They Will Seize Your Food and Resources: “Hoarding of Just About Anything Can Be Banned”


Mac Slavo
SHTFPlan.com
July 2, 2013

In March of 2012 President Obama signed an executive order which, among other things, gives the federal government authority over every resource and infrastructure element in the United States.

The new order provides specific definitions for each of these essential infrastructure elements, indicating that all resources, not just those owned by large farms and businesses, are to be directly controlled by the government.

…

The signing of the National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order grants the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Labor, the Department of Defense and other agencies complete control of all US resources, including the ability to seize, confiscate or re-delegate resources, materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense as delegated by the following agencies:

That the government would seize energy depots, large farms, water reservoirs, and infrastructure-critical factories in the midst of a widespread disaster is a given, but how far can they really go?

According to a detailed analysis by Code Green Prep, The Present Legal Support for Seizing our Food and other Supplies suggests they can go all the way, including what you have stocked in your home pantry.

…the President can order the military to do pretty much anything to anyone, at any time, for any reason.

Specifically, he can order the military to ‘restore public order’ – and you might wonder what ‘public order’ is. Truly, that’s a broad term capable of many meanings, and so too is the verb before the noun – ‘restore’. What types of things can he order the military to do to restore the public order? There’s no limit specified, so presumably whatever he (and he alone with no need to get approval from Congress) feels to be prudent, necessary, and appropriate.

The legal framework was partially outlined in the aforementioned executive order, butDavid Spero notes that it’s not the only law on the books:

Hoarding of Just About Anything Can Be Banned

…

These definitions are written in to the 1950 War and National Defense Defense (sic) Production Act, and so let’s see what the act itself has to say for itself.

Go directly to section 2072. That’s the key part from our perspective.

§2072. Hoarding of designated scarce materials

In order to prevent hoarding, no person shall accumulate (1) in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption, or (2) for the purpose of resale at prices in excess of prevailing market prices, materials which have been designated by the President as scarce materials or materials the supply of which would be threatened by such accumulation. The President shall order published in the Federal Register, and in such other manner as he may deem appropriate, every designation of materials the accumulation of which is unlawful and any withdrawal of such designation.

In making such designations the President may prescribe such conditions with respect to the accumulation of materials in excess of the reasonable demands of business, personal, or home consumption as he deems necessary to carry out the objectives of this Act [sections 2061 to 2170, 2171, and 2172 of this Appendix]. This section shall not be construed to limit the authority contained in sections 101 and 704 of this Act [sections 2071 and 2154 of this Appendix].

So the President can simply say that anything more than (for example) a week’s supply of food (and all the other things listed) is an amount ‘in excess of the reasonable demands of personal consumption’ and then order the Army to impound everything you have in excess of that amount.

…

We don’t want to get into the deeper darker conspiracy theories of what FEMA and HSD might be and do in the future, but we would like to be reassured that these theories truly are as impossible as we hope them to be.

We have no answer to these questions. But we wish we did, because we can readily see a future scenario where the government (which, of course, always ‘knows best’) decides the best thing to do is to centralize all food and other survival resources – all the stuff listed above in the Executive Order – and then distribute it ‘fairly’ as it sees fit.

And, in case you didn’t read the first part of this two-part article,distributing ‘fairly’ is a code phrase that means ‘we’ll take as much as we can from people who have the thing, and then give it to people who don’t have the thing’. The people without the thing doubtless feel that is fair, but how do you feel, as someone more likely to be losing your preps, while seeing people who laughed at you for being a prepper now having your preps passed over to them?

[emphasis add]

Full Reports via Code Green Prep

Part 1: Preppers Beware : Our “Hoarding” Can Be Deemed Illegal
Part 2: The Present Legal Support for Seizing our Food and other Supplies

It should be clear from the laws that are already in effect that the government has given itself a legal pretext for confiscating anything they so choose in the midst of an emergency.

During Hurricane Katrina we saw officials go door-to-door to disarm Americans against their will and in violation of the Second Amendment. They had no authority to do so in a legal sense. They did it anyway.

Should an emergency befall the United States, the military, national guard, and local police operating under orders from the Department of Homeland Security will have carte blanche to do as they please.

For evidence of this look no further than Boston, Massachusetts just a few short months ago when the government declared nothing short of a de facto state of martial law. Militarized police forcibly entered the homes of hundreds of Americans without permission.

In a widespread emergency where supply lines have been threatened and millions of Americans are without essential resources because they failed to prepare, the government will swoop in and attempt to take complete control.

They will enter our homes and search them without a warrant. They will confiscate contraband. And they will take any ‘excessive resources’ that you may have accumulated. This includes food, toiletries, precious metals and anything else emergency planners and officials deem to be a scarce material.

Expect it. Prepare for it.

