Let's have a talk, everyone. (public)

There was a meeting the other night, I'm pretty sure we're all aware it went down. But not nearly enough of us were there, and what we did work out won't matter if the whole damn lot of us aren't working together. Now I know we're all skeptical about trying to plan out much; we're stuck here and more or less at the mercy of the people who put us here. But that DOES NOT mean that there's no point in trying. For all we know, one or more of us might hit on an idea that the shits keeping us here won't see coming.

Janie put forward the idea of group relay points, buildings that are manned regularly and established as safe. It's a good one, hopefully we'll all pitch in to make it happen. I know I will. And before I get to my own reason for writing this, I want to reiterate something: I know a lot of us have already been through hell. We've been tortured, scarred, led on and manipulated. But if we decide that we can't stop it from happening again, we may as well just die. And I don't want to die, I still have retirement and a pension to look forward to. Yes, they can change things on us in a single night; they can remove us or make us distrust each other. But they haven't won.

So here's my point, something that I brought up at the meeting a lot of you skipped: guns. I have them, and there needs to be a decision on what to do with them. If our food supplies run out, we'll need to hunt. If one or more of us is dangerous, we need to account for every option of violence they could access. That's why I took them the day the power went out, and I don't feel guilty for it. So if you don't like the options I'm about to propose, you'd best speak up.

There's two choices, and anyone who wants a say had better put it here. By tomorrow I'm going with the consensus, and anyone who's not a part of it, on one side or the other, is forfeiting their right to complain.

Option A is that I distribute the firearms evenly throughout the town, and we set up a running record of who's been given what. I can train people to use and maintain them, and on the off chance that someone gets dirty with theirs, we'll have a better chance of finding out who with that record in place.

Option B is that we return them to a stockpile of some sort, and agree on an overseer to keep tally of them. The most obvious option is a guy I met at the bar named Seth who said he'd been appointed to a security position when he came here, and if he wants to try and convince anyone that he's right for the job he can. Everyone else has the same option, if they think they'd like to keep an eye on a big pile of guns every day. I don't want that job, personally.

So like I said, speak up if you want to be heard. I'm going with Option A.

 - .

Since no one seems to have listened to me at that absolutely pointless meeting, I'll say it again - under no circumstances do I want that Seth dude to have control of all the guns. The people in charge of this town put him in charge of security, and they've all fucked off conveniently leaving him behind. Anyone they trusted, I don't trust. The only people I'd trust having all the weapons is either you as an ex-cop (no matter how crazy you are now, I don't know) or Lina, because that bitch is just crazy and could probably like, cut off the fingers of anyone who tried to jack a weapon.

I vote to lock them up. Call me crazy, but I don't think it's really a smart idea to give guns to a bunch of people who are traumatized and fucked in the head. Someone's gonna get shot, and I'd really rather it not be me or anyone I know.

 - .

That's two of us tallied, then. And I see your concerns, Hannah. I don't want the job? But if I somehow ended up stuck with it, I wouldn't complain.

 - .

As someone who does not approve of the use of guns for whatever reason, including hunting, I would agree that they should be taken somewhere where they cannot be used. In fact, I would suggest that they all be completely disabled immediately. We have supplies in town, we have a farm which has produced sufficient crops to feed us throughout the winter. We have cattle for milk and chickens for eggs, if we are sensible and work together, we should have enough to see us through. Hopefully.

 - .

I don't agree entirely with your standpoint, but I get where you're coming from. We can strip the firing pins and melt them down to disable the weapons, if that's the course of action we settle on.

 - .

I'm gonna go ahead and vote to veto that suggestion, because I fully intend on taking a gun and shooting any scientists we may find. In the most painful places possible. If there are no guns, I cannot do that.

 - .

Which is exactly why I believe that the weapons should all be disabled. Vengeance will achieve nothing but more pain and further suffering. It is exactly the wrong route to take.

 - .

Okay, so don't shoot anyone. I'll take your share.

 - .

You know, you might get further it you could keep your story straight, darling...

 - .

There's a big difference between being able to use a gun to shoot someone coming at me and using a gun to shoot a scientist being held down by two or three of my closest friends. So bite me, Wheels.

 - .

...you have friends?

Shit

 - .

I know, right? Some of them are even meaner than I am.

Take heart; no one can go through their whole life without making any friends. Your time will come. Maybe you're just a late bloomer.

 - .

I'll sit and wait patiently then, should I?

I'm hate to miss my bloom...

 - .

That's the spirit. Good boy!

 - .

woof

 - .

Sorry, I'm fresh out of treats. Flea bath?

 - .

Yeah, I think that would be good for you. I did wonder...

 - .

...I'll give you that one, but only because I left it open. Smartass.

 - Clearly Unpopular Suggestion!

Okay I'll make the suggestion people're going to hate--why not give everyone a gun? Works for the Swiss. That way everyone's just as much of a threat as the next guy, so it won't be a big Thing that one person's got one, or whatever. That and who knows what kinds of animals are out there. They might start closing in later. (I'm getting flashbacks to tales of forts with wolves circling just beyond the wooden fences if you catch my drift...)

 - .

Hate to point out the hole in your logic there, but if you look at statistics for gun crime Switzerland is only behind the USA in terms of levels of gun crime. So giving everyone a gun just increases the likelihood that you're going to be shot by one.

 - ...

