Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(US Department of Justice)   Here's the DoJ press release detailing how everything went down for the various charges. An interesting read regardless   (justice.gov) divider line 102
    More: Interesting, DOJ, Tsarnaev, Massachusetts State Police, senseless violence, Boston Police Department, Homeland Security Investigations, weapons of mass destruction, Boston Marathon  
•       •       •

9400 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Apr 2013 at 3:12 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-22 02:55:50 PM  
That's actually a very good read. Interesting how it went down.
 
2013-04-22 03:00:49 PM  
Here's the actual complaint detailing all this (it's at the bottom of this page, but it's a PDF so I didn't know if I could directly link to it for a story)
 
2013-04-22 03:15:19 PM  
They're going to plead him down to Man 1, time served.

/only knows Law&Order justice system
 
2013-04-22 03:18:09 PM  
Try him for the murder of his brother while we're waiting for the other cases to come together.
 
2013-04-22 03:19:59 PM  

ourbigdumbmouth: They're going to plead him down to Man 1, time served.

/only knows Law&Order justice system


But that's only because he is giving them info on the Big Fish. Info which will later be deemed inadmissible at Big Fish's trial, leading to much consternation at the 45 minute mark of the episode.
 
2013-04-22 03:21:37 PM  
Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.
 
2013-04-22 03:23:41 PM  
Is it just me or was that actually very bland and uninformative?
 
2013-04-22 03:23:48 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


I was wondering about that -- did the PATRIOT Act create some kind of new legal definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" or something like that?
 
2013-04-22 03:25:39 PM  

HiFiGuy: Try him for the murder of his brother while we're waiting for the other cases to come together.


I like that - let him stew in a very public trial and rot from the inside-out under prosecution and conviction of killing his own bro for the next ## years.  This,  until justice is actually served.

/Put his arse on suicide watch and remind him every day that he killed his brother.
 
2013-04-22 03:26:32 PM  

HiFiGuy: Try him for the murder of his brother while we're waiting for the other cases to come together.


No kidding. It was being run over that killed him.
 
2013-04-22 03:26:36 PM  

Arkanaut: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

I was wondering about that -- did the PATRIOT Act create some kind of new legal definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" or something like that?


The civil and military definition have been different for some time.

For the purposes of US [28] weapons of mass destruction are defined as:
any destructive device defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses[29]any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursorsany weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vectorany weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life[30]The <a data-cke-saved-href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_In vestigation" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">Federal Bureau of Investigation's definition is similar to that presented above from the terrorism statute:[31]
any explosive or incendiary device, as defined in Title 18 USC, Section 921: bomb, grenade, rocket, missile, mine, or other device with a charge of more than four ouncesany weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursorsany weapon involving a disease organismany weapon designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human lifeany device or weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury by causing a malfunction of or destruction of an aircraft or other vehicle that carries humans or of an aircraft or other vehicle whose malfunction or destruction may cause said aircraft or other vehicle to cause death or serious bodily injury to humans who may be within range of the vector in its course of travel or the travel of its debris.
 
2013-04-22 03:26:39 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


I guess the question should be asked, would the Columbine shooters be charged with WMD charges? Or McVeigh, I don't remember if he was. If he did then maybe they're justified, but if McVeigh didn't get charged with a WMD charge, and he killed ~45x more people than these two, then the WMD charges for Tsarnaev are clearly politically motivated. If McVeigh was charged with WMD charges then there's precedent for it.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 03:27:02 PM  
If my taxes are so high, why is my government's web site still slow?
 
2013-04-22 03:27:05 PM  
Can't believe we didn't find any pressure cookers in Iraq...
 
2013-04-22 03:27:48 PM  
FTFA:The statutory chargesauthorize a penalty, upon conviction, of death or imprisonment for life or any term of years.

Death? Does that mean that this is a federal case? Sorry if I'm being an ignorant foreigner, but everything else seems to say Massachusetts, which I understand is part of the civilised world.
 
2013-04-22 03:27:49 PM  

The Dog Ate My Homework: Is it just me or was that actually very bland and uninformative?


read the criminal complaint, (linked at the bottom of TFA and second post here) and it goes into details as to how it all went down in the timeline of things.

for me, that's interesting

/but I'm weird/morbid
 
2013-04-22 03:28:08 PM  

somedude210: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

I guess the question should be asked, would the Columbine shooters be charged with WMD charges? Or McVeigh, I don't remember if he was. If he did then maybe they're justified, but if McVeigh didn't get charged with a WMD charge, and he killed ~45x more people than these two, then the WMD charges for Tsarnaev are clearly politically motivated. If McVeigh was charged with WMD charges then there's precedent for it.


He was.
 
2013-04-22 03:28:45 PM  
A WMD for legal purposes is any explosive device bigger than a certain minimum size that's intended to harm someone or cause a lot of property damage. A stick of dynamite thrown into a crowd could be a WMD, or a bunch of M-80's tied together. I suppose they could try and make the WMD charge stick if you took a bunch of firecrackers and stuffed them into a glass jar and set them off somewhere in public, if it was done maliciously.
 
2013-04-22 03:28:57 PM  

tommyl66: ourbigdumbmouth: They're going to plead him down to Man 1, time served.

/only knows Law&Order justice system

But that's only because he is giving them info on the Big Fish. Info which will later be deemed inadmissible at Big Fish's trial, leading to much consternation at the 45 minute mark of the episode.


My question is, did the brother of one of the detectives find some seemingly criminal disturbance and go out of his way to resolve the disturbance, finding out that there's really some heartwarming story that compassion and understanding could overcome in order to resolve it without an arrest?