Or quit talking and Act, Do what everyone here has been saying for years... join the Militia and fight it NOW...

greywolf

Also stock knowledge and seeds. They are a wonderful hedge against threats to you and yours from being "holodomored" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Good luck with that. You can get away with quite a bit, but when you start fricken with the chow. People are gonna freak!

GW said it right. Expect it. Prepare for it. No surprises here. I would politely suggest you kill anyone from any agency who would take your chow. Hope that was PC enough for the pansies and trolls out there.

The only times they get away with that with our kinds of people is when we are outnumbered and setup, then are facing at best 10 to 1 odds (often as high as 40 to 1) under circumstances where we are caught by surprise.

Under circumstances where there are a dozen of us determined to fight for a particular zone of control good luck with that one.

Now whether or not they would legalize having FEMA managers and a few guards take supervisory control over the Walmarts and some food processing plants; I think the main idea has been to prevent corporate price gouging on basic commodities, not going door to door and emptying pantries.

Now as for stubborn old Farmer Jack or Rancher Rick, deciding that he is not going to allow anyone to empty the grain silos or haul the cattle out without first payment in gold bars, at his price gouge demand level, if he does not have a hell of a lot of backup, then yeah, the old man and his shotgun will he the speed bump between the food convoy and the tactical teams whose job is to make sure the food deliveries happen, regardless of any objections. That's where you get into a couple of those scenarios like we saw in Jericho. That's a community defense, not some greedy rancher deciding that he wants five ounces of Gold per cow plus a hundred ounces of silver for the food convoy to travel on his right of way to get water and expecting to play victim with a rallying cry when he does not get it.

Greedy rancher???

The cattle or grain are his property. If he wants a ton of gold bars that's just fine.

If folks don't want to pay his price they should have got off their lazy asses and prepared to take care of themselves rather than expecting uncle scam to steal it for them.

It is a cute rhetorical issue until you are having to deal with situations like that in real life in a crisis.

Say for example the crisis happens, and the institute the mark of the beast system yet earlier on, it was fashionable for you and you remnant of patriots to get face tatoos, to have a high profile, to be known, and when trying to bug out, you get stranded in a town that is run by the collaborators. There is no hiding it, they know who you are, you know who they are, and they know it is to their financial advantage not to sell to you at any price, they don't want your silver, nobody takes cash, but they only want interbank beast system credits, and if the chip your right wrist is a fake, they don't want to do business with you.

We can moralize and argue rhetoric for weeks, but if you are in charge of a convoy of refugees running low on supplies and everyone is being a prick to you, you either take decisive action or someone else will, or you will be seeing your people surrendering family by family because they want to eat.

At some point, the choice gets made to exercise loyalty to the people who supported you, or someone else will purchase their loyalty. At first you made very reasonable offers for the supplies, but were rebuffed. You need the supplies, you made very fair offers, and they got unreasonable, and there is a crisis going on. That's called the parlay. If the parlay fails, then the choices get simpler, use force or fail to survive. Any governing body of any sort is going to recognize that, and in honest intent, it would be when survival is at stake, not some prick going out and playing Sheriff of Nottingham on some made up emergency. What can and will happen when government abdicates responsibility is that someone else will eventually assert authority in that power vacuum.

We don't want to have to broadcast how those things go, but our main focus is to maintain a level of moral superiority to our enemies, not moral superiority to Mother Theresa.

Nobody would need to ask me twice to pitch in for the good of the community, and to be entirely honest, I expect the same of others I am in community with, and if someone wants to be stubborn and unreasonable, then I have a conference with my people do the checkup from the neck up, make sure everyone agrees that we were being reasonable, and then take a very realistic and sober look at priorities for survival. We will NOT be starving on the side of the road somewhere while the supplies exist within reach, period. Not while I am in charge of much of anything. If someone is expecting me to miss meals over their belief system, realistically, I would expect to see that coming long enough beforehand to bail from such a dysfunctional group or situation.

Some of us have bee dealing with exactly that as we work to get the enclaves built and starting to come to the realities of dealing with extremely selfish and dysfunctional people who probably would be a detriment anyway. Nobody is just chomping at the bit waiting to hoist the Jolly Roger and go shooting and looting over these issues, but everyone needs to make some very sober and realistic choices as far ahead of time to understand how this works, and a lot of those choices in the preservation of wealth in a crisis means making alliances and purchasing loyalty for security, not emotional friendship.

On a day to day basis, I am always going to be the most honest and ethical guy around, as long as everyone is reasonable. Get unreasonable with me, then the game changes and the rules change.

When those rules change, we need to understand that some people will be emotionally and therefor psychologically and therefore fiscally incapable of dealing with the circumstances of those rule changes.

Security in SHTF, or any time for that matter, takes resources and manpower that are usually not nearly as important in easy times, since in the easy times, people don't even like to have to pay for insurance until after there has been a loss of some sort, and they can go for decades like that, getting used to taking some risks and being lucky. Succeeding in a business environment where being stubborn and demanding works well, but that's under circumstances where most people have several choices and nobody with any real power to retaliate is going to be particularly desperate to make things go their way.

