PDA

View Full Version : Raging Against Self Defense: A psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality


sinjefe
01-10-2013, 08:50
By Sarah Thompson, M.D.

http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm

A great read and explains much as well as gives great tools with which to discuss the topic with anti-gun folks. Well worth the read.

kozak
01-10-2013, 08:59
The quotes at the start of the article are unsettling by themself. Interesting article overall and a unique perspective. Thanks.

sinjefe
01-10-2013, 09:02
Police have no constitutional responsibility to protect individuals:
Warren v. District of Columbia (1981): Official police personnel and the
government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus
are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a
special relationship exists.

DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989): A state government agency's failure to
prevent child abuse by a custodial parent does not violate the child's right
to liberty for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution

Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005): A town and its police department cannot be
sued for failing to enforce a restraining order

Sigaba
01-10-2013, 18:15
IMO, the article is distasteful. Dr. Thompson presents evaluations of persons who are not her patients that she's not examined in a clinical setting. MOO, she's counting on laypersons to accept her professional judgment and to not question the theoretical and ethical foundations of her polemic.

The use of psychology in this fashion is exceptionally uncivil. If one sanctions this type of "analysis" of participants in a debate over public policy, one opens the door to others evaluating one's own unconscious drives, needs, desires, and arcs of tension. (Examples include: the gun as a phallic symbol, the defense of the Second Amendment as a manifestation of turning against the self, and the concerns over gun control as a manifestation of castration anxiety.)

I question Dr. Thompson's presentation of empathy and corrective (emotional) experiences as appropriate tools for debate of a policy issue. If someone has a POV towards gun control (or any other issue) that strikes one as overly emotional, "irrational," and ill informed but that POV does not interfere with him/her living a self-efficacious life, the person doesn't need psychological intervention. Thompson's suggestion that it is all right to use two powerful theraputic tools for political purposes. That is, Dr. Thompson's piece is not disinterested guidance on how to facilitate a greater level understanding of people who want more gun control for the purpose of clearer communication and more productive debate, it is a ill-conceived "how to" on psychological manipulation.

My $0.02./YMMV.

Richard
01-10-2013, 18:56
WW*DP*D?

Richard :munchin

*Dr Phil*

GratefulCitizen
01-10-2013, 19:13
I remember this article from years ago.
The part that stuck in my mind:

People who identify themselves as "victims" harbor excessive amounts of rage at other people, whom they perceive as "not victims".


People with a victim mentality hate people who refuse to be victims.
They are shamed by reality.

The urge for gun control is a small part of that larger truth.

SF18C
01-10-2013, 19:41
Maybe the issue is drugs?

Is Mental Health Care to Blame for School Shootings? Part One—Psychiatric Drugs

http://www.cchrint.org/2012/12/19/nental-health-care-to-blame-for-school-shootings/

MR2
01-10-2013, 19:49
Which comes first... the psychosis or the meds?

Roguish Lawyer
01-10-2013, 21:03
IMO, the article is distasteful. Dr. Thompson presents evaluations of persons who are not her patients that she's not examined in a clinical setting. MOO, she's counting on laypersons to accept her professional judgment and to not question the theoretical and ethical foundations of her polemic.

The use of psychology in this fashion is exceptionally uncivil. If one sanctions this type of "analysis" of participants in a debate over public policy, one opens the door to others evaluating one's own unconscious drives, needs, desires, and arcs of tension. (Examples include: the gun as a phallic symbol, the defense of the Second Amendment as a manifestation of turning against the self, and the concerns over gun control as a manifestation of castration anxiety.)


I agree! :eek:

Lan
01-10-2013, 21:24
When Prozac, the first of the new anti depressants first came out there were studies and cases where people that did not have violent tendencies before became violent to the point of murder, mass killings etc. The drug companies covered that up right away and sponsored studies that showed the results were inconclusive about the relationship of violence in some people and the medication. I worked in the medical field at the time.

Tell me about it. Going cold turkey after taking 150mg Zoloft daily for 2 years was one of the worst things I've experienced in my life. Prescription depression, and anxiety meds are handed out to the masses like candy. I was have delusions before I stopped taking the meds (see the quit chewing thread) Hearing things, even seeing things occasionally. There's no doubt in my mind I was crazy.

