Very astute observation!
I'll just add some food for thought regarding that: When Scientology is being a 'mental therapy' whose aim is to make people more intelligent and sane.. And Scientology boldly claims to be 'Authorities on the Human Mind'...
How in hell does that align with such frivolous and irresponsible labeling of a debilitating mental ilness? -
Good point, especially considering that the Church of Scientology attacks psychiatry partially for "labeling mental illnesses" per the DSM-IV.
Oh, I might add that Hubbard does relate the "mental state" of an SP, as described in the PTS/SP Course, with various "behaviors" described in the issues on the "anti-social personality". Hubbard's idea that the anti-social person "cannot complete cycles of action" is based on the idea that such a person is so stuck in this long-ago incident that he or she endlessly FIGHTS to STOP the overwhlem from occurring. Thus, the person "can't move" through anything. Of course it doesn't make sense how textbook "SPs" like Hitler and Stalin then got SO MUCH "done". Hubbard's notions ARE simply a "theory", but he presents them all as "facts". And, nobody can ever
confirm or verify such a thing because the events were "very log ago", and nobody can observe these "case factors" in action. In the end one can only accept, adopt and BELIEVE Hubbard's nonsense, since so much of it simply has no means of verification. Yes, one can and often does apply "logic" to Hubbard's many claims and statements, and comes up with "conclusions" based on some strange association of Scientology ideas. The problem is that so many of his claims and statements themselves cannot be "proven" and/or are false.
Anyways, I don't find the issue on "anti-social" tendencies very helpful in "spotting" such people. I find the term, category, and described behaviors somewhat abusrd, though not completely. For instance, in life I have seen people who excel in making others feel bad, with endless invalidation (especially in absuive relationships). But I find a model of the "ego" better at understanding such behaviors rather than Hubbard's nutty paradigm of SPs and "going PTS".
For example, Hubbard includes that the social person will "only pass along good news", and that the anti-social person will pass along negative news (with the aim to upset), often with exaggeration. There is probably SOME truth to that, but that does NOT mean that any person who describes a
real, existing negative situation, is "evil". For example, in Scientology that gets SO DISTORTED, that Scientology members NEVER "say anything negative" about Scientology, no matter how much data their own observations provide, them, because they would "then be an SP". Church members actually learn to monitor and closely control their own behaviors in alignment with Hubbard's nutty ideas. Also, most Scientologists learn rather quickly that they will get "declared" if they EVER say anything negative - no matter how true the comments might be.
That is why so many top level Scientologists have seen DM slap people around, yet NEVER mention it to others, because doing so would be "passing along bad news".
The whole realm gets so very strange because Hubbard made this statements, and then tied in ALL of the "case SP data" with it:
The anti-social person refuses to help and attacks betterment activites.
Of course Hubbard ASSUMES that Scientology is the ONLY VALID "betterment activity". Thus, using "reverse logic", if a person attacks or finds fault with Scientology, then he or she MUST be such an anti-social person. That is not at all true. Yet THAT is what passes for thought and logic in the minds of a great many overly-indoctrinated Scientologists.
Hubbard used different terms at different times, to define
different ideas, and then mashed them all together in the "ethics tech". "Merchant of chaos", "the anti-social personality", and the "suppressive person". He never actually SAID that they were all equal, but issues about each get put together in course like the "PTS/SP Course" and "ethics mini-hats". And since NOBODY can ask or talk about any of it (no verbal data), most go off
equating all of the ideas together in some strange mental abomination of associated thoughts and significances.
The inner workings of the mind of a "dedicated Scientologist" is an amazingly weird thing to observe.
Lastly, it all got especially nuts when Hubbard made up the list of Suppressive Acts and Crimes, where the
majority of the "bad behaviors" are defined by "doing harm to Hubbard or Scientology"! The majority of "evil" as defined by Hubbard involves affecting the Church of Scientology in some negative way.
Obviously, such a system could not possibly exist as some universal ethics and justice system, because it is defined almost entirely from the viewpoint of SCIENTOLOGY'S EXPANSION & SURVIVAL.
But Hubbard says that his system IS the ONLY valid system of "ethics and justice", and the blind/dumb followers believe him.
Anyway, yes, they surely do "label" people, though they NEVER state that they are labeling a "mental condition". Every person EVER declared as a "suppressive person" was declared due to
specific behaviors that the Church of Scientology viewed as
detrimental to ITS OWN EXPANSION and SURVIVAL. Whether true or not - since many people really didn't "do anything bad" other than speak their minds about some flaw or contradiction with Hubbard or Scientology. But realize, within the framework of organized LRH Scientology, even THAT IS a "suppressive act" (making public statements against Scientoogy or Hubbard to anything or anyone other than a Comm Ev).
In fact, it is a HIGH CRIME to disagree with ANY aspect of Hubbard or Scientology. Well, actually you
can disagree, but as long as you keep paying money and doing services, and TELL NOBODY ELSE, you will be fine. In other words, you can "think whatever you choose", but you do NOT have "free speech". You aren't allowed to EXPRESS your thoughts when they contradict Hubbard or the Church of Scientology. I know, because I got off MANY disagreements in session, over quite a few years while in the Sea Org, I NEVER changed my mind or even lied to them that I changed my mind, and as long as I "played ball" and
kept quiet about such things, they left me alone.
That is partially why I came to have so little respect or interest in Scientology.
started to crap her pants. You see my friend is a declared SP and has got the power 
so when she approached this nut job and started questioning on why she was there and told her that her being there is like another form of intimidation and harrassment knowing that her own church does not allow her to be near or in communication with an SP, that she did not know why she would be there in her workplace. Further she informed that she has been in connect with the AFP and put a formal complaint in and that each time she is in her workplace she will make another report to the AFP due to there troubled history.
If it wasn't so sad and families weren't torn apart, and people didn't die from cancer or shoot themselves in the head, or start crazy rip off pyramid schemes, or, or, or........