• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Almost Shot a Copper Head Snake Today.

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
Says who? And when did anyone here suggest it?

A person with a debilitating fear who carries a gun could well be thrust into a situation where their particular phobic stimuli could present, with potentially dire results. Do I want eamelhorn to stop carrying a gun? Not remotely. I do want him to stop thinking his ophidiophobia is funny, and take action to eliminate it, because he is a danger to himself and others in his current state. Let's review what he said:
"However a debilitating fear is irrational and pathological"

Again, the sufferer already knows that it is irrational. Telling someone their phobia is irrational isn't going to help anything, just tell them what they already know.

When you quoted my line about not chastising, you took it out of context and destroyed it's meaning. So I'll say it again, I won't chastise someone for not confronting their phobia. You gave the impression you would. This is different than chastising someone for having a phobia.

If you'll read that WebMD link again, you will find that exposure to the object of your fears is required to get your phobia under control. Once a phobia ceases to cause such great distress and anxiety, it is no longer a phobia, now is it?

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Again, the sufferer already knows that it is irrational.


I thin that may be true for some cases. People with phobias about events or objects that really cannot hurt them, then it makes sense.

But if a person has a "phobia" about something is in fact life treating or extremely harmful, is it really irrational?

For instance, some spiders can kill or extremely harm you. Therefor, unless one is trained in the proper identification of spiders, the regular joe is going to fear or at least avoid contact with any spider.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
Simply being afraid of spiders is not a phobia. Avoiding a spider is a bit different than running away screaming like a little girl because you thought you saw one.
 
Last edited:

()pen(arry

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
735
Location
Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX
I consider the conditions of
  • Being an adult possessed of the personal responsibility, self-control, and mental discipline necessary safely and appropriately to carry a firearm; and
  • Being possessed of a mental disorder which induces debilitating fear, yet not actively working to eliminate that mental disorder as quickly as is feasible
to be mutually exclusive.

EDIT: So that there's no misunderstanding: "phobia" does not mean "fear". One may be afraid of something, and actively avoid it, without possessing a phobia of it. There's nothing wrong with being afraid of things. Being afraid of something in such a way that one's rational and emotional faculties are impaired is not okay; it's pathological, and it's called a "phobia".
 
Last edited:

eamelhorn

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
143
Location
ripley wv
The thing I dont like about the internet is that you dont see facial expressions or any type of body languge, which is a big part of how we comunicate, typing is emotionless. There was a LOL after what I said, which (to me) was indicating I was over stateing my reaction to snakes. Tho if you throw a snake on me you and I will be in a knock down drag out fist fight. I have never touched a snake on purpose and never plan on it I dont go running a screaming if I see one, throw one on me that could change, I have several Garder snakes I see everytime I mow I DONT KILL THEM thier harmless, but I still aint touching one. If I see a copper head while mowing im killing it, I have small dogs that a bite from a copper head could kill them or at least cost me a bunch of money in vet bills. Also a snake can bite you while in the water, they cant stirke but will bite if thier mouth comes in contact with you, ask the girl I used to date, she steped on one in knee deep water and she was on the way to the hospital from a copper head bite. In other words touching a snake to me is equle to picking up dog crap bare handed, throw either one on me and were in a good old fashioned fist fight. If you want to pick up and play with a snake go ahead, but dont attack my manhood because I dont feel the same, and I will be more careful in how I word things as the people on here dont know me personally as do my facebook friends to which if I made that statement would have known I was overstating my reaction.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Throw a Garder snake on me im dead in half a second, if im not dead in the frist half of second, your dead the within the rest of that second, LOL, I'd scream like a girl and fall down dead of heart failure, cant stand the thought of even touching any kinda snake. If they rattle there a rattle sanke if they dont there a copper head, (in my mind),

Thanks for letting us know, eamelhorn - I'll keep than in mind in case you ever visit us here in Colorado, where garter snakes are quite common. Ok by you if I just shoot you and ask the snake questions later? I think it'd safe us a lot of trouble! :lol:

I'd caution you that snakes love rocks, and rocks tend to rebound bullets which may result in severe if not lethal injuries to yourself and standers/passersby, so your best action upon encountering any snake is NOT to shoot to kill, but to back off and evaluate the situation AFTER clearing the area of spectators. Ricochet-injuries and kills of human beings are very hard to explain, and very costly. If you still feel the need of dispatching the serpentine gent/lass, try a hoe or shovel! They're highly effective. A sharp machete works well, too. Indeed, most of the poisonous, 3-7 foot snakes I "dispatched" in Florida when I was between the age of seven and twelve involved a hoe, shovel, or trident typically used for gigging frogs.

I've caught and released many, but have dispatched about 11 venomous snakes over the years, and only one by firearm, and that was a unique occasion. I was a camp counselor, no one else had any firearms experience, and a rattler (EDB) had crept up along the trail the kids were using to travel between their cabins and the chapel. I was 24 years old, in the best shape of my life, and I tried pinning and catching him as I'd learned in my youth, TWICE, but this sucker eluded the best pin I could put upon him, so for the first and last time in my life I opted for Plan B with a snake: Firearm.