Does the patriarch of the family quietly find a loophole to nail them all while making it look like he was staying neutral in all of it?

/only knows BlueBloods justice
 
2013-04-22 03:32:35 PM  

orbister: FTFA:The statutory chargesauthorize a penalty, upon conviction, of death or imprisonment for life or any term of years.

Death? Does that mean that this is a federal case? Sorry if I'm being an ignorant foreigner, but everything else seems to say Massachusetts, which I understand is part of the civilised world.


Yes, these are Federal charges.  You'll notice they did not charge him (or even mention) the murder of the MIT police officer, and did not charge him the car jacking.  Those charges are likely being reserved for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to file, in the event the Federal case gets totally FUBARed.
 
2013-04-22 03:34:04 PM  
The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.
 
2013-04-22 03:37:31 PM  

Theaetetus: The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.


How's that?
 
2013-04-22 03:37:32 PM  

Warthog: Yes, these are Federal charges.  You'll notice they did not charge him (or even mention) the murder of the MIT police officer, and did not charge him the car jacking.  Those charges are likely being reserved for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to file, in the event the Federal case gets totally FUBARed.


Thank you. Could you (or someone) possible give me a short summary of when federal as opposed to state charges are used, or point me to something that explains it? In my ignorant foreigner way I thought federal charges normally mean you had to do something naughty across a state border.
 
2013-04-22 03:38:23 PM  

orbister: Sorry if I'm being an ignorant foreigner, but everything else seems to say Massachusetts, which I understand is part of the civilised world.


It's the [Federal]  District of Massachusetts. We have a bifurcated system with state courts and federal courts, which, for convenience, tend to be organized around state lines (or subsections in big states, such as the Eastern District of Texas, or the Northern District of California). Federal courts hear federal cases, state courts hear state cases.
In this case, he'll likely be charged with both state crimes (murder, property destruction, carjacking, illegal firearms use, etc., etc.) as well as these federal crimes. It's not double jeopardy because they're different crimes, with different criminal statutes, in different jurisdictions.
 
2013-04-22 03:38:26 PM  

narocroc: Can't believe we didn't find any pressure cookers in Iraq...


Just a bunch of crock pots.
 
2013-04-22 03:40:55 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


It's an abbreviation for a weapon of Massachusetts destruction.
 
2013-04-22 03:40:59 PM  
Sorry, didn't read the whole thing. If he's being charged by the DOJ with the WMD charge, does that mean that MA will be able to charge him with the cop-killing on a star level?
 
2013-04-22 03:41:22 PM  
That's IRRegardless, jerko. Get it right.
 
2013-04-22 03:42:19 PM  

propasaurus: Sorry, didn't read the whole thing. If he's being charged by the DOJ with the WMD charge, does that mean that MA will be able to charge him with the cop-killing on a star STATE level?


FTFM
 
2013-04-22 03:43:08 PM  
Yeah, there should really be something between 'weapon of mass destruction' and 'weapon' ... I mean, having a nuclear bomb and pipe bomb carry the same weight in court is a tad silly. But pipe bombs should carry more weight than a gun. Eh.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 03:43:31 PM  
orbister

In some cases the law requires interstate travel as an element of the crime, in others some interstate effect is sufficient. When the law merely requires an interstate effect, the jurisdictional barrier is trivial to surmount. Some businesses in Boston cater to out of state visitors and closed after the explosion.

So if I get a time machine I think I'm going to take out FDR and his court.
 
2013-04-22 03:44:12 PM  

orbister: I thought federal charges normally mean you had to do something naughty across a state border.


Or anything that has an impact on interstate commerce. That's a really easy thing to establish. Here, not only does the race bring people in from out of state but the explosions shut down roads and stores for a few days. So, it impacted interstate commerce.
 
2013-04-22 03:45:16 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


170 wounded or killed people might disagree with you.
Nuclear WMD is no different.  It would just come with a declaration of war stapled to it.
 
2013-04-22 03:45:47 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


My thoughts, exactly.
 
2013-04-22 03:45:52 PM  

Cork on Fork: orbister: I thought federal charges normally mean you had to do something naughty across a state border.

Or anything that has an impact on interstate commerce. That's a really easy thing to establish. Here, not only does the race bring people in from out of state but the explosions shut down roads and stores for a few days. So, it impacted interstate commerce.


Exactly.  That's why they had all that seemingly tangential language in the document about how many people come from other places for the race, and how much commerce the race generates.
 
2013-04-22 03:47:18 PM  

propasaurus: Sorry, didn't read the whole thing. If he's being charged by the DOJ with the WMD charge, does that mean that MA will be able to charge him with the cop-killing on a star level?


Yes. They could also charge him with state crimes of murder, attempted murder, gun possession, carjacking, robbery (stealing the guy's ATM card), disorderly conduct, breaking into that guy's boat... etc.
 
2013-04-22 03:48:42 PM  

Bravo Two: Theaetetus: The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.

How's that?


Well, the super short version is that Article I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution gives Congress power to do a whole bunch of things, but legislate crimes really isn't one of them - that's instead reserved to the states. Nonetheless, Congress has some power to do so under the Commerce Clause, which allows them to regulate interstate commerce and pass any laws necessary and proper to do so, including criminal laws. So, they can make it a crime to transport hazardous materials across state lines, easy. Or transport child porn across state lines via the internet. They can also make it a crime to, say, murder an interstate trucker, or do any number of things that are related to interstate or foreign commerce.

A while back, however, things got a bit strange in Wickard v. Filburn. There was a tax on wheat production past a certain limit, to protect interstate prices. The farmer who got hit with the fine for growing too much claimed that he was growing the excess amount for purely personal use. The Supreme Court said that that still has an effect on interstate commerce, since it increases the amount he could sell to others. So, purely in-state stuff can still fall under the Commerce Clause.

