Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

U.S. ignores risks posed by readily available explosive

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:03 PM
Original message
U.S. ignores risks posed by readily available explosive
U.S. ignores risks posed by readily available explosive
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20040510/6187388s.htm


Two days after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, neighbors spotted Terry Nichols covering his front lawn with a white powdery substance. He apparently had lots of it.

Nichols, already serving a life sentence for conspiracy and involuntary manslaughter, is now on trial a second time for his role in the bombing. Government evidence suggests he bought the two tons of common ammonium-nitrate fertilizer used to make the truck bomb that claimed 168 lives.

Ammonium nitrate was also the explosive terrorists used in last November's bombings in Istanbul, the Bali nightclub bombings in 2002 and scores of other attacks that have claimed hundreds of lives around the world. As a result, governments from Ireland to Australia have moved to impose restrictions on the manufacture, sale or import of ammonium nitrate. Not so in the USA.

Nine years after the Oklahoma City tragedy, the nation lacks legal barriers to prevent the next would-be terrorist from building a massive fertilizer bomb for less than $500. More than 1.7 million tons of ammonium nitrate are sold annually, and even modest proposals to regulate its manufacture and sale have run into opposition from farmers, the fertilizer industry and professional blasting operations that use it as an inexpensive substitute for dynamite.

*SNIP*

Six years ago, the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council recommended banning sales of packaged ammonium nitrate unless dealers required foolproof identification from buyers and kept accurate records, much as gun dealers are required to maintain. The council also suggested additional steps if terrorist threats increase, such as putting chemical ''markers'' in fertilizer to aid bomb-sensing equipment, licensing all fertilizer dealers and requiring purchasers to obtain government permits.

Yet not even the 9/11 attacks have jarred Congress into action. Though Congress had requested the research council's recommendations, it has largely ignored them.

*SNIP*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. The Corrupt Agriculture Industry(TM) is running the show
Are we all willing to pay the increased food prices that would surely result from any system to make ammonium nitrate a controlled substance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Isn't there an alternative on the market now that is just as...
...effective? I can't remember where I read about that. I'll see what I can find...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Alternative fertilizer that can't be used to make explosives?
Not hardly likely. AN is dirt cheap.

I'd also like to add that ammonium nitrate fertilizer is sold in pellets about the size and shape of split green peas. I used to have a 50-pound bag of it, long since used up. Creating an explosive from it usually involves powdering it and mixing it with diesel fuel, fuel oil, or some other light oil. Detonating that mixture, known as ANFO, is not trivial. You need some kind of primary high explosive to get it going, and those substances are all well controlled and/or much more difficult to manufacture than ANFO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. If I run across the article I am thinking of I will post it. I think it..
...had something to do with nitrate vs. nitrite, but I am not sure. Also, it may exist but be expensive. Is there a farmer in the house? :)

The difficulty in making an ANFO bomb came up at the OK City bombing trial. Supposedly, none of McVeigh's bombs worked until after his trip to the Philippines. Makes you wonder.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Still not finding much at all........
http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309061261?OpenDocument


QUOTE:
Despite considerable international efforts to make fertilizer-grade ammonium nitrate less explosive or render it inert, the committee found that currently there is no practical method that would make the material considerably less explosive without seriously affecting its use as a fertilizer. More research is needed to develop such methods. Meanwhile, the government should develop standard tests to evaluate the extent to which any proposed additives can render ammonium nitrate-based fertilizers inert.
QUOTE:

QUOTE:
WASHINGTON -- Additives that improve detection of explosives before detonation or determine their origins after a blast are not yet practical enough for broad use in the United States, concludes a committee of the National Research Council in a new report. Nor is there a practical method available to neutralize the explosive properties of ammonium nitrate, a commonly available fertilizer that was used in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
QUOTE:

QUOTE:
After examining a variety of technologies for marking explosives using either detection markers or identification taggants, the committee recommended against broad-based implementation of a taggant program at the present time. However, it affirmed a recommendation by the United Nations' Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which called for the use of chemical detection markers in plastic and sheet explosives to allow for better detection by currently available commercial equipment. After the 1988 downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, 34 countries, including the United States, ratified a convention requiring the marking of these explosives. The international convention must be approved by one more nation to enter into force, but already has been implemented by the United States.
QUOTE:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. Gee, not ALL Americans have been ignoring that...
"Law enforcement officials have tried for nearly two decades to persuade Congress to pass a taggant law. President Clinton has consistently supported the idea. The NRA and its allies, however, have resisted putting taggants in gunpowder and has resisted even allowing the federal government to study their use. The NRA claims that taggants will raise the cost and lower the quality of gunpowder, and that federal law enforcement agencies are too untrustworthy to conduct an impartial taggant study.
The merits of the taggant proposal, however, should have made this sound law enforcement idea completely nonpartisan; there has been no valid objection simply to studying whether taggants are safe and effective in gunpowder. With the aid of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. -- a longtime proponent of taggants -- Mr. Clinton defeated objections about who would conduct the study by designating the prestigious National Academy of Sciences."

http://www.s-t.com/daily/11-96/11-21-96/c06op052.htm

"Republican participants in a White House-Congressional Task Force on Terrorism have prevented a bipartisan response to terrorism after Republican leaders refused to accept key provisions requested by President Clinton, the FBI and Democratic leaders. Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee and a task force member, said "the Republicans have come up with a terrorism bill that is all bark and no bite. The party is being run by extremists who can't even agree on sensible provisions to fight terrorism." The weakened version of the antiterrorism passed 389-22.
"We had hoped for new, strong measures that could be supported by both parties," Conyers said. "When a bomb goes off, it's not killing a Democrat or a Republican, it's killing an American. The threat of terrorism is bipartisan. The public wants a serious response to the clear threat of terrorism, and we could do that and protect civil liberties at the same time. But once again the NRA rears its ugly head and the Republicans are eager to give them an election-year kiss."
President Clinton, who requested the task force, had urged approval of certain provisions that had been removed from the anti-terrorism bill approved earlier this year. Conyers said that the Republicans were extremely resistant to the issue of taggants, or tracers, for black and smokeless powder like that used in the Olympics bombing.
"Investigators tell us that it would be easier to trace bombs like the one used at the Olympics if the powder had tracers. I don't see how anyone could oppose technology that law enforcement desperately needs to keep up with the terrorist threat. We need to limit the influence of the NRA. It's out of touch with the public when it comes to fighting crime."

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/dpr40014.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Red Herring
We were discussing control of fertilizer, not use of taggants in gunpowder.

