# When you are told to evacuated?.



## readytogo (Apr 6, 2013)

Heavy rains unleash deadly Midwest flooding
http://weather.yahoo.com/heavy-rains-unleash-deadly-midwest-flooding-191235212.html
You either listen or face death, again mother nature has shown that is unpredictable and out of control and very few if any can prepared for something like this so is better to listen and obey those orders, you can always come back and rebuild, you can`t never replace a love one. This shows that the big 4x4 or the bunker or the hidden fortress are nothing compared to what a few inches of rain can do and that we must humble ourselves to acts beyond our control, is sad but true.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

Told?

TOLD!

I would have the tendency to get my dander up if I was ORDERED off of MY property! 

If I was advised that for safety of my family and for anyone trying an attempt to rescue us (if a rescue was even practical) then that's a different story.

Flooding. Homestead is 625' above sea level. Excellent drainage downhill 30'. It would take a "Noah" event to flood me out.

Never could understand why folks live in a flood plain (like New Orleans) and then are shocked when they lose everything again and again.


----------



## dixiemama (Nov 28, 2012)

We live in the head of a holler, on a bank above the road. Our road might flood for a day, the two lane out of our area towards the 'big road' might flood for a day or two, but it would take A LOT for us to get flooded


----------



## rawhide2971 (Apr 19, 2013)

:rantoff:I tend to take the attitude that I have made a good choice on the location of my home and I am situationaly aware of what can and cannot have an impact on my and my families health and well being. I tend to be very suspecious of anyone from the gooberment suggesting or telling me what I should or must do based on them being "experts". Weather is one area where I am of course more nervous about than some of the other areas that the supposed experts tend to pontificate about. Tornadoes and heavy rains I cannot do anything about, all else I will use my own judgement on. Not going to have to worry about flooding where I am situatied. 
I am pretty much of non trusting of the media, the gooberment or any supposed expert anymore. I am an adult, well informed and am not going to be pushed into a "herd" where I can be Dis armed and seperated from my "stuff" nor am I going to allow my family to be split up by FEMA or any other agency.....ok yeah I know this thread did not start out to be a rant about Gooberment control but I view anything that the Gooberment starts trying to control as a RED FLAG alert....I will E and E and stay free and loose as much as possible.....off my soap box....Rebemember what happened down in NO. of course those people should have left long before the Gooberment took control but once they did the first thing they did was seperate the people from thier ability to protect themselves and .......................oh heck I will shut up.


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

TheLazyL said:


> Told?
> 
> TOLD!
> 
> ...


I agree with your attitude regarding being ordered off of my property. I have only faced a mandatory evacuation once, and that was due to a man made hazard. I sent the wife and kids out, but I remained. I worked in an environment similar to the one posing the risk, and understood the consequences of staying. My home, my decision.

As for the whole flood plain thing, most aren't shocked and realize that it will happen. There are always a few that are just too dang dumb to comprehend (these are the ones that the media seek out), but most do. I lived forty years in the area directly southeast of New Orleans. We always knew the risks and we acted accordingly.

Home is a funny thing. I always looked at those that live on a hillside in wildfire prone areas, on the plains in tornado alley, on reclaimed land in earthquake territory, etc., as just as crazy as I am. When you have a connection to the place where you were born and raised, it's hard to leave. That being said, I have since skidaddled from the marshes of the Louisiana coast, and now live in an area subject to flash floods, ice/snow storms, wildfires, tornadoes, and within reach of the New Madrid fault.


----------



## Viking (Mar 16, 2009)

When the fire first started around us the Sheriff Search and Rescue people came door to door warning that we needed to get out and after they had gone down the road and turned back the women sheriff deputy was screaming out of the truck window that the fire had jumped the lines and was only a half mile down the road. Then they came back a second time to tell us how bad it was. I truly believe she had DHS training to panic the sheeple into doing what they are being told. The firefighters that were with them weren't all shook up and when I talked with them they told me and others along our road that our properties were defensible because of how we had cleared our lands just for the possibility of fires. That's the trouble with having people that have no real experience being allowed to tell others what to do, they often seem to get what I call a "god complex". This is not at all like flood situations but believe me, when we bought our property it was a consideration. When we lived in Colorado we saw what can happen when people think they can take nature to task by living in river bottoms and that lesson give us the wisdom to live up in a safe zone above what the local creek can rise to and to us that was just common sense.


