Monday, August 26, 2013

Ignorance and hubris make a humorous combination...

ubu52 informs Robb Allen why a sign noting that faculty members may be armed is a bad idea at a school:
This sort of thing might work well in rural areas and small towns, but in the cities, criminals might think that's a good place to get guns. 
Oh, definitely. I live in a city, and crooks are all the time strolling into the cop shop down on 42nd and College and boosting the guns right out of the cops' holsters.

Oh, wait, no they don't.

You gotta love how the thinly-veiled contempt for the rubes in the sticks was worked into the, er, bizarre theory about how crooks obtain guns.

Yes, ubu, a significant percentage of cops who are killed by gunfire are killed with their own guns, but that's not how that happens.

13 comments:

Odysseus said...

Why would you go into an Indianapolis Police station to steal the cop's gun, you could just wait for him to be passed out drunk behind the wheel of a patrol car.

Tam said...

Funny you should mention that...

Robin said...

ubu52 has a rich fantasy life that has nothing to do with reality.

Sean D Sorrentino said...

Checking FBI's LEOKA
541 officers killed feloniously from 2001-2010
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/leoka-2010/tables/table27-leok-feloniously-type-of-weapon-01-10.xls
46 killed with own firearm (+1 killed with own baton in 2003 for a total of 47)
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/leoka/leoka-2010/tables/table14-leok-feloniously-with-own-weapon-01-10.xls

That works out to 8.5% of all officers feloniously killed in the last 10 years.

If you want to limit it to just cops feloniously killed by gunfire, that's 46 out of 498, or 9.2%.

Either way, it's not as big a problem as people make it out to be.

Paul said...

It is never the problem the left makes it out to be. Mountains from mole hills should be their motto.

og said...

"Ignorance and hubris make a humorous combination..."

lol. Hubnorance.


WV: ratsmed 1719

Anonymous said...

Sit Ubu sit.

Good dog.

Mark said...

Ha! "Hubnorance" Also called the Dunning-Kruger effect:

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/the-dunning-kruger-effect/3102360

Basically it's being SO ignorant of a subject that you think you know all about it.

Anonymous said...

Cass Sunstein would be proud of ubu. The main thing though is that we're talking about ubu instead of things that are good or that make sense. -- Lyle

staghounds said...

There are plenty of criminals, some of whom are students, who are concrete and stupid enough to make the "Teachers have guns, let's go steal them" plan.

There are plenty of teachers concrete and stupid enough to leave their guns unsecured in their cars at the school parking lot.

Is this a reason not to permit teachers to be armed? No, but criminals, rural and urban, are just as stupid as Ubu... says they are.

Ed said...

This is another argument against "Gun-Free Zones" as being counter-productive. The sign that indicates that staff are armed and prepared to defend should be unnecessary and assumed to be true everywhere you go. Unfortunately, that is not true, and many with evil intent can safely assume that no one is armed, especially in the established "Gun-Free Zones."

As you have noted, DUI laws do not necessarily mean that all drivers are sober and drug-free, only that those detected may be arrested and prosecuted for the offense. Isn't that enough to make everyone "feel" safer?

Steve Skubinna said...

You know, Ed, you may be onto something there. Instead of wasting manpower and time looking for drunk drivers, how about we post "Drunk Free Zone" signs on every public road?

Will said...

Ed:

"...only that those detected may be arrested and prosecuted for the offense. Isn't that enough to make everyone "feel" safer?"

No, I figure when it becomes acceptable to kill the drunk driver who just injured you, on the spot, I might feel a bit safer on the roads. I suspect that the number of drunks on the road might drop quite a bit, if this was the expected response.

My opinion is that getting behind the wheel while drunk is clear evidence that you set out with the intent to do major harm to some random passerby. Said major harm to include possible death. Everyone seems to applaud the guy who recently shot the kid who attacked him with a stun gun, in one of those "punch out a random person" scenarios. I don't see much difference, except a car is a much deadlier weapon.

Can you tell I'm a little bitter about DUI's? I've caused a number of them to be arrested over the years, but that is scant recompense.