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.
The vehicle was stolen while the officer was inside.
Sleeping in the back seat again?
So, over 3 years, 179 / 188,500 weapons went missing, 0.09%, only slightly higher than the percentage eaten by beavers or flattened by steam rollers.
What a travesty. How could they have been so careless with our tax dollars. Let's impeach Obama.
=^P
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.
You must have a personal problem with the Canadian health care. The Canadian government does not directly control the health care. What they do have is a Canadian Health Act, which stipulates the minimum required coverage per province. The individual provinces then create their own modifications to the Canadian Health Act to utilize the tax money allocated for that purpose. The provinces have to give at least the minimum care required.
What's interesting is Canada has an average increased life expectancy of ~2 years more than the U.S..
In addition, the individual tax burden for Canada, as a whole is lower than the cost for health care in the US paying piece meal.
I appreciate your cynical view of Canadian health care, however, I would still rather get seriously sick (or be seriously injured) in Canada as a Canadian citizen than in the US as a US citizen.
...because the alternative is a ravenous beast that feeds on the sick to generate monstrous profits. Socialized medicine has been shown to work* in countries all over the world. I (a non-American) don't have to worry that changing jobs will mean a loss of health insurance, nor that a catastrophic illness/injury will make my family paupers.
*work in the sense that decent healthcare is enjoyed by all residents of a country, instead of having superb care for the rich, generally adequate for the middle class, little or none for the working poor.
Well, we all also do illegal things, but you best be extra perfect in front of a cop. All you need to do is one illegal thing in front of a cop, and he will gladly do his job and process you into the system for punishment. Why should hey get a break when he gets caught slipping?
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
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.
The goal here is an irrational rant. Preferably in wall-of-text format. Why bother actually forming an informed opinion when we can spume and froth at the mouth and work up a good outrage?
So please, quit confusing the issue with stuff like "facts" and "details" like the following.
Infant Mortality Rate and Life Expectancy, by Sex: Canada
Year: 2010
IMR Both Sexes: 4.99
IMR Male: 5.34
IMR Female: 4.63
Life expectancy both sexes: 81.29
Life expectancy male: 78.72
Life expectancy female: 84.00
Infant Mortality Rate and Life Expectancy, by Sex: United States
Year: 2010
IMR Both Sexes: 6.14
IMR Male: 6.81
IMR Female: 5.44
Life expectancy both sexes: 78.24
Life expectancy male: 75.78
Life expectancy female: 80.81
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Data Base.
United States - Latest Data Used in the Estimates and Projections
Reference years: 2007
Data source: vital registration
Data collection years: 2007
Notes: Preliminary data on total registered deaths.
Citation: National Center for Health Statistics. 2008. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_21.pdf.
Canada - Latest Data Used in the Estimates and Projections
Reference years: 2004
Data source: vital registration
Data collection years: 2004
Notes: Registered deaths by age and sex.
Citation: Statistics Canada. 2006. Annual Demographic Statistics: 2005. Ottawa.
Note: Infant deaths are approximated as IMR times births in the year and may not add to totals due to rounding.
U.S. data are based on official estimates and projections. Population estimates for 1950-1999 are based on the resident population plus the armed forces overseas. Population estimates for 2000-2008 are for the resident population and are based on Census 2000. Population data in the IDB for 2009-2050 are projections of the resident population. The U.S. population components shown in the IDB for 2000-2050 may not match the official population components for the United States, due to differences in how they are displayed (calendar year versus midyear estimates). Revised official population estimates are released each year (see http://www.census.gov/popest/). Therefore, the U.S. population estimates (official compared with IDB) may not match due to differences in the timing of their releases.
I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
Oh, but when it comes to a cop, they better be more than perfect.
Yes. Exactly.
We're talking about *cops*. We entrust them with our lives, and give them power over us, so yes, I think it's reasonable to expect them to be a little less careless than the average slashbot such as yourself. If they can't handle those expections, they should #gtfo, because they don't deserve the responsibility they've been given.
We're also not talking about a set of keys, here. We're talking about a *firearm*. Last I checked, most people aren't dumb enough to lose their 38 special between the seat cushions of their couch.
Frankly, I'm shocked this even surprises you.
The DHS has a total of around 200,000 employees. The number of those who are actually armed (as opposed to sitting on their butts in an air conditioned office in D.C.) is significantly less. In a cursory search, I couldn't turn up any concrete numbers, but I imagine it's safe to say that probably 10% of DHS employees are actually "agents" of some type (Border Patrol, ATF, Air Marshals, etc). So that's 20,000 armed employees.
I don't see a 1% loss rate as "statistically insignificant" when you're talking about firearms lost through negligence.
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com