last on the guns list would be pistols. They are very useful if you need to travel light, and quick, and possibly in a populated place where concealement is needed, and you don't want to be unarmed. It would only be used to buy time to get the heck out of dodge, and to relative safety, or to access a bigger gun. (see 12 guage.) Plus the learning curve for using a pistol with acumen is steeper than a long gun due to the short sight distance, and inherent operational complexity. People blasting it out with pistols, and winning the day against overwhelming odds only happens in the movies. When you get in a fire fight against long guns especially semi-automatics with a pistol it' s the same as bringing a knife to a gun fight, you're probably gonna loose. A rifle round to a limb usually devastates the limb, and you can easily die of blood loss. Most pistol rounds to a limb are survivable unless it hits a major artery, or is a very large hand gun. (see .44 Mag) In a SHTF scenario most of the bad guys won't be carrying big artillery though. It simply weighs too much, and they are very expensive to feed. They would get pitched for smaller arms quickly.

I would also not spend too much time/money in aquiring firearms after the purchase of your initial main defense weapon (the 12 guage). I would acquire my water, and food, and other necessities first then start thinking about guns again. Guns are fun, but they get really expensive really quick(preaching to myself here), and it wouldn't do much good to die of dehydration, or starvation with an arsenal in your hands.

During the night, use night vision goggles to cruise your local area, looking for dead bodies, drag these back to your fort. Then you want to mutilate these corpses like really bad and string them up all over your perimeter as a warning.

These bodies may also serve as an emergency food supply.

Do this and the rest of your deterrents will not be necessary. You can focus on other things.

reply to post by rajaten


Did I go too far with that one?

Originally posted by xpert11
reply to post by amazing

 

Oh dear the fortress concept is not very wise . Your attackers could just simply choose to starve you out like that you to happen in the days of castles and bow and arrows . Where there is nothing wrong with having a base of operation you need to secure it when you are not there . A flexible doctrine build around mobility is a smarter option by far sheez .

Cheers xpert11.

Starve me out? Are they wanting to move in or do they want the food and supplies?
If the attackers are after food and supplies why would they sit and wait for you to use up your food and supplies? How long do they sit in your front yard? A week? 2 months? A year? What if I have 2 years of food put away? Once it is gone all that leaves is a house and there are a lot of those around that will be much easier pickings. I also think a short term disaster is much more likely than teotwawki. That makes the starve out scenario even less likely.
Your example of knights and castles isn't really relevant. Opposing forces in that situation wanted the death of the lord of the keep which meant a gain of land and peasants. They were not after the supplies within the keep.

Originally posted by Sideband
Are they wanting to move in or do they want the food and supplies?

It could be either or they may just want to get rid of you .

If the attackers are after food and supplies why would they sit and wait for you to use up your food and supplies?

Well makes you think that you will know the enemy exact intentions and motives ?
In that case they would do a Recce and pin point any weakness and wait for you to fall asleep .

How long do they sit in your front yard?

They would surround you for how ever long it takes providing they have the patience , the desire to do so and a superior supply chain .

What if I have 2 years of food put away?

Well aside from putting all your eggs in one basket you would just be painting a giant target on your back .

Once it is gone all that leaves is a house and there are a lot of those around that will be much easier pickings.

Well if you become predictable or you don't create any diversions or feed your enemy disinfo then you aren't playing things smart . Just look at how insurgents travel .

Your example of knights and castles isn't really relevant.

The sort of tactics or strategy I mentioned is almost as old as warfare itself .

They were not after the supplies within the keep.

You are assuming that is the enemy only intend . Assumptions are the mother of all dangers .

People are right about trying to make an impenetrable fortress. It's a bad idea.

1) You are instantly broadcasting that you HAVE supplies.

2) Your home is connected to roadways which means it's easy to find. You basically have a big arrow pointing everyone to your location.