Oh, poke away. I still say if we all had guns, no one would be unprotected, and no one would have all the power, either. I don't like the idea of anyone having that much power over everyone else here. I also don't like the idea of the guns being decommissioned either, because that leaves us all in a bind if we do need something like that. So...I say everyone gets one.

 - .

Giving everyone a gun doesn't give everyone the power - it just gives more power to the people who will use the guns, over the people who won't. You get someone who'll use a gun meeting someone who won't and what you'll get in one unarmed people, and one person with two guns...

 - ...

In this scenario, you're assuming people have John Woo powers, and can rock the dual gun thing. Which I don't really think that'll happen much, though if it did, it might be very cinematic, and we'd just need white doves to do continual flybys to complete the imagery. How's your dove training?

And while you're right about the people who will/won't use a gun, I don't see that it actually makes a point. Everyone's got kitchen knives too, that won't help a whole lot against wolves if the town starts looking tasty. We dealt with wolves in my experiment, it would have been a lot cooler if someone had just been able to shoot the rabid, out for blood things.

 - .

What about the people who can't use guns? Giving me one would be completely fucking useless, and I don't want people I don't know or trust to have a projectile weapon when I don't. Even if they have shit aim.

 - .

Actually I was going more with the point being that you'd end up with half the town unarmed. And not only unarmed, but unarmed and frightened because they'd (a) had it proved to them they couldn't do it if they needed to and (b) had their property removed from them.

Added to this, there's Hannah's good point - for some people it doesn't matter whether or not they are mentally capable of shooting someone/something if it comes down to it. Some people simply aren't physically capable of it.

The issue of wolves can be taken into consideration, but it doesn't require the entire town to be armed - last time I checked, wolves couldn't open doors. All you need is for someone to be able to take them out and for everyone else to just be sensible about things.

 - Rock and a Hard Place

I'm really not sure which is worse: giving everyone a gun, or locking them all away from everyone or completely disabling them, only to need them later. Both have their pros and cons. However, if everyone had a gun, at least we could protect ourselves.

Then again, I don't know the first thing about guns. Would there be some kind of training if everyone decided to give everyone a gun?

 - ...

See, that's what I'm saying. If we all had one...

Training could be good for everyone. I'm sure someone knows what they're doing. Like Everett. Or Seth or whatever. Anyone else know enough about firearms?

 - Not a fan of guns, but...

I have to back Janie up on this one. I'd rather know where the guns are for one, knowing I have one of them instead of wondering where they are, who has them, if someone might have hidden some away before anyone went to do inventory...

I also don't think I'd do too great fighting a wolf or a bear with nothing but kitchen utensils if it came to that.

 - .

If everyone has them, and was taught how to use them right, then it might help make people feel safer. But there are a lot of people who get scared at things after the experiments, so they might be jumpy and shoot on accident? I don't know. But all in one place with one person sounds bad too. Maybe if we let one person look after them, that person should change? So anyone who had the job would know they'd only have it for a week, and whoever came next would be able to check and make sure things weren't missing?

Both ways sound bad, but since we have to do one, I think A?

 - ..

okay this might sound fucked, but i am with Janie, because i want a gun. this place isn't anywhere even on the same continent as safe, and i want to be able to defend myself and my household. without having to go sign out a weapon and get approval checks and whatever bullshit. sometimes, there's not time. as long as everybody's careful and we keep an eye on the people who might get trigger happy (could have interview or something before you get your piece), i think that's the best option.

 - .

So, who would be doing the interviews? Is there anyone here that everyone actually trusts? Nobody trusts the interns, the interns have seen too much of the participants to trust them, nobody even knows the volunteers....

 - ..

fuck if i know, man. maybe a collection of people? somebody from each experiment, and a rep from the interns and the volunteers? make it a council-type decision? we're in a tough spot, and there's no way everybody's gonna be happy with any one thing. feel bad for the volunteers, they're the ones who're the most fucked here, they don't even know each other, probly, much less all of us.

 - .

If you're having reps from each experiment you should have interns from each experiment as well - they didn't know each other beforehand. They didn't know there were any other experiments.

 - .

So they say.

 - .

I'd rather be able to defend myself as well. Option A.

 - .

I can't touch one. Can't and won't. Don't know how, don't trust myself. But everyone else should. Option A, as long as I don't have to take one.

 - .

A current tally of who supports what, for my own sake as much as everyone else's (getting old is HELL, people)

Option A supporters:
Everett (me)
Janie
Jeremy
Rin
Gavin
Bethany
Ben

Option B supporters:
Hannah
Adam

Several others have chimed in but haven't picked an option yet, or I'm more senile than I thought and didn't catch their choices. Feel free to correct me at any time. And to respond to a few points that were brought up in the discussion:
- Yes, I am willing and able to train people on gun safety, maintenance, and use. 'Use' entails aiming and firing, obviously.
- If we end up rounding up the weapons and electing overseers, I agree with the idea of a rotating committee. The more of us involved in every aspect of this situation, the less room any one of us has for malfeasance.
-If we opt to pass the guns out around town, I'm taking it on myself to give preference based on peoples' involvement in fortifying ourselves here. To clarify; if you've been hiding in your house and eating canned peas since the power went out, you get what you get.

 - .

Put me down for option A. And no canned peas for me. I've also got firearms experience, so I don't need training.

Brett

 - ...

both options are fucked. i'm not used to being surrounded by guns but i don't think i like the option of some one person having them all. if you're teaching i might try to shoot one but... fucking hell.