How to Build a Bomb?

[John Cuthber]

I have not accessed the site.

Why are you talking about something you haven't even read?

lol

[Iggy]

Any judge or jury, with a brain in their heads, will realize that "How to Build a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom" from Al Qaeda's "Inspire" magazine has no probable good purpose, beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Al Qaeda has no probable good purpose. Bomb making instructions can. If you're aiming to silence al Qaeda then I'm with you. If you're aiming to censor bomb making instructions then I'm not.

 

"Any judge or jury" is too general. What is the name of the person who decides what I can read and write? I need a specific name, and I suppose I'd like to know why that person is more fit than myself to decide what I read and write.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Iggy

[DevilSolution]

I just wanna find some gold, why cant i use a bomb to unsettle it and net it further down my own stream?

People (unfortunately) cannot be arrested just for posting that sort of information. At least as far as I'm aware.

 

They can in my country... I'm not sure if religious or other intent is required.

[Airbrush]

I just wanna find some gold, why cant i use a bomb to unsettle it and net it further down my own stream?

 

 

They can in my country... I'm not sure if religious or other intent is required.

Once again for anyone who hasn't read this:

 

Feinstein Amendment SP 419

 

"In June of 1997, Congress voted 94-0 to add an amendment to a Department of Defense spending bill to prohibit the distribution of bomb-making instructions in the United States. The penalty for violating this law is a fine of $250,000 and/or a maximum of 20 years imprisonment. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) was the sponsor of the bill. In April of 1997, the Justice Department released a study revealing a connection between the availability of bomb-making instructions and the making of bombs. Although prohibiting the distribution of bomb-making instructions could be seen as a violation of the First Amendment, the Justice Department decided that the distribution of such materials was an obstruction of justice and not a free-speech right, providing the amendment was narrowly written. Thus, the Feinstein Amendment only precludes the distribution of material intentionally directed toward a "a federal offense or other criminal purpose affecting interstate commerce".

[John Cuthber]

Does anyone know the legal status of bomb making information in the other 95% of the world?

After all, the OP's question was "Is this info that needs to be available on the internet? Is this knowledge that should be freely available to every dummy on Earth?"

 

Also, under the law cited above, distributing the information is an offence but possession per se is apparently not and receiving it seems to have been left as a grey area too.

If someone outside the US posts the information and a US citizen downloads it is anyone breaking the law?

Would the ISP be liable?

 

What about a US citizen distributing the information to people whom he believes, in good faith, to intend to use the bombs to further the ends of the US. For example if the bombs had been for use against the Russians in Afghanistan or some similar future conflict?

 

If the US denies it's citizens access to this data but others round the world are permitted it, has the Justice dept set it's own people at a disadvantage

[EdEarl]

Living is dangerous and freedom is not free.

 

We should be careful to protect our freedoms, such as freedom of speech. Making laws to ban disseminating information, such as bomb making, diminishes our freedom of speech. We need to carefully balance the benefits and costs, before we make laws that infringe on our freedom.

 

What is the chance of any one of us being killed by a bomb?

 

Would banning bomb making info from the internet really reduce our chance of being killed by a bomb, if so, how much?

 

What are the bad effects of making a law to ban information. What would its benefits be? Is such a law enforceable? If it is enforceable, what would it cost? Could we spend the money in a better way?

 

Etc.

Edited May 14, 2013 by EdEarl

[Airbrush]

Those are all good questions above. Our legal system is intended to sort it out.

 

Living is dangerous and freedom is not free.

 

We should be careful to protect our freedoms, such as freedom of speech. Making laws to ban disseminating information, such as bomb making, diminishes our freedom of speech. We need to carefully balance the benefits and costs, before we make laws that infringe on our freedom.

 

What is the chance of any one of us being killed by a bomb?

 

Would banning bomb making info from the internet really reduce our chance of being killed by a bomb, if so, how much?

 

What are the bad effects of making a law to ban information. What would its benefits be? Is such a law enforceable? If it is enforceable, what would it cost? Could we spend the money in a better way?

 

Etc.

The chances of any of us being killed in a bombing is miniscule, however we are entering an age where all kinds of info is available everywhere, and one person can cause the death and dismemberment of hundreds or even thousands of people. This did not exist before.

 

Your cost/benefits analysis sound interesting. Maybe there can be such studies. Any volunteers?

 

Iggy: "Any judge or jury" is too general. What is the name of the person who decides what I can read and write? I need a specific name, and I suppose I'd like to know why that person is more fit than myself to decide what I read and write."

 

We must also concider the "common good" besides your needs to read about how to build a bomb. I think a panel of experts should decide what info is too dangerous for general distribution. This web site has moderators decide what should be deleted. I think the best way to enforce such a law is for the panel of experts in the field to simply delete such material from the internet, rather than trying to track down who posted it.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Airbrush

[EdEarl]

Those are all good questions above. Our legal system is intended to sort it out.

 

 

tyvm

 

You are more optimistic about our legal system than I. IMO, some things they do well and others they ignore, unless citizens force them to pay attention.

[Moontanman]

If anyone thinks that information about bombs can be kept away from those who want to build a bomb I think you are closing the barn door after the horse is gone. When I was kid, almost 50 years ago we were building explosives out of various home supplies just for fun. Too little too late I am afraid...

[Airbrush]

If anyone thinks that information about bombs can be kept away from those who want to build a bomb I think you are closing the barn door after the horse is gone. When I was kid, almost 50 years ago we were building explosives out of various home supplies just for fun. Too little too late I am afraid...

