Reader Matt sent this screen grab (original from seattleguns.net) from a University of Washington test question. Click the image above to embiggen it. The creative math prof asks his charges to calculate the relationship between “state-registered automatic weapons” and murder rates in Northwestern states. But it’s a trick question! Because, as the clueless anti-2A academic is blissfully unaware, automatic weapons have, for the most part, been outlawed in the Northwest – and pretty much everywhere else – since 1934. Maybe this molder of young minds should be one of the first to take advantage of  Take a Newbie Shooting day on March 9. We’re pretty sure Chris Dumm or another northwestern person of the gun would be more than happy to show him or her the ballistic ropes.

## 30 Responses to Incendiary Image of the Day: Algebraic Anti-Gun Edition

1. Daniel Silverman says:

I hope he answered zero on both!

2. TTACer says:

That is supposed to be a college level math question? I had algebra in 8th grade.

3. Nick says:

That is highly unprofessional (and of course inaccurate)

4. TeutonicTenifer says:

How many murders are to be expected? Cannot be answered, since there is no correlation between number of firearms and firearm homicides.

Also, why the hell is this considered a college-level course? Shouldn’t they be giving students Calculus or at least Statistics?

• Chris says:

College entry is a low bar these days. Wouldn’t be “fair”

• William says:

“How many murders are to be expected? Cannot be answered, since there is no correlation between number of firearms and firearm homicides.”

Ipso facto, the correct answer for both is “zero”. I mean, “0”.

5. g says:

It’s only nine 1-point questions… I’m guessing a quiz?

As a WA state resident and proud U-Dub grad, I would have been the smart@zz that answered “zero”, because as Dan pointed out, automatic weapons are already banned.

• John in AK says:

Yes, the correct answer to both questions would be ‘there is no appropriate empirical data presented to answer this question’, OR ‘zero,’ because since 1934, there have been NO murders in the US committed with any registered automatic weapon. This is not a ‘trick’ question, but instead a very foolish one that has no valid mathematical answer.
On the other hand, automatic weapons have NOT been banned–they are still available to civilians if the arm in question was imported or built prior to 1986, so long as the proper documentation is prepared and approved and the appropriate \$200 tax stamp obtained. If you really desire a fully-automatic machine gun, and can afford one, you’re certainly legally able to buy and shoot one.

• Casey T says:

I’m a Washington State resident as well and happy that I have absolutely nothing to do with the University of Washington. As far as I’m concerned, they are a bunch of stuff shirt elitists. I purposely chose not to go there after I learned how great they thought they were which is the exact opposite of a learning environment I wanted to be involved with. This was for both undergrad and grad school and I had more than an adequate record to get in.

6. My Name Is Bob says:

Wow, college has really slacked off on its math skills, and apparently credentials for professors.

7. Anonymous says:

Imagine the public outcry if the professor had asked his students to correlate violent crime rates with the population of certain minority groups.

• John in AK says:

Oh MY, THAT would not go over well. If anyone was truly serious about curbing the national plague of violence, including that which requires a firearm, one would first have to exercise the fortitude to come out and admit that Step One would be to control ‘InnerCityYutes.’ One would then be noisily crucified on the altar of PC.
Remember, it’s YoungWhiteMalesWithStaringEyeBalls that commit all of the ‘gun violence,’ and it’s elderly women, small children, and the handicapped committing all of the aircraft hijacking–certainly NOT those ‘MiddleEasternYutes’ one hears about on FoxNews.

• TTACer says:

“By your logic, I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.”

Homer is confused: “Hmm; how does it work?”

Lisa: “It doesn’t work; it’s just a stupid rock!”

Homer: “Uh-huh.”

Lisa: “… but I don’t see any tigers around, do you?”

Homer, after a moment’s thought: “Lisa, I want to buy your rock…”

• kb says:

LOL, bear patrol…

Good times.

8. scottlac says:

Where are all these thousands of “automatic weapons”?

• Thanks, I’m fully aware of that. Which is why I said “for the most part.” While technically legal, full-auto guns are generally rare as hens teeth, while the math question made it sound like they’re readily available in any gun store.

• WA_2A says:

The term “assault rifle” doesn’t help; there are far too many people out there who think that “assault rifles” AKA rifles with evil cosmetic features are fully automatic.

When statistics don’t support the antis’ arguments, misinformation and fear-pandering will.

• Matt says:

They’re not rare, but just like a Barrett 50 BMG…you gotta have the \$\$\$’s to buy and feed them.

• CarlosT says:

Washington is not one of those states:

RCW 9.41.220
Unlawful firearms and parts contraband.
All machine guns, short-barreled shotguns, or short-barreled rifles, or any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, illegally held or illegally possessed are hereby declared to be contraband, and it shall be the duty of all peace officers, and/or any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington, to seize said machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or parts thereof, wherever and whenever found.

I think you can still get around it somehow (maybe with a trust), because there are a few people up here with full auto guns, but that’s what the law says.

• rosignol says:

The ban was implemented in the early 90s. You could keep them if you had them before the ban became law. Only way to get around it involves a time machine.

• Jake says:

Given that most of the pre ’86 hardware is already privately owned and jealously guarded, it is effectively illegal in the spirit of the second amendment, as the prohibitive cost virtually negates any possibility of a poor American purchasing a modern American birthright. What does a full auto M-16 sear go for these days, besides the unconstitutional and racially motivated tax? Pretty hefty. What I would give to be able to legally buy my own shiny pig, fresh pressed. I would just carry it around, I have it from reliable sources that this is quite good exercise. Plenty of modern full autos would cost way less than a Barrett if legally marketable.

9. Aharon says:

“We’re pretty sure Chris Dumm or another northwestern person of the gun would be more than happy to show him or her the ballistic ropes.”

Chris or Joe will have to do it since I’m too busy sending those guys political cartoons. Here is one:
Deer hunting after the Obama gun ban
http://www.thesurvivalistblog.net/deer-hunting-obama-gun-ban/

10. pat says:

The commie libtard professor is not “clueless” and “blissfully unaware”. The pig knows but is appealing to ignorance. Please, do not underestimate the enemy.

11. Christopher Willett says:

The question, I believe, comes from pre-calculus textbook written by Blitzer. Not to exhonerate the professor, but the question was probably just copied word for word from the text rather than something that the professor made up. I do the same thing in my math courses but with NICS checks versus violent crime rate to illustrate regression analysis and correlation.

12. DentalPrepper says:

This is bullshit propaganda that has no place in a reasonable educational institution. In addition, the math is bullshit.
The units for x are the absolute number of firearms and the unit of murders is per 100,000 people. So a super small state can be drowning in guns per capita and barely be affected, and a large state can have enough guns that murder the entire population each year. According to the formula, 115 million full auto firearms and the murder rate can be expected to be 100%.
I give the professor an A for bullshit propaganda and an F for math.
What subject is being taught again?

13. personfromtheinterwebs says:

A = 4.624 (thous)
B = 2.25 (thous)
99% correlation my ass. I guess thats why this instructor included the regression equation. If students found it on their own they would call bs on r and r^2

14. Elliotte says:

The best part of this equation, that even if there were 0 “automatic weapons” there would still be 3.98 murders per 100,000 people.