[exodus]

To: exodus
"The simple fact is, most of New Orleans is below sea level. They had five days warning that a hurricane was coming with 160 m.p.h. winds. To stay in the path of such a thing is begging for death and disaster. Usually, these things are handled by the mayor and governor - who have proven incapable. This thing should have hit a ghost town ..."
*********************************************

Agreed, five days warning is plenty of time, if you have money and a place to go.

You'd think that most people would, even without money, leave the area, but poor folks aren't used to thinking that way. They wouldn't see it as a choice between 'broke and alive somewhere safe' or the chance of 'still broke and in an unsafe disaster area.'

They would think that their best interests would be served by riding out the storm, and counting on government or charitable organizations to help them if things got too out of hand. Poor folks don't have the resources to take action based upon what 'might' happen.

In this case it's plain that they made a bad call, but bad choices do not negate their Right to protect themselves after the fact.

Taking that bus was the correct decision.

[supercat]

You'd think that most people would, even without money, leave the area, but poor folks aren't used to thinking that way. They wouldn't see it as a choice between 'broke and alive somewhere safe' or the chance of 'still broke and in an unsafe disaster area.'

Another thing to consider is that leaving was a guarantee that they would lose everything (including their pets, if they had no way to leave with them) even if the storm wasn't as severe as expected. Given that survival odds were pretty good for those who stayed, it's not hard to see how some people might view such a decision as a rational one.

Providing a way for people to leave with pets, and re-instilling confidence in people that LOOTERS WILL BE SHOT would probably do much to encourage people to leave while it's easy to do so.