Slashdot Mirror
Officers Lose 243 Homeland Security Guns
In a screw up so big it could only be brought to you by the government or a famous athlete, 243 guns were lost by Homeland Security agencies between 2006 and 2008. 179 guns, were lost "because officers did not properly secure them," an inspector general report said. One of the worst examples of carelessness cites a customs officer who left a firearm in an idling vehicle in the parking lot of a convenience store. The vehicle was stolen while the officer was inside. "A local law enforcement officer later recovered the firearm from a suspected gang member and drug smuggler," the report said.
by the government of a famous athlete
I'm sure you had a joke in there that you were dying to get out, but this makes less than no sense.
Yup, we all do stupid things. Lose our car keys, forget to lock up our guns, dont wear a condom...
Oh, but when it comes to a cop, they better be more than perfect.
Just the other day a 3 year old shot themselves while attempting to get a gun from under their grandmothers couch.
So... yeah. If anything this just shows they need better weapons handling training. What? You think this was the first time someone did something stupid with a gun?
I understand your point regarding incompetence, but the only reason we know about this is because this is a government agency. If it was private company the public would have no idea. You could make an argument regarding hiring standards between the government and private companies, but based on my experience private companies hire lazy and incompnent employees as well. Where is the public report from a Health Care company where mistakes cost hundreds of premium paying customers money or time to recoupe money due to sloppiness on the insurance company? Or worse, where are the reports where people were delayed necessary procedures? You won't see it because it is a private company. I agree the government may not do a great job managing heathcare, but this is not a valid example.
You'll have to explain to me how losing a statistically insiginficant number of weapons constitutes proof of government incompetence. Not that I necessarily assume the government is competent, mind you, but losing 250 out of a total number of guns that must be in the hundreds of thousands doesn't constitute 'proof' of anything.
How about looking at personal responsibility and labeling the individual as at fault. If you do that, your statistics will mean more. One officer was issued two weapons and lost one.
Pull my finger for my public key.
The Dems don't understand business and the private sector; they don't understand what actually generates wealth in this country because they themselves are destroyers, not creators, of wealth
Interesting idea when you consider the largest destroyers of wealth are in New York City on Wall Street, rather than in Washington DC. But those of us in the know, know that the Dems and Reps all have their campaigns paid by Goldman Sachs anyway.
To understand power in the United States, don't follow government. Follow the money.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
...Because a 0.09% rate of failure isn't as bad as you make it out to be.
well you need to compare this to the army and the average loss rate in the general population
No one else has proven capable.
Next question?
I think you'd find the loss rate in the Army vanishingly small. The kinds of punishment a cop gets for misplacing a weapon pale beside what they can do to a soldier losing a rifle.
For a good number of years I was the company armorer and ran the company arms room when I was in the Army and we never lost a weapon--because every soldier knows what will happen to him if he loses his rifle, and every sergeant knows what will happen to him if his troop loses it, and so on up the chain.
I doubt any of the DHS employees got more than a wrist-slap
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
but based on my experience private companies hire lazy and incompnent employees as well.
This is true, but there is one key difference between private businesses and the government. If a private business hires bad employees and operates inefficiently it goes out of business (or at least it should, provided that the government doesn't bail them out). The government, on the other hand, cannot go out of business or disappear; it usually takes a very protracted period of bad performance for governments to be finally shown the door. Also, we can choose not to patronize bad businesses, but taxes are not optional. These are a few of the key differences between private businesses and government.
To understand power in the United States, don't follow government. Follow the money.
and where does all of that money lead? It says "federal reserve note" right on each bill. The government ultimately controls the money supply and the fact that Wall Street went to Washington for their bailouts demonstrates that the government is still master of the money supply; the source from which all credit flows.