Crime certainly doesn't lose it's motive; to take what you want. Defying the law isn't the purpose hardened criminals have behind breaking said laws. In fact, crime has bigger motivation when there's no law to stop you other than the people you're doin' wrong, and the necessities for survival are scarce.
My point is, guns and numbers are power. The most common person to have either and especially both are criminals and gangs. Psychopaths and villainous scum aren't gonna have second thoughts about ravaging the supplies of survivors and markets and such during the first days of the apocalypse.
A nuclear apocalypse would reduce government to primitive form. There would be less people, less technology. A small centered government would be formed. City states most likely.
It is much harder to pull a crime when you are trying to harm your own neighbor.
That would be true in Texas, where everyone has a gun.
You're not gonna be able to kill a group of criminals even if you outnumber them 5 to 1 if they have guns and you don't, because noone's gonna suicide themselves by grouping to a crowd and running at 'em. Let's not forget that modern people in modern societies can barely fend for themselves without electricity, none the less fight off or join a vigilante group.
Gangs are gonna strike fast and hard while everything is still ****ed up and chaotic, take all the supplies, kill people who've yet to band together if they resist, and out of intimidation and the chance of survival increase their own numbers. Rural towns, if they've the fire power, will definitely band together and protect their own, but if a large gang wanted to wage war, they'd be ****ed. Town with 30 hunting rifles > 10,000 handguns and submachineguns.
I can't agree that vigilante justice is very common in modern society, either... If it was, do you think Mexico would be in a state of pure fear of all the drug cartels?
It most certainly is.Originally Posted by SSBfreakCK
To compare: America is in one of it's lowest points, and yet immigrants keep trying to get here. Mexican governors are killed and no one minds, reporters go missing, and there are no police. Happens in other 3rd world areas.
That is due to the power of the drug trade, which no one needs. If you were to set this in a post-apocalyptic setting, thedrug cartels would vanish. And since Mexico doesn't rely on technology as much, it could easily sustain itself in a food crisis.
I don't understand how you don't understand my point. >_>;
An apocalypse would send mankind to a primitive age. But even with that, crime would certainly be scarce.
In order to gain power, they would need money. NO ONE would buy drugs when items such as food and shelter are top priority.
History repeats itself. This is what has happened in places where crime has taken over. In these areas, drug consumption is nonexistant. If you take those factors into the apocalyptic theory, then crime would be at a low, until civilization got back on course.
Last edited by WiiAssasin; 11-01-2011 at 02:21 PM.
Oh come on. Were already at post apocalypse... We haven't even discussed fallout.
Too many variables... At this point there's no telling what could happen. I personally believe that humans are way too fickle when desperate and facing extreme survival. Sure in situations where there is some hope they will work together and coexist but who knows, if faced with this scenario cannibalism is even a real possibility. And Im not talking eating the recently deceased, Im talking hunting and eating other survivors O_O Hee what was that movie The Road, where the cannibal baddies had a cellar full of prisoners...