Urban Decay as seen in the Fallout Universe and America's East Coast

So while I was working at my last job, I stayed away from Fallout: New Vegas. I knew I wouldn't possibly have the free time necessary to enjoy the game, and boy was I right. It is almost like I replaced one full-time job for another! (This time, of course, it is insanely fun and I cannot wait to start "working"... a shame I can't find a real job that both makes me that excited and also actually pays me.)

Anyways, I played Fallout 3 when it first came out and have recently been diving into Fallout: New Vegas. Both games' settings are pronounced by the 200-year-old ruins of America. Buildings are more often than not just gutted shells or half-destroyed frames full of rubble. There's abandoned tools and industrial machinery scattered about carelessly all over the landscape, and the roads are barely more than rivers full of blacktop islands separated by spider-web potholes.

It is a very interesting setting to explore, and I especially enjoy it because of my fascination with the fragility of society. Namely, how quickly and easily everything we've managed to accomplish could disappear in the event of a major disaster resulting in the collapse of society.

I occasionally travel through America using Amtrak (our national passenger rail service), and coincidentally two of the longest trips I've taken happened to be while the Fallout universe was fresh in my mind. (Shortly after completing FO3 and while still playing FO:NV.) From the windows of a train, huge swathes of the East Coast (we're talking from Cincinnati to DC to NYC) look remarkably similar to the ruins depicted in Fallout.

Abandoned buildings in ill-repair or falling apart, stripped down vehicles left to rust, crumbling roads littered with debris, big heaps of masonry and garbage just piled up randomly, even some industrial machinery left to the elements. It was really quite striking to see the similarities. Maybe I should start stockpiling drinking water and firearms? Or maybe I'll just enjoy my legal right to a cold beer, instead. Happy Repeal Day, everyone!

How far is too far?

This here is a bit old, but I've been meaning to mention it.

In April, a militia-group was rounded up and placed under arrest for planning to shoot up a bunch of police officers. There was a debate over whether to release them or not, since their case was mostly based on speech alone, with no definitive plan of action to show intent.

On the other hand, if you arrest a group of radical militants that meet together to talk about how the government holds tyranny over their lives, and that the only way to stop it is to become martyrs in a grand gesture of multiple murders, then you let them go free briefly before their trial... does this not give them incentive to believe their views and furthermore give them no reason to not act on them?

I believe in the protections of free speech, and I don't believe in locking people up for no good reason... but I also recognize a need for public safety.

I just don't know how to think on this one. What about you?