Montana Highway Patrol Accident Reports: Fill & Download for Free

There had been a murder about a month before the incident. It happened at a railroad crossing on a gravel road that lead to the Golf Course, beside the Golf Course, in fact between the clubhouse and the road lay the city Cemetary, and the murder had taken place within about ten yards from the edge of the graveyard. Now we don’t get a lot of murders up in North Dakota, well we didn’t back then, so it was a major event, and the fact that our alcoholic Sheriff ruled it a car accident didn’t set well with the public, most of who knew better as the family of the murder victum was known to be in a lot of turmoil with spouse abuse, alcoholism and child abuse. In fact it got so bad that Unsolved Mysteries TV Show even came out and did a show on the killing.I had been off duty when the murder was discovered by my partner, who was, of course off duty as well, and just happened to drive his buddy home from a night of computer gaming (think 286 DOOM) and noticed the car fire that was used to cover the murder. The following morning, I accompanied the Sheriff back to the scene and helped him measure it out for an accident report. His conclusion was that the lady had been driving down that gravel road, lost control at the crossing, and ran off the road, across the railroad tracks, thus breaking her neck, then the car somehow bounced back to the edge of the road where it caught fire. Now I had a LOT of experience under my belt by then, but I also knew the Sheriff very well, so I just sort of mentioned to him that I could not really see it happening that way, but he was the boss, and pretty much told me to mind my own business.At any rate, things got real strange after that, with investigations by the Highway Patrol, the Crime Bureau and such, but being just a traffic cop at the time, I stayed out of the whole thing.So it happened about a month later, we intinsified patrols at the golf course because there had been some vandalism, also some headstones had been upended in the grave yard, so we made a few more passes through there at night as well. It was during one of those passes that I caught the sight of what appeared to be a lady in a white translucent dress, she was running from the location of the murder to the middle of the graveyard, then she was gone. I had kept her shape in the spot of my spotlight because my first thought was some damn kids were out there screwing with the grave yard or breaking into the golf clubhouse again, but no. I got out and walked the area, and there were no foot prints! Then the hair on my arms began to stand on end, and a chill went up and down my spine, I walked over to where the shape had dissipated, it was the grave of the murder victim. In life, she had been a friend, she worked nights at the liquor store, where we used to stop off for a pop or candy bar at night, and bs with her. Her son’s were friends of my son, so I knew them as well. So I really wasn't afraid of her spirit, but it sort of ingrained a strong belief that there may well be life after death, well something after death.A week or two after that incident, when I crossed that railroad crossing, I heard a woman’s scream. Again, I stopped the car, and got out with my flashlight, and checked the ditches and walked the graveyard and golf course clubhouse but found nothing. It was indeed strange.The next election, the Sheriff lost, and went into a drunken retirement. The murder was at last solved, sort of, a group of retired law enforcement officers from the area decided to form a team to re investigate the incident, when they found a lead that indicated her husband may have killed her, they notified authorities in Montana, where he had moved when things got to uncomfortable for him in the Dakota’s. The team met with the local Sheriff out in Montana, and chased the husband down, when they pulled his outfit over to serve a search warrant on his home and pickup he shot himself in the head. Everyone pretty much considered that a confession of sorts.

