[WS:] That should be easy to answer by a sociologist. In the same way as magic rituals saved Trobriand islanders from natural forces beyond their control.
Wojtek
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Alan Rudy <alan.rudy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Jordan Hayes <jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Alan Rudy writes:
> >
> > I'm suggesting that shooting snakes probably isn't the
> >> best way to deal with them...
> >>
> >
> > ... and that's based on your many years as a snake wrangler?
> >
> > Nope, just dealing with them while hiking the east and west coast and in
> swamps in Jersey. Do you jog with a snake shooting gun? or know anyone
> else
> who does? I don't but I live in no-snakeville mid-Michigan (where I know a
> raft of people who hunt and none who talk about shooting snakes... the
> rattler thing posted elsewhere made clear sense but I don't know if there
> are rattlers or other dangerous snakes in Austin, thus my question.)
>
> >
> > particularly because if you have time to stop jogging,
> >> pull your gun out, aim your laser and shoot a fairly
> >> still snake then the snake's not much of a threat in any event...
> >>
> >
> > I'm confused: either it's not a threat (in which case it doesn't matter
> how
> > it takes you to do nothing; apparently the Gov has been living in this
> "no
> > threat" world for a while, since this is the first we've heard of him
> > shooting anything on his jog); or it's a threat, and shooting it before
> it
> > bites you (or your dog) is an important calculation. Which is it? Is
> there
> > an amount of time where a threat is something that can be countered, or
> is
> > it the case that it's not a threat until it's an unstoppable threat, in
> > which case it's not worth trying?
> >
> > As per usual, education/training is the answer: your mileage may vary.
>
>
> > if you don't have time, and its actually a poisonous snake
> >> (are there lots of poisonous snakes in Austin? I really have
> >> no idea), then its probably bitten you already and shooting it
> >> off you or thinking that you're going to be collected enough
> >> after being bitten by a venomous snake to shoot it - particularly
> >> if you know you're already afraid of them - is just stupid.
> >>
> >
> > You're still losing me. If the snake is too fast, you (or your dog)
> > deserve to get bitten and die?
>
>
> Really? You went there? Shit that happens out of peoples' control is their
> fault? How does carrying a gun in this instance stop you from getting bit
> by
> a snake you stepped on or a fast one that gotcha?
>
>
> > That's just like the Law Of The Jungle or something? And if you don't
> have
> > a weapon, the snake can take his time biting you? Maybe even twice? Or
> > getting bitten the first time is the best time to stop worrying about a
> > threat, because there's no chance you'd be able to do anything that's not
> > stupid?
> >
>
> Is it that you like the idea of shooting snakes or that you want to defend
> the Gov. or that you know something I don't that's at root here.
>
> >
> > There are apparently snakes in Texas. And coyotes.
> >
> > So far you don't seem very convincing that it's "stupid" and "idiocy" ...
> > but hey, I'm here to learn.
> >
> > Doesn't read that way. I never claimed expertise, just took a stance
> (where I admitted to being under-informed) just about none of which is
> reflected in your faux interpretation of it.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>