Should intelligent psychopaths who lack empathy, own guns ?

Should intelligent psychopaths who lack empathy, own guns

  • Total voters
    94
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gun control makes no sense. It is impossible to do away with guns. Guns can be made in basements or garages. The only expected outcome of taking guns away from people is to disarm honest law abiding citizens in favor of arming criminals. Why would anyone want to disarmed in the face of death? History has shown that people giving up their guns is precursor to their annihilation.
 
pubjohn47 said:
The only thing I find reasonable is a scientifically proven brain scan that detects empathy and if empathy is missing or lacking, then no guns to that particular individual.

Its better to be safe than sorry .

Since we disallow mentally unstable individuals from acquiring guns, a psychopath in my opinion is also mentally unstable, no matter how intelligent he is.
Click to expand...

As you say, it's clearly better to be safe than sorry - no matter what Benjamin Franklin said about the matter! Sure, Benny-boy was a smart guy, but it's pretty obvious he was "mentally unstable."

After all, how else could he possibly have believed that anything could be more important than safety & security? Psychiatrically, that pretty much scientifically proves that ol' Ben was definitely "mentally unstable." (I'll bet he was "lacking in empathy," too.)

You should definitely put Ben Franklin at the top of your list of people who should not be allowed to have guns - if only George Washington had had access to "scientifically proven brain scans," he could have done something about dangerous nutjobs like Franklin!
 
http://www.a-human-right.com/

s_monopoly.jpg
 
pubjohn47 said:
The only thing I find reasonable is a scientifically proven brain scan that detects empathy and if empathy is missing or lacking, then no guns to that particular individual.
Click to expand...

Which will not exist in the next umpteen years leaving your paper tiger of an argument dead in the water.

HTH
Rev9
 
I was at the beach one time with my family. There was a huge puddle, almost big enough to be considered a pond, that was separated from the main water by just a few feet. My brother and I wanted to make a little river from the puddle into the lake just for fun. It started off as just a trickle, a little stream, then as the water moved it took more and more sand along with it which made the stream bigger. The stream soon became a raging river spewing tens of gallons a second into the lake. At that point it was unstoppable. We jumped in it, poured sand on it, placed rocks in it, but no matter what we did it just kept on gushing.

Government regulation is like that little stream. It starts off small and innocent then becomes an uncontrollable force. The lesson I learned is that it is best to not even start something if there is even the possibility that it can become something bad. I apply this philosophy to my political beliefs and that is why I think gun control in any amount is bad. It all has to do with incrementalism.
 
Last edited:
I'm against gun control in its entirety, meaning I strongly support vigilante justice. Folks killing children should be more worried about the extremely-driven parents & idealists than the police.
 
The only people I don't trust to have guns are people who don't trust everybody to have guns.
 
2young2vote said:
I was at the beach one time with my family. There was a huge puddle, almost big enough to be considered a pond, that was separated from the main water by just a few feet. My brother and I wanted to make a little river from the puddle into the lake just for fun. It started off as just a trickle, a little stream, then as the water moved it took more and more sand along with it which made the stream bigger. The stream soon became a raging river spewing tens of gallons a second into the lake. At that point it was unstoppable. We jumped in it, poured sand on it, placed rocks in it, but no matter what we did it just kept on gushing.

Government regulation is like that little stream. It starts off small and innocent then becomes an uncontrollable force. The lesson I learned is that it is best to not even start something if there is even the possibility that it can become something bad. I apply this philosophy to my political beliefs and that is why I think gun control in any amount is bad. It all has to do with incrementalism.
Click to expand...

Great analogy. I suspect it is impossible for institutionalized initiation of force not to follow that path.
 
I voted "not sure" because in order to determine whether someone has Antisocial Personality Disorder, they'd need to agree to psychological testing. In order to determine whether someone is intelligent, that would be another psychological test. Now we're up to approximately 6 hours of psychological testing just to start to solve your problem. I am against any form of psychological testing to own a firearm. So "Yes" and "No" would still require some form of evaluation.

The topic of "brain scan" opens up another can of worms. Now we're going to brain scan everyone with a technology that is not demonstrated in the research to be a reliable or valid method of identifying personality disorders or intelligence. That's another 1-2 hours of evaluation (if it is a brain scan with contrast, then you are dealing with medical exclusions for the dye injection and possible allergic reactions to the dye). Not to mention if someone has a pacemaker or other medical implant that would exclude them from MRI or fMRI scans.

Lets see... the psych testing is approximately $120 / hour (total so far is $720). The brain scan (CT, CT w/ contrast, SPECT, MRI, fMRI????) will cost a minimum of $1500. So for each gun owner, they'd have to shell out $2220 and approximately 7 hours of evaluation just to get in the door.

It is a baited question that will require additional regulation. I'm not sure you've thought this out carefully enough. So I'm 'not sure'.
 
Last edited:
The Federal government has no business restricting anyone from owning any firearms, and the states really shouldn't have gun control legislation either.
 
pubjohn47 said:
If the request is reasonable.

If the government says only individuals who passes a scientifically proven brain scan , that indicates empathy, can purchase a gun ; I would be fine with that demand.

If a psychopath who fails the brain scan and who is truly afraid for his life; he can always take precautions such as only going to places that are safe, installing an alarm system, installing a safe room, hiring a bodyguard, wearing body armor, asking for added police protection or patrols etc

Would you let a guy who threatens your life or the life of your children , own a gun ?
Click to expand...

Luckily, and for the time being anyway, my rights are not determined by what you "feel fine with".

Rest assured though, this shooting will be the end of any firearms rights in Norway.
 
If guns are banned a psychopath will merely adopt a different manner of killing which others will obviously not have a means of viable defense against due to guns being banned. I think the bomb the Norwegian killer triggered is only a small taste of what a person can do when he focuses his entire life, energy, and mind on the simple goal of killing. I mean pop in homemade weapons into Google and viola, that's all you need for the building plans for bombs, homemade shotguns, booby traps, the list goes on.

Taking away more freedoms to ease fear is never the answer.
 
The Bavarian said:
If guns are banned a psychopath will merely adopt a different manner of killing which others will obviously not have a means of viable defense against due to guns being banned. I think the bomb the Norwegian killer triggered is only a small taste of what a person can do when he focuses his entire life, energy, and mind on the simple goal of killing. I mean pop in homemade weapons into Google and viola, that's all you need for the building plans for bombs, homemade shotguns, booby traps, the list goes on.

Taking away more freedoms to ease fear is never the answer.
Click to expand...

or perhaps we need the government to control the internets to save us from ourselves! :eek::eek::eek::D
 
The Bavarian said:
If guns are banned a psychopath will merely adopt a different manner of killing which others will obviously not have a means of viable defense against due to guns being banned.
Click to expand...
Most of them won't "adopt a different manner of killing" - they'll just acquire their guns illegally.
Hell, the BATF might even take up some of the slack by trying to sell guns to them.
They've done it for violent drug dealers, so why not for psychopaths?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
Should intelligent psychopaths who lack empathy, own guns ?
Replies
1
Views
2K
ProIndividual
ProIndividual
P
Should intelligent psychopaths who lack empathy, own guns ?
Replies
1
Views
2K
ProIndividual
ProIndividual
Back
Top