[ExI] libertarian ideas ATTN: HENRY

[William Flynn Wallace]

Mental cases: who is a mental case?  It must be defined in legal terms
before it can be enforced by legal means.  You are the most qualified
person here to answer the question, being in the biz and a professor of
that discipline.    spike

(Henry, I hope what is below represents the past.  I hope that there are
newer ideas, which I hope you will share with us.)

Spike, it's impossible.  Legal theories are based on knowing right from
wrong (a 19th century standard) ,which standard is also applied to the
mentally retarded -an unfortunate standard in both cases.  Even severely
mentally retarded people have the basic understanding - stage 1 Kohlberg -
it is wrong if you get punished for it (or right if you get rewarded).
This is recognized as a moral stage.  Yet society gets their underwear all
in a knot when the mentally retarded come to trial for a capital offense.
"They don't know what they are doing.  They can't tell right from wrong."
Totally wrong and misguided.  I have worked with patients as low as IQ 25.

Who can predict with any accuracy what a mentally ill person will do, or
even is capable of doing?  No one.  We usually know what they can or will
do after they have done it.  Then some come forward, including parents, who
say that they warned the police about their son (rarely daughter).  But the
police have their hands tied - no legal authority to do anything.  At this
point in time an impossible situation that really does need answers.
Personally I would favor a bias that takes away guns from people with
certain diagnoses - paranoid schizophrenia at the top of the list.  And yet
most of them don't do any harm to others their whole lives.  It is hard
enough for psychology to predict group statistics such as averages.  It is
impossible to accurately and reliably predict individuals.

I am aware of the definition of an automatic weapon.  Those guns which fire
one bullet for each pull of the trigger are just about as dangerous.   bill
w

On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 11:01 AM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> *On Behalf
> Of *William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat
> *…*
>
>
>
> >…Bottom line:  I support guns up to but not including automatic weapons
> for everyone except mental cases and felons.  You?  bill w
>
>
>
>
>
> Billw, these discussions go off the tracks because of a misunderstanding
> or misuse of terms.  For instance, most people think an AR-15 is an
> automatic.  It isn’t.  The AK-47 is not an automatic either, and neither of
> them are assault weapons (a term used often but incorrectly (an assault
> weapon is an automatic.))  An automatic fires continually as long as the
> trigger is held down until the ammo is exhausted.  This definition does not
> apply to a pistol or handgun, because those cannot be continuous fire: they
> couldn’t be controlled.
>
>
>
> Regarding felons: I definitely do oppose their right to bear arms.  They
> forfeit that right forever by committing a felony.
>
>
>
> Mental cases: who is a mental case?  It must be defined in legal terms
> before it can be enforced by legal means.  You are the most qualified
> person here to answer the question, being in the biz and a professor of
> that discipline.
>
>
>
> Usually felons forfeit the right to vote.  No guns and no voting for
> felons.  If no guns for mental cases, are mental cases allowed to vote?
> How do we determine who loses their right to vote, based on their mental
> state?
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20210822/484289c3/attachment.htm>