Psychological Evaluations and Gun Ownership: Unnecessary or Unjust?

Every year, thousands of people in the United States purchase handguns as part of their arsenal of personal security. But a prevalent question looms: does buying a handgun in the USA come with a psychological evaluation? To date, the answer is a resounding no, and this article will explore the reasons behind this decision and why such evaluations would not only be impractical but potentially unjustified.

The Principle of Due Process

Before diving into the complexities of psychological evaluations, it is essential to understand the concept of due process. Our legal system is built on the principle that an individual’s rights cannot be removed or restricted except by a court finding that the person is guilty of having already committed a crime or is mentally incompetent. This principle is crucial in preventing the government from imposing unnecessary restrictions on individuals.

A Targeted Approach to Psychological Evaluations

Psychological evaluations must be targeted to answer specific questions. A common misconception is that a psychological evaluation can provide a definitive answer on whether an individual is “normal” or “likely to become violent.” However, these terms are subjective and not well-defined. For instance, defining “normality” in psychological terms is a complex issue, and there is no current technology that can reliably predict future violent behavior. This means that a blanket psychological evaluation for gun ownership does not align with the principles of due process.

Challenges in Legal Definitions

Our current legal system is based on specific criteria for restricting certain rights. Mental incompetence is one such criteria, but determining this involves intricate and nuanced assessments. For example, the inability to manage one’s finances, including filing tax forms, is not a sufficient basis to deny an individual the right to drive, marry, or own a gun. Similarly, being diagnosed with a mental disorder does not inherently impair one’s right to own a gun. Conditions like an irrational fear of snakes or spiders, both relatively common, and depression, the most prevalent psychological diagnosis, are examples of why such evaluations would be insufficient and unjustified.

The Real Concerns of Gun Ownership

While psychological concerns are valid, the primary concern regarding gun ownership should be competence and intent. Unlike driving a car, where we require a license based on the public interest in road safety, the responsibility to own a gun lies in the individual. The ability to handle a firearm competently, responsibly, and without posing a threat to oneself or others should be the focus of any regulatory measures.

Safe and Responsible Ownership

Many individuals who own firearms are fully capable and responsible. It is important to distinguish between those who genuinely pose a risk and those who are competent and careful. A psychological evaluation does little to address the real issues of safe ownership. Instead, extensive background checks, proper training, and licensing should be the primary focus.

Conclusion and Final Thoughts

In conclusion, requiring psychological evaluations for gun ownership would not only be impractical but could also be seen as an overreach of governmental power. The legal and psychological complexities involved, along with the practical difficulties in predicting future behavior, justify the current system of background checks and education-based regulations. The real focus should be on ensuring that those who own firearms do so in a safe and responsible manner, not on the subjective and imprecise nature of psychological assessments.

Interesting Comments in this Thread

Often, references are made to driving licenses. Most driving takes place on public roads, which serve as a public service. It is logical to require a license to drive on public roads, as it ensures that the driver is a safe and competent individual. However, a licensed driver is not immune to all potential risks. Factors such as moments of inattention, personality disorders, or substance abuse can still pose a threat. Similarly, individuals who own guns must also be held to high standards of responsibility and competence, but this does not necessitate a psychological evaluation.

Personal experience shared by a user: I personally believe I suffer from a touch of paranoia, which I view as a healthy trait. However, I am far more concerned about the potential for harm from an aggressor with a firearm than from a potentially incompetent driver on the road. This perspective highlights the distinct risks associated with gun ownership and driving, emphasizing the need for different regulatory approaches.