The question asks if it is LEGAL to drive at 80mph, under certain specific circumstances, even though the posted speed limit is 65mph: And the short answer is Yes and No. There are two answers to this question because there are two general categories of law that govern the activity of motorist speed. The vast majority of the times, these two categories of law are incongruent or otherwise in conflict with each other, as I will demonstrate with examples later on. However, after reading this article closely, you will be better informed on how the law works in the USA.The first category of law is known as "The Basic Speed Rule", and has been the preeminent legal doctrine, adjudication standard, and guidance for motorists since 1926; when a committee under Commerce Secretary Herbert Hoover compiled the first national Uniform Vehicle Code as a model for traffic laws in all states. The Basic Speed Rule states: NO PERSON SHALL DRIVE A VEHICLE GREATER THAN IS REASONABLE AND PRUDENT UNDER THE CONDITIONS AND HAVING REGARD TO THE ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL HAZARDS THEN EXISTING (UVC 11-801). To fully comprehend the Basic Speed Rule, we must understand its three variable components: 1) “Reasonable and prudent”; 2) “Conditions”; 3) “Hazards”.“Reasonable and Prudent” means in law “SAFE”. But we can further define what constitutes “SAFE”, because scientists have determined that safety (accident risk) has a parabolic correlation with speed. From a properly plotted parabolic risk curve, we can see that the 85th percentile speed has the lowest risk. A traffic engineering study is the only accepted method for determining the 85th Percentile per 1988 MUTCD 2B-10. Therefore, because “reasonable and prudent” means SAFE, and SAFE is calculated as the 85th percentile in a traffic engineering study: We begin to appreciate why the “reasonable and prudent” standard appearing in UVC 11-801 is necessarily predicated on traffic engineering studies.“CONDITIONS” include weather (wind, rain, sleet, snow, fog, etc.), road surface, road width, traffic volume, contrast and visibility, extreme temperatures, children, pedestrians, bicycles, etc. From these examples, it is clear that roadway “conditions” are infinitely variable and changing, and thus cannot be known in advance.“HAZARDS” include road construction, disabled motorists, emergency vehicles, safety cones, emergency flares, roadway defects, debris on the roadway, animal crossings, etc. From these examples, it is clear that “actual and potential hazards then existing” are infinitely variable and changing, and thus cannot be known in advance.From the foregoing analysis, we have learned that the proper application and enforcement of the Basic Speed Rule necessarily requires three things: 1) A comprehensive traffic engineering study; 2) A real-time assessment of the CONDITIONS on the roadway; 3) A real-time assessment of (potential) HAZARDS on the roadway. So, if we want to answer the question of whether it is LEGAL to drive 80mph under certain circumstances, as it relates to the application and enforcement of the Basic Speed Rule, then we need to consider the above three requirements. And here are the facts regarding the above three requirements:1) COMPREHENSIVE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDY: There is no speed limit sign anywhere in the USA that has always been in conformance with the periodically revised Federal DOT MUTCD standards for performing and maintaining comprehensive traffic engineering studies, using nationally recognized traffic engineering standards encoded under federal regulations going back to the 1988 MUTCD, in the calculus of the posted speed limit. (For any Licensed Traffic Engineers who might disagree, I would ask that at a MINIMUM, you be prepared to provide documentation proving that your speed limit has always been in conformance with each edition of the MUTCD. This would include the mandatory prerequisite study that demonstrates there is an accident risk on a given section of roadway that can only be cured by the proper posting of an R2-1 safety device. Otherwise, please do not waste my time, or try to confuse others with non-sense.)2) CONDITIONS: A traffic officer may cite you for not driving a speed that is safe for conditions, regardless of the speed posted on a speed limit sign, only if he/she can articulate precisely what was unsafe about your driving. Example: An officer cannot simply testify that it was raining, and you were driving 65mph in a 55mph zone. Those facts say nothing about whether you were driving safe for conditions. However, if the officer testifies that your vehicle was hydroplaning and swerving out of your lane during a rain storm while you were driving 55mph in a 65mph zone, then those facts MAY satisfy evidence of driving a speed that was not "reasonable and prudent under the conditions". I say "MAY", because there are many other factors to consider, such as the competence of the driver, the type and condition of tires on the vehicle, the type of vehicle, the degree of swerving, traffic engineer findings, etc. Unfortunately, traffic enforcement officers in the USA have little or no high level training on this subject.3) HAZARDS: In the same way that traffic officers are not given high level training