Please try to stay on topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TX-RAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Taggant in ammonium nitrate
Sound like a good place to start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minavasht Donating Member (353 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. And you’ll know what?
At 1.5 million tons sold every year you’ll know that this particular batch was sold in only 20 states. That will make it VERY easy to catch the bad guys, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TX-RAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. How many manufacturers?
Would be better than the system we have now.
20 states is better than 50.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Evidently some people think the only thing to do
in any situation is throw up their hands after the bombing and say like idiots, "well, no law would have prevented it."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TX-RAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. At least it would give us something to work with.
Each manufacturer has a differnt taggant, and there own tracking with sales recipts. Don't sound that hard to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Exactly...
No earthly reason to give potential terrorists access to any untraceable explosives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
24. please don't put your faith in taggants!
Edited on Wed May-12-04 01:22 PM by NorthernSpy
(added codicil)


Anybody who really cares about getting away with a bombing or other atrocity can either

1) remove the extraneous chemicals, or

2) figure out what each manufacter uses to tag their wares and simply re-dope the homemade bomb at random, thus making useless the information that taggants are supposed to provide.*


In fact, a person could manufacture his own ammonium nitrate from untagged source materials (ammonia and nitric acid).** It might take a while to come up with a large quantity, but getting it done would be well within the abilities of a dedicated terrorist, I'm afraid.


And besides, ANFO is far from being the only reasonably available thing that goes boom. How about the various organic peroxides? They're not hard to make, and talk about 'readily available': acetone, hair bleach, and drain cleaning acid... Nothing exotic there!*** I mean, is it reasonable to try to come up with a unique chemical signature for every lot of hydrogen peroxide or drain cleaner?


For taggants to make sense, they have to be sufficiently rare that their detected presence reliably constitutes useful information. Tag too many things, and you risk creating false leads and ever-multiplying tons of mostly useless info.


Mary


* Remember the fairytale about the soldier and the tinderbox? At one point in the story, one of the three magical dogs carried the princess on his back to visit the soldier. The king's messenger followed them, and chalked a big X on the soldier's door so that the palace guards would know whom to arrest. The magical dog saw the X, and rather than try to wash it off, got a lump of chalk and marked hundreds of Xes on other doors throughout the town.

Sort of like that.


** Not a recipe! I doubt it's actually illegal to make your own ammonium nitrate, but I don't recommend trying, even so.


*** Absolutely NOT a recipe! Note that I haven't included the necessary amounts or instructions: my point is only to show just how mundane and ubiquitous the "ingredients" really are. Do NOT under any circumstances try mixing random stuff with strong peroxide. And, for heaven's sake, do NOT ever try to make any kind of organic peroxide explosive! The fact that doing so is totally against the law might actually be the least of your worries, as there might well not be enough of you left to arrest at the conclusion of your little "experiment".


Codicil: Since this post started as a reply to Mr Benchley, I want to assure him that I know that he isn't going to make explosives, and doesn't need to be cautioned. I just thought it was appropriate to include a warning with my remarks, because there is always a chance that someone out there might get curious and start mixing things just to see what might happen.

Can't go around assuming that everyone has good sense, unfortunately. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FatSlob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Thank you, Mary.
That was an excellent, informative post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. Thank you, Fat Slob
Glad you liked it.

I don't really understand why our colleague Benchley so completely discounts the modest points that I tried to make. I didn't say that no one could ever come up with a good reason to support the use of a chemical taggant in any product whatsoever: that would have been a pretty bold claim! My argument is that taggants won't necessarily be as useful as some of us seem to expect. Certainly, I can be wrong, but I'm really not spinning "fairy tales" here, even if I did cite one for illustration... ;)


Mary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Yeah, surrrrrrrre....they'll pick them out with tweezers...
Well, I have to admit it's hilarious to hear how desperate the fairy tales get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. not tweezers...
When I say "remove" the tags, I mean remove them chemically by purifying the ammonium nitrate via an appropriate process. Just because our hypothetical bombmaker is evil, doesn't mean that he is also stupid.

On the other hand, I suppose the taggant chemical could be mixed in as prills, and therefore removed mechanically, at least as a first step. I know of food aid recipients in Asia removing protein pellets from bags of rice by picking them out, literally one by one. They thought the pellets made the rice taste nasty.

Where there's a will, there's a way. No fairytale there, I'm afraid.


Mary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. And some criminals wear gloves
shall we dismantle the fingerprint databases and stop dusting for prints at crime scenes? After all, they may not help in some extreme cases.

"Where there's a will, there's a way"
So why not do all we can do to help? Ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. but that's not the same thing, though
Whether or not we collect and store information from crime scenes is one issue. Whether we chemically tag fertilizer and other products before they reach the consumer (and the fairly remote possibility of being used in the commission of a crime) is different issue. They're not connected. We can tag nothing and analyse everything, or the other way round, or whatever.


Mary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minavasht Donating Member (353 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #26
35. There are at least 2 very simple ways to remove taggants from AN.
I don’t want to be accused of helping terrorists by giving them out, but everybody with a HS diploma can figure them out.
Hint – water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. I've been trying to figure out
what the situation is in Canada, without much luck.

There was a Bill C-55 that died on the order paper (is that Cdn? became defunct when the session of Parliament ended) and there was a Bill C-17 that, hmm, ah, now I see, doesn't seem to have made it through the Senate in the current session. It's the Public Safety Act and it does all sorts of things, including

http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Bills_ls.asp?Parl=37&Ses=2&ls=C17#part7txt

Under clause 38, it is forbidden to possess any restricted component in addition to the current prohibition on the possession of explosives, unless authorized by the Act or any exemption. The Governor in Council may make regulations prescribing a component of an explosive and providing that only a stipulated person or body, or a class of persons or bodies, has the right to acquire, possess or sell such a component (clause 37(1)). However, clause 37(2), and the new section 6(2) proposed in clause 38(5), authorize the Minister to exempt any body or person, or any class of persons or bodies, from the ban on possessing explosives or restricted components of explosives, as provided in clause 38(3).
Hmm, once again -- looks fairly simple. Ammonium nitrate would be a "restricted component". Farmers could be exempted from the prohibition on acquiring components of explosives.

Anyone haha interested could ask google for "bill C-55" ammonium canada to see what was said in the House of Commons about this.

And of course we can guess what old Gary Breitkreuz MP had to say about it (and we may take this as an example of someone posting a link to a site and *not* adopting much of anything said there) ...

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/speeches/may-9-2002.htm

If the bill goes through unamended it could actually do the exact opposite to the government's stated objective. I will elaborate. The federal government is using the September 11 terrorist attack as an excuse to continue its anti-gun, anti-hunting, anti-farmer, anti-sport shooter, anti-firearms collector, anti-historical re-enactor, anti-licensed firearm and ammunition dealer, anti-guide, anti-outfitters and anti-aboriginal hunting rights agenda. Those are the honest, law-abiding, taxpaying Canadians the Liberals have targeted with these 10 pages of proposed explosive act amendments in the bill.
Amazing how Gary and I can both loathe Liberals, and do it for such different reasons. (Just in case anybody clicks, I should probably point out that the official site I linked to notes that the restrictions on "inexplosive components" of ammunition that Gary was so exercised about were deleted from the bill.) Gary continues:

A spokesman with the explosive regulatory division, minerals and metals sector of Natural Resources Canada indicated that at this point it had only one component in mind. The component to be restricted by this act is ammonium nitrate, one of the substances used in the Oklahoma City bombing a few years also. Presently a person can buy this product without having to show any link to the agricultural industry. The goal is that the regulations will impose tighter control on the retail sale of this product. The actual controls would be set out in proposed regulations and would need to go through the regulatory consultation process. It is clear that in the future other components may be added to the restricted list as needed.