But then, in US v. Lopez, the Court said that a federal statute criminalizing possession of guns in school zones was unconstitutional, because, even though a gun was probably made in a different state and has passed through interstate commerce, the gun-school zone thing itself has nothing to do with interstate commerce. And they followed that up with US v. Morrison saying that the domestic violence criminalized in the VAWA also has only an indirect link on interstate commerce, and that Congress was really trying to criminalize the act and not regulate interstate commerce, and they don't have that power.

So, how about here? The statutes the guy's charged under both refer to things that "affect interstate commerce", but they're being read broadly enough to basically include "any economic activity," because we have a national economy. They're not really regulating interstate commerce, but criminalizing an act. And under Lopez and Morrison, that's unconstitutional.

There's a lot more complexity than just that, but that's sort of the base argument.
 
2013-04-22 03:50:36 PM  

Warthog: seemingly tangential language


Yeah, that's what a lot of people won't get. And they will start complaining about how the government is concerned about losing money or something.
 
2013-04-22 03:52:47 PM  

ZAZ: In some cases the law requires interstate travel as an element of the crime, in others some interstate effect is sufficient. When the law merely requires an interstate effect, the jurisdictional barrier is trivial to surmount. Some businesses in Boston cater to out of state visitors and closed after the explosion.


That may not be enough anymore, after Lopez and Morrison:
The Court explained that the need to distinguish between economic activities that directly and those that indirectly affect interstate commerce was due to "the concern that we expressed in Lopez that Congress might use the Commerce Clause to completely obliterate the Constitution's distinction between national and local authority." Referring to Lopez, the Court said: "Were the Federal Government to take over the regulation of entire areas of traditional State concern, areas having nothing to do with the regulation of commercial activities, the boundaries between the spheres of federal and State authority would blur." The majority further stated, "t is difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power, even in areas such as criminal law enforcement or education where States historically have been sovereign." Justice Thomas's concurring opinion also expressed the concern that "Congress [was] appropriating State police powers under the guise of regulating commerce."
 
2013-04-22 03:57:58 PM  

JPSimonetti: Yeah, there should really be something between 'weapon of mass destruction' and 'weapon' ... I mean, having a nuclear bomb and pipe bomb carry the same weight in court is a tad silly. But pipe bombs should carry more weight than a gun. Eh.


Well tangent here...

The US Gov has slowly been decreasing the bar at which all things are elevated to 'serious' crimes or felonies.  The idea being that if they make it much, much easier to a charge someone with something very heinous with incredible penalties, then the easier it is to get a plea bargain (95+% of all fed cases never see trial) and / or the easier it is to reach out and touch people that are on the 'bad' list with the fickle finger of fate.

The corollary to this is that at any given time every single person in the this thread has probably committed several felonies but they have not been the subject of being looked at by the feds yet, but if they were to be it would be much easier to investigate and prosecute.

if one was to follow the logical extension of what they are using as 'WMD' definitions for this thread, US soldiers are walking WMDs and giving someone tetanus by hitting them with a rusty nail is too.
 
2013-04-22 04:01:48 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


If you read the actual language on what is a weapon of mass destruction, you might be shocked to find what all is listed there.  If you use a sawed off shotgun, you have committed a crime with a WMD.  Same thing for any automated weapon.   Some large fireworks you can pick up in Tennessee are also, if used towards a group, WMDs.
 
2013-04-22 04:06:09 PM  

orbister: Death? Does that mean that this is a federal case? Sorry if I'm being an ignorant foreigner, but everything else seems to say Massachusetts, which I understand is part of the civilised world.


The US federal government is filing charges.

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts is the local prosecutors office for the federal government.
 
2013-04-22 04:07:23 PM  

FitzShivering: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

If you read the actual language on what is a weapon of mass destruction, you might be shocked to find what all is listed there.  If you use a sawed off shotgun, you have committed a crime with a WMD.  Same thing for any automated weapon.   Some large fireworks you can pick up in Tennessee are also, if used towards a group, WMDs.


Not a shotgun, but many other things:
18 USC 2332a(c)(2): "The  term "weapon of mass destruction" means - (A) any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title..."
and 18 USC 921:
(4)The term "destructive device" means-
(A) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas-(i) bomb,(ii) grenade,(iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,(iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,(v) mine, or(vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses;(B) any type of weapon (other than a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Attorney General finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes) by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile by the action of an explosive or other propellant, and which has any barrel with a bore of more than one-half inch in diameter; and(C) any combination of parts either designed or intended for use in converting any device into any destructive device described in subparagraph (A) or (B) and from which a destructive device may be readily assembled.

But:
The term "destructive device" shall not include any device which is neither designed nor redesigned for use as a weapon; any device, although originally designed for use as a weapon, which is redesigned for use as a signaling, pyrotechnic, line throwing, safety, or similar device... or any other device which the Attorney General finds is not likely to be used as a weapon, is an antique, or is a rifle which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational or cultural purposes.

So, potato gun? Maybe yes, maybe no. Basically depends on how hard they want to nail you.
 
2013-04-22 04:09:14 PM  
well, i guess iraq actually DID have wmd's then. of course, so does the fireworks shop down the road.
 
2013-04-22 04:10:16 PM  

mopar1956: Arkanaut: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

I was wondering about that -- did the PATRIOT Act create some kind of new legal definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" or something like that?

The civil and military definition have been different for some time.