I asked the camp director if he had a shotgun. He said "yes, it's in the truck" and came back within a minute or two. I checked the load and said, "It's ready to go, do you want to do the honors?" at which he replied, "No, you seem to know what you're doing. Go ahead."

I cleared everyone to a safe distance, then fired, dispatching the EDB rattler who unfortunately decided to camp out on the same trail visited many times weekly by more than 50 school children per week.

Getting back to your gardener snake story... What? eamelhorn, if you're ever in my neck of the woods, please look me up. There's a wonderful wildlife center where we can go and help dispel some of your fears.
 
Last edited:

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I consider the conditions of
  • Being an adult possessed of the personal responsibility, self-control, and mental discipline necessary safely and appropriately to carry a firearm; and
  • Being possessed of a mental disorder which induces debilitating fear, yet not actively working to eliminate that mental disorder as quickly as is feasible
to be mutually exclusive.

EDIT: So that there's no misunderstanding: "phobia" does not mean "fear". One may be afraid of something, and actively avoid it, without possessing a phobia of it. There's nothing wrong with being afraid of things. Being afraid of something in such a way that one's rational and emotional faculties are impaired is not okay; it's pathological, and it's called a "phobia".

By DSM IV, Merriam-Webster, Oxford English Dictionary, countless others, a phobia is "an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation." It is only "pathological" if it exhibits itself to such a degree that it significantly alters your ability to do normal things, like hold a job, have friends, marry, and be a parent. Many people have acrophobia (fear of heights), but they are NOT pathological, as the condition doesn't interfere with their normal, daily lives. Categorizing all phobias as "pathological" does a huge disservice to hundreds of millions of people.

Similarly, claiming carry and phobia to be mutually exclusive also does a huge disservice. There are MANY people with a phobia who've been carrying a firearm responsibly, with self-control and discipline all their lives, often having served our country, with distinction, in combat.

Let's not give the antis any ammunition, particularly when it's incorrect or unsupported.

Thanks.
 

()pen(arry

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
735
Location
Seattle, WA; escaped from 18 years in TX

Diagnosis

The diagnostic criteria for 300.29 Specific Phobias as outlined by the DSM-IV-TR:

  1. Marked and persistent fear that is excessive or unreasonable, cued by the presence or anticipation of a specific object or situation (e.g., flying, heights, animals, receiving an injection, seeing blood).
  2. Exposure to the phobic stimulus almost invariably provokes an immediate anxiety response, which may take the form of a situationally bound or situationally predisposed panic attack. Note: In children, the anxiety may be expressed by crying, tantrums, freezing, or clinging.
  3. The person recognizes that the fear is excessive or unreasonable. Note: In children, this feature may be absent.
  4. The phobic situation(s) is avoided or else is endured with intense anxiety or distress.
  5. The avoidance, anxious anticipation or distress in the feared situation(s) interferes significantly with the person's normal routine, occupational (or academic) functioning, or social activities or relationships, or there is marked distress about having the phobia.
  6. In individuals under the age of 18, the duration is at least 6 months.
  7. The anxiety, panic attack, or phobic avoidance associated with the specific object or situation are not better accounted for by another mental disorder, such as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (e.g., fear of dirt in someone with an obsession about contamination), Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (e.g., avoidance of stimuli associated with a severe stressor), Separation Anxiety Disorder (e.g., avoidance of school), Social Phobia (e.g., avoidance of social situations because of fear of embarrassment), Panic Disorder With Agoraphobia, or Agoraphobia Without History of Panic Disorder.

So. If it's a phobia, it's pathological, by definition. If it's merely fear, it's not a phobia. Whether any given person's fear of snakes, or spiders, or something else is, by definition, a phobia has to be determined on a case by case basis.


Failed attempt at being snide noted. Thanks.

The point I've been making is that mature adults take control of themselves and their emotions and don't let their fears interfere with their ability to remain collected and rational in all situations. A mature adult with a genuine phobia does what's necessary to get rid of it with all due haste. None of this necessarily has anything to do with guns, so spare me the "ammunition for antis" card. However, if you are an adult who has not taken control of yourself and your emotions and does let your fears interfere with your ability to remain collected and rational in all situations, then you damn well shouldn't be carrying a gun. In my opinion.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
....blah....blah....(no disrespect intended)....blah....

Many people have acrophobia (fear of heights), but they are NOT pathological, as the condition doesn't interfere with their normal, daily lives.
Or, it may be that they avoid high places where their pathologicalnessness will not manifest itself, therefore it does/will not interfere with their daily lives.

But your point is valid. I have a near pathological fear of spiders, but I am able to draw and shoot at them quite easily every time I see one. So, I have overcome my paralyzing fear and have improved my condition to a simple irrational fear, with lethal consequences.....for spiders.

Cops don't bug me about it too much, the shooting spiders part, because I have a note from my shrink. They're down with that.
 
Top