4 ms·

That would depend on your definition of a "bioweapon". How many people have to be killed by a toxic substance injected into the air to consider it a weapon? 1

That would depend on your definition of a "bioweapon". How many people have to be killed by a toxic substance injected into the air to consider it a weapon? 1.2 million people died in China alone in 2010 from air pollution. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/world/asia/air-pollution-linked-to-1-2-million-deaths-in-china.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/world/asia/air-pollution-l...

PhasmaFelis 11y ago
Weapons are defined by intent, not body count.
- StanislavPetrov 11y ago
  Criminal negligence doesn't require intent. If you fire your gun into the air because you are a jackass, and the bullet comes down somewhere and kills someone, the gun is still a weapon, even though you had no intent to kill.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - venomsnake 11y ago
    I think he meant the intent of the creator of the compound/item. A gun is created to kill. A taser to incapacitate. A knife is created to cut/stab things - and since human flesh is highly cuttable substance even kitchen knives are considered weapons. A car is created to transport people but can be used to kill. Cars are not weapons because in their conception there is no intent to harm someone.
    - StanislavPetrov 11y ago
      What about a rock? The same analogy holds true. Anything can be a weapon, its simply absurd to contend that intent matters.
      - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
        There has to be intent in there someone. A gun is a weapon. A rock can be a weapon. A dangerous polluting factory may be criminally negligent and morally despicable, but it's not a weapon unless it was deliberately deployed to maximize exposure to a target group. (Which isn't out of the question, given human nature, but I haven't heard of any evidence for it happening yet.)
  - ryanlol 11y ago
    What if we replace the gun and bullet with a bottle rocket? Is it a weapon now?
Hondor 11y ago
1.2 million premature deaths, not outright deaths. These will be people about to die anyway who died slightly sooner than otherwise. Car crashes kill people 50 years ahead of schedule, not 1 year.
venomsnake 11y ago
It is not a bioweapon. It is chemical weapon. Quite the different beast.
ctdonath 11y ago
That's kinda the point of the article. Not only does it purify contaminated air for the occupants, it actually reduces contaminants outside the car. Tesla is marketing this to locales with literally dangerous levels of smog.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago

Weapons are defined by intent, not body count.

StanislavPetrov 11y ago
Criminal negligence doesn't require intent. If you fire your gun into the air because you are a jackass, and the bullet comes down somewhere and kills someone, the gun is still a weapon, even though you had no intent to kill.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- venomsnake 11y ago
  I think he meant the intent of the creator of the compound/item. A gun is created to kill. A taser to incapacitate. A knife is created to cut/stab things - and since human flesh is highly cuttable substance even kitchen knives are considered weapons. A car is created to transport people but can be used to kill. Cars are not weapons because in their conception there is no intent to harm someone.
  - StanislavPetrov 11y ago
    What about a rock? The same analogy holds true. Anything can be a weapon, its simply absurd to contend that intent matters.
    - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
      There has to be intent in there someone. A gun is a weapon. A rock can be a weapon. A dangerous polluting factory may be criminally negligent and morally despicable, but it's not a weapon unless it was deliberately deployed to maximize exposure to a target group. (Which isn't out of the question, given human nature, but I haven't heard of any evidence for it happening yet.)
- ryanlol 11y ago
  What if we replace the gun and bullet with a bottle rocket? Is it a weapon now?

Hondor 11y ago

1.2 million premature deaths, not outright deaths. These will be people about to die anyway who died slightly sooner than otherwise. Car crashes kill people 50 years ahead of schedule, not 1 year.

venomsnake 11y ago

It is not a bioweapon. It is chemical weapon. Quite the different beast.

ctdonath 11y ago

That's kinda the point of the article. Not only does it purify contaminated air for the occupants, it actually reduces contaminants outside the car. Tesla is marketing this to locales with literally dangerous levels of smog.