I'm somewhat closer to "head in the sand" myself. I am watching the news closely, but don't feel anything I can do in my immediate daily life is consequential to the situation.
But for what on earth do they need to stock up on ammo?
For an European that's beyond strange
So yes not comparable.
Ammunition is relatively cheap and extremely high value if it's needed, and more likely to be needed in an emergency.
During Katrina, there was widespread looting but also violent gang rapes and other assaults. People, especially in inner cities, are easily victims of violence and theft.
A good look into what this looks like would be the Algiers Point shooting in the Hurricane Katrina aftermath.
Russia, Germany, Finland, Ireland, Austria, Portugal, Yugoslavia three times, Spain, Poland, Greece, Romania, Cyprus, Georgia, Albania
Wearing masks also helps set a new social norm. It is now common in Taiwan subways and trains--basically everyone wears a mask.
Not clear if it's useful to wear a mask if not displaying any symptoms. I didn't see any official recommendations for doing so. I've been traveling quite a bit in Asia these last few weeks, and I'd say 80% in planes wear masks. However, most of them don't use them properly. They take them on and off, reuse them, adjust them, touch their faces. Sometimes they don't even wear masks, but piece of clothes.
Yeah those type of people always think civilisation is about to collapse. And lots of them are looking forward to it.
Stocking up in advance of $WIDELY_REPORTED_THREAT is not something you really question, because it is what you, and everyone you know, has always done for as long as you can remember. Sometimes it has even come in handy and helped people.
Hearing gunfire isn’t at all uncommon here. I live right on the edge of city limits, and I doubt a day goes by without being able to hear someone shoot if I’m sitting on my back porch. I totally get that it’s a cultural difference, but it’s very common throughout the US. The only exceptions are very dense urban areas, really.
I’ve heard it said that there are two kinds of places in the US, and they’re categorized by what sound makes you worry. In some places, if you hear an emergency vehicle’s siren you ignore it, but get concerned if you hear gunfire. In others, you ignore the sound of gunfire but get concerned if you hear an emergency vehicle. I definitely live in the latter kind of place.
I don't recall armed individuals with whatever they stocked for themselves to make difference when real issues happen.
What made difference were organized trained ideological groups with those arms. So, in that case, I am really interested to know which ideological group are those people stocking for - and against who they intend to use those guns.
That is why it dont make sense to stock some ammo in abstract and why the expression is slimmy.
Owning a gun just for self-defence isn't generally allowed or needed, and would of course be counterproductive anyway as using lethal force would likely land you in much deeper trouble than the looter would face. I'd end with "rightfully so" but I do realize there are deep cultural differences regarding this point.
Not in certain US states (look up "stand-your-ground" laws).
Sit back and wait for the state to save you? I'm not American myself but the lack of self-reliance exhibited by non-Americans, particularly Europeans, is sometimes bewildering.
But if it makes you feel better…
I don't have an answer for this, but it's something worth keeping in the back of your mind when discussing theoretical catastrophes.
What I mean is that evidence shows that when a society collapses, the corrupt and evil will explicitly use the state's monopoly on violence to take what you are trying to defend.
Typically they juice this by exploiting local grievances to de-ligitimise your claim to your property and co-opt the local law enforcement with promises of future gains.
Then they will appear at your homestead WITH the local enforcement - who will do nothing when the mob takes yours assets.
At one level this is to discourage you and increase your sense of isolation - to get you to just abandon your assets and leave. At which point they move onto the next property/resource owner.
However, at another level they WANT to to fight back - with firearms preferably. Not only will this still be deemed illegal (under laws passed by the old functioning society) but hopefully (from their perspective) you injure or kill one of the riled-up mob - further de-legitimising you.
At this point, the co-opted law enforcement will step in, arrest you, etc.
Zimbabwe, the Balkans, and Indonesia are text-book examples.
When society fails violently, there really is no hope.
I wish it wasn't thus, but is is and will be.
The U.S. was founded on rebellion. And I believe enough Americans would readily backstab an illegitimate U.S. government (one that has stopped serving its people and instead serves itself) in pursuit of good.
FTFY
2.The U.S. was founded on rebellion.
So was Somalia. Its not a sufficient reason to protect you from the failure mode I explained above.
This varies very much on the "something". In the case of a virus like this I have plans to do what seems sensible - keep washing my hands, isolate myself as much as possible.
In the case of a war I'll hope my side wins and keep my head down if it doesn't. Not sure stockpiled ammo is going to be the critical factor there!
Total war may have been the exception, but farms and cities both suffered enormously during pre-20th century European warfare. Indeed the page you linked gave a bunch of examples of total destruction prior to the 20th century.
Outside those examples, most warfare then relied on looting farms for supplies (including seed crops)[1]. Indeed there was a whole technique of warfare called Chevauchée which relied on this before the 14th century:
A chevauchée [..] was a raiding method of medieval warfare for weakening the enemy, primarily by burning and pillaging enemy territory in order to reduce the productivity of a region, as opposed to siege warfare or wars of conquest... The chevauchée has gained recognition for its use during the Hundred Years' War between the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of France. It was not a new tactic and had been used many times before; for example, William the Conqueror had used the tactic before the Battle of Hastings to encourage Harold to engage in a battle.[2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_warfare#Supplies_and_...