----------



## mosquitomountainman (Jan 25, 2010)

We live in forest fire country and we've taken steps to insure that our property is defensible.

However, we also have pug-out plans in place should we need to go in a hurry.

Please, if you stay home, do not interfere with those sent to fight the fire (or whatever). Our son was at one wildfire area where their team was sent to defend a home (no evac. order given) and the idiots who lived there started a back fire on their own that would have burned down their place and trapped the firefighters in the blaze. Then they wanted to argue with the firefighters over what needed to be done. What needed to be done was for the morons to shut up and do as they were told!!!!!!

Actually the words "idiot" and "moron" don't adequately describe people like that.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

Viking said:


> ..Sheriff Search and Rescue people came door to door warning that we needed to get out and ...women sheriff deputy was screaming...people that have no real experience being allowed to tell others what to do, they often seem to get what I call a "god complex". ....


Yep.

It was a nice warm sunny day with no wind.

A Driver drove off the side of a road and grazed the side of a electric pole causing the ground cable to temporarily flip into the high voltage line. Grounded voltage traveled thru the ground into one of our telephone pedestals. Burnt our telephone cable to a crisp.

Our crew was repairing the cable when the Electric Utility (EU) arrived. I chatted with the EU for about 10 minutes before he determined the area was unsafe and ordered us to leave the site!? Pole wasn't damaged. Aerial ground had flip back on it's insulator. I refused.

EU got very animated. How dare I question his authority!

He got back into his truck and talked on his radio for 15 minutes. Keep in mind that his truck was parked in the area he deemed "unsafe". I asked our crew if they felt they were in danger, "NO".

EU got out of his truck and again ordered us to leave. I pointed out to him if any tried to call 911 the call would fail and we were going to finish our repairs. THAT did not make him happy.

A second EU truck arrive and they both talked for a bit. The first EU ordered us a 3rd time to move and stated they were moving their trucks to a safe area. Gave me a dirty look and left. So his truck was parked in the "unsafe" area for a 1/2 hour so why was it "unsafe" for us?

We finished our work and I waved at the EU guys when we left.

Knucklehead.


----------



## biobacon (Aug 20, 2012)

Well as for myself I think that Im just going to ask them to "forget" to take care of my area so that the house can be destroyed and I can pick up the insurrence check. Then I can buy a new house and the government can collect taxes on it and everyone wins right?


----------



## stayingthegame (Mar 22, 2011)

and you add to the economy. right?


----------



## Padre (Oct 7, 2011)

Living 14ft above sea level I take any SUGGESTION to vacate the premises VERY seriously, but I don't take kindly to ORDERS. The way as I see it is if I am endangering myself, then suggest I leave, but if I don't let me take my chances, and feel no obligation to endanger yourself by coming to get me if I end up in a pickle. 

The only situation that I think orders to stay or go are justified is in case of plague, in such a case movement becomes a vector for disease and a danger to the public.


----------



## HamiltonFelix (Oct 11, 2011)

First: Know your area, know the threats. 

I have been here for a long time. I know where it floods and where it does not. I have seen it many times. I know which roads and bridges get washed out. 

I know something of the behavior of fire, both from fighting forest fires in my youth and from running a small volunteer fire department for a while. 

I know something of the behavior of electricity, from 39 years in the electrical industry, daily work in a powerhouse and 240,000 volt switchyard. 

I know what earthquakes are, having experienced quakes here in 1965 and 2001.

I will not be run out because someone else thinks I should leave. I will evacuate after I have made an informed decision that it's the thing to do.