This proposed legislation enables the government to go well beyond the parts of this bill and that causes us concern. This is enabling legislation. We do not know what regulations in future the government will bring in. These could be very harmful to farmers and dealers who deal with this particular type of fertilizer.
The sky is obviously fixing to fall.

Gary might want to pause and consider this:

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2000/2000scc58.html

The accused has a lengthy history of mental illness and of dangerous handling of explosives. He also has a long history of treatment, and received out-patient psychiatric treatment as a requirement of a probation order in force against him between 1993 and 1996 because of an incident where he had taken a firearm to work with the intent of shooting a co-worker, for which he received a conditional discharge, three years' probation, and a 10-year firearms prohibition. In 1998 the accused pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of an explosive substance and to possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, contrary to ss. 100(12) and 87 of the Criminal Code. The police had found in the accused's vehicle and in his apartment an arsenal capable of causing mass destruction to property, death and serious injury to persons in the area.

In the <appellant>'s vehicle was a suicide bomb. The only requirement for the device to deploy was the movement of the switch by the operator or victim. In the car were explosive substances, including two 500 ml bottles containing nitro-methane and picric acid, chemicals, which are extremely unstable in nature. Also located in the vehicle was a duffle bag with a container of 37% formaldehyde; 500 ml of sodium nitrate; 500 grams of sulphuric acid; 500 ml of lead nitrate; and 500 ml of picric acid; and 150 ml of glycerine and various other chemicals. The chemicals found in the vehicle have capability on their own, or in combination, to form highly explosive substances and could have been used to create an arsenal of devices.

Similar chemicals were located inside the residence, including two 80 lb bags of ammonia nitrate and two pipe bombs. Three detonators were seized including one that had been exploded.

The bomb inside the vehicle, if detonated, would have destroyed the vehicle and killed the person activating the device. The debris would have caused damage to cars, buildings and injured anyone within a 75 metre radius. The two 80 lb bags of ammonia nitrate, if mixed with fuel oil and detonated in the <appellant>'s suite, would have damaged the suites two to three floors above and two to three on either side, as well as cars parked along the street and houses across the street. Anyone in the area would be killed or seriously injured.
But hey, as long as it wasn't Gary.

The only part of the bill that is any good at all is the increased penalties for the criminal use of explosives.
Yes, Gary, and when you get to hell, you can make sure that anybody who succeeds at what that guy was trying to do is properly charged and sent to prison for a loooong time.

.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:25 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. That'd be kind of hard on....
suburban people who like plants, wouldn't it?

Here, at least, nost commercially marketed plant foods contain Ammonuim Nitrate in large percentages.

We routinely use it in our garden and in our flowerboxes. I guess we better be careful, lest the Government think we're secretly making bombs camoflaged as herb and flower gardens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Gee, refill...
Do you really think people are plotting to make bombs with those little boxes of MiracleGro?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:37 PM
Original message
that's where Tim McVeigh got his....
from agricultural use AN....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
27. and the operative word is ...
Edited on Wed May-12-04 01:37 PM by iverglas


... and I'll highlight it for your ease (and, on edit, fix my html) --

Here, at least, nost commercially marketed plant foods contain Ammonuim Nitrate in large percentages.

If you mix fuel oil with your geranium-gro and do what needs to be done to detonate it, will it blow up? If not, can the ammonium nitrate be readily separated from the other components in the mix?

Me, I don't know. I figured you must know and it must do that (blow up) or be readily capable of that (being separated), or you wouldn't have thought it germane to the discussion.

Is it?

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
29. Ammonium nitrate + fuel oil requires hypersonic shock to detonate
Edited on Wed May-12-04 01:49 PM by slackmaster
Ordinary blasting caps cannot detonate a straight mixture of AN and fuel oil. Typically a charge of dynamite, C4, or other standard explosive is used.

It's possible to make a mixture with ammonium nitrate, ammonium perchlorate, and powdered metals that can be detonated with a blastic cap or a high-power rifle bullet.

I can't say how easy it would be to isolate AN from geranium food. That's a question for a chemist.

Edited to correct the recipe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #29
59. Blasting powder apparently works...
For many years AN was considered to be non-explosive... they used to store HUGE hundred foot tall piles of it, which would clump up. They would break it up with bulldozers and dynamite! Eventually the inevitable happened, and they found out that AN isn't non-explosive, it's just darned hard to initiate.

*SNIP*

About 7:30 a.m. on September 21, 1921, two powerful explosions occurred at the BASF plant in Oppau, Germany. The explosions destroyed the plant and approximately 700 nearby houses, and killed 430 persons.

The explosions occurred as blasting powder was being used to breakup storage piles of a 50/50 mixture of ammonium sulphate and ammonium nitrate. This procedure had previously been used 16,000 times without mishap. About 4,500 tons of the mixture were involved in the explosion, which created a crater 250 feet in diameter and 50 feet deep.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. A lot of substances behave differently in very large quantities
That mixture probably "shouldn't" have detonated, but in a big pile of anything there can be unanticipated heat buildup, unknown impurities present; who knows what else going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. peacetime explosions
Unfortunately, Canada holds the record for them.

http://www.eco-online.qld.edu.au/novascotia/novascotia/halifax.html

On 6 December 1917, during the First World War, the French munitions ship Mont Blanc collided with a Belgian ship, the Imo, in Halifax harbour. The Mont Blanc was carrying a deadly cargo of explosives: 35 tons of benzol, 300 rounds of ammunition, 10 tons of gun cotton, 2300 tons of an acid used in explosives and 400 000 pounds of TNT.

The resulting explosion held the record for the world's largest human-generated explosion until the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan in 1945. Almost all the north end of Halifax was destroyed, 131 hectares of it. Two thousand people died and 9000 were injured. Windows 80 kilometres away were shattered. The barrel of one of the Mont Blanc's cannons was found over five kilometres away from the harbour.
One of our "war" heroes is the guy who sat at the teletype machine and succeeded in warning an incoming passenger train to stop, rather than running from the blast site himself. The only person I ever met who was there was the step-grandfather of my former co-vivant, who was a USAmerican from California stationed there, and whom I met in Dallas.



.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #61
63. Wow - 200 tons of TNT
Thanks for pointing the Canadian accident out. I hadn't heard of it, and always thought the Texas City explosion was the biggest. The Halifax incident beats it by quite a lot.

It's even twice the amount of TNT that was used to callibrate instruments just before the Trinity atomic bomb test:

http://www.childrenofthemanhattanproject.org/LA/Photo-Pages-2/LAP-159.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. WWI, all round
About the worse disaster to hit humanity. Ecologically, in particular. Whole great big areas of France, for instance, are still unfit for any use. Unexploded shells and other assorted dangerous debris regularly ooze up out of the mud.