For the purposes of US [28] weapons of mass destruction are defined as:
any destructive device defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses[29]any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursorsany weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vectorany weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life[30]The <a data-cke-saved-href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_In vestigation" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">Federal Bureau of Investigation's definition is similar to that presented above from the terrorism statute:[31]
any explosive or incendiary device, as defined in Title 18 USC, Section 921: bomb, grenade, rocket, missile, mine, or other device with a charge of more than four ouncesany weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or their prec ...


So I guess Road Flares are WMD's too?
 
2013-04-22 04:10:44 PM  

somedude210: The Dog Ate My Homework: Is it just me or was that actually very bland and uninformative?

read the criminal complaint, (linked at the bottom of TFA and second post here) and it goes into details as to how it all went down in the timeline of things.

for me, that's interesting

/but I'm weird/morbid


I'm with you. The complaint shows the detailed, step-by-step connecting of all the dots, as well as how the prosecution is attempting to show that all the necessary elements of the crime are present.

It's not the sexiest part of police work, but it's how the legal system works.
 
2013-04-22 04:10:46 PM  
"Sir I have a movie idea"
"Are you kidding, we gave up that crazy shiat in the 80's with coke as well, now get out before you're fired"
 
2013-04-22 04:11:09 PM  

Theaetetus: The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.


The bombing itself falls under federal regulation of explosives clauses.
 
2013-04-22 04:17:40 PM  

somedude210: Here's the actual complaint detailing all this (it's at the bottom of this page, but it's a PDF so I didn't know if I could directly link to it for a story)


So, they didn't include the cop shooting or him killing his brother in this outline of charges. Guess that will come later?
 
2013-04-22 04:18:16 PM  

The Dog Ate My Homework: Is it just me or was that actually very bland and uninformative?


No it isn't just you; it was actually very bland and uninformative. I think subby needs to review what the word 'interesting' means.
 
2013-04-22 04:20:12 PM  

This text is now purple: Theaetetus: The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.

The bombing itself falls under federal regulation of explosives clauses.


... which Congress was able to pass due to the Commerce Clause and are limited by its scope, yes.
 
2013-04-22 04:20:15 PM  

flightmonkey88: mopar1956: Arkanaut: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

I was wondering about that -- did the PATRIOT Act create some kind of new legal definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" or something like that?

The civil and military definition have been different for some time.

For the purposes of US [28] weapons of mass destruction are defined as:
any destructive device defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses[29]any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursorsany weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vectorany weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life[30]The <a data-cke-saved-href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_In vestigation" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">Federal Bureau of Investigation's definition is similar to that presented above from the terrorism statute:[31]
any explosive or incendiary device, as defined in Title 18 USC, Section 921: bomb, grenade, rocket, missile, mine, or other device with a charge of more than four ouncesany weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or ...


I guess if you bound them all up, tossed them in a room full of people and locked the doors.

The point is the WMD charges have been around for some time( Timothy Mcveigh was charged the same way) It has nothing to do with trying to score political points.
 
2013-04-22 04:23:18 PM  
Seems to me that a person who doesn't have the body count to be classified as a serial killer shouldn't be charged with a "weapon of mass destruction".

Hell, I even a gas can explosion could do that much damage.
 
2013-04-22 04:26:01 PM  

Alphakronik: Seems to me that a person who doesn't have the body count to be classified as a serial killer shouldn't be charged with a "weapon of mass destruction".

Hell, I even a gas can explosion could do that much damage.


You do realize those terms have nothing to do with each other right?
 
2013-04-22 04:32:09 PM  

FitzShivering: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

If you read the actual language on what is a weapon of mass destruction, you might be shocked to find what all is listed there. If you use a sawed off shotgun, you have committed a crime with a WMD. Same thing for any automated weapon. Some large fireworks you can pick up in Tennessee are also, if used towards a group, WMDs.


IANAL, but frankly, I'd rather see him (and anyone else caught in the US trying to do the same, regardless of whether they're working for AQ or not) charged as a murderer who used a weapon of mass destruction, rather than as an enemy combatant who's attacking non-combatants illegally. Charging him as an enemy combatant under the Laws of Armed Conflict legitimizes his cause.

This way, he's just a murderer, and if convicted, gets a murderer's punishment. Some prison white supremacist is going to have himself a new girlfriend after he knocks this kid's teeth out with a steel pipe. Well, what teeth weren't knocked out when he tried to shoot himself, anyway.
 
2013-04-22 04:42:08 PM  

Warthog: Cork on Fork: orbister: I thought federal charges normally mean you had to do something naughty across a state border.

Or anything that has an impact on interstate commerce. That's a really easy thing to establish. Here, not only does the race bring people in from out of state but the explosions shut down roads and stores for a few days. So, it impacted interstate commerce.

Exactly.  That's why they had all that seemingly tangential language in the document about how many people come from other places for the race, and how much commerce the race generates.


They have to abuse the commerce clause, since the Police Power is reserved generally to the states.  Purchased a knife in Illinois and carried it back to Wisconsin, where 1 year later you stabbed someone?  Interstate commerce, federal case.  Even better if you did it at an Interstate rest area.

Sometimes (but only sometimes) the Supreme Court cries foul.  In one case, they questioned whether beating women was a commercial activity (held: no, it isn't).  In another, they found that a federal "gun free schools" law was unconstitutional, questioning how a local defendant carrying a gun into his local school affects interstate commerce in any way.  It was there that they created a muddy "inference" test.  Basically, if the prosecutor has to pile on "inference after inference" to reach an outcome that affects interstate commerce, it doesn't affect interstate commerce and go pound sand.
 
2013-04-22 04:49:12 PM  

another cultural observer: they questioned whether beating women was a commercial activity (held: no, it isn't)


i28.tinypic.com
What a laterally compressed look of disapproval may look like.
 
