Posted on 05/01/2018 11:06:18 AM PDT by jonascord
As gun policy discussions unfold in the wake of mass shooter incidents, they routinely end in three buckets. Theres the tyranny can never happen here bucket, which the left has mostly abdicated in the wake of Trump winning after they called (and still call) him a tyrant. Theres the you cant fight the army with small arms bucket, which is increasingly unsound given our ongoing decade-and-a-half war with Afghani tribal goat herders. And theres the what the hell do you need an AR-15 for anyway? bucket, which, by its very language, eschews a fundamental lack of understanding of what those people are thinking.
Skipping to the last paragraph.
When our semiannual mass shooter culture war erupts after the latest round of media Handwaving Freakoutery, it always seems to focus on rifles. Most recently, we had some guy cut his own AR-15 in half on YouTube, to thunderous applause. Dont mischaracterize my position. If Mr. Pappalardo thought that he might be prone to murdering someone with his rifle, or more statistically likely purposely killing himself with it, then he should absolutely sell or destroy it. But if he isnt going to do either of those things, all he must do to ensure it doesnt hurt anyone is not shoot anyone with it. He could leave it in his attic with a couple of cans of ammunition, just in case something horrible does transpire where he might actually need it. There are certain things in the world youd rather have and not need, than need and not have. And paramount among those things, given the state of the modern human condition, is a rifle.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
I am not a prepper. But I know a few. Some of the ones I do know are smart. They may not be doing as deep an analysis as I present here, on a mathematical level, but the smart ones are definitely doing it at a subconscious level. If you want to understand the perspectives of others, as everyone in my opinion should strive to do, then you would do well to read to the end of this article. To get where were going, we will need to discuss the general framework of disaster mathematics. Stormwater Hydrology and the Mathematics of Unlikely Events.
Im not a writer by trade. Im a stormwater hydrologist, and in my opinion, a pretty good one. Hydrology is the science of tracking water as it moves through the water cycle, from ocean evaporation through cloud formation, precipitation, groundwater infiltration, runoff, evapotranspiration, riverine hydraulics, and the time series behavior of reservoirs. It is a deep and fascinating field, but one of its most relevant applications to our lives is delineating floodplain boundaries.
To determine a floodplain boundary, we first identify a storm event that concerns us. We use historical rainfall data and some statistical magic to calculate the worst storm event a place is likely to experience in a 100-year time span, probabilistically speaking, and we call that the 100-year storm. Theres a push in the field to quit calling it that, because it confuses the muggles, so now we often say something like the storm which has a 1% chance of happening in any given year. Then we take that rainfall data, judiciously apply more math, and turn it into a flow rate in a river. Then we do hydraulics (more math) to determine how deep the river will have to be to carry that much water, and we draw a line on a map.
You should have seen this line, if youve ever bought a house near a floodplain. If you bought a house near a floodplain and were not shown this line, contact me professionally to ensure you didnt make a terrible mistake.
We dont buy houses in the floodplain if we can help it, because we are risk averse, even though the chance of it flooding in any given year is only 1%. Why? We will live in the house longer than one year. Over the 30-year life of a mortgage, the chance of the house flooding at least once vastly exceeds 1%, because every year is another roll of the dice. Its not cumulative, though. The mathematics for back-calculating the odds is called a Bernoulli Process. Heres what it looks like:
Lets quickly walk through this. The chance of flooding, P(F), is 1%, or 0.01. The chance of not flooding, which we notate P(F), is 100%-1%, or 99%, or 0.99. To see the chance you dont flood two years in a row, you would have to not-flood the first year, and then not-flood the second year, so you multiply the two probabilities together, and get 0.9801. The chance of not-flooding 30 years in a row is calculated by multiplying the chance of not flooding with itself, over and over, 30 times, which is a power relationship. P(F)³⁰. Thats 0.7397 chance of 30 consecutive years of no flood, which means a 26% chance of at least one flood.
And then your mortgage broker doesnt give you your thirty-year fixed rate loan, because a 26% chance of a disaster is a big chance, when were talking about disasters. Now lets talk about a bigger, nastier disaster than a flood.
Prepper Math
Theres a common misconception in the media about the eventuality for which the preppers are exactly prepping. Thats because theyre a diverse group, and prep for many different things. No, they arent planning for a revolution to overthrow the government. (Most of them, anyway.) Mostly theyre planning to keep themselves and their families safe while someone else tries to overthrow the government. That, or zombies. (More on zombies below.)
