I’ve been out visiting today to a local friend’s house. He lives in an old pub which has been converted into individual living spaces. Enough for about 20 people. The olde style floor plan and the layout means that there is a meandering corridor that leads to his door.
We were discussing the eventuality of a collapse and what it would mean as he is bugging in. No doubt of that. He lives pretty close to a large river and his long term plan is for him to bug out by boat. He is even planning to build the boat himself. In the meantime though we discussed how he would keep his head down and survive whilst on the outskirts of a busy housing estate. His room is not really defensible and being at the end of a corridor is not ideally placed for hiding from intruders. He believes that his neighbours would all leave and those that wouldn’t be able to would not have any stores at all. His plan is to just outlive them.
I actually think that there is a lot of potential in the situation once the others are gone because of the meandering corridors. There are several rooms that when evacuated could be sealed off by building a quick plasterboard wall and under cursory examination, for example someone just walking down the corridor should miss it. It could make the difference between life and death. I’ve suggested that he looks around and considers what he can seal off now. I suspect that even the owner doesn’t now about all these potential hidey holes and even if he does he is unlikely to visit the place to search them anyway after an event. This makes his risk more from predators and neighbours rather than the owner.
I’ve found that looking at his situation is easier than looking at my own. I can critically analyse his situation and see that his biggest risk is from his neighbours, those that don’t evacuate and that he has the potential for hiding out once the place is empty. There are also potential places for stores and a large back garden that could be used for growing food. It isn’t really overlooked but it is visible from a raised road although if the area was not planted in rows but randomly nobody would see the difference at that distance from it being overgrown. It also has a working area nearby that could be used to build his boat. It has several advantages that my place doesn’t have. His weakeness though is that he is not very advanced with his preps but he is working on them.
I would recommend that if you have someone you can trust you talk them through your plans and let them give you some feedback. It will give you a better feeling to know that you have not made an obvious gaffe. They will see things you have not thought of and may also see areas you can use to your advantage. You don’t have to accept what they say but it is always worthwhile getting feedback.
Only who you can trust though. That is very important. It may even be an idea to get someone in from far enough away you know they won’t come calling.
I don’t think I would want to discuss any plan with anyone else.
Now if it was just say general talk and the subject came up say “I wonder what I could do to fortify the place better against someone getting into the place would be okay as it would just come up. But not to have that in mind when you see your best chum.
The thing I would do is draw a (not to scale yet) drawing of the place, divide it up into sections and see what is needed section by section. Keep lists and/or take pictures of spots that are weak. Then work on each section at a time. If you find that fortifying one spot leads into another then address the whole thing at one time.
And take a day off of thinking about all of this. If you relieve your mind from the details of security you will look at it again and see if that is what is really needed, or can it be done more simply etc.?
Better yet give your neighbors a thrill by invading your own place. That should test the spots that need weak.
That last sentence was suposed to be that are weak and need work.
Ellen,
I understand that. That is why I emphasised trust.
The problem with raiding your own place is that you wouldn’t do what an intruder would do. You believe you know the weak spots and you would miss what you consider strong spots. If it was truly logic then generals would always have the best plan.
Look at the wars our leaders do. The war on drugs. Druggies are winning that war because they never do what is expected. The war on tax evasion is the same, they come out with new tactics all the time, it takes them months to think of them and drug lords/tax firms have avoidance plans in place before the ink is dry on the legislation.
I can understand you not wanting to explain your plans to a third party but you must therefore consider that they may be flawed.
I was responsible once for the computer DR plans in a company. We dry ran them several times on paper and everything worked. I talked the MD into trying it for real and they failed. Not because the computers were not up and running but because the users kept all their contact data on paper. They couldn’t get near them because we had locked the doors to simulate the building burning down. A valuable lesson.