
Man's 'experiments' with explosives were lawful, court rules - Tomte
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/mar/11/mans-experiments-with-explosives-were-lawful-court-rules
======
anfilt
I hate how chemistry can land people in legal hot water due to overzealous
government policies. While this example is not in the UK. It's illegal to own
certain glassware without a permit in Texas for instance. The glassware is
considered a drug precursor, like freaking glassware. Oh also federally the
DEA treats Phosphorus as a type 1 precursor to meth. That's a freaking
element! An element is illegal/regulated like that is just insane to me.

Anyways a low amount of explosives with no intent to hurt anyone should not be
a problem. Even a large amount in a remote area that is away from other people
and property should be fine.

~~~
3pt14159
In D&D there is a certain type of spell called Power Word Kill which works
slightly differently based on the version of D&D you're playing with, but the
effect is that it essentially kills a single individual with a single word.

I'm not saying phosphorus should be legal or illegal, but at some point "it's
just a packet I sent on the internet" or "it's just a PDF I sent to someone
overseas" or "it's just an element" misses the point. In most democratic
countries there are procedures for getting what you need if you what you're
doing is fundamentally good. Nuclear power plants get uranium. Science
researchers get viruses. Anti-virus vendors get malware. A certain degree of
limiting the power of individual actors is wise.

~~~
beambot
Deciding what is fundamentally good or drawing the line (eg the glassware) is
the muddy part. The road to hell is paved with good intentions -- next thing
you know, science chemistry kits are illegal & large swaths of population no
longer believe in a spherical earth, evolution, and climate science.

~~~
WalterBright
Chemistry sets were emasculated right around 1970. I know because I got one of
the good ones immediately prior. Had lots of fun making stink bombs, burning
various chemicals just to see what would happen, dissolving things in acid,
generating hydrogen gas, etc.

The ones after 1970 were like "hey, watch salt dissolve in water."

~~~
ethbro
Looking back on it, the chemistry set I got in the 90s could have easily been
outdone by rooting around under the kitchen sink with a copy of the AC.

------
hirundo
> section 4 (1), in the 1883 Explosive Substances Act, which says that anyone
> who makes or has in their possession explosive substances is liable to
> prosecution unless they can show that it was “for a lawful object”.

> But two other judges ... declared that “to say that something is done for
> one’s own private education is not a sufficient object for the purposes of
> the section 4(1) defence, as it does not identify the use to which the
> explosives will be put in order to provide such education.

In my epistemology these judges have committed blasphemy. Private education is
not just a lawful object, it is a primary motive and purpose of human action.

~~~
AstralStorm
Ultimately that is enough to nullify terrorism charge unless they happen to
somehow show this person wanted to commit acts of terror.

They can still be liable for unlicensed handling of explosives and controlled
chemicals.

------
pjc50
For context, the UK has suffered a number of terrorist bombings over the
years; explosives are controlled substances, and anyone making them without a
license _will_ have the terrorism book thrown at them. Not really much point
in spending two decades in Afghanistan "fighting terrorism" if you're going to
let people brew TATP in their bathtubs like the 7/7 bombers.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing)
: TATP, 23 dead, 800 injured. Grimly has a disambiguation page, for the other
occasion terrorists blew up Manchester in 1993.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_July_2005_London_bombings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_July_2005_London_bombings)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Bishopsgate_bombing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Bishopsgate_bombing)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_hotel_bombing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_hotel_bombing)
: very nearly assasinated most of the government!

[https://www.cbc.ca/archives/the-day-an-ira-bomb-claimed-
the-...](https://www.cbc.ca/archives/the-day-an-ira-bomb-claimed-the-life-of-
lord-mountbatten-1.5245750) : Queen's cousin murdered by bomb

And previously [https://www.irishtimes.com/news/the-devastating-effects-
of-a...](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/the-devastating-effects-of-a-century-
of-bombing-britain-1.29330)

~~~
smth_mst_b_done
"The Explosive Substances Act was quickly passed by parliament in 1883 in
response to fears of Irish nationalist bomb attacks and because previous
offences were thought to provide insufficient protection for the public."

Looking at the above list, it seems that terrorists are going to make bombs
despite this venerable law. Who would have thought!

~~~
DuskStar
Yeah, pretty much my thought. The real question is "how many bombers were
arrested ahead of time due to this law", which is a bit harder to answer
though.

~~~
AstralStorm
Rather easy. How many people were arrested due to this law as a whole?

I suspect not too many. These charges should not be thrown around willy nilly.