2013-04-22 04:49:39 PM  
It seems that "Weapon of Mass Destruction" is the term used when they actually mean "Weapon of Indiscriminate Destruction".     It's not so much the number of victims, as it is that the perp doesn't know in advance who they'll be.
 
2013-04-22 04:52:05 PM  

Theaetetus: This text is now purple: Theaetetus: The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.

The bombing itself falls under federal regulation of explosives clauses.

... which Congress was able to pass due to the Commerce Clause and are limited by its scope, yes.


The point was more that they can skip the tortured logic of "the marathon was interstate" and go directly to "explosives are interstate". The latter argument is easier, considering the ATF hasn't been struck down yet.
 
2013-04-22 04:52:32 PM  

Cork on Fork: Or anything that has an impact on interstate commerce. That's a really easy thing to establish.


ZAZ: In some cases the law requires interstate travel as an element of the crime, in others some interstate effect is sufficient.


Theaetetus:It's the [Federal]  District of Massachusetts. We have a bifurcated system with state courts and federal courts, which, for convenience, tend to be organized around state lines (or subsections in big states, such as the Eastern District of Texas, or the Northern District of California). Federal courts hear federal cases, state courts hear state cases.
In this case, he'll likely be charged with both state crimes (murder, property destruction, carjacking, illegal firearms use, etc., etc.) as well as these federal crimes. It's not double jeopardy because they're different crimes, with different criminal statutes, in different jurisdictions.


Danke schön, all three. That's much clearer, even if it does sound like a bit of a fudge.
 
2013-04-22 04:55:50 PM  
WMD?

Pfft, in MY day, we called them infernal machines.

http://politechbot.com/docs/massachusetts.infernal.machine.cases.020 10 7.txt

/And wore tophats and rode in carriages...
 
2013-04-22 04:56:26 PM  

Cork on Fork: orbister: I thought federal charges normally mean you had to do something naughty across a state border.

Or anything that has an impact on interstate commerce. That's a really easy thing to establish. Here, not only does the race bring people in from out of state but the explosions shut down roads and stores for a few days. So, it impacted interstate commerce.


Actually, bombs have been under federal jurisdiction for a while, even when used in-state.  ATF can still bust you for distilling alcohol even if you don't cross state lines to sell it.  Some things just fall under federal jurisdiction.
 
2013-04-22 05:03:13 PM  

Alphakronik: Seems to me that a person who doesn't have the body count to be classified as a serial killer shouldn't be charged with a "weapon of mass destruction".

Hell, I even a gas can explosion could do that much damage.


The fact that he wasn't a terribly competent bomb maker doesn't change the statute...it's like people who say Palestine hasn't killed many Israelis with their rockets...INTENT is important.
 
2013-04-22 05:03:49 PM  

CMcMahon: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

My thoughts, exactly.


Doesn't the WMD definition include the bombers' intent?  The same devices planted a few hours earlier or a few feet differently may have killed scores more.  Greater than one device deployed at different times that kill/injure more than one is "mass", no?.

If a nuclear bomb goes off in a forest and nobody's hurt, is it still a WMD?
 
2013-04-22 05:05:37 PM  

This text is now purple: Theaetetus: This text is now purple: Theaetetus: The charges are actually pretty interesting, from a commerce clause jurisprudence standpoint.

The bombing itself falls under federal regulation of explosives clauses.

... which Congress was able to pass due to the Commerce Clause and are limited by its scope, yes.

The point was more that they can skip the tortured logic of "the marathon was interstate" and go directly to "explosives are interstate". The latter argument is easier, considering the ATF hasn't been struck down yet.


Explosives are no more interstate than guns are interstate, and see Lopez for that one. They don't allege that these particular explosives were trafficked across state lines, nor are they charging him with one of the trafficking statutes.
Point being that their only ties to "interstate commerce" are:
(i) explosives are sold in interstate commerce, so therefore, any and all uses of explosives have the effect of diminishing the supply of explosives in commerce, raising prices;
(ii) lots of businesses had to close, and some of their patrons may have been from other states; and
(iii) the Marathon itself is an international event, inviting many foreign and interstate visitors.

Under Lopez, (i) doesn't seem to be enough. Under Morrison, (ii) doesn't seem to be enough. And (iii) is really just the same as (ii) but with more force behind it. That may be enough to show a "substantial" connection to interstate commerce, but even then, they'd have to significantly narrow the statute, which has no such distinction.
 
2013-04-22 05:07:29 PM  

rkiller1: CMcMahon: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

My thoughts, exactly.

Doesn't the WMD definition include the bombers' intent?  The same devices planted a few hours earlier or a few feet differently may have killed scores more.  Greater than one device deployed at different times that kill/injure more than one is "mass", no?.

If a nuclear bomb goes off in a forest and nobody's hurt, is it still a WMD?


'WMD' is a catch all with fuzzy edges just like 'terrorist organization' and 'material aid'.  The definition fits if and when the US Fed chooses to prosecute.  The terms themselves are somewhat meaningless standing alone.
 
2013-04-22 05:07:49 PM  

JPSimonetti: Yeah, there should really be something between 'weapon of mass destruction' and 'weapon' ... I mean, having a nuclear bomb and pipe bomb carry the same weight in court is a tad silly. But pipe bombs should carry more weight than a gun. Eh.


Depends on the pipe bomb, and the gun...Newtown whackjob got 20 with a gun, and you'd need a BIG pipe bomb for that.
 
