First denial, then cover up, then compo exemptions for manufacturers.boxy wrote:All it would take would be an incident or two in the US, and you can bet your arse there'd be plenty of talk about banning americium-241 (despite the name) from sale without some pretty hefty safeguards.Outlaw Yogi wrote:Big phuking deal .. I could give entire towns or small cities cancer with items available on supermarket, hardware, and discount store shelves. The item generally costs $11 or 2 for $20, 3 within a cubic metre of soil is considered hazardous to humans, and the method is entirely indiscriminate, killing young, old, healthy or ill alike.boxy wrote:Go have a look back at what the crazy fuck in China (where you can't own fucking military weapons on a personal whim) did... he tried to massacre a bunch of kids in school with a knife... FAIL.
Want to do a mass killing? .. well a sack full of entirely legal items containing americium-241 in the water supply will do the job.
So where's the campaign to outlaw smoke detectors?
If they started losing thousands of people to smoke detectors each year, what do you think would happen?
Or they could extract the most toxic part, concentrate in a pill and sell it as a remidy for some common minor complaint like the soy industry does.
The nuke industry sells depleted uranium for ammo, so who knows?
You reckon? I carried an SKK (7.62X39mm) and Mossberg 590 (12 guage slugster/riot-gun) in a PVC tube wrapped in a blue tarp (so it looked like a tent) on the Sydney rail system from the Illawarra line to the end of the East Hills line and was never challenged. Days later I transported about 1200 rounds via the same route, and never got looked at.boxy wrote:[The chance of detection and ability to overpower the offender is much greater when they're not carrying an arsenal of assault weapons and body armour so that they can just walk through the front gate and open up with hundreds of rounds a minute.Outlaw Yogi wrote:That Chinese bloke must have been a bit thick .. a candle and a gas cylinder would have done the job.
Y'see if crims want guns, they'll get guns ... no matter what. They might have to commit more crimes prior to obtaining to pay for it, but they'll get it.
Restricting the publics' access to weapons gives the crim's gun more power and condemns the public to victimhood.
The gun lobby's catchcry "When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns" is quite true.