Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat

Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

KenDckey -> Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 2:22:56 PM)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110222/ap_on_re_us/us_supreme_court_mistress_attacked "Suppose (Bond) decided to retaliate against her former friend by pouring a bottle of vinegar in the friend's goldfish bowl. As I read this statute, that would be a violation of this statute, potentially punishable by life imprisonment, wouldn't it?" Justice Samuel Alito said. "I'm not sure, Justice Alito," Justice Department lawyer Michael Dreeben said. ". I'm not sure that vinegar is a chemical weapon." "Well, a chemical weapon is a weapon that includes toxic chemicals," Alito replied. "And a toxic chemical is a chemical that can cause death to animals. And pouring vinegar in a goldfish bowl, I believe, will cause death to the goldfish, so that's a chemical weapon." Not withstanding the charge and arena that it was used, I am fairly sure that, based upon her conviction period, that she could be convicted in state court for domestic violence. But I do agree that this is a stretch in the Federal Arena. If they let the conviction stand I wonder what will happen with some of our cooking and cleaning supplies.

rulemylife -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 2:27:54 PM)
Maybe this is where the WMD's in Iraq disappeared to.

Lucylastic -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 2:48:44 PM)
She stole chemical 10-chloro-10H phenoxarsine from the company where she worked and purchased potassium dichromate, This isnt simple vinegar ...its proper chemicals, shes a lab tech you cant just walk into target and buy a gallon Potassium dichromate, K2Cr2O7, is a common inorganic chemical reagent, most commonly used as an oxidizing agent in various laboratory and industrial applications. As with all hexavalent chromium compounds, it is potentially harmful to health and must be handled and disposed of appropriately. It is a crystalline ionic solid with a very bright, red-orange color. 10-chloro-10H-phenoxarsine, a chemical so toxic that half a teaspoon is lethal to an adult. the question was rhetorical her method of poisoning had nothing to do with simple cleaning supplies

KenDckey -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 3:06:30 PM)
Didn't say she deserved mega trouble at state level. Hell, sounds like attempted murder, theift, assault, who knows what. regardless of the actual intent of the crime, it turns on the definition. Any toxic chemical is illegal to possess, sell, etc etc and can be classified as a chemical weapon (justice Alioto) so under that definiton of a chemical weapon, your household bleach, your lice killer, your bug spray, etc, etc are all chemical weapons. They are chemicals, they kill animals (sometimes very small ones). She was charged as a terrorist. Why not as a murderer or something on state statutes? I agree she violated some postal regs (most probably) because she put something in a mail box other than mail (I think that is illegal). The fed can do with that and I have no problem. Go for it. Add in attempted murder of a postal carrier for all I am concerned. But terrorism? Yeah, under the definition that any chemical that kills any animal (including prescription drugs) are chemical weapons and their use therefore fits the definition of terrorist act. Really? I personally think not. If so, we may all be forced to get rid of a lot of household products.

rulemylife -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 3:13:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic She stole chemical 10-chloro-10H phenoxarsine from the company where she worked and purchased potassium dichromate, This isnt simple vinegar ...its proper chemicals, shes a lab tech you cant just walk into target and buy a gallon Potassium dichromate, K2Cr2O7, is a common inorganic chemical reagent, most commonly used as an oxidizing agent in various laboratory and industrial applications. As with all hexavalent chromium compounds, it is potentially harmful to health and must be handled and disposed of appropriately. It is a crystalline ionic solid with a very bright, red-orange color. 10-chloro-10H-phenoxarsine, a chemical so toxic that half a teaspoon is lethal to an adult. the question was rhetorical her method of poisoning had nothing to do with simple cleaning supplies They are weapons of mass destruction. Alito said so. And he's a Supreme Court Justice. That means he is infallible as the Pope.

Lucylastic -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 3:15:44 PM)
I think you are jumping the gun, or howling at the moon the two chemicals used are not household chemicals and she stole the first one from a technical lab, not conveniently from under her sink,. Maybe they are fed up of using attempted murder shit like that on her mailbox and car, anyone could have been contaminated, this wasnt in her home, private it was public Im dodgy on the legal aspects, but it could have caused a lot of terror in the neighbourhood had a kid passed by and touched her car door. someone poisoning the neighbourhood? killing innocents? year terror for sure meh, the sky isnt falling just yet

KenDckey -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 3:16:54 PM)
hmmmmm wouldn't the drugs pushed by the drug cartels, etc, fall under the definition? That being the case, shouldn't pushers and users be prosecuted for treate violations?

KenDckey -> RE: Ownership of legal chemicals may be terrorist owned chemical threat (2/22/2011 3:21:36 PM)
Rule The definition is on page 9 of this cite http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/082677p.pdf It pretty much says the same thing. http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/11B/229 is the legal page with the same site. You might be right, they are all reading it wrong except the prosecutor, judge and jury.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02