2013-04-22 05:09:42 PM  

megalynn44: somedude210: Here's the actual complaint detailing all this (it's at the bottom of this page, but it's a PDF so I didn't know if I could directly link to it for a story)

So, they didn't include the cop shooting or him killing his brother in this outline of charges. Guess that will come later?


This is a capital offense, so if he's convicted the punishment can't get any worse.

Since they threw a bomb in Watertown, the WMD trial could air the facts about all their crimes except maybe killing the MIT cop and robbing the 7-11.
  The time & expense of another trial for a lifer or death row inmate wouldn't be a great use of resources.
 
2013-04-22 05:17:13 PM  
flightmonkey88: ...

It's all in how you use it.

rkiller1, yes. It is still willful destruction of property with a device. The government cares about the land it owns, and rents to us. In fact, I can imagine the government cares more about its land/assets than its people.
 
2013-04-22 05:17:29 PM  

megalynn44: somedude210: Here's the actual complaint detailing all this (it's at the bottom of this page, but it's a PDF so I didn't know if I could directly link to it for a story)

So, they didn't include the cop shooting or him killing his brother in this outline of charges. Guess that will come later?


Well, I can't actually see the complaint, because the #@!!! site won't load, but I'm guessing that these are the Federal charges? Federal murder has a different set of parameters, and murder is nearly always a state charge unless Federal officials are killed in the commission of the crime. So the cop killing would be for the state of Massachusetts to prosecute separately.

I could be wrong, but that would be my guess.
 
2013-04-22 05:29:33 PM  

jaytkay: The time & expense of another trial for a lifer or death row inmate wouldn't be a great use of resources.


Still, if I was the cop's loved one, I would want my day in court for the crime to be addressed.
 
2013-04-22 05:39:49 PM  

megalynn44: jaytkay: The time & expense of another trial for a lifer or death row inmate wouldn't be a great use of resources.

Still, if I was the cop's loved one, I would want my day in court for the crime to be addressed.


I agree. I can see Massachusetts filing charges for that reason.

Though I haven't seen any evidence tying the brothers to that shooting. Was there a dashboard cam? Did they take his gun?

I do not doubt it was them, but I haven't seen the evidence.
 
2013-04-22 05:41:15 PM  
Why rush to file charges?  Why is the federal governemnt even filing charges?  This is just another example of oBOMBa ignoring states rights.
 
2013-04-22 05:43:05 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Why rush to file charges?  Why is the federal governemnt even filing charges?  This is just another example of oBOMBa ignoring states rights.


I guess you read neither the charges nor the entire thread.
 
2013-04-22 05:53:46 PM  

Gyrfalcon: I guess you read neither the charges nor the entire thread.


More trolling/satirizing.

Though, I do honestly question the need for federal charges for things like this, especially how the usual "states rights" nutters are the same ones calling for the feds to ship him off to gitmo.
 
2013-04-22 06:02:32 PM  
The bottom line is, fark him and the horse he rode in on.
 
2013-04-22 06:06:44 PM  
How everything went down? Man, that's gonna be a long read.
 
2013-04-22 06:07:27 PM  
Will the operators of the West, TX fertilizer plant also be charged with WMD?
 
2013-04-22 06:09:14 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Gyrfalcon: I guess you read neither the charges nor the entire thread.

More trolling/satirizing.

Though, I do honestly question the need for federal charges for things like this, especially how the usual "states rights" nutters are the same ones calling for the feds to ship him off to gitmo.


I was just discussing this with someone who doesn't really understand the federal/state distinction. She believed that federal crimes were "bigger" or more important, and that's why he should be charged federally, since otherwise would diminish the importance of the crime.
Totally incorrect, but probably a pretty common belief.
 
2013-04-22 06:31:43 PM  

Theaetetus: I was just discussing this with someone who doesn't really understand the federal/state distinction. She believed that federal crimes were "bigger" or more important, and that's why he should be charged federally, since otherwise would diminish the importance of the crime.
Totally incorrect, but probably a pretty common belief.


Most importantly, it's easier to get the death penalty.
 
2013-04-22 06:40:53 PM  

propasaurus: Will the operators of the West, TX fertilizer plant also be charged with WMD?


Did they blow up their plant on purpose with the intention of killing lots of people? Then, no.
 
2013-04-22 06:46:16 PM  

JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.


In 'damage utils' I'd say it falls well below two pistols and a couple extra magazines.  Apparently, I've got more WMDs than Kim Jong... heeeey wait a second.
 
2013-04-22 06:52:39 PM  

Gyrfalcon: propasaurus: Will the operators of the West, TX fertilizer plant also be charged with WMD?

Did they blow up their plant on purpose with the intention of killing lots of people? Then, no.


Should they reasonably have known that 27 tons of ammonium nitrate might be unsafe?
 
2013-04-22 06:58:04 PM  

Pawprint: How everything went down? Man, that's gonna be a long read.


First the earth cooled. And then the dinosaurs came, but they got too big and fat, so they all died and they turned into oil. And then the Arabs came and they bought Mercedes Benzes. And Prince Charles started wearing all of Lady Di's clothes. I couldn't believe it.
 
2013-04-22 07:20:59 PM  

orbister: FTFA:The statutory chargesauthorize a penalty, upon conviction, of death or imprisonment for life or any term of years.

Death? Does that mean that this is a federal case? Sorry if I'm being an ignorant foreigner, but everything else seems to say Massachusetts, which I understand is part of the civilised world.


It appears that they are attempting to use the Commerce Clause to make this a Federal case. I'll leave it to one of our local lawyers to say whether or not their interpretation of it is sound.
 
2013-04-22 07:53:24 PM  

Cork on Fork: Or anything that has an impact on interstate commerce. That's a really easy thing to establish. Here, not only does the race bring people in from out of state but the explosions shut down roads and stores for a few days. So, it impacted interstate commerce.