While we dont have any good sources of data on how often zombies take over the world, we definitely have good sources of data on when the group of people on the piece of dirt we currently call the USA attempt to overthrow the ruling government. Its happened twice since colonization. The first one, the American Revolution, succeeded. The second one, the Civil War, failed. But they are both qualifying events. Now we can do math.
Stepping through this, the average year for colony establishment is 1678, which is 340 years ago. Two qualifying events in 340 years is a 0.5882% annual chance of nationwide violent revolution against the ruling government. Do the same math as we did above with the floodplains, in precisely the same way, and we see a 37% chance that any American of average life expectancy will experience at least one nationwide violent revolution.
This is a bigger chance than your floodplain-bound home flooding during your mortgage.
Its noticeably bigger.
Following the same procedure, we can see that even over an 18-year span we have a 10% chance of violent revolution, which is an interesting thought experiment to entertain before you have kids. Its also important to note that a violent nation-state transition doesnt just affect people who live in a floodplain. It affects everyone stuck in the middle. Especially the poor and defenseless.
But Youre Cheating
Am I? Two instances in 340 years is not a great data pool to work with, I will grant, but if you take a grab sample of other countries around the world youll see this could be much worse. Since our 1678 benchmark, Russia has had a two world wars, a civil war, a revolution, and at least half a dozen uprisings, depending on how you want to count them. Depending on when you start the clock, France had a 30-year war, a seven-year war, a particularly nasty revolution, a counter-revolution, that Napoleon thing, and a couple of world wars tacked on the end. China, North Korea, Vietnam, and basically most of the Pacific Rim has had some flavor of violent revolution in the last 100 years, sometimes more than one. With Africa, its hard to even conceive where to start and end the data points. Most Central and South American countries have had significant qualifying events in the time span. And honestly, if we were to widen our analysis to not only include nationwide violent civil wars, but also instances of slavery, internment, and taking of native lands, our own numbers go way up.
Or we could look at a modern snapshot. Counting places like the Vatican, we have 195 countries on the planet today. Somalia is basically in perpetual war, Syria is a hot mess with no signs of mitigation any time soon, Iraq is sketchy, Afghanistan has been in some flavor of civil war or occupation my entire life outside the salad days of the Taliban, and Libya is in such deep throes of anarchy that theyve reinvented the African slave trade. Venezuela. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict may be a qualifying event depending on how you define it. And again, Africa is hard to even conceive of where to start. Spitballing, perhaps 3% of the nations in the modern world are in some version of violent revolt against the ruling government, some worse than others. Theres at least some case to be made that our 0.5% annual chance estimate may be low, if were looking at comps.
Or we could look at a broader historical brush. Since the fall of Constantinople in 1453, there have been 465 sovereign nations which no longer exist, and that doesnt even count colonies, secessionist states, or annexed countries. Even if we presume that half of these nation-state transitions were peaceful, which is probably a vast over-estimation, thats still an average of one violent state transition every 2.43 years.
If we look at raw dialectic alone, we reach dismal conclusions. Do you think the United States will exist forever and until the end of time? Clearly any reasonable answer must be no. So at that point, were not talking if, but when. If you dont believe my presumed probability, cook up your own, based on whatever givens and data pool youd like, and plug it in. The equations are right up there. Steelman my argument in whatever way you like, and the answer will still probably scare you.
Eyes on the Horizon
In 2010, 8.5 million tourists visited Syria, accounting for 14% of their entire GDP. Eight years later, they have almost half a million dead citizens, and ten million more displaced into Europe. They didnt see this coming, because if they did, they would have fled sooner. Nobody notices the signs of impending doom unless theyre looking carefully.
Further, the elites of a nation rarely take it on the chin. They can hop on a plane. The poor, disenfranchised, and defenseless experience the preponderance of the suffering, violence, and death. Theyre the ones that should be worried.
Pretend youre someone with your eyes on the horizon. What would you be looking for, exactly? Increasing partisanship. Civil disorder. Coup rhetoric. A widening wealth gap. A further entrenching oligarchy. Dysfunctional governance. The rise of violent extremist ideologies such as Nazism and Communism. Violent street protests. People marching with masks and dressing like the Italian Blackshirts. Attempts at large scale political assassination. Any one of those might not necessarily be the canary in the coal mine, but all of them in aggregate might be alarming to someone with their eyes on the horizon. Someone with disproportionate faith in the state is naturally inclined to disregard these sorts of events as a cognitive bias, while someone with little faith in the state might take these signs to mean they should buy a few more boxes of ammunition. Prepping is Just Disaster Planning
But if one of these things happens, youre screwed anyway! Well, sure. The point of disaster planning for a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, or wildfire, is not to be not-screwed. Its to be notably less screwed. Ready.gov is the central point for information about family disaster preparedness planning here in the US. They list a wide range of things they think you might want to prepare for. Chief among these is flooding, which is my field, but they also list many other things an alarmist might include in their family disaster preparedness plan, from volcanoes and tsunamis to space debris, nukes, and terrorist dirty bombs. Violent nation-state transition doesnt make the list, though, because the list was compiled by the government. But the best one to prepare for, in my opinion, is zombies.