A trade for the Manhattan Project site:

http://w1.865.telia.com/~u86517080/BattlefieldArchaeology/ArkeologENG_2.html#anchor913223
"The Archaeology of the Western Front"

One can imagine the front as an extended but quite narrow subterranean shanty-built town, from the English channel to Switzerland, shelled and inhabited by some million men for four years, shovelled over, with all its dirt, waste, junk, dead bodies and duds in the years after the war. The fact that the clearance workers were often prisoners of war, or civilians paid per square meter (Belgium), and that French contractors had been awarded work on the basis of submitting the lowest bids, indicates that the clearance workers were likely to be quite careless in their work. Environmental considerations were, of course, not taken into consideration at the time being. But duds, as well as all kind of battlefield debris, which as mentioned were buried quite carelessly in the trenches after the armistice, sooner or later reach the surface of the fields again. "Der Materialkrieg", the material war, as the German writer Ernst Jünger called it, is still to be seen.

With the annual ploughing up of old war junk goes the epithet "the iron harvest": Special army patrols still drive around the countryside picking up old grenades which the farmers put in piles beside the road. Even 80 years after the war, every year there are still accidental deaths caused by live ammunition exploding. Farm workers are at greatest risks, because their machines do not discriminate between buried grenades and sugar beets, potatoes or other root-crops, and, of course, because they work on the former battlefield each day. For example, in 1991 a total of 36 farm workers had died when their machines hit duds (today 39).




"Lumberjacks have collected duds and other scraps of war from a sawing area in the centre of a former Verdun battlefield - notice that the dud is marked in orange to help the disarmers find it. On the ground are a shoe, spades, water bottles, mess tins, gas mask filters and German hand grenades, 'potato mashers'. (1999)"

Even without depleted uranium, there were ways to ruin things.

There is little that can compare to WWI for abject pointlessness. I always think of one of the worst movies of all time, the remake of Mayerling with Omar Sherif and Catherine Deneuve, and the most appallingly dumb movie line of all time, which she delivered to him as they rode cutely through the mountains in a sleigh, covered in furs, and which I am determined to say to someone before I go to my grave:

If only you weren't a Hapsburg prince!


The Halifax Explosion stands as the biggest non-natural disaster (accident) in history, btw.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #63
67. It does beat both of the Texas City explosions by a lot. I don't...
...think I ever want to live near a harbor.


Here are some good Texas City Disaster links:

http://www.local1259iaff.org/disaster.html

http://www.texas-city-tx.org/docs/history/exp.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. I first learned of this disaster last night while looking through...
...the web site: http://slp.icheme.org/incidents.html#Others .

Absolutely unbelievable!


From: http://www.region.halifax.ns.ca/community/explode.html

*SNIP*

Much of what was not immediately levelled burned to the ground, aided by winter stockpiles of coal in cellars. As for the Mont Blanc, all 3,000 tons of her were shattered into little pieces that were blasted far and wide. The barrel of one of her cannons landed three and a half miles away; part of her anchor shank, weighing over half a ton, flew two miles in the opposite direction. Windows shattered 50 miles away, and the shock wave was even felt in Sydney, Cape Breton, 270 miles to the north-east.

There were about 20 minutes between the collision and the explosion at 9:05. It was enough time for spectators, including many children, to run to the waterfront to watch the ship burning, thus coming into close range. It was enough time for others to gather at windows, and thus an exceptionally large number of people were injured by flying glass -- 1,000 unfortunate survivors sustained eye damage.

*SNIP*

With astounding speed, relief efforts were set in motion. Money poured in from as far away as China and New Zealand. The Canadian government gave $18 million, the British government almost $5 million, but most Haligonians remember the generosity of the state of Massachusetts, which donated $750,000 in money and goods and gave unstintingly in volunteer assistance through the Massachusetts-Halifax Relief Committee. To this day, Halifax sends an annual Christmas tree to the city of Boston in gratitude.

*SNIP*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. the xmas tree
I might have heard about that. There is indeed a long tradition of mutual assistance in times of trouble, the most recent manifestation being the efforts of Canadians to assist USAmerican and other travellers grounded in Canada on 9/11:

... Damn, PBS's good web page about its documentary, "Stranded Yanks", is gone.

A WWII story: when the Netherlands fell, the Dutch royal family took refuge in Canada. Former Queen Juliana, who recently died, had her second daughter in a room of an Ottawa hospital which was designated Dutch soil for the purpose. Canada was subsequently, and I imagine coincidentally, in the forefront of the liberation of Holland.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2004/03/20/389583-ap.html

As a tribute to Canada, the people of Holland presented Ottawa with a gift of 100,000 tulip bulbs in 1945 in appreciation for the safe haven given the royal family and for Canada's role in the liberation of the Netherlands. Juliana sent a personal gift of 20,000 tulip bulbs, the start of a lifetime annual bequest.
And it's nearly Tulip Festival time.

http://www.travellady.com/Issues/Issue74/T74N-tulips.htm

What started as a heartfelt gesture of thanks has blossomed into over five million tulips. This amount has been verified by the Netherlands Flower Bulb Growing Center. More tulips grow in Ottawa than any other city, making Ottawa the tulip capital of the world. It is expected that this year’s festival will draw over a million-and-a-half visitors from around the world.
Myoko visits the Tulip festival (with the utterly monstrous new US Embassy conveniently in the background):



And here you thought that people came to Canada for the nightlife.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minavasht Donating Member (353 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #59
75. Actually they started to use dinamite instead of blasting powder.
That’s how they found that AN is an explosive. At least that’s what they told us when I was studying for my explosive experts’ license.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
36. It depends on which product you buy.
"If you mix fuel oil with your geranium-gro and do what needs to be done to detonate it, will it blow up?"

If the product you buy is basically "fortified soil", which is dirt with AN added, then no. If the product you buy is straight-out fertilizer without soil, it'll blow. Around my house, we use "Peter's Special Plant Food", which is mixed with water, then applied to the soil of the plants. It's almost pure AN, certainly pure enough to use as an explosive base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. well then
In the case I cited, right here in the peaceable kingdom of Canada, the guy had, what, 2 80-lb bags of ammonium nitrate? And he wasn't any kind of serious terrorist, just a common or garden crazy person. That would have taken out several of the surrounding apartments in his building. What could you take out with your package of geranium-gro mixture? The birdcage?

Seems to me that anybody buying in that quantity is either (a) a commercial farmer or (b) a bomb-maker. (Yes indeed: somebody might just be both. We'll all just have to remain vigilant, I guess.)

It would then, as I was saying, be an easy matter to restrict the sale of quantities large enough to blow up something significant, and allow them only to individuals identified as commercial farmers. And/or (I'd think "and", preferably) to restrict the sale of the material for hobby gardeners to a dirt-AN mixture, or some other mixture containing the stuff, that is not readily convertible for explosive use.

Where there is a problem, there is so often a solution.