----------



## Sentry18 (Aug 5, 2012)

Our general orders when it comes to an evacuation is this: If the government owns the property, you WILL be leaving during an evac. If the owner of the property wants you gone, you WILL be leaving during an evac. If you own the property, we strongly advise that you leave for your own safety and advise that no one will be coming to rescue you after whatever o'clock on whatever date. If you decide to stay you are on your own. If you allow others to stay you _may_ be culpable if they die or are injured (civilly not criminally). I think that policy is reasonable.


----------



## musketjim (Dec 7, 2011)

Some want to protect their stuff, some have nowhere to go and some just want to prove how tough they are. If you stay when they recommend evac. then no rescue. That is never followed tho and people put their lives in danger to go and rescue folks. Just the way it is.


----------



## BillM (Dec 29, 2010)

This is a good place to discuss "normalcy bias".

We all value our stuff and we all have considered a range of hazards that might present themselves that would threaten our well being.

With this said, do not allow your normalcy bias kill you because you do not want to leave your stuff behind.

Tornados , earth quakes and other natural disasters may overcome any and all preparations you have made.

Your number one preparation should always be your ability to make a hard decision based on the immediate circumstances you face .

You and I have a "normalcy bias" just like the sheeple. 

Our "normalcy bias " tells us we have thought of every possible threat, when no one can possibly think of every threat .

Admitting this to your self may allow you to realize that the LE at your door may have information you don't have and is actually trying to save your life.

Make open minded decisions in dangerous circumstances.

There is not a "kit " for every situation !


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

IF they come to tell me about a flood I better already be building an Ark.


----------



## ras1219como (Jan 15, 2013)

BillM said:


> This is a good place to discuss "normalcy bias".
> 
> We all value our stuff and we all have considered a range of hazards that might present themselves that would threaten our well being.
> 
> ...


Very very well said Bill. Folks please understand that if LE or Fire or any other individual comes to your door in an official capacity and advises you of an evacuation it is not just for giggles. Evacuations are decided upon based on facts and circumstances which make it likely that you and/or your property may be in danger. What you do is ultimately up to you but don't put yourself or others in danger unnecessarily. Make informed decisions.


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

About the only reason that I can see us bugging out would be wildfire or _possibly_ an issue with the nuclear plant about 120 miles to our southeast (but not very likely). Most everything else could be handled in place. We've made our home relatively fire safe by clearing any brush within about 200 ft. of it. We also have a pond close to the house, and two gasoline powered pumps with plenty of hose. I still have close by trees that I have to deal with, but I'm dreading the thought of losing that shade.

We practiced bugging out at least twice a year, but we would have to leave so much of our preps behind that it is almost unthinkable to have to do so. I'm looking into a future purchase of an enclosed bug out trailer that we could pre-pack _if_ we have enough warning of a fire in the area.


----------



## libprepper (Aug 8, 2013)

Sentry18 said:


> Our general orders when it comes to an evacuation is this: If the government owns the property, you WILL be leaving during an evac. If the owner of the property wants you gone, you WILL be leaving during an evac. If you own the property, we strongly advise that you leave for your own safety and advise that no one will be coming to rescue you after whatever o'clock on whatever date. If you decide to stay you are on your own. If you allow others to stay you _may_ be culpable if they die or are injured (civilly not criminally). I think that policy is reasonable.


A sound policy. Amazed how many people want to give the various government agencies the middle finger all the time but hit the panic button and expect them to rescue there proud defiant arrsses when they get into trouble. See it all the time in the closed area back-country where I live.


----------



## lazydaisy67 (Nov 24, 2011)

So what if you live on a hill, there's flooding that may be damaging some homes in your area and LE is evacuating everybody just "to be safe". Or pick a different scenario, escaped convict, terrorist threat, blue ring pine tree beetle. My question is, can LE force you off your land, at gun point or otherwise for any reason at any time?


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

lazydaisy67 said:


> So what if you live on a hill, there's flooding that may be damaging some homes in your area and LE is evacuating everybody just "to be safe". Or pick a different scenario, escaped convict, terrorist threat, blue ring pine tree beetle. My question is, can LE force you off your land, at gun point or otherwise for any reason at any time?