The zombie apocalypse is obviously pure fiction, but it has an allure to a few tongue-in-cheek preppers because of its functional completeness. If you are prepared for zombies, you are literally prepared for anything. The key fixture of zombie preparedness is a fundamental understanding of what happens when our systems of economics, governance, and civil infrastructure fail. Theres a great one going on right now in Venezuela, with people eating rats and dogs, incapable of trading in the local currency, and a general humanitarian disaster associated with descent into anarchy. No class of person is more capable of riding out a situation like that than a well-provisioned zombie prepper. Various fixtures of zombie prepping include:
Food stockpiles
Access to clean (or cleanable) water
Shelter that exists away from the zombies (a.k.a. other citizens)
Subsistence agriculture
Medicinal supplies
A way to defend items 15. In modern terms, that means firearms. Rifles in particular.
Optional: Escape method. Sailboats rank highly on any objective list here.
For the ethical zombie prepper, firearms are a relatively small piece of this overall disaster plan, but a necessary one. For an unethical zombie prepper, firearms may be all they need, if they can find someone else from whom to steal.
The Bosnian War is a great test case for this, and many firsthand experiences have been chronicled since, about how prepper-minded people were the likeliest to survive.
And its not just tin foil hat equipped right wingers thinking about this stuff. Theres a widely reported trend of Silicon Valley billionaires building apocalypse bunkers, as many as 50% according to Steve Huffman, the guy who founded Reddit. Yishan Wong, another former Reddit CEO, goes through a conceptual ROI analysis with The New Yorker.
Yishan Wong, an early Facebook employee, was the C.E.O. of Reddit from 2012 to 2014. He, too, had eye surgery for survival purposes, eliminating his dependence, as he put it, on a nonsustainable external aid for perfect vision. In an e-mail, Wong told me, Most people just assume improbable events dont happen, but technical people tend to view risk very mathematically. He continued, The tech preppers do not necessarily think a collapse is likely. They consider it a remote event, but one with a very severe downside, so, given how much money they have, spending a fraction of their net worth to hedge against this . . . is a logical thing to do.
And its not just the techies. A lot of folks in Hollywood are thinking the same thing. Its big business out there.
Gary Lynch, GM at Rising S Bunkers, a Texas-based company that specializes in underground bunkers and services scores of Los Angeles residences, says that sales at the most upscale end of the market mainly to actors, pro athletes and politicians (who require signed NDAs) have increased 700 percent this year compared with 2015, and overall sales have risen 150 percent.
So thats another canary in the coal mine for the tin foil hat right winger you have a class of people who are vehemently demanding confiscation of rifles in the public sphere, while some of them are secretly building underground fortresses in the private sphere.
Buy another box of ammo. Clearly. A Fundamental Disconnect on Rifles
When our semiannual mass shooter culture war erupts after the latest round of media Handwaving Freakoutery, it always seems to focus on rifles. Most recently, we had some guy cut his own AR-15 in half on YouTube, to thunderous applause. Dont mischaracterize my position. If Mr. Pappalardo thought that he might be prone to murdering someone with his rifle, or more statistically likely purposely killing himself with it, then he should absolutely sell or destroy it. But if he isnt going to do either of those things, all he must do to ensure it doesnt hurt anyone is not shoot anyone with it. He could leave it in his attic with a couple of cans of ammunition, just in case something horrible does transpire where he might actually need it. There are certain things in the world youd rather have and not need, than need and not have. And paramount among those things, given the state of the modern human condition, is a rifle.
So if you ask someone else on the opposite side of a culture war argument, Why would you want to own one of those things, anyway? please dont be surprised if they simply respond, Why wouldnt you?
1-Dems win 2018 mid-terms, Impeach Trump and won't allow Pence to be seated. Following a series of liberal excesses, Civil unrest ensues.
2-EMP via Iran or other. Transport & commerce halt. Panic ensues.
3-CME (see #2 above)
4-Major weather event in your area. (Tornado, Flood, Snow, etc...)
5-Water supply contamination in your area.
HA!
Here I sit near Denver and I left off the possibility of a “Yellowstone Eruption”....!
bttt
Good post.
