Conflicted: Gangs and Innocents – What Would You Do?

Conflicted is a Survival Card Game.  Each card in the deck has a scenario that will stretch how you would respond in an SHTF situation.  What would you do?  Leave your thoughts in the comment section below!

SCENARIO – You were told by your scouts that a gang in a large caravan is headed your way and your community leaders identify a choke point where you could easily kill them all.  It is well known that the gang travels with women and children, and to ambush them would mean the death of innocents for sure.  Your camp would be overwhelmed if you let them through due to their large numbers. Would you sacrifice their innocent in order to save yours?

Don’t forget to leave your thoughts in the comments below.

If you are interested in purchasing your own Conflicted deck – CLICK HERE.





This article first appeared on Ed That Matters.

Get updates in your email when a new article is posted. Join the Newsletter or grab the RSS Feed.

If you enjoyed the article, please vote for the site at Top Prepper Websites.

Copyright – Content on Ed That Matters (unless the work of a Third-Party) may be reproduced in part or whole with attribution through a link to If you are interested in a Third Party article, please contact the author for permission.

Todd Sepulveda

I'm the owner/editor of Prepper Website, a DAILY preparedness aggregator that links to the best preparedness articles on the internet. I'm also a public school administrator and a pastor. My personal blog is Ed That Matters, where I write about preparedness and from time to time, education. Connect with me on one of my social media outlets below.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
TwitterFacebookLinkedInGoogle PlusYouTube

11 thoughts on “Conflicted: Gangs and Innocents – What Would You Do?

  1. vey

    These moral dilemmas are always tough, but my answer is, “Yes, I would ambush them”.

    First, I would need to be confident that the gang intended to attack our group. If I thought they were simply traveling through and unlikely to get into a conflict I would pass, but if it was clear that they are here to engage with us, I would ambush. Although it’s a pre-emptive strike, I would still consider it self-defense.

    I would give clear instructions to the ambush team that we are to do our best to not injure innocent people, and if they are injured, we should give them aid to the best of our abilities.

    We will pray for God to spare the lives of the innocent, and provide a means of escape for those He wants to save. Like Rahab in Jericho, he can save the life of anyone He desires. If we are able to kill their captors, we may actually be saving their lives from something much worse than death anyway.

    So ethically and logically I think the answer is, “yes” to the ambush.

  2. Illini Warrior

    Sorry, not going to be such a thing as “innocents” in a serious long term SHTF – women will be armed and fighting along side the men – and children will be used as baiting to trap the unlucky with a weak heart ….

  3. Cyan

    It really depends on how much of a direct threat this group is to my own people. I don’t believe in killing just for the sake of killing and I don’t believe in causing undue pain when or if it can be avoided.

    If bloodshed is unavoidable; we will be using that chokepoint, but our shooters will be picking their shots to avoid those who are not a threat. The survivors will be rounded up for questioning- their weapons & loot confiscated until the community decides what to do from there.

    Perhaps we could assimilate some or most of these people into our own community. If they were always causing us trouble, perhaps they will be used or sold as slaves. Or perhaps we blindfold them and drop them off a hundred miles down the road. A lot of that just depends on them and their actions- someone good at heart has nothing to fear.

  4. Heartless

    Take them out and hope as few ‘innocents’ are affected/harmed/killed. There is no other choice that is rational or practical.

  5. Dave

    I would ambush them. Unless someone has actually been in their ‘camp’ and seen first hand…there would be no way to know if they are, indeed, ‘innocent’. Always a tough choice, but between theirs and mine…I’ll take mine.

  6. John in VA

    Ok, for anyone shaking their head and saying they should pass or you would not shoot unless you absolutely had to…well, in reality you would likely die and then your family would. In a true survival of the fittest situation you must act with deliberateness and there are no non-combatants in a situation like this or in gang life.

    Do you think the women and children you spare will thank you and then move on? Do you think the gang bangers sons will appreciate that you freed them from a life of crime?

    No, they will see you as the enemy and wish for your death and take whatever action they can to bring it about.

    Survivors do what must be done, not what is nice, polite or at times moral.

