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

[sinjefe]

By Sarah Thompson, M.D.

http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ragingag...elfdefense.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]

The quotes at the start of the article are unsettling by themself. Interesting article overall and a unique perspective. Thanks.

[sinjefe]

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]

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]

WW*DP*D?

Richard

*Dr Phil*

[GratefulCitizen]

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]

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/ne...ool-shootings/

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

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!

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

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" ".