Bombing Suspect charged with Conspiracy, to use WMDs....

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by BTPost, Apr 22, 2013.


  1. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    Yep, that is RIGHT... The glorious Federal Prosecutor has charged the guy, with using a "Weapon of Mass Destruction"..... This is just Ludicrous, on its Face... The whole combined US Military, CIA, NSA, DIA, and every other Letters Agency, couldn't find ONE, not even ONE, WMD, in all of Iraq, after the Invasion of that country, but these two Brothers built, on their OWN, THREE, WMDs, in their Secret Bomb Making Plant, in a Boston suburb, and the survivor is NOW CHARGED, with using them, and conspiring to Use them, in the Boston Marathon Bombing..... Where does this Bitch of a Prosecutor get her Reasoning from, Fruit Loops R Us, or a Cracker Jacks Box? Of all the DUMB Things, to charge this Guy for.... This takes the Cake... and this Cake, comes with Super Chocolate Frosting..... and all the Trimmings.... I mean this is Moroooon 101 (Bugs Bunny Definition) My Opinion... YMMV.....
     
    Motomom34 likes this.
  2. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Moderator Moderator Site Supporter++

    What did you expect BT? I also thought the WMD charge was odd. I need to go get the true definition of a WMD.
     
  3. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Moderator Moderator Site Supporter++

    Here is the official define of WMD under the law.
    18 USC § 2332a - Use of weapons of mass destruction | Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 25, 2015
  4. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    Motomom34 likes this.
  5. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    The definition of 'destructive device' under section 921 is what defines a WMD, as per the USC you cited. Here you go:

     
    Motomom34 likes this.
  6. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Moderator Moderator Site Supporter++

    Thanks Broker cause what I quoted didn't quiet fit. I got stuck on the first part and thought what????

    BTW- B) am I reading correctly that most guns could fall under this?
     
  7. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    No, most Guns do NOT have Barrels with bores over .5" in diameter... That is 50 Caliber.....
     
    VisuTrac, Brokor and Motomom34 like this.
  8. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    Alright, then how are cannon legal? a nine pound cannon ball is roughly 4 inches, if I remember correctly, and are not intended for single kills. yet cannon can and are in private hands, are have private shooting, like machine-guns do.o_O
     
  9. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    Yeah, I first thought the same thing, but they may fall under "antique" and "recreational", but I also remember an episode of RedJacket Firearms. I suppose there are hurdles, too.
     
  10. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    One volley of canister, atop grape, atop ball, would have done much more damage to persons and property.
     
  11. VisuTrac

    VisuTrac Ваша мать носит военные ботинки Site Supporter+++

    Yeah, but try rolling it down the street. Probably not going to get it off the pad at the VFW hall.
     
    vegasrandall likes this.
  12. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    ALL cannons built after the Antique Cutoff Date, are DeMilled, so they are just hunks of steel, or they belong to the .MIL, and are exempt from NFA Act. Cannons built prior the that Date, can only be used with BLACK Powder, or they become Destructive Devices. This is why Pumpkin Chunking Cannons can ONLY use Compressed Air as a Propellant, or they would be Destructive Devices.
     
  13. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    You will NOTICE, That the Governor was very specific in the wording he used, to "suggest" that Residents of Boston, and surrounding area, and "hole up in place" .... He did NOT use the word "Order" or " Declaration" which have very specific Legal meanings. Now the MSM did use very different Language in their pronouncements, during their Broadcasts, and this was deliberate, in that their pronouncements have NO legal Standing, so they can say ANYTHING they want, and intimate anything they want with no Legal Recourse, for them, unless the .Gov chose to make a fuss, which they had no intention of doing, as this was the Plan, for the wanted response from the residents. Just Say,en.... YMMV....
     
    VHestin and VisuTrac like this.
  14. VisuTrac

    VisuTrac Ваша мать носит военные ботинки Site Supporter+++

    Just condition of the sheeple. Getting them ready for the day the busses come down the street to take them someplace safe and out of the harms way
     
  15. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    Two things come to mind. one, if I was to use such a cannon, it could be on a electric carriage, and it would not matter about the recoil, for it is a one shot wonder. two, if i was to use such a device (i would not of course) having a law about what powder I used would have no effect at all. I would already be in the process of full bore illegality. What's a few more charges?
    Canister is sacks of loose musket balls, grape is one ounce lead slugs or balls, followed by cast iron which shatters on hard objects. It would not have left anyone standing, in the direction it was aimed. problem would be hiding it, or making it appear to be something it was not. It would be quite heavy, but perhaps it could look like a refrigeration unit, or a chest freezer, a drinks bar, or a concession trailer. My point is it need not look like a cannon to be deadly. A little prep work with a caulking gun, and the sewers could have been flooded with oxy-acetylene. cheap, very easy to get, in quantity, and stores long term. depending upon the volume, the blast would have been impressive.
    The devices used were man portable, but these guys though small scale. With nothing more than a copy of a key, these guys could have shaped and installed fitted bombs into the drop boxes of those mailboxes. could have been done days before, and just after the last mail pickup, or before daylight, the night before the race, and no one would have been the wiser. (as long as there sealed against the dogs noses.) there was no need to be near the blast zone at all. So, NO...If I were bent on doing mayhem more laws, or stronger penalties, would have no difference at all. And making the weapon itself, illegal , is simply ludicrous. Of course it is illegal, it is being used for murder.
     
  16. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing |

    bloombergkelly.

    “The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Sorry, the only thing I can think of is how this man is still breathing.
     
    oldawg, ghrit and tulianr like this.
  17. Quigley_Sharps

    Quigley_Sharps The Badministrator Administrator Founding Member

    Well there it is... the end game.
    Them: lets see if the crazy Mayor can get away with saying this in public. If so next step is the White House to say it...
     
    Brokor and tulianr like this.
  18. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    In the 'old days' people were responsible for their own security and would have told the Feds to shove it long ago.
     
    oldawg, franks71vw and ghrit like this.
  19. VisuTrac

    VisuTrac Ваша мать носит военные ботинки Site Supporter+++

    Erm, according to the Supreme Court, we are still responsible for our own security.
    The feds are responsible for the country border (which is a sieve to get in to).

    Police just report on incidents and track down the perps.

    If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and git sum' or something like that.
     
    oldawg and BTPost like this.
  20. VHestin

    VHestin Farm Chick

    Well people yes, but not sheeple. I'm not stupid enough to rely on the LEOs for anything.
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7