6 ms·

> "intending to make an explosive" That is a meaningless statement by itself, and "making an explosion" does not merit punishment in and of itself. You may as

by jlgreco 14y ago

> "intending to make an explosive" That is a meaningless statement by itself, and "making an explosion" does not merit punishment in and of itself. You may as well say "Stan was clearly intending to make a fire (A small one, but one nonetheless). ...intentionally creating a fire on school grounds definitely merits punishment)" What do we mean by fire? Did he set his desk ablaze, or did he light a wooden splint? "He intentionally set a fire" gives us no basis to make a blanket judgement. Explosions do not inherently merit punishment, just as fires do not. The massive range of intended harm and magnitude that could be encompassed by the general description "explosion" or "fire" means that these acts cover everything deserving of "a stern look from the teacher" to "lock them away and throw away the key". Edit to add: When I was in 10th grade my physics class was making alka-seltzer rockets in the football field. A few of us threw a bunch into a 12-oz pop bottle and blew it up. We got an eye-roll from our teacher; it wasn't even considered worth a comment.

Zimahl 14y ago
I'm not sure fire is a great example. Fire can get out of hand and grow. Just as I don't want you playing with matches in my house, you probably shouldn't be playing with matches in school. In the end, it all comes down to intent. If you lit some paper on fire and threw it in a trashcan to cause a disturbance that's an issue and a serious one. I am having trouble finding a good reason to light a fire in a school other than to light a Bunsen burner. shrug The problem with an IED (perfectly fine name for what was made) is that it's affects are much less controllable. Many could be hurt and very quickly. I think it might warrant a very stern response and possibly legal punishment. Once again, to me it somewhat comes down to intent, although with IEDs I don't think the law really cares.
- cliffu 14y ago
  Yes, let's equate the popping of any pressurized plastic bottle to roadside mines, that's totally reasonable. That little terrorist. She probably get the plans directly from Al-Qaeda.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  > I am having trouble finding a good reason to light a fire in a school other than to light a Bunsen burner. shrug For highschool students I think the usual 'good' reason is "Well we already have this bunsen burner going for this lab, we are bored, we have all of these extra wooden splints, and we are teenagers." There really is little to no harm that is going to come of that sort of situation so, although the rules clearly forbid it, any reasonable teacher is just going to ignore them or tell them to knock it off. Zero-tolerance attitudes benefit nobody. > IED (perfectly fine name for what was made) You have got to be kidding me. The only reason to call it that is to invoke an emotional reaction.
  - Zimahl 14y ago
    > IED (perfectly fine name for what was made) You have got to be kidding me. The only reason to call it that is to invoke an emotional reaction. IED stands for "improvised explosive device". It might be emotional to you, however, it's exactly what was made. It's a device that is improvised from household materials with the entire point of exploding. It explodes via pressure but in no way does the IED label require it to be a brick of C4 detonated via a burner cell phone.
    - jlgreco 14y ago
      If you honestly thought that was a perfectly innocent term for what was made, with no emotional baggage, you would not have immediately, preemptively, defended your use of the term. Call it what it was. It was a "works bomb".
      - Zimahl 14y ago
        I'm assuming you aren't an American because I have never heard the term "works bomb" before. It's also funny because on the first link from google[1] (below the youtube video) it clear states: Warning! The Works bomb is illegal to make! Don’t do it! The information below is purely for educational purposes (such as research papers) and may leave ... crucial steps. If you think IED has no emotional baggage, try the word "bomb". When I was in college I had the misfortune of being in a bathroom when a pipe burst in the ceiling. Just 1 idiot speculating and saying the words "cherry bomb" cost me 3 hours of questioning by police. [1] http://chemistrytwig.com/2009/08/21/the-works-bomb/ http://chemistrytwig.com/2009/08/21/the-works-bomb/

by jlgreco 14y ago

Zimahl 14y ago

I'm not sure fire is a great example. Fire can get out of hand and grow. Just as I don't want you playing with matches in my house, you probably shouldn't be playing with matches in school. In the end, it all comes down to intent. If you lit some paper on fire and threw it in a trashcan to cause a disturbance that's an issue and a serious one. I am having trouble finding a good reason to light a fire in a school other than to light a Bunsen burner. shrug The problem with an IED (perfectly fine name for what was made) is that it's affects are much less controllable. Many could be hurt and very quickly. I think it might warrant a very stern response and possibly legal punishment. Once again, to me it somewhat comes down to intent, although with IEDs I don't think the law really cares.

cliffu 14y ago
Yes, let's equate the popping of any pressurized plastic bottle to roadside mines, that's totally reasonable. That little terrorist. She probably get the plans directly from Al-Qaeda.
jlgreco 14y ago
> I am having trouble finding a good reason to light a fire in a school other than to light a Bunsen burner. shrug For highschool students I think the usual 'good' reason is "Well we already have this bunsen burner going for this lab, we are bored, we have all of these extra wooden splints, and we are teenagers." There really is little to no harm that is going to come of that sort of situation so, although the rules clearly forbid it, any reasonable teacher is just going to ignore them or tell them to knock it off. Zero-tolerance attitudes benefit nobody. > IED (perfectly fine name for what was made) You have got to be kidding me. The only reason to call it that is to invoke an emotional reaction.
- Zimahl 14y ago
  > IED (perfectly fine name for what was made) You have got to be kidding me. The only reason to call it that is to invoke an emotional reaction. IED stands for "improvised explosive device". It might be emotional to you, however, it's exactly what was made. It's a device that is improvised from household materials with the entire point of exploding. It explodes via pressure but in no way does the IED label require it to be a brick of C4 detonated via a burner cell phone.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    If you honestly thought that was a perfectly innocent term for what was made, with no emotional baggage, you would not have immediately, preemptively, defended your use of the term. Call it what it was. It was a "works bomb".
    - Zimahl 14y ago
      I'm assuming you aren't an American because I have never heard the term "works bomb" before. It's also funny because on the first link from google[1] (below the youtube video) it clear states: Warning! The Works bomb is illegal to make! Don’t do it! The information below is purely for educational purposes (such as research papers) and may leave ... crucial steps. If you think IED has no emotional baggage, try the word "bomb". When I was in college I had the misfortune of being in a bathroom when a pipe burst in the ceiling. Just 1 idiot speculating and saying the words "cherry bomb" cost me 3 hours of questioning by police. [1] http://chemistrytwig.com/2009/08/21/the-works-bomb/ http://chemistrytwig.com/2009/08/21/the-works-bomb/