[vwat]

I find it surprising sociopaths are allowed to just be free in society. They invariably are a net loss for society and certainly for anyone who is involved with them. I can’t even imagine how screwed this persons husband would be if this article were true. One way to spot a sociopath is to look at the people close to them. They almost always are a little odd or dumb. This is because smart, normal people never allow themselves to get too close to sociopaths. Somewhere along the line between acquaintance and close friend, most people get a peek under the veil and feel the cold, nauseating feeling that comes over you when you encounter pure, unnatural evil. People really don’t get it until they have some kind of experience with a sociopath. There’s nothing more creepy than getting that glimpse of their true nature, through a small crack in their facade, and seeing things that are totally outside of normal human behavior. Things you wouldn’t even think of until you saw it. The reason why nobody gets it is because it’s just too alien.

Sociopaths are dangerous. Everything in our culture and society is built around the fact, purposefully or not, that most people have basic empathy for the direct and visceral experience of seeing another person suffer. If you involve yourself with a sociopath, there are no mechanisms at play to help you. You will find yourself totally destroyed. If everyone in the world really knew what sociopaths are, they wouldn’t be allowed to roam freely. I’m astounded at how casually the subject is addressed in this thread.

[saagarjha]

Sociopaths are not inherently evil, they just have no inherent feelings for other people. But they can and often are taught how to behave "normally"–sure, it may not be their "true nature" or whatever to care for others, but if they're trying their best to emulate it and end up doing the same things that a normal person would as a result what is there to judge?

Actually, taking a step back: your comment horrifies me. It's coherently worded and looks similar the other comments in this thread on the surface, but you are very clearly advocating for the author and people like her to be locked up; calling this you're calling this wife a danger to her husband, this mother of a family a menace to society. This is a woman who took the time and courage to write about how she maintains a fairly normal life with a highly stigmatized psychological condition (often eliciting the very reaction you've had in your comment–"pure, unnatural evil") using words that I know if directed at me would make me fear for my very existence. I read comments every day that violate the Hacker News guidelines ("lol the author of this post is dumb", "the Clintons were behind 9/11") and it's usually easy to tell because they stand out as being gross violations that nobody is going to take seriously. But this…the conviction with which you say these words that I don't think I could make any more discriminatory…is what astounds me. I am honestly struggling for words to describe how wrong your comment feels.

[finder83]

Randomly locking up or segregating society based on perceived psychological conditions is a dangerous path...there are high functioning sociopaths, even those that never show "symptoms" or act on a lack of empathy.

There are lots of dangerous people groups. Are you going to include any veteran with PTSD? Or brilliant MBAs because they might learn to game the system or start a trading scam?

It's estimated that 46% of adults have a severe psychological condition at some point in their lifetime.

We have to be careful as a society of locking people up because of what they could do, not because of what they've done.

[jl2718]

> odd or dumb

I feel insulted, but I can’t refute this.

[GhostVII]

I'm sure there are lots of sociopaths with smart friends, they are just better at acting normal. Of course sociopaths all seem creepy, because they are the only ones you notice. If you look at someone like Ted Bundy, he had lots of fairly normal friends who were very surprised to hear what he had done.

And I think it's a bad idea to try and imprison people because of who they are.

[vwat]

So people who are born with a sexual desire to hurt small children, not rape but actually torture and mutilate as seen in the “hurt core” community, should be allowed to roam freely? Your opinion is an artifact of convention. How dull...

Of course people who were friends with Ted Bundy were surprised! Do you think they would be his friends otherwise? For every friend there were two people who weren’t surprised I can promise you. And yes some sociopaths are geniuses but that’s not relevant to my point at all. Most sociopaths are not able to play a rol perfectly forever. Ted bundy is a perfect example of that.

I once had the pleasure of encountering a sociopath in a social setting. He was charming and I was the only one who knew, and I knew instantly, everyone else loved him. And sure enough it was only a matter of time before the others came around one by one. If you know what to look for they are easy to spot. Extremely easy. The difference in autonomic responses alone is almost impossible to conceal.