Talk:Bug-out bag
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Removing Stub
I think that this is an important page. I do not think it is a stub, there is an undeniably large amount of quality information, and it is comprehensive in scope. I do, however, think that the tone and shifting POV is rather troubling, and indicates a definite lack of compositional quality. I suggest removing the stub-box and replacing it with a plea for standards. Magicwombat 09:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Defensive Tools
The comment that one is more likley to be killed with one's own gun needs to either be linked to the study which derived it or it should be removed. Paj 11:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I think the section about defensive tools should be either modified or removed. This article is about building a bug-out bag, or a 72-hours kit. The author talks more about protecting his property than to prepare for an evacuation. Plus, the writing style is too "personal" i.e: "and I repeat, it will save your life". It is also too technical for the needs of this article (we don't need to compare the different kinds of firearms and their advantages). The bag should include a knife for sure, but the "1 rifle per adult" advice sounds a little bit out of place. Finally, this section shouldn't be the lenthiest one of the article! FireWire 12:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Some pretty good information in this page, but when the author starts trotting out the moronic propaganda of the anti-gun left, the whole thing is ruined. That bit about getting killed with one's own firearm is simply not true, and is completely out of place in a forum devoted to factual information.
[edit] ARFCOM link and subsequent revisions
I rewrote the intro and defensive weapons sections tonight after seeing the article linked from ar15.com. I tried to cut the fat out of the intro and just give the basic information which could be expanded on later in detail. In the defensive tools section I cut all the specific gun opinions to solve the above complaints about back and forth edits. I was pretty aggressive about removing text, so I guess we'll see what everybody thinks of it. --Askaggs 07:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] merging with survival kit
i think is a good idea, and someone must make a good/complete list of items.
Though the topics are related, they are nonetheless separate and should not be merged. Evacuations from danger zones have a different impetus than survival schemes. Bug-outs are a matter of removing from harm's way with the idea that auxiliary aid or resources will be available. Survival is about maintaining an existence despite hardship, often without the idea of auxiliary assistance or resources. Emergency preparedness needs to be looked at as a two-part program: 1) bug-out AND; 2) bunker down/survival. As for a good/complete list of items, the American Red Cross has a checkllist of basics on their web-site which serves as a good starting point. From there you can refine your lists to meet you and your family's needs to make your kits complete.
Oppose two separate things. --Knife Knut 21:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. I also think they are two separate things Magicwombat 14:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. A survival kit is a wilderness-oriented item; a BOB is an urban-oriented item. Lots of overlap, but there are too many critical differences to make a successful merge.
- I'm going to go ahead and remove the merge tags since the discussion both here and on Talk:Survival kit is in favor of keeping them two separate articles. KleenupKrew 03:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Should Servival Kit be in the "See also" section?12.145.73.51 14:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Addded Items to the list
Blanket, poncho liner and sleeping bag were added to the list. --21kev 18:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Complete revamp
While the information in this article is extremely helpful, informative, and valuable; it repeats itself many times ("BOB is not a survival kit"), and at several points is written in the first person. It sounds as if the individual who (apparently) wrote most of this article thought that Wikipedia was his/her blog or something.... For future reference please write in the third person while contributing to Wikipedia Thank you. Mk623SC20K 21:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