Here’s an oldie but a goodie from my posting history:
27 Prepper Precepts Complete
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2877305/posts
On a clear day, I can see Mt. St Helens out of my picture window...
Great article, thanks for posting.
In the case of the man in the MAGA hat who was refused service at a bar, the courts ruled that political beliefs were not a protected class and that the bar was within it's rights to refuse service.
With that in mind, if I owned one of these bunker complexes, I would refuse to sell to anyone who was pro gun control, especially public figures, politicians, athletes, actors, singers, journalists, etc.
“Crazy is building your ark after the flood has already come.”
I’m composing a speech about conformists to combat the gun control movement. When I got down to brass tacks, it was rather stunning that my conclusion was that most people choose to conform, subservient to the masters of society, aka “government.”
There is no logical argument possible from a gun control perspective when society is defined as conformists (law-abiding citizens) and non-conformists (criminals).
Ironically, the same applies to those who choose to ignore future hazards at their own peril. Hence, that movie line quote from 10 Cloverfield Lane is perhaps the best one-liner I’ve ever heard supporting the notion of “preppers”...a term which to me is an oxymoron unless the presumption is that most people are patently-ignorant.
Touche’...
I’ve lived in California, the South and the East Coast.
Been through Fires, mudslides that blocked roads at both ends, Snow/Ice that blocked roads, earthquakes, Hail, Tornadoes, Floods and a few crickets.
The point of preparing is based on the probabilities that those events will very likely happen.
When you see a bunch of ass hats blowing Shiite up around the world and they tell you they are coming after you and your family, Do you believe them?
When you see a bunch of retards running around acting with malice toward those who are easy prey and have no protection, then they tell you they want a revolutionary change, Do You Believe Them?
Just be prepared. There really isn’t a reason not to be.
If you are prepared you are less of a victim of circumstance.
If you do not prepare, you will be a statistic of circumstance.
The point of disaster planning for a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, or wildfire, is not to be not-screwed. Its to be notably less screwed.
Thank you for a very good laugh.
By the way...
When I was moving to downtown Portland, OR, more than 20 years ago, the very FIRST apartment I looked at had a bull's eye view of Mount St. Helens from the living room window!
Seemed like an especially ominous warning at the time.
The chance of flooding, P(F), is 1%, or 0.01. The chance of not flooding, which we notate P(F), is 100%-1%, or 99%, or 0.99. To see the chance you dont flood two years in a row, you would have to not-flood the first year, and then not-flood the second year, so you multiply the two probabilities together, and get 0.9801. The chance of not-flooding 30 years in a row is calculated by multiplying the chance of not flooding with itself, over and over, 30 times, which is a power relationship. P(F)³⁰. Thats 0.7397 chance of 30 consecutive years of no flood, which means a 26% chance of at least one flood.Notice, Gentle Reader, that not being inside the 100-year flood line is one thing - but being on that line means that the 26% result applies to you exactly. That is, best be cleanly outside that line. What that says is that you dont just want a 1% in one year line which is a "26% in 30 years line, you want a a 20% in 30 years line, and a 15% in 30 years line, and so on.And then your mortgage broker doesnt give you your thirty-year fixed rate loan, because a 26% chance of a disaster is a big chance, when were talking about disasters. Now lets talk about a bigger, nastier disaster than a flood.
I would expect those latter two lines to lie not so very far outside of the 26% in 30 years line. But that would depend on local topology, obviously. And on exactly what you think "not so very far means . . .
The zombie apocalypse is obviously pure fiction...
Not exactly. It's a metaphor. Communicable diseases and social breakdown in cities are both perfectly real, as are the likely consequences of the dwellers therein attempting to escape. The walking dead part of that is essentially irrelevant, as the author does come around to conclude himself. And by the way, the mathematics of epidemics and migration are similar to the ones the author showed for floodplains, and just as scary.
So thats another canary in the coal mine for the tin foil hat right winger you have a class of people who are vehemently demanding confiscation of rifles in the public sphere, while some of them are secretly building underground fortresses in the private sphere.
Buy another box of ammo. Clearly.
Oh, yeah. The answer to "what do you need a rifle for?" is the same as to "what do you need a bunker for?" - it's "you don't need one at all, until you do." Make that several boxes.
What do we need Free Speech for?
Just shut up and everyone will get along just fine.
Cough, cough...
“Prepper” Ping.
Ammo cans. Ammo can-sized boxes.
Thanks!
Good article.
And THAT is why we should take prepping seriously, because if those who are most likely to mock it are doing it, then you know something is up.
Prep for LATER!
Great read. Thanks for posting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.