About a week ago I sat down to put together my BOB. I already have the BOB supplies (and then some!) nicely organized in Rubbermaid totes in my garage closet, but I didn't have a kit made up and consolidated in a pack. So before doing so I got online and read back through many of the BOB posts here, on other sites, and just in general got more specific info on the concept of the BOB and its contents. After doing this however, instead of going out to my garage and putting my BOB together, I started questioning the general BOB concept, and now after a week of thinking about this I am almost convinced I have no use for a BOB. I may also go so far as to say I'm not convinced most people need a BOB. Here's why:
First, let me define what I mean by BOB, so we can be on the same terms.
- a bag that holds a kit of supplies one could survive on for at least a couple of days.
- a "real" kit of supplies, including food, shelter, ammo, etc. Basically most of the items anyone on this site would include. Thus, my kit would be more complete than something like the Red Cross or FEMA would suggest.
- the bag itself must be large enough to hold the kit, but also manageable enough to actually wear
Second, by "concept of BOB" I mean a pack that holds the kit of supplies one would need in an emergency situation where one needs to be mobile on foot in order to escape and/or relocate to a safer location.
So, by BOB I am NOT talking about a "get home bag", or an organized stash of supplies in a garage or other location. I am talking about a bag that a person would literally put on their back and walk somewhere with.
And that is my main critique of the BOB concept: what type of situation could arise such that I would actually need to walk to some other location, and where in the hell would I go anyway? Don't take this to mean that I don't have an evacuation plan, I do (in a very serious scenario, I would go to my in-law's farm near Kokomo, and in a worst case scenario I would try to get to northern Minnesota where my family has a 100% self-sustaining, very remote cabin). But I can't think of anywhere I could walk that would be safer than either 1) staying at home, or 2) attempting to drive to Kokomo.
I've thought of some actual events that have happened recently that could potentially happen here in central Indiana, and how a BOB may have helped people. For example, would a BOB have helped in anyway people in Joplin, Japan, or even during/after Katrina? I honestly don't think so. Being a person who is more or less aware of things, and is pretty prepared and capable, I like to think that I would try to remove myself from a situation before it happened. For example, if warnings were issued about some impending natural disaster, I would try to leave. But if warnings were not issued and/or the disaster was totally unforeseeable, again what good would a BOB be? I don't think anyone in Joplin tried to grab their BOB and escape the scene, nor could anyone in Japan go anywhere anyway after the tsunami.
I've also thought about other types of scenarios that could be realistic in Indiana. Let's say the big earthquake finally happens. Well, where am I going to walk to, and what am I going to do when I get there? Or what if a nuclear attack occurs across the country (which in all reality is a low probability), including Indianapolis- again where am I going to walk to and what am I going to do when I get there?
Regarding terrorism, what is more realistic is another 9/11-type attack in some major city in some other state. Let's say New York is attacked. What good is a BOB going to do me when I could just get in my car and follow my plan of driving to Kokomo? You are probably thinking "what if you can't drive anywhere?" That's a great question, but if some event occurs with such severity and speed that I cannot drive anywhere, again where am I going to walk and what am I going to do once I get there?
I could see that for some people a BOB may be useful. For example, if someone has a plot of land within 2-5 days walking distance, assuming they actually could walk for that amount of time with their heavy pack, then a BOB may be useful. But I think these people are very few and far between.
After thinking about all of this for about a week, my solution is to NOT give up on the concept of "bugging out," but instead to question the idea of a bag (pack) that somehow would be useful. Simply put, it seems to me a more realistic solution is to have 1) a small "get home bag" with only the essentials, the goal being what you may need to literally just get home, and 2) an organized kit of survival/defense supplies ready to go that you could use to survive/defend your home but also throw in your car if you actually needed to "bug out". How would such a kit differ from a BOB? Well, I can fit a ton more stuff in my two Rubbermaid totes than I can fit in a pack that I would supposedly wear and walk with for 2 to 5 days.
Of course there is nothing wrong with being too prepared. But my concern is that perhaps people are spending a lot of time making a BOB, which may not actually be too useful, at the expense of making more realistic and useful preparations.
What say you?
First, let me define what I mean by BOB, so we can be on the same terms.
- a bag that holds a kit of supplies one could survive on for at least a couple of days.
- a "real" kit of supplies, including food, shelter, ammo, etc. Basically most of the items anyone on this site would include. Thus, my kit would be more complete than something like the Red Cross or FEMA would suggest.
- the bag itself must be large enough to hold the kit, but also manageable enough to actually wear
Second, by "concept of BOB" I mean a pack that holds the kit of supplies one would need in an emergency situation where one needs to be mobile on foot in order to escape and/or relocate to a safer location.
So, by BOB I am NOT talking about a "get home bag", or an organized stash of supplies in a garage or other location. I am talking about a bag that a person would literally put on their back and walk somewhere with.
And that is my main critique of the BOB concept: what type of situation could arise such that I would actually need to walk to some other location, and where in the hell would I go anyway? Don't take this to mean that I don't have an evacuation plan, I do (in a very serious scenario, I would go to my in-law's farm near Kokomo, and in a worst case scenario I would try to get to northern Minnesota where my family has a 100% self-sustaining, very remote cabin). But I can't think of anywhere I could walk that would be safer than either 1) staying at home, or 2) attempting to drive to Kokomo.
I've thought of some actual events that have happened recently that could potentially happen here in central Indiana, and how a BOB may have helped people. For example, would a BOB have helped in anyway people in Joplin, Japan, or even during/after Katrina? I honestly don't think so. Being a person who is more or less aware of things, and is pretty prepared and capable, I like to think that I would try to remove myself from a situation before it happened. For example, if warnings were issued about some impending natural disaster, I would try to leave. But if warnings were not issued and/or the disaster was totally unforeseeable, again what good would a BOB be? I don't think anyone in Joplin tried to grab their BOB and escape the scene, nor could anyone in Japan go anywhere anyway after the tsunami.
I've also thought about other types of scenarios that could be realistic in Indiana. Let's say the big earthquake finally happens. Well, where am I going to walk to, and what am I going to do when I get there? Or what if a nuclear attack occurs across the country (which in all reality is a low probability), including Indianapolis- again where am I going to walk to and what am I going to do when I get there?
Regarding terrorism, what is more realistic is another 9/11-type attack in some major city in some other state. Let's say New York is attacked. What good is a BOB going to do me when I could just get in my car and follow my plan of driving to Kokomo? You are probably thinking "what if you can't drive anywhere?" That's a great question, but if some event occurs with such severity and speed that I cannot drive anywhere, again where am I going to walk and what am I going to do once I get there?
I could see that for some people a BOB may be useful. For example, if someone has a plot of land within 2-5 days walking distance, assuming they actually could walk for that amount of time with their heavy pack, then a BOB may be useful. But I think these people are very few and far between.
After thinking about all of this for about a week, my solution is to NOT give up on the concept of "bugging out," but instead to question the idea of a bag (pack) that somehow would be useful. Simply put, it seems to me a more realistic solution is to have 1) a small "get home bag" with only the essentials, the goal being what you may need to literally just get home, and 2) an organized kit of survival/defense supplies ready to go that you could use to survive/defend your home but also throw in your car if you actually needed to "bug out". How would such a kit differ from a BOB? Well, I can fit a ton more stuff in my two Rubbermaid totes than I can fit in a pack that I would supposedly wear and walk with for 2 to 5 days.
Of course there is nothing wrong with being too prepared. But my concern is that perhaps people are spending a lot of time making a BOB, which may not actually be too useful, at the expense of making more realistic and useful preparations.
What say you?