I think that it depends on your locality and the policies that they have in place. Unfortunately however, LE can basically do whatever they want to do. It may be wrong and you may get vindicated in the end, but when they decide that they're going to do something, you have no recourse but to do it or face arrest and litigate it after the fact.


----------



## Turtle (Dec 10, 2009)

k0xxx said:


> I think that it depends on your locality and the policies that they have in place. Unfortunately however, LE can basically do whatever they want to do. It may be wrong and you may get vindicated in the end, but when they decide that they're going to do something, you have no recourse but to do it or face arrest and litigate it after the fact.


That isn't really true; as Sentry indicated, the common stance on this is that law enforcement organizations cannot force you to leave your property if you do not wish to do so. Personally? If I were to assume the risk of going into a dangerous area to warn residents of impending danger, I would make an honest attempt to impress the serious nature of the risk and let them know that I won't be coming back.

"Serve and protect".... Not "save you from your own stupidity. "

Now, with that said...

Someone mentioned that LE sometimes has information which you may not. This is often the case. However, we are often also concerned with liability and the availability of resources. So, there may be more concerns at play than *simply* your safety.

The other thing to take away from this is: know your laws and rights.


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

Turtle said:


> That isn't really true; as Sentry indicated, the common stance on this is that law enforcement organizations cannot force you to leave your property if you do not wish to do so. Personally? If I were to assume the risk of going into a dangerous area to warn residents of impending danger, I would make an honest attempt to impress the serious nature of the risk and let them know that I won't be coming back.
> 
> "Serve and protect".... Not "save you from your own stupidity. "
> 
> ...


Au contraire mon mai. It has been proven many times in the past that, whether or not they have a legal right to, LE can do what they want at that moment and you are powerless to do anything about it. I'm not saying that they have a legal right to do it, just that once a member of LE decides something is going to be done, they have all of the power to do it.

A perfect example is Katrina. A good friend and his family evacuated by boat after the storm had destroyed the lower floor of their home. They carried out what possessions they could, and left behind everything else. When they got to a police check point that was keeping people out of the area, he was forced to turn over his valuables, including jewelry that his wife's mother and grandmother had left to her, because he couldn't prove that it wasn't looted. No receipt was given, and it was either turn it over or get arrested and they'd take it anyway. They never saw that jewelry again. Look at the number of people who were physically forced out of their homes as LE went door to door. Look at the number of firearms that were illegally taken from people. Yes, the courts eventually sided with the individuals involved, but that was well after the fact and after along legal process.

I don't know that there is a remedy for these situations other than better training, but the fact remains that LE has all of the power in these situations and you have none. I'm also not sure that this isn't the way it should be. As stated before, in most situations LE has better info on the situation than the average person, and they can't stand around all day and argue in an emergency. All we can do is hope that we get to deal with a reasonable and level headed member of LE, and not one of the few that aren't.


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

> ...they decide that they're going to do something, you have no recourse but to do it or face arrest and litigate it after the fact.





Turtle said:


> That isn't really true;...


Yes it is. Kent State. Ruby Ridge. Katrina 



.

NRA to settle suit over Katrina gun seizures

NEW ORLEANS (AP) - City officials have agreed to return hundreds of firearms that police officers confiscated in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, part of a deal to resolve a lawsuit filed by gun lobbying groups.

The settlement agreement filed Tuesday in federal court calls for the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment Foundation to drop their case if the city follows a plan for returning guns to owners who had them seized by police after the Aug. 29, 2005, hurricane.

Both sides also are asking U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier to sign off on the pact and issue a permanent injunction barring the city from seizing lawfully possessed firearms. Barbier didn't immediately rule on the agreement, which doesn't involve a monetary award.

Police department spokesman Bob Young said it has stored 552 guns that were confiscated after Katrina, through Dec. 31, 2005. Police have said they only took guns that were stolen or found in abandoned homes.