And it's always amazing how some people will just go on fretting and dreaming up problems with the solution.

Is there some reason *not* to regulate/restrict access to this stuff? If not, is the reasonable approach not to propose solutions to the problem, rather than dream up problems with the solution as if they might cause the sky to fall?

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. IMO the only possible arguments against regulation are economic
Anything that makes ammonium nitrate more expensive to obtain, store, etc. is bound to raise the price of food in the long run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. Nah, there's a constitutional argument as well...
based upon the ICC.

In order for the Federal government to pass a law, there MUST be a constitutional basis for it. Given the beating that "the ICC covers everything" doctrine has taken in the past 12 years (starting with Lopez), it's possible that the Federal Government doesn't have the authority to regulate it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. Ummm....
I've got just under 2 acres of assorted gardens. Depending on the use (flowerbeds vs windowboxes, herbs versus vegetables, et cetera), I use different products. I've been known to buy 500-1,000 pounds of AN at a time, in spring, when I'm getting ready to put in the vegetable patch.

Let's say that you made it so that only commercial farmers could buy large quantitites of AN. Are you going to require it to be stored in a guarded AN magazines so that it can't be stolen? Are you going to regulate resale of AN? Some of the folks near to me pool their money to buy AN in tractor-trailer lots, and then subdivide it amongst themselves, because it's cheaper that way. Would that be illegal?

You say restrict the sale to people identified as commercial farmers. What about people like me, who put in a garden large enough to provide veggies year-round for their families (we can our own, and offer none for resale)? What possible constitutional justification could be given for such federal regulation, especially considering how the ICC has been reinterpreted by SCOTUS since Lopez in 1992?

Dirt/AN mixtures are fine for very small areas, in situations where, for example, you're potting seedlings, and don't want to go digging up the yard for dirt. They're totally impractical if you've got an existing garden. It's also much more expensive.

You talk about another mixture that isn't suitable for bombmaking. What on earth makes you think such a mixture would be suitable for gardening? It would, by necessity, require a large part of inert material to be included. Use something with a lot of inert material, and in 5 years, you've got a problem. If it's water-soluble, there will be environmental run-off issues. If it's not water soluble, you'll have built up enough to render your ground either less fertile or completely unuseable.

You need to do some kind of cost-benefit analysis. I may have missed it, but from what I've seen and read, ANFO-related criminal incidents are a relative rarity. How far down the road to a police state, and how much added expense, are you willing to go in order to POSSIBLY prevent a rare incident?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. 2 solutions
1. Stop using the damned chemicals on your veggies.

2. Mix ammonium nitrate with road apples for sale to non-commercial users.





I see three possibilities:

(a) you think there is a potentially serious problem (the use of AN to cause significant death and destruction, whether by terrorists or crazy people) and you are interested in investigating measures that could reduce the risk of the problem occurring;

or

(b) you don't think there is any risk worth thinking or bothering about;

or

(c) you don't give a shit one way or another as long as whatever anybody else decides to do about whatever potential problem there may be doesn't inconvenience you.


I'm not quite clear on where we're at, at this point.



In other agro-chemical news:

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php?story=20040115153707649

Canada has pulled the rug out from under Round-Up Ready wheat. It seems there just wasn't going to be any market for it outside Canada, among other little problems.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. And what business is it of yours or the government, exactly....
WHAT I put in my garden?

Where does your constitutional authority come from to regulate a legal local product, used locally, to produce food for local consumption? Remember, the big things about AN is that it's a) bulky, and b) prone to explode, which makes it prohibitively expensive to ship long-distance. Consequently, it's widely produced in smaller lots around the country, rather than there being "one big facility" that ships everywhere. It's cheaper that way, and less dangerous.

Due to Lopez and it's aftermath, I kind of doubt that Wickard would qualify as "good law" any more if the case was heard today. And if they passed the kind of laws you're talking about, a challenge would be forthcoming almost immediately.

Frankly, I DO NOT think that AN poses some kind of great threat to the world order or civilization. Tagging it is preposterous, and banning it for all but commercial farmers would most likely be unconstitutional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. Gee refill, didn't you read the initial post?
"Frankly, I DO NOT think that AN poses some kind of great threat to the world order or civilization"
Guess the rest of the world can chalk that up as one more thing you're mistaken about....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. different strokes
I would really, really think that when *I* tell *you* (or actually, anyone) to stop putting the damned chemicals on your veggies, you oughta be able to see the ghostly tongue-in-cheek idiot smileyface hovering in front of your monitor.

;^)

;^)

;^)

Copy 'em off, replenish your stock, sprinkle liberally when in doubt.

I then would have thought my point was made even clearer by what followed -- essentially, exasperated hand-throwing-up: do you see a problem that needs solving, do you see a problem but reject any solution that interferes with your convenience, or do you not give a shit? My alternative "solutions" were premised on your seeing a problem that needs solving, and having rejected any more reasonable-sounding ones offered.


Due to Lopez and it's aftermath, I kind of doubt that Wickard would qualify as "good law" any more if the case was heard today. And if they passed the kind of laws you're talking about, a challenge would be forthcoming almost immediately.

Well, that's your law and your constitution. My fed govt appears to have jurisdiction over dealings in explosives and other hazardous substances. Offhand, I'm not sure which paragraph of section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867 this would come under, but nobody seems to have challenged it up here. Of course, criminal law is sensibly under federal jurisdiction here, so that might just about cover it. Hey, it covers leaving holes in the ice unattended.

The question of what level of govt has jurisdiction to do something really is quite different from the question of whether something should be done. "Unconstitutional" in the sense of ultra vires
is not at all the same as "unconstitutional" in the sense of individual rights-violating.


Frankly, I DO NOT think that AN poses some kind of great threat to the world order or civilization.

No ... but that wasn't really the question.

The Cdn case I cited involved one individual who posed a rather serious and apparently quite imminent threat to, oh, maybe a few dozen people, tops, and of course a lot of property. He was a genuine certified wacko. He had previously been barred from possessing firearms after "an incident where he had taken a firearm to work with the intent of shooting a co-worker". He apparently toddled down to the local feed & seed and bought himself a hefty quantity of ammonium nitrate. Nobody thought to prohibit him from possessing that, I guess. But here's the rub: if anyone had, there would have been no way to prevent him from acquiring it through normal, legal commerce, as he was prevented from acquiring firearms by virtue of the licensing requirement.

That situation is one that a lot of people might want the govt to do something to prevent. What good's a govt if it doesn't try to prevent wackos from blowing your apartment building up, eh?

The proposal that the stuff be available only to commercial users was a bit of a proxy for restrictions on access of various types. A licensing requirement might involve a bit of cost -- for small users like yerself, it might require confirmation of identity and residence, and a quick one-time visual inspection of the intended location of use.