for understanding roadway conditions, they receive little or no training for the proper identification of when hazards and speed are an unsafe combination.If you do not understand anything else from this article, I'm hoping that you will take the time to understand traffic engineering studies. So before we continue, let's touch on the basic requirements, methods, and documentation of a traffic engineering study. Federal regulations require that a traffic engineer perform a very basic statistical calculation to determine the speed limit that is posted on the R2-1 safety device (speed limit sign). The traffic engineer covertly measures the speed of traffic during free flowing conditions, and records those observations so that they can later be published in the final engineering report. Ideally, the sample will include thousands of observations taken at various points of weekdays, weeknights, and weekends during free flowing conditions. The engineer then calculates the 85th percentile speed of the sample. As an example, let's say the engineer measured the speed of 100 cars, and then sorted the speed from lowest to highest: The 85th percentile speed will be the speed of the 85th observation on the list. The 85th percentile is important, because that is the speed of the SAFEST vehicle i.e. the vehicle having the lowest probability of being involved in an accident or crash. The engineer is then required to round up from the 85th percentile to the nearest 5mph (MUTCD 1988). Under certain circumstances, the engineer may round down to the nearest 5mph, if certain circumstances exist such as hazards. The engineer publishes their findings and recommendations, including all data observations obtained, in a final comprehensive report. This is required for each and every section of roadway that uses R2-1 safety devices. However, a prerequisite study is required that indicates and documents an above average accident risk for the section of roadway under review; and, the study must provide evidence and support for the conclusion that accidents can be reduced by posting an R2-1 safety device (speed limit sign).We can now answer the question of whether it is legal to drive 100mph, in the flow of traffic, with a speed limit of 65mph "within the context of the Basic Speed Rule". First, the question does not assume or give any evidence that the driver is doing anything unsafe; or that there are aberrant conditions, or substantial hazards existing. What we do know is that the driver is driving with the flow of traffic, which roughly equates to the 50th percentile speed, which is less than the safest speed of the 85th percentile. So, we know that the driver is actually driving a speed that is less than the SAFEST possible speed. In this scenario, with speed as the only factor in question, we know that the motorist is driving a speed that is reasonable and prudent for the conditions. Thus, the answer to the question is unequivocally "YES", because the motorist is in compliance with the Basic Speed Rule.Before we answer the second part of the question, i.e. the question as it pertains to the second category of law under consideration, I will preempt any attempts toward impeaching the Basic Speed Rule. This preemptive exercise is necessary, because the vast majority of Americans are ignorant of the Basic Speed Rule, its history, and why it is important. So, let's establish some basic facts regarding the Basic Speed Rule.#1) The Basic Speed Rule, promulgated and codified under a federal regulation known as Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC) 11-801, is the law of the land. The UVC was adopted by Congress under the Highway Safety Act 1966, for the purpose of establishing adjudication standards for all states to follow, and has the force and effect of LAW:Section 1A.11 Relation to Other PublicationsStandard:To the extent that they are incorporated by specific reference, the latest editions of the following publications, or those editions specifically noted, shall be a part of this Manual:25. "Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC) and Model Traffic Ordinance," 2000 Edition (National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances)#2) California is the only state that attempts to comply with Federal Regulation UVC 11-801. This is easily verified by reviewing California Vehicle Code (CVC) 22350:CVC 22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.Amended Ch. 252, Stats. 1963. Effective September 20, 1963.There is only one minor difference between CVC 22350 and UVC 11-801, and that is that CVC 22350 replaces HAZARDS with “safety of persons or property”. But taken on the whole, CVC 22350 is substantively the same as UVC 11-801, and is a model for enforcing and adjudicating R2-1 safety devices in compliance with Federal law. And you will notice that California adopted the Basic Speed Rule effective September 20, 1963, just a few years before the Basic Speed Rule became the law of the land i.e. Federal Law. To this day, California traffic officers continue to write millions of traffic tickets under CVC22350 every year.#3) The Basic Speed Rule language appears in the vehicle code statutes of all 50 states.#4) Prior to the passage of the federal fuel crisis speed limit of 55 mph in 1974, the Basic Speed Rule was the de facto standard in all 50 states in the USA.