The agreement calls for the city to post a notice on its website that explains how gun owners can claim their firearms.

Gun owners must sign an affidavit claiming ownership of a gun but don't need to present written proof, such as a sales receipt or serial number. A background check also is required to certify that someone claiming a gun can legally possess a firearm.

The city won't be liable if a dispute arises over the ownership of a returned gun. Authorities can dispose of any guns that go unclaimed after two years.

"This is all we've wanted all along: a practical return program," said NRA lawyer Stephen Halbrook, who estimated that the department should have 1,200 guns available for owners to claim.

"I think it satisfies all our concerns," said Dave Workman, a spokesman for the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation. "The city for way too long has been dragging its feet on this. We're glad it's over and we can move on to other issues."

Young said the department "will do everything possible to notify people that their guns are available for pickup."

In April 2006, police made about 700 firearms available for owners to claim if they could present a bill of sale or an affidavit with the weapon's serial number. Halbrook, however, said few people could present proof of ownership after Katrina, which flooded 80% of the city.

Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Superintendent Warren Riley were defendants in the case, which was scheduled to be tried next month.

In their lawsuit, the gun lobbying groups accused the city of violating gun owners' constitutional right to bear arms and leaving them "at the mercy of roving gangs, home invaders, and other criminals" after Katrina.

In response, the city argued that federal law doesn't apply to the plaintiffs' claims against city officials "because the right to keep and bear arms has never been recognized as a fundamental individual right."


----------



## Turtle (Dec 10, 2009)

TheLazyL said:


> Yes it is. Kent State. Ruby Ridge. Katrina Video Link:




Way to throw the law enforcement equivalent of the "race card".


----------



## TheLazyL (Jun 5, 2012)

Turtle said:


> Way to throw the law enforcement equivalent of the "race card".


I thought you threw out a blanket statement earlier so I thought I'd just flip the blanket over and expose the other side. :ignore:


----------



## Turtle (Dec 10, 2009)

TheLazyL said:


> I thought you threw out a blanket statement earlier so I thought I'd just flip the blanket over and expose the other side. :ignore:


Haha! Touché.


----------



## GrinnanBarrett (Aug 31, 2012)

Having been a volunteer fireman in years past, I understand the need to evacuate under certain conditions. Also as a kid I lived with my uncle on the Texas Gulf Coast. In 1961 Hurricane Carla was supposed to come in at Sargeant's Beach but instead came in right on top of us. Our home at Surf Side Beach (one of three house on the beach at that time) was blown totally away. We had pulled back to our other home on Bastrop Bayou. We had been TOLD to evacuate by the Sheriff but my uncle didn't like that. When the water was waist deep we got in the Swamp Buggy and followed the telephone poles to figure out where the road was. We almost died that day. Nothing was left of our place. Where the house had been was a torn up fire truck from a town ten miles away. I still have a fire extinguisher off that fire truck. It reminds me to know when it is time to leave. GB


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

When they come to put you in the bus headed for the camp... I hope you have more fortitude than to decide the courts are your only hope... Or your dead meat.

Why would you prep. if you feel this way?


----------



## k0xxx (Oct 27, 2011)

stanb999 said:


> When they come to put you in the bus headed for the camp... I hope you have more fortitude than to decide the courts are your only hope... Or your dead meat.
> 
> Why would you prep. if you feel this way?


When they come to put you in the bus headed for the camp, as you say, then there is a legitimate need to resist. I'd like to think that I have enough sense to know that there is a huge difference in being sent off to a camp, and disagreeing about being told to evacuate for a wildfire. I hope that you do also.


----------



## stanb999 (Nov 14, 2011)

k0xxx said:


> When they come to put you in the bus headed for the camp, as you say, then there is a legitimate need to resist. I'd like to think that I have enough sense to know that there is a huge difference in being sent off to a camp, and disagreeing about being told to evacuate for a wildfire. I hope that you do also.


Yes, there is a difference.


----------