What that successful person may be in denial of is that when that system is destabilized, so is the previous set of rules concerning what has worked for security and insurance, and what things are worth if and when they are delivered to market under the new rules. If you are looking at government which is above the law in the best of times, then in the worst of times, it is realistic to expect that people with anything worth taking are going to have to navigate a landscape of authorities and brigands and make the deals and alliances where they can.

that's part of why I have been moving most of my bulk survival supplies to a location where there is real security, a combination of passive security and active security, but most importantly, the right kinds of people. I am also looking at sufficient distance between that location and where I normally live that the parasites are not to follow and any cost to benefit analysis calculated by looters will come to the conclusion that the risks associated with an attack will outweigh any profit.

Anyone with something to protect ought to be thinking the exact same way, forming and maintaining those alternative communities for the purpose of survival and making an honorable reputation among such communities that if they are in need, doors will be opened, but the flip side has to be a willingness to open doors to the right kinds of people who will reciprocate loyalty.

That all depends upon who the people are!

The millions on the Obama phones, receiving the free food will be for it. Those will be the ones the media are asking, not you and I.

This hoarding law has actually been on the books since the mid 1940's. Obama has just applied it and his EO to enhance the readiness acts passed by congress in December 2012.

The only way they can get a foot hold on Martial Law is with 20 to 30 percent of the people asking for it in the streets. They have a chance to go as soon as August.

The people who receive food stamps do so from the Dept of Agriculture. The new Senate and house plans call for reducing the funding to the Dept of Agriculture.

They can't reduce the FDA inspections since that is a funding source. So where better to reduce by sequestration than the food stamps that millions use to eat on. When the debit cards stop working in the ATMs and Wally World they will be in the street.

When a governor declares a state of Emergency we will again see foreign troops in the streets of our towns and cities.

Recently, Obummer signed a mutual aid type agreement with the Russians that allows the use of Russian troops within the CONUS for peace keeping purposes during a state of emergency.

Russian Forces to Provide “Security” At US Events

FEMA signs deal with Russian Emergency Situations Ministry to “exchange experts”
http://www.prisonplanet.com/russian-forces-to-provide-security-at-us-events.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kK6nLz79ylA

Breacher, while I understand what you are saying...

Reality will be nasty. When shtf, people are not going to be charitable. If they feel sorry for every hungry group who passes through their area, they'll soon be starving themselves due to giving supplies away to the needy.

In this area, the rule is simple...Keep moving or be shot. There will be no discussion. Anyone who attempts to steal anything by force will receive no quarter.

http://codegreenprep.com/2012/08/four-waves-of-food-and-shelter-seekers/

http://codegreenprep.com/2012/08/pr...fugees-bandits-and-other-problem-groups/

http://codegreenprep.com/2012/08/sh...-people-into-your-community-after-tshtf/

Ok. Let me say it in a different way. You (meaning) an agency of your choice. Frick with my chow, or my families chow. Yeah, were gonna fight. It wont matter who dies in that exchange either.

They need a moment of pause to think about how much they earn and if their pay scale is worth dealing with folks who wont and dont back down. They must also understand that their own families are now at risk. Sometimes trouble follows you home...

My point is this. You frick with me, and I will definitely frick your world up! The juice isnt worth the squeeze.

No where to run or hide. So, Im not going to bother. I say, stand your ground and make them earn it the hard way. They always seem to forget one of the most important lessons in life. They bleed to!

All of which gets us into the classic battle of haves vs have-nots. I think we also end up looking at these things on a case by cases basis and situation by situation basis.

People survive with what is there in the environment around them, and we are NOT in a poor country. There is a social safety net in effect, but what I am finding in getting the retreat and enclave situation together is the worst people to deal with are those who will parasitically manipulate those around them or simply not reciprocate contributions when they have the means to do so even when that means to do so might have to involve going to sign up for the food stamps and welfare.

Any of us could be a house fire or vehicle breakdown from having little or no resources in a bad situation. Even in SHTF, sure, there is a place for charity, but lets not lose focus on what we are talking about here, which is the threat of government use of force in wealth distribution. I'll go out on a limb here and say that someone else being stubborn and unreasonable during a disaster then having the expectation of volunteer freedom fighters to just show up and defend their wealth for free has many other guesses coming.

To clarify my point...

We don't intend to just light folks up because they are in need, begging for assistance.

The local NOMAD operates by the 10 percent rule. Everyone sets aside 10 percent of their food and supplies to help those who are truly in need.

There are cases where we will trade goods for things we might need or for certain services or work.

But, people who expect to just walk in and demand we turn over our supplies because they were too stupid or lazy to help themselves will be dealt with harshly. We refuse to let our people starve just to help bums. Gangs or government thieves will be treated with extreme prejudice.

+1