The key is going to be making it look like you have nothing. In case that doesn't work and there is a total breakdown of society for extended periods of time, your location needs to be set up like this:

You need early warning/detection set up. You need a good vantage point. Whoever controls the high ground ALWAYS has the advantage. Even today this holds true. The areas around you need to be reasonably clear in order to force those attacking to come out into the open for a lengthy distance. Vehicles, landscaping, sheds, all instantly become cover for those attacking.

Once your perimeter is breached, you have to have an easy path for the attackers to take. The benefit in this, is that you almost guarantee that they will approach using this path. That way, you almost certainly turn a 360 degree attack into a linear one. All your hostile targets are then in one line of sight. This path needs to constrict and funnel them with obstacles to slow them down on the way. Even wire set waist high is enough to slow their movement. Once in a funnel, you could also set it up as a trap.

This is about the best you can do. You'll never have an impenetrable location. The key is to give them ONE blatantly easier entry path. It makes them choose the attack path that you set up and are prepared for. In a pinch, if that ends up breached too, have a retreat route up a stairwell if at all possible. One person at the top of stairs can block those trying to come up for a long time. Ask anyone with tactical home entry and they will tell you going up stairs is by far the most dangerous part of it.

For my money though, I'm going with the nomadic approach. Find a body of water with a huge area of forest on it, and you'll have your best bet for survival. Remember, fish are plentiful and fishing is silent. Fish can be eaten raw if you can't make a fire.

First, I don't accept your premise... I don't know of anyone...and I really mean I don't know of anyone...that has 2 trucks, one of the two being a 4x4..and two dogs, and lives 30 minutes from town.... that does NOT own a gun.

Secondly, if you own two dogs, have two trucks, live 30 minutes from town.... you have at least one out building...probably two... maybe even a small barn. Oh, and where's the bass boat? And the 4wheeler?

On a more serious note.... well, I was being serious then, too. Anyway, if you don't have a firearm... first purchase is a firearm, Preferably a Mossberg 12 ga. pump...cheap, effective. Then maybe a .30-06 of some sort for long distance shooting and hunting.

Next, stock up on food... basic supplies... you know the list by now. Battery radio...flashlights and what not....

Hey, did these imaginary people just move to the country, cause they REALLY would already have all this stuff? I really don't kbnow anyone that doesn't unless they just moved here from out of state. I mean really, every boy and girl that ever dreamed of living 30 minutes from town already has a gun, and already hunts, has camo...a 4 wheeler, ... are there really people that live that far out and don't have guns and put up food? They must be tree hugging liberals from California or Vermont....

The house as a fortress is useless, it should be a base of operations and a safe haven...nothing more. Mobility....that is the key. A secondary havebn hidden away about 100 yards away within sight of the home is good.... the house is the decoy.

one thing i rarely come across in any discussion is facing attackers. most posters comment
on firearms which we in the uk do not have the luxury to own. i have considered many
scenarios over the years. it is preferable to be away from populations but the final
decision is down to the individual whether to stay at home or go. i have considered family, friends
who are disabled and elderly. who will look after them when or if the system goes to rat#?
my take on this is eventually tribes will form with all individuals mucking in to the best
of their abilities. safety in numbers is the key to survival in a wider context. back to my main
point. in a broken down system where the rule of law has ceased to exist all interested
individuals will have to face the fact that they will eventually may have to resort to extreme
violence in order to either protect themselves and others.my preferred weapon in the event of
this situation cropping up would be a good felling axe. you could learn to use this tool in your
own time in a yard or garden. it is easy to carry and only needs sharpening. due to it's length
it could be a useful 'stay away from me 'weapon. for cqb i would also carry hand weapons. a good wire
brush would also be an excellent deterrent to attacking animals. the nose of an attacking dog
is very sensitive and a whack across the nose will make the pooch think twice about continuing
an attack. hope this makes sense to all those over the pond packing heat!
f

reply to post by AlreadyGone


Not to derail the topic, but to add to your suggestions about guns, the Mossberg 500 and the Remington 870 are both equally popular. The only major difference is the safety position. Mossberg has the universal left/right hand safety and the Remington has a right handers push button safety. 30-06 is good too, preferable over any other round comparable due to price/round being cheaper. 30 30s hold a great deal of appeal, but the rounds cost a good deal more.