Once again, of course, it becomes an issue of what cost/inconvenience the public as a whole, and/or individual members of the public (depending on how the costs of licensing, for example, were shared), are willing to bear in order to enhance the safety of the public in general and whatever undetermined individuals might one day suffer the harm it is sought to prevent. In this case, as in the case of firearms, serious harm indeed: death.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #49
51. I find that VERY hard to believe...
"But here's the rub: if anyone had, there would have been no way to prevent him from acquiring it through normal, legal commerce, as he was prevented from acquiring firearms by virtue of the licensing requirement."

Don't you have a conspiracy statute, or a codified crime of attempting to blow shit up?

I don't know much about the Canadian system, but down here, his ass most certainly would be in jail awaiting trial for serious charges, which he would most likely be convicted of. By purchasing the AN, he went past the point of "just thinking about it", and was in the process of committing the crime, unless he could produce some legally justifiable reason for having it.

If he had shown his drivers license at the store, what POSSIBLE difference would it have made unless they conducted background checks on purchasers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-04 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. eh?
But here's the rub: if anyone had, there would have been no way to prevent him from acquiring it through normal, legal commerce, as he was prevented from acquiring firearms by virtue of the licensing requirement.

Don't you have a conspiracy statute, or a codified crime of attempting to blow shit up?

Read it again now, noting the bit I have emphasized. Neither suggestion you make would have prevented him from acquiring it. And again -- can we all try following the breadcrumbs?

I quoted from the Supreme Court of Canada case relating to Knoblauch's appeal of his sentence. He was convicted. Not of the possession of the AN, I gather, but in relation to the substances and devices in his car, with which he apparently planned to blow up a good bit of a city block (250-foot radius).

There don't seem to have been any laws under which he could actually have been charged for having the AN and other components in his apartment. That's kind of the whole point.

Conspiracy would have been no use since he was acting alone. He had made no attempt to blow anything up; he had merely made the arrangements to enable him to do so. And if he had actually made the attempt, and succeeded, he would (from all indications of what he was planning) have been dead. Along with quite a number of other people, in all likelihood.

If "we" really want to prevent that from happening, is it sensible to rely on conspiracy and attempt laws?


By purchasing the AN, he went past the point of "just thinking about it", and was in the process of committing the crime, unless he could produce some legally justifiable reason for having it.

My goodness, I don't thiiiink so. And I don't think that the US law of attempt is really very different from the Canadian. Are YOU "in the process of committing" a crime when YOU buy AN??

The law of attempt does *not* characterize planning and preparation as an attempt. If others are involved, it may well be conspiracy, but in this case no one was.


If he had shown his drivers license at the store, what POSSIBLE difference would it have made unless they conducted background checks on purchasers?

And again, let's follow those breadcrumbs (or, sigh, start over again); from the official explanation of Bill C-55, which I included in my first post in this series:

Under clause 38, it is forbidden to possess any restricted component in addition to the current prohibition on the possession of explosives, unless authorized by the Act or any exemption.

The Governor in Council <federal executive branch> may make regulations prescribing a component of an explosive and providing that only a stipulated person or body, or a class of persons or bodies, has the right to acquire, possess or sell such a component (clause 37(1)). However, clause 37(2), and the new section 6(2) proposed in clause 38(5), authorize the Minister to exempt any body or person, or any class of persons or bodies, from the ban on possessing explosives or restricted components of explosives, as provided in clause 38(3).
Under that bill, if it passes in the next two weeks or is reintroduced after the upcoming election, showing a driver's licence would not assist anyone unless s/he belonged to an exempt class of persons, e.g. commercial farmers.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. I think the sheer volume of AN that is used per year...
...around the world makes it somewhat doubtful that a solution to tagging fertilizer will be found anytime soon. Even if it was limited to commercial farmers it would be next to impossible to secure.

I am sure that this time, if someone is interrupted by Middle Eastern looking men while walking around a Ryder truck to find the source of the diesel smell, they will be on the phone to the FBI right away.

If you want to see a little more of what fertilizer can do, take a look at these links. Note that the drive shaft of one of the ships is still embedded in the ground to this day...about a mile and a quarter away from the blast site.

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1138.htm

http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/view/TT/lyt1.html

Perhaps now you can see why many of us are not too worried about terrorists and guns. It is just too easy to get ahold of stuff that goes boom in dramatic fashion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. that's so sweet

I am sure that this time, if someone is interrupted by Middle Eastern looking men while walking around a Ryder truck to find the source of the diesel smell, they will be on the phone to the FBI right away.

Timothy McVeigh was "Middle Eastern looking", was he?

The Canadian who was fixing to blow up an apt. building with AN was named Warren Laverne Knoblauch. I doubt that he was very Middle Eastern looking either.

So, as long as we're all on the look-out for Middle Eastern looking men, we should be okay.

Whew.

.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. The Oklahoma City case most likely involved Middle Eastern...
...men, if the thirty or so witnesses are to be believed. We will see when the trial is over. Sorry I was not clear, but I was referring to a specific event.

And what was to stop Knoblauch from buying the AN? Are you advocating the (potentially) mentally disturbed be placed in some sort of database? And even if the AN was traced back to a particular manufacturer or something, after the explosion, what good is that information going to do you?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-04 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. please follow the breadcrumbs
And what was to stop Knoblauch from buying the AN? Are you advocating the (potentially) mentally disturbed be placed in some sort of database? And even if the AN was traced back to a particular manufacturer or something, after the explosion, what good is that information going to do you?

Trace this little chat back up the line to the post of mine that it stems from, and you'll find the following, taken from the explanation of Bill C-55, which, I gather, is currently before the Canadian Senate (and likely to die on the order paper again when Paul Martin calls an election in 2 weeks, I would assume):

Under clause 38, it is forbidden to possess any restricted component in addition to the current prohibition on the possession of explosives, unless authorized by the Act or any exemption.

The Governor in Council <the federal executive branch> may make regulations prescribing a component of an explosive and providing that only a stipulated person or body, or a class of persons or bodies, has the right to acquire, possess or sell such a component (clause 37(1)). However, clause 37(2), and the new section 6(2) proposed in clause 38(5), authorize the Minister to exempt any body or person, or any class of persons or bodies, from the ban on possessing explosives or restricted components of explosives, as provided in clause 38(3).
The rule would not be blanket access with prohibitions on certain persons or classes of persons, as your question implies, but blanket prohibition with exemptions for certain persons or classes of persons.

I, of course, have said nothing whatsoever at any time about measures to allow for tracing anything back to a particular manufacturer. That is a post facto measure that I would not regard as having very much preventive - deterrent - effect at all.


Whatever the point behind your reference to "Middle Eastern looking men" was, vigilance about Middle Eastern looking men hanging around trucks that smell like fuel oil is quite obviously an inadequate, and in its inadequacy inappropriate, response to the problem people like Mr. Knoblauch (who was not "potentially mentally disturbed") having access to the means of committing mass murder -- that being a problem in some people's eyes, at least.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-04 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. The legal information is interesting, but tell me again how...
...you would keep Knoblauch from access to AN if he had a desire to aquire it? I make the assumption that the average Canadian is aware that farmers use fertilizer. :) Going to Home Depot for a bag of Scotts is convenient but lacking that a farm is an easy place to acquire it as farm's are not exactly bastions of security. And while at the farm I am sure Knoblauch would notice all the big white tanks with "Caution : Anhydrous Ammonia" stenciled on the side. Or perhaps he would take an interest in the propane tanks, or the oxy/acetylene rigs, or the...