The police did that, not the explosions.
 
2013-04-22 07:53:32 PM  
Looking at the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, he will be lucky if he ONLY gets life in prison.  Considering that any act of terrorism makes him an automatic Class VI criminal offender and the minimum level of his crime is 28, plus the multiple deaths, plus the other additional sentencing points, he's already looking at life in prison from the get go.  Getting him out of a death sentence won't be a freaking cakewalk.
 
2013-04-22 07:55:04 PM  

stampylives: well, i guess iraq actually DID have wmd's then. of course, so does the fireworks shop down the road.


Came in here to say this...
 
2013-04-22 08:23:51 PM  
The definition of WMD they use in insane. It includes "rockets with more than 4oz of propellant"

The familiar Estes hobby motors can exceed that by clustering (4) D-12-0s as a first stage and (3) C-6-Xs as a second. So a teenager building and launching such a thing and having it go awry and start a fire that results in a death is eligible to be executed?

(D12: 21.1g; C6: 10.8g)
 
2013-04-22 08:35:02 PM  
Could some nice (ahem) Farker see if there is another link?  I've been unable to load the PR with server errors.  Farkied?  I'd really like to read it.  Thanks!
 
2013-04-22 09:05:34 PM  

CodyPendent: I've been unable to load the PR with server errors. Farkied? I'd really like to read it. Thanks!


They load instantly for me. Maybe direct links without the added fark code will work?

Press release

Criminal Complaint (PDF)
 
2013-04-22 09:50:00 PM  

AndreMA: The definition of WMD they use in insane. It includes "rockets with more than 4oz of propellant"

The familiar Estes hobby motors can exceed that by clustering (4) D-12-0s as a first stage and (3) C-6-Xs as a second. So a teenager building and launching such a thing and having it go awry and start a fire that results in a death is eligible to be executed?

(D12: 21.1g; C6: 10.8g)


Oh God, I'm building an Estes Saturn V as we speak, and it takes 3 D engines.  Probably going to qualify me as a terrorist.

Lucky I live on 45 acres.  The only person I could possibly hurt is myself.
 
2013-04-22 09:57:23 PM  

Lsherm: AndreMA: The definition of WMD they use in insane. It includes "rockets with more than 4oz of propellant"

The familiar Estes hobby motors can exceed that by clustering (4) D-12-0s as a first stage and (3) C-6-Xs as a second. So a teenager building and launching such a thing and having it go awry and start a fire that results in a death is eligible to be executed?

(D12: 21.1g; C6: 10.8g)

Oh God, I'm building an Estes Saturn V as we speak, and it takes 3 D engines.  Probably going to qualify me as a terrorist.

Lucky I live on 45 acres.  The only person I could possibly hurt is myself.


Thankfully I launched my last (custom) rocket a couple of years ago. 3xE25 and an F50 for the first stage. Clustering Aerotech AP motors is challenging but can be done. Electrically air-starting the second stage (3xE25) worked in testing but failed at altitude, so the vehicle was a complete loss.

I had access to a 200 acre gravel pit :)
 
2013-04-22 10:11:56 PM  

AndreMA: Lsherm: AndreMA: The definition of WMD they use in insane. It includes "rockets with more than 4oz of propellant"

The familiar Estes hobby motors can exceed that by clustering (4) D-12-0s as a first stage and (3) C-6-Xs as a second. So a teenager building and launching such a thing and having it go awry and start a fire that results in a death is eligible to be executed?

(D12: 21.1g; C6: 10.8g)

Oh God, I'm building an Estes Saturn V as we speak, and it takes 3 D engines.  Probably going to qualify me as a terrorist.

Lucky I live on 45 acres.  The only person I could possibly hurt is myself.

Thankfully I launched my last (custom) rocket a couple of years ago. 3xE25 and an F50 for the first stage. Clustering Aerotech AP motors is challenging but can be done. Electrically air-starting the second stage (3xE25) worked in testing but failed at altitude, so the vehicle was a complete loss.

I had access to a 200 acre gravel pit :)


That's way more industrious than I want to get :)  I need to find the damn thing after it launches.  I think running a second stage is cool as hell, but not realistic for me.

I'm more worried about the parachute working.  The model I have requires it breaking in half when the back explosion happens and deploying the chute.  Frankly, I'm not sure it's going to work.
 
2013-04-22 10:18:50 PM  

Lsherm: AndreMA: Lsherm: AndreMA: The definition of WMD they use in insane. It includes "rockets with more than 4oz of propellant"

The familiar Estes hobby motors can exceed that by clustering (4) D-12-0s as a first stage and (3) C-6-Xs as a second. So a teenager building and launching such a thing and having it go awry and start a fire that results in a death is eligible to be executed?

(D12: 21.1g; C6: 10.8g)

Oh God, I'm building an Estes Saturn V as we speak, and it takes 3 D engines.  Probably going to qualify me as a terrorist.

Lucky I live on 45 acres.  The only person I could possibly hurt is myself.

Thankfully I launched my last (custom) rocket a couple of years ago. 3xE25 and an F50 for the first stage. Clustering Aerotech AP motors is challenging but can be done. Electrically air-starting the second stage (3xE25) worked in testing but failed at altitude, so the vehicle was a complete loss.

I had access to a 200 acre gravel pit :)

That's way more industrious than I want to get :)  I need to find the damn thing after it launches.  I think running a second stage is cool as hell, but not realistic for me.

I'm more worried about the parachute working.  The model I have requires it breaking in half when the back explosion happens and deploying the chute.  Frankly, I'm not sure it's going to work.


