ABSTRACT: Some moral responsibility theorists think that some agents (like psychopaths) can be morally responsible for what they do even though they lack moral competence. But what is moral competence? And is it, or is it not, required for responsibility? In this paper, I attempt to answer these questions in a rather odd and obscure fashion, by exploring the nature of cruel jokes and the people that find them funny. As it turns out, there are distinct personality constructs that have great difficulty negotiating various types of humor norms when they intersect with certain moral norms, and learning about them and their impairments yields a wealth of information about the nature of moral competence and why it's required across numerous normative domains, including, of course the moral.