#5) Prior to 1974, some states such as Nevada and Montana did not have a maximum speed limit. Speeding tickets written on highways in those states were based purely on a violation of the Basic Speed Rule, because highway speed limits were not posted in those states.#6) After the fuel crisis 55mph speed limit was repealed by Congress in 1996, for approximately 3 years, Montana did not have maximum speed limits for its highways and interstates. However, Montana highway patrol continued to write tickets for violations of the Basic Speed Rule.STATUTORY SPEED LIMITSNow, we can answer the second part of our question as it relates to the category of speed limit laws known as "statutory speed limits". A statutory speed limit is a legislative decree for speed limits to be posted according to the road type. For example, California has CVC 22349 for speed limits on highways and interstates, to be posted at 55, 60, or 65 mph, depending on the type of highway. California also has CVC 22356 "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than 70 miles per hour, as posted."-for interstates that meet certain prescribed conditions appearing in the statute.By the way: Although Legislators have no background in traffic engineering or roadway safety, when they pass statutory speed limit laws, they are replacing the traffic engineers' determination of the 85th percentile safest speed with their own INVENTED NUMERIC. This has disastrous consequences for roadway safety. Conservative estimates are that several thousand deaths (5,000+) occur every year because of under posted speed limits. After Petersen published his findings supporting this conclusion in the early 1990's, the federal government refused to fund any further speed limit safety studies.But let's answer the second part of the question, as it relates in the context of statutory speed limits.If the speed limit is posted as 65mph, and you are travelling ANY speed higher than 65mph, the officer has probable cause to arrest you under the relevant state statute. Period. No exceptions. No defense allowed. As a matter of law, there is no allowable margin of error.In California, the relevant state statute is CVC 22349 or CVC 22356. Theoretically, the officer could also cite you under CVC 22350, but California has anti-speed trap laws that allow you to appear in court to defend yourself. Under CVC 22350, you simply appear in court and ask to see the relevant traffic engineering survey; and if the prosecution does not produce a certified copy of the engineering study, your case will be dismissed upon request. Since California does not do any substantive engineering studies for its highways, your case would be easy to defend, which is why you are not likely to receive a ticket under CVC 22350 by the California Highway Patrol.Conclusion - The answer to the second part of the question requires an understanding of the two legal standards in the USA: The Basic Speed Rule versus Statutory Speed Limits. Taking the question exactly as it is stated, and with the above points in mind, the answer to the question is as follows:It is legal to drive 80mph under the Basic Speed Rule, but illegal to drive 80mph within the context of the statutory speed limit.Unfortunately, the vast majority of times, these two legal standards are in conflict. In other words: Motorists are cited for speeding when they are, as a matter of fact, driving safely. Perhaps the most shocking fact is that the majority of speeding tickets, approximately 90% of all speeding tickets, are written to drivers who are driving at the safest possible speeds i.e. 75th percentile to 95th percentile.Another shocking fact is that mortalities actually INCREASE substantially when speed limits are under posted. Writing tickets generates a lot of revenue for the government, but this means that politicians and police officers are killing motorists: I call this the "Highway Death Tax". And it needs to end. This is why I created the Motorist Union.There is one additional point that I'd like to make concerning the constitutional rights of motorists. The use of INVENTED NUMERICS to arrest motorists is unconstitutional for many reasons. In the interest of brevity, I will focus only on the 4th Amendment:The US Supreme Court decided in Whren vs. U.S. that probable cause is a necessary prerequisite for any traffic stop:The Fourth Amendment guarantees "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." Temporary detention of individuals during the stop of an automobile by the police, even if only for a brief period and for a limited purpose, constitutes a "seizure" of "persons" within the meaning of this provision. See Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 653 (1979); United States v. Martinez Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 556 (1976); United States v. Brignoni Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 878 (1975). An automobile stop is thus subject to the constitutional imperative that it not be "unreasonable" under the circumstances. As a general matter, the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred. See Prouse, supra, at 659; Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 109 (1977) (per curiam)In the context of a