I find this to be a very interesting comment - illustrative of the large and growing political divide in the developed world and the US in particular.
> Rather than assuming that society will come together in a crisis and help each other out
I grew up in an area where during good weather and normal times, police and EMS response could be an hour or more. If you're cutting a field on a tractor and manage to crush your hand in the PTO, having a tourniquet and medical supplies is the difference between life and death. Likewise, if there is a half inch of ice on the ground and you slide off the road on your way home, having warm clothing, blankets, food, and water can keep you from dying of exposure before someone happens by.
For my daily life "back home", there is no "society" to pull together. For immediate emergencies, it's often just you. For the short-term events described in the article it's you, your family, and perhaps a neighboring family or two.
> armed to the teeth against dangerous others who are undoubtedly coming to take our shit.
Again, police response is an hour away - crime happens even in rural areas. If you don't take measures to protect yourself, you're simply unprotected.
That's not even considering that there are uses for firearms other than defense against human beings. I've dispatched many injured animals on the side of the road; I can't imagine having to leave them in agony to die of exposure, or waiting that aforementioned hour for someone else with a gun to arrive and do what I could have done in seconds for pennies. It's cruel.
> It's sad.
No, it's _different_. Incomprehensibly different, if living in close proximity to others is all you know.
> I honestly think this another example of the huge class divide in America
This is a cultural thing, not a class thing. It may appear to be based on economic factors because rural areas are typically much poorer than urban ones, and because the urban poor are far more at risk of being a victim of violent crime, but in my experience it's clearly a rural/urban difference.
> Rather than assuming that society will come together in a crisis and help each other out
I grew up in an area where during good weather and normal times, police and EMS response could be an hour or more. If you're cutting a field on a tractor and manage to crush your hand in the PTO, having a tourniquet and medical supplies is the difference between life and death. Likewise, if there is a half inch of ice on the ground and you slide off the road on your way home, having warm clothing, blankets, food, and water can keep you from dying of exposure before someone happens by.
For my daily life "back home", there is no "society" to pull together. For immediate emergencies, it's often just you. For the short-term events described in the article it's you, your family, and perhaps a neighboring family or two.
> armed to the teeth against dangerous others who are undoubtedly coming to take our shit.
Again, police response is an hour away - crime happens even in rural areas. If you don't take measures to protect yourself, you're simply unprotected.
That's not even considering that there are uses for firearms other than defense against human beings. I've dispatched many injured animals on the side of the road; I can't imagine having to leave them in agony to die of exposure, or waiting that aforementioned hour for someone else with a gun to arrive and do what I could have done in seconds for pennies. It's cruel.
> It's sad.
No, it's _different_. Incomprehensibly different, if living in close proximity to others is all you know.
> I honestly think this another example of the huge class divide in America
This is a cultural thing, not a class thing. It may appear to be based on economic factors because rural areas are typically much poorer than urban ones, and because the urban poor are far more at risk of being a victim of violent crime, but in my experience it's clearly a rural/urban difference.