I've never had much problem with chutes deploying, assuming the final stage lights. Good luck!
 
2013-04-22 10:19:32 PM  
If a pressure cooker is a WMD, then so is a handgun. Discuss
 
2013-04-22 11:01:51 PM  

Lsherm: AndreMA: Lsherm: AndreMA: The definition of WMD they use in insane. It includes "rockets with more than 4oz of propellant"

The familiar Estes hobby motors can exceed that by clustering (4) D-12-0s as a first stage and (3) C-6-Xs as a second. So a teenager building and launching such a thing and having it go awry and start a fire that results in a death is eligible to be executed?

(D12: 21.1g; C6: 10.8g)

Oh God, I'm building an Estes Saturn V as we speak, and it takes 3 D engines.  Probably going to qualify me as a terrorist.

Lucky I live on 45 acres.  The only person I could possibly hurt is myself.

Thankfully I launched my last (custom) rocket a couple of years ago. 3xE25 and an F50 for the first stage. Clustering Aerotech AP motors is challenging but can be done. Electrically air-starting the second stage (3xE25) worked in testing but failed at altitude, so the vehicle was a complete loss.

I had access to a 200 acre gravel pit :)

That's way more industrious than I want to get :)  I need to find the damn thing after it launches.  I think running a second stage is cool as hell, but not realistic for me.

I'm more worried about the parachute working.  The model I have requires it breaking in half when the back explosion happens and deploying the chute.  Frankly, I'm not sure it's going to work.


Parachute or parachutes?  That's a good sized rocket.  It's been decades since I built one but I've had fun recently watching my nephews build and launch Estes rockets.
 
2013-04-22 11:50:28 PM  

mopar1956: Arkanaut: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

I was wondering about that -- did the PATRIOT Act create some kind of new legal definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" or something like that?

The civil and military definition have been different for some time.

For the purposes of US [28] weapons of mass destruction are defined as:
any destructive device defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses[29]any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursorsany weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vectorany weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life[30]The <a data-cke-saved-href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_In vestigation" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">Federal Bureau of Investigation's definition is similar to that presented above from the terrorism statute:[31]
any explosive or incendiary device, as defined in Title 18 USC, Section 921: bomb, grenade, rocket, missile, mine, or other device with a charge of more than four ouncesany weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursorsany weapon involving a disease organismany weapon designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human lifeany device or weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury by causing a malfunction of or destruction of an aircraft or other vehicle that carries humans or of an aircraft or other vehicle whose malfunction or destruction may cause said aircraft or other vehicle to cause death or serious bodily injury to humans who may be within range of the vector in its course of travel or the travel of its debris.


How come your definition is the only one that includes toxins, poisons, and radiation?
 
2013-04-23 12:06:34 AM  

Tobin_Lam: mopar1956: Arkanaut: JohnnyC: Suspect in Boston Marathon Attack Charged with Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction

I think this is a stupid way to charge him. Neither of those bombs strike me as being "Weapons of Mass Destruction". Nuclear weapons, large scale biological or chemical weapons... those are weapons of mass destruction. A homemade pressure cooker shrapnel bomb... It is a weapon. It does create destruction, but it's not a weapon of mass destruction... not even remotely.

I was wondering about that -- did the PATRIOT Act create some kind of new legal definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" or something like that?

The civil and military definition have been different for some time.

For the purposes of US [28] weapons of mass destruction are defined as:
any destructive device defined as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, grenade, rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce, mine, or device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses[29]any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursorsany weapon involving a biological agent, toxin, or vectorany weapon that is designed to release radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life[30]The <a data-cke-saved-href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_In vestigation" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">Federal Bureau of Investigation's definition is similar to that presented above from the terrorism statute:[31]
any explosive or incendiary device, as defined in Title 18 USC, Section 921: bomb, grenade, rocket, missile, mine, or other device with a charge of more than four ouncesany weapon designed or intended to cause death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or ...


A weird thing about that is that it seems to exclude causing radioactive contamination that is not dangerous to human life, but merely extremely expensive to clean up and disruptive of commerce. I doubt that the Americium in a few smoke detectors, if spread over a city block, would be actually dangerous... but it's enough to require expensive cleanup...
 
2013-04-23 12:49:23 AM  

propasaurus: Gyrfalcon: propasaurus: Will the operators of the West, TX fertilizer plant also be charged with WMD?

Did they blow up their plant on purpose with the intention of killing lots of people? Then, no.

Should they reasonably have known that 27 tons of ammonium nitrate might be unsafe?


Probably, but that's negligence, not malice. And negligence, even criminal negligence, is a civil tort, not a felony.
 
HBK
2013-04-23 03:20:30 AM  

Gyrfalcon: propasaurus: Gyrfalcon: propasaurus: Will the operators of the West, TX fertilizer plant also be charged with WMD?

Did they blow up their plant on purpose with the intention of killing lots of people? Then, no.

Should they reasonably have known that 27 tons of ammonium nitrate might be unsafe?

Probably, but that's negligence, not malice. And negligence, even criminal negligence, is a civil tort, not a felony.


Wrong. Criminal negligence can often be a felony.

Law (Texas as an example)

Example
 
2013-04-23 06:12:50 AM  
Calling an IED a 'Weapon of Mass Destruction' is ridiculous.  Not that he doesn't deserve to go away for a long time, and not that bombing and terrorism aren't serious offenses, but charge him with that.  Maybe if it was a dirty bomb, but not really even then, IMO.

\Only nukes are WMDs.
\\That way, it's a beautiful pun.
\\\Weapons of Mass Destruction, get it?
 
Displayed 102 of 102 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report