The thing though is range. I don't plan on having a defense situation arise outside of 30 yards maybe 50. If your target is 100 yards away, it's an offensive shoot. So, for defense I would want 2 weapons to feel comfortable. 12 ga pump and .22 LR Marlin rifle.

Back on topic!

To those in the UK, remember a weapon doesn't have to go bang. You can booby trap your home with all sorts of fun and nasty things that are just as effective. =)

reply to post by rajaten
This may work for you but I will not be desecrating dead bodies. I also will not be eating people. If the S gets that bad I will be passing with the rest of the world. JMNSHO

This bug's me the most being about being a survivalist.
In the home I have a 12ga with "00" buckshot. What bug's
me; I believe in GOD, and do not want to stand before judgment.
That I shot someone because he was hungry. Or could be some drunk
drugged up kid in a blackout state. What I am thinking about getting
is some kind of shot gun shells that are not deadly. I heard some home
owners put rock salt in their shells. Any ideals?

People talk bad about what happen with Katrina. FEMA bring in trailers,
some people got rent money for over a year. All we heard from MSM was nothing
good. In times of trouble Americans come together, and rebuild, is what we do
best.

reply to post by xpert11

The more thought I give your opinions, the less relevant they are. You accuse me of making assumptions about the motives of an imaginary army with equally imaginary supply lines, while you make assumptions of my situation without knowing anything about it. I could live in an old missle silo, a cave or a cardboard box. I might even be living in a barracks in Ft. Hood You don't know. One thing that is certain is that your opinion against making your home your final destination, is not one size fits all. I have chosen where to live and have taken into consideration a lot of factors, all of which I determined I could accept. I have a secondary location a bit over 200 miles from here if this location were to become uninhabitable, but travel poses its own risks.

I always thought when TSHTF (Major, ie roving bands of looters, no reconstruction...Say extinction level event or complete and utter collapse of the US) a HUGE problem for survival would be woodfire smoke. Any looter/cannibal/gov't enforcer would see and home in on a smoke plume. That and the smell. Fresh smoke would draw in the parasites if you know what I mean.

What solutions are there to disperse campfire smoke or minimize it? Are there non-smoke heating and cooking options for the long term? (Of course canister stoves/propane, but that will run out relatively quick.)

Because in preparing for TSHTF, knowing any tricks in this department might keep more of us alive past the hardest period of a culture changing event.

reply to post by blamethegreys


I agree with you about the cooking issues.

I prefer LPG, since there is no smoke. Still, in a survival situation, the smell of food is just as tell-tale. On the other hand, there will be a lot more fires burning in that situation, and so it will be much more acceptable.

picture a city of 100k, with no heat. Yep, there's be about 15k worth of fires burning around town.....

reply to post by 19rn50


Most on-line ammo stores carry rubber "less-than-lethal" rounds. Caveat: at close range they can still kill! They are "less-than" lethal, but still potentially lethal. They hurt worse than actually getting shot with lead. I would load the first 1 or 2 rounds in LTLs, and then put the last 4 or 5 00 buck. If the rubber rounds fail to get their attention you need to stop worrying about impressing them, and just stop them cold.

Fire smoke can be minimized by picking the right wood - low creosote and using a Dakota fire pit.

About the non lethal rounds, a 12 gauge has the most variety of uses in the rounds. They make blanks, flame throwing shells, roman candle like shells, rubber bean bag shells, and the coolest of all to me, pepper spray shells.