Pharm companies will continue to rule our government until We The People decide we've had enough. I cannot tell you how many times I thought about killing myself and I'm so glad I didn't. If anyone out there is reading this feeling the same way, you have to power through it. The problems you have can be worked out so many better ways and the sooner you stop taking pills the better. I am not a doctor, so talk to a Psychiatrist before you think about discontinuing use of your medicine. It's just my opinion that most people who are taking medicine don't need it. They need more exercise, a healthier lifestyle, and more people to talk to.

Sigaba
01-10-2013, 22:56
Pharm companies will continue to rule our government until We The People decide we've had enough. What's to stop Big Pharma from devising chemicals to put in the water supply to ensure that the people remain complacent and subservient?

Pete
01-11-2013, 03:39
IMO, the article is distasteful. Dr. Thompson presents evaluations of persons who are not her patients that she's not examined in a clinical setting. .....................

Distasteful?

The shooting and the issue of "needed" gun control has brought forth some interesting comments from some normal people I thought I knew.

Their "evaluations" of people who own assault rifles dipped into the obscene. When I mentioned I was one of those folks it was like "Yep, You're one of them." This was all before I read the article.

As I read the article I was like ' "Man, that's them to a "T" ".

Lan
01-11-2013, 10:51
What's to stop Big Pharma from devising chemicals to put in the water supply to ensure that the people remain complacent and subservient?

Don't mistake my disdain of corporate interests for lunacy and don't patronize me.

Utah Bob
01-11-2013, 14:21
Tell me about it. Going cold turkey after taking 150mg Zoloft daily for 2 years was one of the worst things I've experienced in my life. Prescription depression, and anxiety meds are handed out to the masses like candy. I was have delusions before I stopped taking the meds (see the quit chewing thread) Hearing things, even seeing things occasionally. There's no doubt in my mind I was crazy.

Pharm companies will continue to rule our government until We The People decide we've had enough. I cannot tell you how many times I thought about killing myself and I'm so glad I didn't. If anyone out there is reading this feeling the same way, you have to power through it. The problems you have can be worked out so many better ways and the sooner you stop taking pills the better. I am not a doctor, so talk to a Psychiatrist before you think about discontinuing use of your medicine. It's just my opinion that most people who are taking medicine don't need it. They need more exercise, a healthier lifestyle, and more people to talk to.

While they are certainly a multibillion dollar business with significant infuence, I don't know that I'm convinced they rule the government.

ZonieDiver
01-11-2013, 14:26
While they are certainly a multibillion dollar business with significant infuence, I don't know that I'm convinced they rule the government.

That's because YOU'RE not listening to the voices in your head! Mine speak French, which I don't undrstand, so they don't bother me.

Richard
01-11-2013, 14:43
Mine speak French, which I don't undrstand, so they don't bother me.

That's because their mouths are full of American fries and they're mumbling something about abridging your 2nd Amendment rights.

Mine speak French, too, but in my mind's eye they look like Catherine Deneuve, Sophie Marceau, and Marion Cotillard cooking my dinner in their Maidenform bras so I don't care what they're saying, I just enjoy looking at them and sipping my Domaine de la Romanée-Conti 1978 Montrachet. :D

Richard :munchin

Lan
01-11-2013, 14:59
After re-reading what I wrote, I can see how insensible it sounds. The point I was trying to make was not that pharmaceutical companies control our government, but that they are one of many special interest groups who control decision making in Washington at our expense.

This thread should be focused on the problem of prescription drugs in our society. Having had first hand experience with it, I felt compelled to share my thoughts. I felt it necessary to include the idea that we should be angry at the possibility that the same companies who have enjoyed the opportunities to operate and grow in our country, do so with little regard to Joe taxpayer.

Utah Bob
01-11-2013, 15:08
That's because YOU'RE not listening to the voices in your head! Mine speak French, which I don't undrstand, so they don't bother me.

I always listen to them. Sometimes they're hard to hear because of the ringing. Don't know where that comes from.

No..wait...yes I do.:D

sinjefe
01-11-2013, 17:42
After re-reading what I wrote, I can see how insensible it sounds. The point I was trying to make was not that pharmaceutical companies control our government, but that they are one of many special interest groups who control decision making in Washington at our expense.

This thread should be focused on the problem of prescription drugs in our society. Having had first hand experience with it, I felt compelled to share my thoughts. I felt it necessary to include the idea that we should be angry at the possibility that the same companies who have enjoyed the opportunities to operate and grow in our country, do so with little regard to Joe taxpayer.

This thread is about whatever the guy who started it says it is. Start your own thread if you want talk about Big Pharma ruling the world.;)