The point of the oddity of Middle Eastern looking men, travelling about with a young white guy I might add, in a Ryder truck that smells of diesel is that you are going to have to rely on people, law enforcement included, being vigilant in order to catch people like Knoblauch before they can do anything destructive. It is also a case that I thought you, as a lawyer, may be interested in following.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-04 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. you mean: answer another question you could figure out for yourself?
but tell me again how...
...you would keep Knoblauch from access to AN if he had a desire to aquire it?


In searching around for info on this issue, I ran across regulations governing the storage of regulated materials. I didn't preserve the links, and I don't have the time or interest to go doing it again. Oh, well, here ya go -- I asked google for "ammonium nitrate" storage on pages in Canada, and now I'm just exhausted. Have a picnic: this was the first result on the page --

http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations/GENERAL/R/rsa/regulations/010/rsa019/rsa19.html

4. These Regulations do not apply to

(a) storage facilities which at no time will contain more than 3,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate or ammonium nitrate mixed fertilizers;

(b) nitro carbo nitrates or other ammonium nitrate blasting agents; the preparation, storage or use of such blasting agents or similar mixtures in or contiguous to an ammonium nitrate or ammonium nitrate mixed fertilizer storage facility is prohibited; and

(c) ammonium nitrate mixed fertilizers containing less than 60 per cent ammonium nitrate by weight if they do not contain iron oxide, chromic oxide, inorganic salts of chromium, copper or manganese, powdered metals, sulphur, potassium chloride or any other ingredient in quantities which will appreciably sensitize or otherwise increase the hazard of ammonium nitrate.
Please, if someone wants to comment on this subject, read the fucking regulations and something about them, don't just read, let alone skip right over, what I've reproduced. These regulations exist now; I expect that there would be more restrictive regulations if Bill C-55 is enacted.

This really is just tiresome. YES YES YES -- no law or preventive measure in the world is likely going to succeed in stopping EVERYONE who wants to do ANYTHING bad. But laws and preventive measures can deter and impede some of them from doing some of those things.


The point of the oddity of Middle Eastern looking men, travelling about with a young white guy I might add, in a Ryder truck that smells of diesel is that you are going to have to rely on people, law enforcement included, being vigilant in order to catch people like Knoblauch before they can do anything destructive.

And my point was pretty obviously that this vigilance is going to do NOTHING to catch "people like Knoblauch", because HE WAS NOT A "MIDDLE EASTERN LOOKING MAN" and HE WAS TRAVELLING ABOUT BY HIMSELF.

The concern about things like ammonium nitrate, which is fairly new, has arisen *because of* its use by a particular kind of person, the "terrorist" kind.

But now that this information and awareness - that really good bombs can be made from fertilizer - is much more in the public domain than it was before that happened, there is plainly more risk that loons like Knoblauch will use it to cause serious harm. The perceived increased risk of terrorist attacks of all kinds is NOT the ONLY reason to restrict access to these materials.

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-13-04 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. Again, the law is interesting and if it provides y'all with some...
...degree of comfort then go for it. It sounds expensive and a drain on the resources of law enforcement..but that is not my business. If you feel that this law will prevent someone with even a mild interest in getting his hands on AN...well, I don't want to disturb your comfort. I grew up on a farm. Based on experience I know that what the law is trying to accomplish will not serve much purpose.

And the Lone Nut, in any criminal enterprise, is always the hardest to catch. You hope that someone will spot something and report it. Maybe they will. Maybe they won't.

The concerns about ammonium nitrate are certainly not new. See my post on the Texas City Disaster or Google on Stump Farmers if you want to see how long this information has been in the public domain. But yes, it is much more public now after some high profile bombings and the Internet supplying instructions on bombmaking of all types.

Maybe you can slow down the use of ammonium nitrate for devious purposes by your laws. Good luck. My two cents is that you better spend all your resources trying to identify and apprehend the people who would use AN to do harm and not try too hard to contain AN, or any of the other explosive substances that a modern society produces.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fescue4u Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #39
62. 2 80 pounds bags
"Seems to me that anybody buying in that quantity is either (a) a commercial farmer or (b) a bomb-maker. (Yes indeed: somebody might just be both. We'll all just have to remain vigilant, I guess.)"


Or someone who likes a green law.

Every couple years I buy 4 or 5 50lbs bags of A.N. and spread it over my lawn. Does wonders for the color and and growth. (although Im a lawn cutting fool for the next few weeks)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #62
66. We farmed commercially for years. Our AN was delivered...
...by a semi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #62
69. ah well
I ripped out the lawns and planted trees, shrubs and perennials, doing my bit for the environment, and I don't put anything at all on them. The co-vivant is in charge of the dozen tomato plants, and I think they get fed a bit from a litre bottle of tomato fertilizer that's a couple of years old, before going in the ground. People do stop to marvel at my flowers. When I failed to stake my two 8-foot black-hollyhock plants properly last summer and they all took to lying across the driveway, the co-vivant tastelessly started calling them ... well, it's too tasteless for public consumption. Had the same problem with a too-tall and weak birch tree out front, when it started lying down across the road in ice storms, but the city solved that problem by killing it when it excavated the entire neighbourhood a couple of years ago.

In case anyone's wondering, the word for the ice that forms on things in a freezing-rain storm, in French, us not having such a word in English, is verglas.

But anyhow, I guess I just don't know nuttin' 'bout fertilizing stuff. I'll watch out for what becomes of Bill C-55 and see how the Cdn govt plans to address all these qualms and quibbles, though.

.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. Lady Bug Brand Organic Fertilizer is good if you can get it...
...up your way. It does a good job and doesn't kill your soil. If you are getting fast growing plants with weak trunks/stems, your plants may be taking the fertilizer up too fast.

I thought you are calling yourself Iverglas after the ancient name of a river in Europe. I read about it in a book...but can't remember which one.

I just remembered something from a trip to Home Depot some years back. We went for pool supplies; muratic acid and chlorine pellets if I remember correctly. We found the chlorine but not the acid and had to ask a salesperson where the acid was kept. He showed us where it was kept, which was some distance away. I asked why it was kept so far from the pool supplies when the acid was obviously a pool item. The salesperson asked if I knew the size of the explosion that would result if you mixed the two under the right conditions, which I don't remember. I did not ask for a demonstration.

And one last forgotten disaster:
http://www.ezl.com/~fireball/Disaster01.htm



*SNIP*

When the huge riverboat Sultana went down in 1865, the death toll was 1,547 even more than the 1,512 lives lost on the Titanic.

The doomed Sultana had been launched in 1863. "She was part of the Union's effort during the Civil War, carrying troops and supplies up and down the Ohio, Missouri and Mississippi Rivers," said historian Vlrgil Carrington Jones.