------
ty7yt
good for him. he only has one life and he aint spending it in a sandwich
factory. hes exploring some of the most exciting chemistry this world has. and
its a shame we live in a place where people are terrified and manipulated by
tv into thinking anyone who shows interest in these things must be placed in a
small room for a long time. 300 gears ago governments would be giving him
money and patting him on the back. some people we not not born for this time.
a time of sol destroying mortgages, overbearing laws, 1000's of unwritten
rules and a general utter boring existence unless you were born into wealth.

~~~
noir_lord
Could not disagree more, for much of human history only the rich and their
offspring typically had access to higher education and crucially learning
materials, books where horrendously expensive for example for all but the most
wealthy.

We live in a golden age for autodidacts, that people often seem intellectually
incurious says less about the society and more the people who constitute it,
many people are simply incurious - it’s not a bad thing, it is their life and
they are free to live it how they want, it doesn’t hurt me that people binge
watch the Kardashians.

And the idea that society has somehow gotten worse and prior generations where
not like this is crazier still.. we are only a couple of centuries out from
executing spinsters for witchcraft and believing in curses.

~~~
Fnoord
What you wrote is basically Hans Rosling's "Factfulness" [1] and the other
person wrote the rhetoric of 1984 or whatever. I guess we see what we want to
see, and the news focuses on the negative. Consider, for example, computer
security. You'd think with a recent RCE in Bluetooth and in Windows SMBv3 the
world is insecure. Well, it was way worse 20 years ago, and even worse 30
years ago. Heck, barely anything used strong encryption back then. Everything
was MITMable! But the news does not support that statement. Only if you look
into the details (which does require some specific expertise, knowledge wise),
you notice such. I also don't believe this to be a conspiracy; people are
generally harmless, and good. Perhaps, in a case like this, we need to figure
if there were clear harmful intentions. Same with USA's Espionage Act though.

[1] Full title: Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why
Things Are Better Than You Think

~~~
noir_lord
Had not heard of Hans Rosling so thanks for that it seems I'd like his books.

I've always strived (but not always achieved) to reach my opinions on the
world based on evidence and figures and facts that I've looked at myself
deferring to experts in the various fields where I'm not educated enough to
understand (medicine - I trust my doctors).

If you look at the world through that lens for the average person this is a
golden age despite all the problems we still have.

------
tathougies
I mean, you really ought to be able to experiment with explosives in a free
country, as long as you're not hurting anyone / planning to hurt anyone. It's
obviously legal when companies in the industry do it. Why shouldn't it be for
private citizens.

~~~
Someone
_”as long as you 're not hurting anyone / planning to hurt anyone”_

By that definition, car racing on public streets, running red lights and
ignoring speed limits is absolutely fine, as long as you’re not hurting anyone
/ planning to hurt anyone.

Regulations that limit the risks people get exposed to exist for a reason: you
can’t undo damage done to others by punishing the culprit. That’s why, for
example, reckless driving is illegal.

Lots of things are only legal, not when companies do it, but when those doing
it follow safety protocols.

~~~
rcurry
You’re talking apples and oranges here - public streets are filled with, well,
the public, and we have laws against racing and running red lights for that
very reason. On the other hand, if you own forty acres in New Mexico and want
to blow up an old washing machine with a pound of C4 on a lazy Saturday
afternoon, well, more power to ya.

~~~
Someone
I’m not saying people shouldn’t be able to do that, just that, if society sets
rules, they should be followed, and can restrict what you can and cannot do.

For example, if you buy that C4, how does it get on your land?

If you make it yourself, how do the ingredients get on your land? Is that safe
for the public? Does the process produce waste (gases, liquids) that may cause
damage to neighbors or the environment?

If one of your experiments doesn’t go ‘boom’, do you toss what’s left in the
garbage bin, or do you think that should be regulated?

Do you make precautions so that playing kids can’t accidentally enter the
area? Do you calculate how far parts of that washing machine may get thrown
away, to make sure parts don’t end up in your neighbors house?

------
Causality1
22 months in jail for making "damp firework" level explosives. What a
travesty.

~~~
londons_explore
Years ago I remember school mates competing for the prize of "loudest bang
from 1 gram".

If they did that now, I reckon they'd all be in prison...

~~~
rcurry
When I was ten years old, I used to bicycle from my grandfather’s house to his
farm property eight miles away. I’d sling my .22 rifle on the back of the bike
so I could go hunt rabbits and as I pedaled down the highway in the hot
California sun, I’d pray that I’d run into a cop because they’d always pull
over, throw my bike and my rifle in the trunk of their squad car and give me a
ride up the road to the property.

Good times.

------
hyperpallium
> made explosives and detonated them remotely in his back garden by means of a
> mobile phone signal.

Scary. But amount was similar to a firework, and he had done so several times
before. And he's autistic.

> liable to prosecution unless they can show that it was “for a lawful object”

> can personal experimentation or own private education, absent some ulterior
> unlawful purpose, be regarded as a lawful object?

They still had to _prove_ that that was his purpose - the onus is on the
defence. i.e. reversing assumption of innocence.

The dissent, that the purpose of education is not a "purpose" is ridiculous.

Yet, I bet the legislators didn't intend such a broad defence, and we'll
quickly see amending legislation confining it, given terrorism fears.

------
lowdose
The government should have offered him a job instead of treating him as a
criminal, especially considering his autism.

~~~
chmod775
> The government should have offered him a job

As what exactly?

~~~
oh_sigh
Bomb disposal technician?

------
sircastor
I misread this at first and thought it said "man's experiments with explosives
were awful"