speeding violation, we assert that the legal test for probable cause turns on the adjudication standard set by Congress i.e. the Basic Speed Rule of UVC 11-801. Simply stated, if a motorist is driving in a “reasonable and prudent” manner, there is no probable cause to arrest them. States cannot prove that their statutory speed limits do not target “reasonable and prudent” drivers, because their regulatory standard has no probative factual, legal, or engineering foundation; therefore, the regulatory standard enforced under statutory speed limits results in an unknown number of arrests that are made in the absence of probable cause: A clear violation of the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution (emphasis).More importantly, we argue that any stop that is made solely for violating a statutory speed limit (sic), in the absence of any probative empirical, scientific, or engineering evidence that justifies the statutory speed limit, is necessarily pretextual. Numerous US Supreme Court cases, including Whren vs. U.S., have made it clear that pretextual arrests violate the 4th Amendment requirement of “probable cause”.The essence of our argument here is that if the numeric limit (and/or its enforcement threshold) are “spurious”, then the “probable cause” to arrest is also “spurious”. When we say “spurious”, we mean there is no probative empirical, scientific, or engineering justification.As to any argument that the wholesale violation of 4th Amendment protections from illegal seizure should continue in the interest of custom, established practice, or stare decisis, we turn to the Supreme Court decision of Arizona v Gant; where the unconstitutional search powers granted to police officers vis-à-vis New York v Belton was overturned:“The doctrine of stare decisis is of course “essential to the respect accorded to the judgments of the Court and to the stability of the law,” but it does not compel us to follow a past decision when its rationale no longer withstands “careful analysis.” Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 577 (2003). We have never relied on stare decisis to justify the continuance of an unconstitutional police practice. And we would be particularly loath to uphold an unconstitutional result in a case that is so easily distinguished from the decisions that arguably compel it.”If we compare the statutory enforcement thresholds of the several states, we find some states using 55 MPH on interstates (Oregon), and some states using thresholds as high as 85 MPH (Texas). And there is no probative empirical, scientific, or engineering justification for any of them, because none of the several states set their highway and interstate speed limits based on the “reasonable and prudent” standard of UVC 11-801. Therefore, we argue that these statutory speed limits must be declared arbitrary and capricious, pretextual, and unconstitutional after a “careful analysis”.It is time for all states to articulate how/why the “spurious” numbers of 55-85 MPH establishes “probable cause” that motorists are violating the “reasonable and prudent” adjudication standard set by Congress under UVC 11-801. There are limited ways that the states can prove that their INVENTED NUMERIC thresholds are not spurious, such as empirical data, scientific studies, and engineering covenants that support their contention. But this is where things become “sticky”.Assuming arguendo that a single state such as California can show that its regulatory standard of 70/75 MPH is THE threshold that properly establishes violations of the “reasonable and prudent” standard, “probable cause” for arrest, no rebuttable defenses, etc.: In that scenario, the US DOT must explain why the other 49 states are not using the 70/75 MPH thresholds. After all, the Highway Safety Act of 1966 requires uniformity of application, expectation, and adjudication.The bottom line is this: More than 50 million speeding tickets are written every year, and there is absolutely no probable cause for over 99% of these arrests. How long will Americans continue drinking the Kool-Aid?If you would like to help put an end to the non-sense of statutory speed limits, then please donate to the Motorist Union at the Motorist Union paypal account. And please educate as many motorists with this information as you can. Your life, or the life of someone you love, may depend on it.Richard ColterPresident - Motorist Union

Survivalist…evil.Doomsday Prepper…naive.Pragmatic…shit happens.Why evil? Bill Clinton’s administration dug their heels in and began a war with the lifestyle, starting with Randy Weaver (I met him in person in 1999 in Birmingham, AL, at a Y2K Gun Show, and years later crossed paths with Gerry Spence, the lawyer that got him acquitted), along with the Waco debacle, followed by the OKC bombing, and the Olympics bomber Eric Rudolph…these things and much more made the term “survivalist” a dirty word with the government, and especially the media, with anyone associated with that lifestyle suspected of total anti-government thoughts, guns and ammo stocked to the roof, and dangerous to everyone who crossed their paths. The Unabomber? Lived in a shed in Montana. Survivalist. Many like him all over the country.Remember back in the 70’s that a survivalist was a back to nature