Shortly after the war ended, the Sultana was ordered to Vicksburg, Miss., to bring home Union soldiers who'd been held prisoner at Andersonville, a Confederate prison camp. By then the ship was in wretched condition, but the Army decided to postpone a much-needed overhaul. It wanted to transport the men, who were waiting anxiously to get north to their homes and families. Most were walking skeltons; many had to be carried on litters. All were in high spirits. Even though the ship was outfitted to carry only 376, the Army insisted she take on more solders eager to reach Cairo, IL., where they were to be mustered out of service," said Jones. "The enormous load totaled 2,200 people, plus 60 horses and mules and 100 hogs."

On April 27, 1865, the ship was paddling upriver just above Memphis when it was suddenly rocked by a gigantic explosion. One of the boilers had exploded, spreading fire that soon engulfed the entire vessel. "Most of the men were former POWs who were weak, diseased and not fit for swimming" said the historian. "Those who didn't die in the explosion or fire drowned in the dark waters. "It was the worst marine disaster in U.S. history." Yet few people have heard about this catastrophe because of another tragedy that kept the news off the front page.

On April 14, Abraham Lincoln had been shot and papers were still following up the story The Sultana was relegated to a few paragraphs in the back pages and was soon forgotten.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. lady bugs themselves
After buying my rental property and ripping out the lawn,
I bought a good-sized linden tree for it. A couple of years
later, my sister pointed out that the leaves were covered
with spikes. Then there started being yucky larvae things.
So I cut a twig and couriered it to the landscape centre.
(I've couriered cat poop to the vet, too; best not to say,
when you make the call.) The owner, an older German woman
whom I do a mean imitation of (according to the guy who
delivered the topsoil last summer ... Zere are linden trees
in Chermany zat have been zere sree honnerd years, zey will
be zere long after you are dead), left a phone message saying
Don't do anything! Call me in the morning! I figured my tree
was a plague tree.

Turns out it had both spider mite and ladybug larvae, and the
ladybugs were fixing to eat the spider mites, and she wanted
to make sure I didn't wipe 'em out before she talked to me.
I've had spider mite spikes each year since, but it diminishes
year by year, so I figure the bugs are doing their job. This
year, however, it seems that the squirrels have decided to
take on the tree; at least one branch has been stripped of
enough bark to kill it. Why do they do this?? Apart from
the fact that they have access to a giant sack of sunflower
seeds in the garage 24 hours a day, and live in the eaves of
my house, what's the evolutionary advantage in killing the
things you live in? I mean, they're not beavers.

I met the River Iverglas on google long after "iverglas".
It (an ancient name for a river in Ireland) and I appear to
be the only ones extant.

I'm sure I'd never heard of the Sultana. It is the "little"
tragedies of wars that often feel the worst ... the pointless
ones. My oldest maternal great-uncle was gassed in France in
1918, and died only three weeks before the Armistice.

Well, I look for a picture, and see what I find ...





11,000 British Soldiers, of which contains 1 Victoria Cross
holder, 217 Military Medal holders, 69 Military Cross holders
of which several had been awarded France's top military honour,
the Legion d'Honneur(My uncle was a member of the Canadian expeditionary forces, and a lot of Canadians are buried there.)

The graffiti says:
Rosbeefs (like "frogs", in reverse: English) go home.
Saddam will win and your blood will be let.
Dig up your garbage, it's polluting our soil.
Death to the yankees.
Bush, Blair to the TPI.
(I don't recognize "TPI" offhand.)

There is a picture of many gravestones knocked over. I hadn't heard about this, and it's not at all pleasant to see.

All of us would apparently do well to know a little more history.



.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. oh yes
Edited on Fri May-14-04 04:26 PM by iverglas
On a more pleasant note, *my* pool.



This weekend it might be time to pump it up, fill it up and put the new solar cover on it (in the hope that the great suck of a co-vivant might get in above his knobby knees this year). Up here in the great white north it's nearly hot enough right now to fry the proverbial egg.


(edit ... my posslq is a great suck, not a great such)

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasMexican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #10
32. So what laws prevent murder?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-04 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. We'd already have it
except for the corrupt gun industry and the GOP...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. Bullshit
The bill MrBenchley is alluding to was DOA because it covered too many things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
16. Yup....right about the time....
you start figuring out how to "tag" batshit, which is the source for another explosive precursor...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Gee, refill, trust you to be full of batshit knowledge
Hey, everybody! Let's just throw up our hands and let terrorists buy untraceable explosives because refill thinks he knows how to make explosive out of bat shit!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoNotRefill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
38. Don't blame me....
for your lack of understanding of basic chemistry.

Old batshit is one of the purest natural sources of saltpeter out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minavasht Donating Member (353 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #38
53. You can make your own from cheap, regular salt
Do we have to regulate the sale of salt too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maurkov Donating Member (126 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-14-04 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #53
73. Explosives? meh.
I just like chemistry.

"You can make your own from cheap, regular salt"
Are you suggesting from regular salt you can make saltpeter or explosives? IIRC, table salt is stable, unreactive stuff. Unless step 1 is electrolysis, I don't think either can be done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
minavasht Donating Member (353 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-15-04 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. My bad!
Actually you can make potassium chlorate by electrolysis.
I still struggle with the english names.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
20. I would have no problem with taggants in ammonium nitrate
Has anyone in Congress ever proposed just that, without confounding the issue by including a proposal to put taggants in smokeless gunpowder?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JayS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. This is part of what I found last night.
http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309061261?OpenDocumen...



QUOTE:
WASHINGTON -- Additives that improve detection of explosives before detonation or determine their origins after a blast are not yet practical enough for broad use in the United States, concludes a committee of the National Research Council in a new report. Nor is there a practical method available to neutralize the explosive properties of ammonium nitrate, a commonly available fertilizer that was used in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
QUOTE:

QUOTE:
After examining a variety of technologies for marking explosives using either detection markers or identification taggants, the committee recommended against broad-based implementation of a taggant program at the present time. However, it affirmed a recommendation by the United Nations' Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which called for the use of chemical detection markers in plastic and sheet explosives to allow for better detection by currently available commercial equipment. After the 1988 downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, 34 countries, including the United States, ratified a convention requiring the marking of these explosives. The international convention must be approved by one more nation to enter into force, but already has been implemented by the United States.
QUOTE:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Thanks - good information
So the US already have taggants in plastic and sheet explosives.

And contrary to MrBenchley's ridiculous claim, nobody in the world is putting taggants into smokeless gunpowder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU GrovelBot  Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
37. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##
==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================

The time now is 3:37:38PM EDT, Wednesday, May 12, 2004.

There are exactly...
4 days,
8 hours,
22 minutes, and
22 seconds left in our fund drive.

This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.

Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.

- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot


Click here to donate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TX-RAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
41. Were you aware
The same product we're discussing here is being sold all over the US in 50lb bags by the Boy Scouts of America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-04 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. I always knew there was something shady about those sickos. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 04:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC