Personally I was thinking post-attack (by volcanic ash, microbes, highly energetic particles,etc), but in the pre-recovery or pre-PAW stage, and nobody is certain which it will be yet.
Was reading some think tank studies from the 50's and 60's (mostly) this morning, USSR vs. USA nuclear war stuff obviously given the timeframe. There are many similarities to what moab mentions on resources and cities, small communities sticking together for protection, and others. Maybe a dedicated thread on these studies would be informative? Anyway, an opinion piece of a PA (post attack) story of fictional Parville, TN as invisioned by what seems to be a respected RAND Corporation think tank researcher in 1968.
[url=https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/p ... /P3764.pdf
]Law enforcement, preattack style, has become meaningliess in most areas. Local police in food-rich communities help defend the status quo against outside "mobs" which in turn may have police assistance from evacuated or food-poor communities. Primary loyalties are the local group and its leaders who are focusing first on the group's short-range needs. Violence is common when these groups meet.]
He mentions (underlined for effect no less!) that "the grimness will be deliberately emphasized", yet by today's standards it's probably tame enough for a 7-yr old. Much like the earlier quote from the other study of a "undignified scramble for surviving resources", the reader is left to fill in the details for themselves. An "undignified scramble" sounds more like a 3-legged Father-Daughter sack race to me anyway. But from the quote above, can we say which group of police are a good guys? The ones trying to protect their community or the ones trying to protect their community? I won't be picking sides until the goals and methods of the groups have been determined, and not picking sides starts pre-attack IMO. Didn't intend for my earlier post to sound like cop-bashing if that was how it was interpreted by anyone anyway.