  7. BeggarMidas

    It’s a lot easier to cleanly sever consequences from your actions in your minds eye…But I am here to tell you, if you ever have the misfortune to witness a child caught in carnage, unless you are a sociopath or religious/political fanatic it will never, ever leave you. Ever. To your dying day, when you close your eyes at night you will have those hollow eyes following you into the dark. Time and distance will only magnify the weight of their gaze.
    With that caveat in place, i propose that the tacsit as presented is too absent of detail to form a tacstrat around. Are the women and children hostages, slaves, or camp followers(look it up if you don’t know the term), or is the ‘gang’ just another loosely familial group banded together for mutual support wandering the badlands? Each category has distinct earmarks that a discerning scout should be able to identify, and each carries it’s own tactical solution. I will break them down by each.
    1) Hostages: Hostages will be kept towards the center of the marauding group. The heaviest concentration of combatants will likely be to forward(heavy) and rear(light/mobile), with each flank having smaller numbers of units functioning as both resource scavengers, and stray chasers. They will also likely have at least one or more advance scouts that know their business. You can count on this group having a fair number of seasoned soldiers among them. Chokepoint ambushes are part of 101 boot training. Unless they are exhausted, overconfident, or pressed for time they will not be caught so easily nor will they come through as a concentrated group if they have any choice in the matter. They must be treated as a tactical platoon, on specific mission orders, and as attached to a larger military regiment. Also, they will have functioning orders to preserve the life of hostages(otherwise they become valueless in whatever negotiation they were being taken for).
    You need to seriously think about not only your chances of taking down a seasoned sortee, but what repercussions may result from their command staff investigating their loss. If bleak survival is your goal, i suggest approaching them clearly, cleanly, and visibly with a squad of your own soldiers under a flag of truce. You can reasonably deduct that their primary mission scope is delivery of their human cargo, and that they would prefer to be risk avoidant of anything not directly pertinent to that mission goal. Neither side will trust the other, but it’s in both parties interest to avoid undue combat. Instruct your own soldiers to not give the hostages much thought, they are bargaining chips in a negotiation you have no stake in. Otherwise, one of your own men may feel obligated to do something stupid that’ll get a bunch of people killed on both sides, AND invite reprisal from whatever brigade they were attached to. Keep just enough of your own forces visible to them as they traverse your territory. do NOT allow them line of sight of your primary settlement, and have some of your own men guide them through your territory on your terms. They will report your presence to upper command, but also communicate that you can be open to negotiation. They will also be unable to report to command what your actual force numbers, your defenses, or what your tacsit is. Chances are they’ll take you as a well armed, well prepared, and well seasoned and cut you a wide berth until they look to consolidate you as part of a larger effort, or pushing starvations edge.
    2) slaves/camp followers. I group these together because they are practically and tactically similar, with two distinctions a) Slaves will have handlers b) camp followers will not. In either case, the sortie will likely concentrate all forward with one or more scouts running reconnaissance, likely highly mobile light unit/infantry/cavalry. In this tacsit you must have both patience and timing. If their scouts detect anything out of the norm or fail to report in, they’ll go full death blossom on you. They’ll have noted the chokepoint but you must give it the appearances of not having seen a human boot in some time. Scrub surrounding area for evidence of human transit or occupation. Have your troops concealed, provisioned, and camouflaged. Radio silence should be observed by everyone except your own scouts reporting into command(and even then only using burst communiques coded in what could be mistaken for a hunter calling home or somesuch). Bring overwhelming force to bear once they’ve taken the bait and are at ideal disadvantage with a clear conscience, as the noncoms will be at the rear and can be absorbed into your own numbers gratefully. Any residual forces will either flee or surrender. It’s up to you what to do with either. Chances are very likely that the unit you just exercised extreme prejudice upon comprises the bulk of that forces numbers. Stragglers will be unlikely to return with a larger force to exercise retribution.
    4) familial groupings: Unless you are in a circumstance of extreme privation, these are people just looking for a safer place to call home, not adversaries by default. Have your scouts gather as much actionable intel(such as leadership structure, dynamics, and agitators) as invisibly possible. Let them come into your chokepoint, spring your ambush, but your troops should hold their fire unless ordered otherwise(There is a high likelihood they will panic and erupt with some blind fire, accept that without lethal response unless left no other choice). Once you have them on the defensive, the commander or his designated seconds in command should directly and confidently approach the familial association and offer them conditional safe harbor, as long as they can abide by your policies and orders, and are willing to contribute as part of your general collective. Identify and make allies/supporters of their leadership. To those leaders and agitators who cannot be reasonably convinced to become allies you should assign to your highest risk details and squads and let attrition take it’s course if possible. Those agitators or vying leadership members who cannot be expunged thusly should be quietly killed in such as way as to appear from natural events so as not to unduly agitate their familial associations. Either way, give those opposition members burials of full honors, as it will go a long way towards placating their kin. You can expect their numbers to have been reasonably consolidated with your own within 18 months to two years.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sign-Up for Our Email List and
Enroll in the FREE eCourse
Build a More
Self-Reliant Life!

Thank you for subscribing. Please check your email!

Something went wrong.