fan, someone wanting out of the rat race, dropping out of the hamster wheel to enjoy a slower, less complicated way of life.Mother Earth Magazine was their path to a better, healthier lifestyle. The idea was to find a new path, to see what he or she could really do to live on their wits, in a humble, quiet corner of nature, many miles from the bustling hum of the big city.Suddenly, liberals began to see self sufficient people as threats to the benovelent mother government that US citizens have watched become less friendly, and more tyrannical over the last decade.Laws being passed for people living in tiny homes in or on the edge of town, using rain collection for water, and solar and wind for energy…breaking municipal laws and being evicted from their own property, because even local government demands that any occupied home MUST be connected to city water and electric power.Where is our freedom? Where is our ability to go to the woods, as Thoreau did at Walden Pond, to see what nature could teach him, if he would only listen. Simplify, simplify.We only want to survive our lives, in as simple and frugal ways as we can, maybe having interesting hobbies that open our minds, let us become creative, and maybe create useful and thoughtful things that offer anyone interested the ability to gather those tools, supplies, and training to make their own lifestyle a bit more bullet proof. Why? Because Shit Happens.By the way, I have skills, tools, abilities, training, knowledge, experience, and a vast library of documents and manuals that would curdle your toes if you saw the depth and breadth of what our own government has done to create a nationwide plan for “continuity of government”.Am I a survivalist? A Prepper? A realist? Do I love my family? Do I care for and watch out for my friends and neighbors, looking for things that seem out of place? Do I think of just a portion of potential threats that might affect my family someday…or has already happened in my life, and will absolutely happen again in the future, somewhere near me, when I least expect it?I think like a Boy Scout, the old school ways…BE PREPARED.Call me what you will. I don’t care. I’ll make sure I’m ready and able to take care of myself. I’ll make sure my family is prepped and understands what to do for the most likely events to happen where we live.Then, when I’m not home, and I’m out and about…and I see someone in need of help, or a threat coming from the sky or the river, or a potential failure of something that could affect many lives, I act. I help. I get involved. I step up. Because I have the experience, the training, the study and backstory to dangerous threats to people anywhere, anytime.I’m. THAT. Guy.Why? Because I’m someone who has dealt with the worst of Mother Nature, with tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, lightning strikes, house fires, car accidents, sick children having to go to the hospital, broken limbs, children’s seizures, animal attacks, burglary, threats on the street, attempted muggings, dead bodies, leveled neighborhoods, search and rescue, volunteer work with state and federal agencies, careers spanning a decade at both state and federal government jobs, training for self defense for correctional facility jobs, wild animal problems, farm and ranch accidents, blizzards, ice storms, breakdowns 60 miles from the nearest city in any direction, crime, holdups, man made disasters, horrible multiple vehicle accidents where I was first on scene at gory accidents on rural highways, hitting large wildlife at 65 miles an hour in the dark, and so much more. Yes, truly as I live and breathe and write these words, ALL of these things have been part of my life in the last 30 years.Hitting a deer at 65 mph killed my classic vanContinuity of government. Selfish, greedy, thoughtless ingrates paying millions of dollars of other people’s money, to get into congress, so that THEY are high enough on the food chain to have enough power and gall to take a net worth of $800k of so, and a simple few terms in that position build their networth to tens of millions more.COG. That phrase replaces “civil defense”, where the idea was to help our nation’s citizens prepare for global thermonuclear war, when the communists created their own nuclear weapons, after spies stole the intel and plans.The government itself has become the very thing it despised….a survivalist tribe that will save its own ass before it saves its citizens. To hell with all the little people…the voters…the taxpayers.That’s what we have. And because that’s what we have, millions of Americans are stocking up on whatever advertised products they find, that offers safety, convenience, and long term investment…and become Preppers.At this very moment, 3/20/19, the Midwest is suffering the effects of a winter storm “bomb” cyclone…a hurricane over dry land. Nebraska is in shambles from the flooding and historic levels of damage. Minnesota got a ton more snow than usual, and it’s starting to melt off.The Missouri River starts way up in Montana, winding it’s way thru the Dakotas, Nebraska, and then right into Missouri, and that huge giant surge of water and vast chunks of ice still embedded in it is heading this way. Thankfully, it passes 35 miles south of my home, then u-turns