Forum Post: Something to agree on, psychopaths should not have access to guns under the mental health exception to the 2nd Amendment
Posted 11 years ago on Feb. 4, 2013, 2:19 p.m. EST by nomdeguerre
(1775)
from Brooklyn, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
For the purpose of gun ownership, psychopathy should be considered a mental illness and thus a disqualification for gun ownership.
Since it is considered innate and unaffected by treatment (similar to gayness), psychopathy is not generally considered a mental illness. But for the sake of public safety I argue it should be considered so here.
Science has now determined that psychopaths have a different brain structure that shows up in brain scans. Would-be gun owners should have to prove they are not psychopathic.
"Psychopath Brain Different In Brain Scans" http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/006418.html
"Brain Scans Show Abnormalities In Psychopaths" http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/001998.html
"Twins Study Finds Genetic Cause For Psychopathy" http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002792.html
"Criminal Minds -- Will testing the brain, even before birth, separate the good seeds from the bad?" http://www.utne.com/Science-Technology/Neurodevelopmental-Criminology-Acquired-Sociopathy-Predict-Criminals.aspx
http://pathwhisperer.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/post-redux-are-saps-socially-adept-psychopaths-real/
http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2010/06/psychopath-and-brain-matter.html
"What Is a Psychopath? Definition and basic criteria" From the comments: "A 'psychopathic trait' not belonging to a psychopath can't really be considered a 'psychopathic trait'. This is not to say that ordinary people do not behave in pathological ways that are, in that moment, outwardly indistinguishable from a psychopath's behaviour. But it's important for people to realise that the inner landscape of a psychopath is so totally different from theirs that it marks them apart as a different species from humans." http://www.sott.net/article/257630-What-Is-a-Psychopath-Definition-and-basic-criteria
Earlier discussion from http://occupywallst.org/forum/ny-passes-new-gun-control-laws/#comment-914600 :
"Psychopathy should be added to the mental health screening, disallowing gun ownership. Every applicant should be brain scanned for psychopathic brain structures.
http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/05/11/scans-show-psychopaths-have-brain-abnormalities/38540.html
https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/psychopath-brain-structure-_n_1497753.html "
Well there are already federal laws on the books dealing with "mental health and firearms.
Here's the link. If only the fed would start enforcing the laws they write:
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/niaafrpc.pdf
No one should have access to guns unless it's for hunting for survival, or police work. Simply take guns and religion away from Americans and you'll already have a much healthier society. It's that simple.
Good luck with that program.
I agree, removing religion and taking ALL guns will never happen. Not in the foreseeable future.
But people should be judged by their actions, not their thoughts. A psychopath is not inherently dangerous. Most are assholes, but still function in society. I read somewhere recently that a large portion of business executives are psychopaths.
If people have no history of being dangerous, or not clinically certified to be mentally unfit, then they should be able to own a gun. Your proposal is nothing more than trying to be the thought police.
I wouldn't call recognizing individuals with no guilt or empathy and no possibility of developing such as thought policing.
The mental health exception to the 2nd A is a very slippery slope. I've heard of preppers, survivalists, 9/11 truthers and dissenters in general being called insane. Such terminology is a specialty of authoritarian governments.
Psychopathy however is real, and the misery caused by psychopaths is in far excess of their numbers.
Again, The point is psychopaths are not ingerently dangerous, and not anymore apt to go on a shooting spree than anyone else.
The mental health issue truly a slippery slope. But you can't just condem a entire group of people just because they are jerks.
Well, just as sure as water flows downhill, I believe psychopathy will be added to the mental health exception. The whole point of the new regulations (while the old aren't even being followed, see http://occupywallst.org/forum/something-to-agree-on-psychopaths-should-not-have-/#comment-924669 ) is the goal of complete citizen disarmment.
The whole background checking process is a hole in the 2nd A you could drive a truck through -- environmentalists, anti-factory farm activists, truthers, OWSers could all be labeled terrorists OR as suffering from a mental illness. The goal is to exclude as many categories as possible.
Personally, I'd prefer a hard and fast rule regarding commitment to mental hospitals as dangerous psychotics, and that's it. But if we are going to have expanded mental health screening, screening for psychopathy is a natural.
The background check form already asks the question “Have you ever been hospitalized for mental illness”, don’t remember if that’s the exact wording. I also asks if you’ve ever been arrested for domestic violence. I don’t know if a Yes answer would automatically disqualify from buying a gun.
In my State, when you apply for a Concealed Handgun License you have to explain any arrests or diagnosed mental conditions. I’m not sure, but I don’t think doctors or hospitals are required to report potentially dangerous people.
My opinion is unless you have a history of violence or have medically diagnosed mental condition that could make you dangerous, you should be able to buy a gun. I think it virtually impossible to pre-determine who will commit a gun crime. Therein lies the problem.