IQ Requirements for Firearm Purchases: Unnecessary and Ineffective

It is an intriguing thought: should there be an IQ requirement of 120 or higher for purchasing a firearm? While this idea might seem logical at first glance, it is essential to critically evaluate such a measure. This article delves into the reasons why high IQ levels alone are not sufficient to determine an individual's capability to own and use a firearm responsibly. We will explore the misleading nature of IQ as a sole criterion, the logistical challenges, and the broader implications of such a requirement.

The Misconception of Intelligence and Decision-Making

Intelligence, as gauged by IQ tests, does not ensure sound decision-making. The infamous example of Adolf Hitler, whose IQ test scores were above average, serves as a stark reminder that higher intelligence does not necessarily translate to good judgment or moral behavior. Similarly, Theodore Kaczinski, infamous for his role as the Unabomber, had an extremely high IQ, yet his actions led to widespread harm. These examples underscore the fallacy that an individual's intelligence level is directly proportional to their wisdom or morality.

The Practical and Ethical Challenges

Implementing an IQ requirement for firearm purchases presents numerous practical and ethical challenges. An IQ test would require a trained professional for administration and scoring, which would be resource-intensive and expensive. Millions of guns are sold annually, meaning that administering IQ tests to every potential buyer would be logistically unfeasible and highly impractical. Additionally, mandating such tests raises ethical concerns about civil liberties and the infringement of individual rights.

Broader Implications and Other Considerations

There are also broader implications to consider. For instance, the requirement could disenfranchise a significant portion of the population with below-average IQs, potentially excluding approximately 40% of the adult population. This exclusionary policy could inadvertently lead to an imbalance in the distribution of firearms, resulting in a loss of Second Amendment protections for this demographic. Furthermore, similar arguments could be made for other activities that involve potential danger, such as obtaining a driver's license or voting. Stipulating that only individuals with above-average IQs could vote, for example, would significantly limit democratic participation and could lead to absurd and undesirable outcomes.

The Constitution and Current Legislation

The right to purchase and own firearms in the United States is enshrined in the Constitution, and the standards for firearm ownership are explicitly outlined in federal and state laws. The Constitution does not mandate any cognitive tests for firearm purchases, and current federal law requires only that individuals be of age and U.S. citizens. Stricter requirements, such as IQ tests, would complicate the legal and regulatory landscape without providing any clear benefits, especially given the myriad ways in which individuals can and do misuse firearms regardless of their intelligence level.

Conclusion

IQ should not be a determining factor for firearm purchases. Intelligence tests offer an oversimplified view of an individual's capability to manage a firearm responsibly. Instead of focusing on IQ, policymakers and legislators should concentrate on other measures that better reflect an individual's ability to handle firearms safely, such as background checks, training, and responsible ownership practices. This more nuanced approach would be more effective and equitable than relying solely on intelligence metrics.