Originally posted by amazing
The premise is that the SHTF and you are in a semi urban country area, meaning 30 minutes away from Urban Center ..small town. You have a two story house with yard and fence. Two car garage, no out buildings. 2 weeks worth of food, two dogs, two trucks, one is four wheel drive. No weapons. Normal camping gear-tents, sleeping bags etc. Modest work bench with standard hand tools and garden tools. Modest home library.

1. First issue is that the S might not HTF.
2. Second issue is Money. Preparing must be on the cheap.

What are your first preparation steps? What is the most important thing? How do you prepare without going overboard?

It all sounds ok except for no self respecting american that lives out in the woods / rural area like this wouldn't have a gun or 2.
1) food
2) water / windmill with working pump...pumping water
3) generator with 20+ gal of fuel
4) gun(s) and ammo

out in the country where I am from we all have these things....ALWAYS

Again, a house should not be a fortress but a safe haven or a temporary base of operations...a secondary/primary residence should be established about 100 yrds away...but with in sight of the house. The house then becomes a decoy.

The actual base camp/ haven should be in a bottom or holler as we call them. It can be constructed fairly well and then covered with a layer of logs/mud/leaves as camoflage...the smoke....use an old boot legger trick... run a flue or smoke vent pipe up and away from the camp, BUT under the ground. The smoke comes up away from the actual fire.

Alwayts enter the area of the camp from a different point so as not to make an unnatural path...

reply to post by amazing


I have read a lot of the comments posted on this tread and some are good some aren't..in my opinion...

1) second floor with all your stuff...
2) take out stairway to upstairs where your staying
3) throw trash around to make it looked abandoned..but board up the area your in??? on second floor?
4) cut hole in garage roof and have battery disconnected and no fuel in truck???

ok not to offend those that responded but think of this....

1) A fire will burn you out and be to big to handle real fast when you cannot stop it at the source right away...it takes awhile to burn through one floor to another but when it climbs up to do it...its to big even for a fire truck with 1000 gallons of water to completely put out!!!
2) How do you get out if the stairs steps are removed?...jump down with all your gear on? oh throw it down to the ground where the bad guys are???? then you come down...ok
3) The trash will make them come have a look see and when the 2nd floor is boared up that makes them more interested in...WHATS UP THERE? then stairs are removed too...look out they are going to have a look at whats there!!
4) hooking up a battery and filling truck with gas...where is gas? upstairs? refer to #1...how long does it take to fill up truck with gas jugs? 5-10 minutes + hooking up battery???....you wanna stand there that long and be getting shot at...all the bad guys have guns you have to assume for your safety.

In a shtf a lot of people will have rifles, and pistols...rifles are good out to 300-500 yards some farther than others...pistols are to about 50-75 max for the most part...if the guys are hid, will you see them 500 yards away?
Walls are not bullet proof...plywood and 2x4's and drywall...even your bed and dressers in front of the walls will only slowdown bullets and you will have debris from the wood fling everywhere in all direction...

Not to bust on anyones bubble but in my opinion you should think about what you really want to accomplish and think like the enemy...put yourself in there shoes and look at it from there point of view...

Best of luck to you.

I agree with saltdog, and would add that the REAL survival scenario will only last about 3 weeks.

Most US cities don't have three weeks of food in them.

So you can do the math and see where it points. If you can survive the first week of true mayhem and bloodletting, I expect that sanity will restore itself pretty quick, even if the bull market doesn't begin for another decade or so.

The exception, nasty as it is, would be a situation like Germany after the 1918 surrender. That is a long-slow slide into a bloodbath that accelerated over a period of 5 years.

In that sort of scenario, you've got bands of veterans roaming the countryside, setting up roadblocks and "taxing" the locals, while communists in the urban centers use arson and wildcat strikes to force a revolution. The weak government and foreign interference foster the formation of private mercenary armies in the pay of various warlords. Meanwhile, runaway inflation starves the unemployed half of the population.

Then the populace begins to clamor for a "strong central leader who will impose law and order."

That sort of thing is fairly difficult to survive, even with a fortress the size of Great Britain.