north, before taking a wide right turn and dumping right into the Mississippi River, just north of downtown St. Louis.The snow and heavy rains of the “bomb” continued into Minnesota and further east, and that cold ice and snow has started melting. The surge heading this way down the Mississippi, or at least the first one, should come through here by Sunday.My home is located less than three miles from the Mississippi River, at the Foley Access area, which as of yesterday, was already under water.The access road to the river, is now flooded, and the river is still rising.The Winfield lock and dam 25, is 4 miles south on the river. That’s where the official flood level measurements are done.We were just informed this evening, by the county EMA manager, that “be prepared to evacuate”. Surge number one shouldn’t be that bad…it’s the one in late April that may surpass the 1993 Great Flood of St. Louis and surrounding areas. That flood hit the top step of the tiny city hall across the street, in this little hamlet of 164 people. The floor of my home is two feet lower than that top step.We’re starting to make plans to put our most important belongings into a storage unit, in Winfield, that is 50 feet higher than our current location. We may loose our home, furniture, and appliances. Our beds, our sofa, two chest freezers, and new fridge. No place to take them. No ability to move them. I’ve never felt such a threat to my family from nature…and the inevitable. But, shit happens…A daily trip down that dirt road to see how far the river is moving up in flood mode. When it crosses the smaller second levee, that’s when we get the last of our stuff, and head to storage, because all that separates the flood waters from us is flat, open farm land, a single line railroad, a two lane county highway, and the local fire department. Then an alley, my shed and my home. It will get bad really fast.What happens to my grandkids school? My daughter’s job in Ellsberry? Our roof over our head.We’re about to find out.I can guarantee you this. We. Will. Survive.We will find a new home, above flood stage, and restart. We’ll get the Grandkids education taken care of.That’s pretty much the crux of your question. Experience with a wide range of disasters big and small. Learning how to avoid loss of family or belongings better and better each time. Being acutely aware of when it’s time to get the hell out of Dodge.Am I a survivalist? Yes.Am I a doomsday Prepper? Hell no. I deal in reality.Am I a pragmatist? What do you think?I’ve spent 30 years building up an online library, that I’ve been sharing online for nearly 22 years…for free. 78 years of government preparedness survival documents, going all the way back to 1941. 3.2 million printable pages…and I’ve read most of it.Funny thing. With the government training I’ve had, the investment into one of largest libraries of this kind of information on the Internet, my training, and certifications, I applied last year to the EMA agency in the county just south of us, I was hopeful. The position was emergency management specialist.I made it to an interview. Four county officials including police and sheriff officers were in the panel interview. I mentioned my training, my certifications, my federal and state careers totaling 20 of the last 28 years, and then I mentioned that website. Screech. Brakes applied.Police captain asks, “Are you one of those doomsday preppers?” Sarcastic, nose raised, eyes narrowed, and all five people in this interview stare at me, waiting for an answer.My answer? “No sir, I am not. I believe and write about the very basic tenets of one of our formerly most esteemed youth groups in our nation…the Boy Scouts. Be prepared.”My 2005 Telly Award for a short video produced for the local high school and police department, for a teen group called “Young Adults Against Addiction” or Y.A.A.A. The governor of Wyoming saw this video and others and helped get it around the state.I explained my experience, my volunteer work, some of which I have awards for, and my belief that helping the community become ready for the most likely threats that might occur is a prudent and thoughtful thing to do.Monday of this week, got to the top of the levee but the water was coming over the only road in.A few more short questions, and I was done. I handed them ALL the required copies of my training, including FEMA classes, weather spotter, community volunteer work, college degrees, letters of recommendation from all my jobs going back to 1991, credit report, and some more obscure things they requested, such as my high school transcript (1978).I felt I’d given it my best shot. I knew it was going to be tough, but I saw it through.So yes, even now, survivalists and preppers are frowned upon by the government, even at the county level…and its probably going to stay that way…and I think it’s a sad thing.A solution? Volunteer in your community in any area of public safety. Show them what you can do. And give it your all. CERT. Volunteer fire department. PTA. Civil Air Patrol. Scouts.That’s how we change being a Prepper to being a self sufficient person who you can count on to help your community…and go do it.In all seriousness, being prepared is about BEING AN ADULT, ALL THE TIME.It just can’t be said any simpler than that.