When I was a kid I was fascinated by firecrackers. However, I never had the desire to cut open a hundred fire crackers (or cherry bombs) and compact them into one massive bomb.

 

Most people who want to know "how to build a bomb" are not as smart as you were when you were a kid. You were even smarter than I was, since I never wanted to know how to build any kind of bomb. The idea is to make it more difficult for the DUMMY Bombers (such as the stupid Boston bombers). You will never find a "Bombmaking for Dummys" book. Hahahaha.

[EdEarl]

When I was a kid I was fascinated by firecrackers. However, I never had the desire to cut open a hundred fire crackers (or cherry bombs) and compact them into one massive bomb.

 

When we were about 13, my cousin and I did that. Filled up a bottle with the powder from many black-cats, ran a thin wire thru the bottle, connected it to a train transformer, and put the bottle in a wash tub filled with water. We put the tub assembly outside the back door, ran an extension cord inside the house to the transformer, and turned it on.

 

The explosion nearly knocked the bottom out of the tub and sent it flying into the air a couple of meters. The tub was ruined. Of course, our parents weren't happy about our adventure, We were lucky not to do more damage or hurt ourselves. But the fun was worth the grief.

[John Cuthber]

 

. You will never find a "Bombmaking for Dummys" book. Hahahaha.

Is this close enough?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anarchist_Cookbook

[Arete]

The idea is to make it more difficult for the DUMMY Bombers (such as the stupid Boston bombers).

 

Why are you assuming they were stupid?

 

Obviously they were a lot of things, but why are you assuming they couldn't of improvised ways to hurt people without explicit instructions?

 

I think the idea that we can regulate information pertaining to explosives as to prevent people using them for nefarious purposes is rather naive. A combustion engine relies on an explosive reaction. An improperly used propane tank is very dangerous. A lot of information that would allow someone to create an explosive device is easily obtainable simply from information pertaining to things not to do. I.e. are you going to ban safety information on storing your fertilizer near you diesel fuel because someone might figure out you can do bad things with it? How about not storing your car battery in an enclosed space? How about poison labels in case someone puts it in the water supply?

 

Do you think restricting that information, or making it available will cause more harm?

Edited May 14, 2013 by Arete

[Moontanman]

When I was a kid I was fascinated by firecrackers. However, I never had the desire to cut open a hundred fire crackers (or cherry bombs) and compact them into one massive bomb.

 

Most people who want to know "how to build a bomb" are not as smart as you were when you were a kid. You were even smarter than I was, since I never wanted to know how to build any kind of bomb. The idea is to make it more difficult for the DUMMY Bombers (such as the stupid Boston bombers). You will never find a "Bombmaking for Dummys" book. Hahahaha.

 

I'm not so sure that smart was the right label but we managed to make a sizable quantity of gunpowder, enough to blow up several large stumps and a large rock out of a cliff face... I can't remember now where we got the potassium nitrate but sulfur turned out to be the hardest to find... I found a supply of sulfur seeping out of a large pile of fire bricks that had never been used, I have no idea why sulfur was seeping out of that pile of bricks... we were in the 6th grade...

[Airbrush]

Why are you assuming they were stupid?

 

Obviously they were a lot of things, but why are you assuming they couldn't of improvised ways to hurt people without explicit instructions?

 

I think the idea that we can regulate information pertaining to explosives as to prevent people using them for nefarious purposes is rather naive. A combustion engine relies on an explosive reaction. An improperly used propane tank is very dangerous. A lot of information that would allow someone to create an explosive device is easily obtainable simply from information pertaining to things not to do. I.e. are you going to ban safety information on storing your fertilizer near you diesel fuel because someone might figure out you can do bad things with it? How about not storing your car battery in an enclosed space? How about poison labels in case someone puts it in the water supply?

 

Do you think restricting that information, or making it available will cause more harm?

The number of blunders they made AFTER the bombing gives them the "stupid" label. Also, the idea of just killing a lot of strangers because of your religion is a stupid idea. All it will do is make infidels hate your religion MORE.

 

Yes, you are right, but a pipe bomb (or a pressure cooker bomb) is the smallest, most efficient way to get a bang that hurts and kills a lot of folks. If you brought a big propane tank or other combustibles to the Boston Marathon, you would have stood out like a sore thumb. Also, it is not enough to merely combust, it must do so explosively, which takes special technique. Moontanman knew enough to submerge the device under water. Where did he learn to do that?

 

I'm not so sure that smart was the right label but we managed to make a sizable quantity of gunpowder, enough to blow up several large stumps and a large rock out of a cliff face... I can't remember now where we got the potassium nitrate but sulfur turned out to be the hardest to find... I found a supply of sulfur seeping out of a large pile of fire bricks that had never been used, I have no idea why sulfur was seeping out of that pile of bricks... we were in the 6th grade...

Who or what was guiding you and your 6th grade friends? Making gun powder requires specialized knowledge. I've known what gun powder is made of, but not the exact quantities, but finding enough sulfer and saltpeter is a challenge. Edited May 14, 2013 by Airbrush

[Moontanman]

If I remember correctly I got the recipe from our history book...

[EdEarl]

I've known what gun powder is made of, but not the exact quantities, but finding enough sulfer and saltpeter is a challenge.

 

I believe sulfur is available in garden centers. Saltpeter can be made from available material, as it was originally in China and elsewhere.

[Iggy]

Iggy: "Any judge or jury" is too general. What is the name of the person who decides what I can read and write? I need a specific name, and I suppose I'd like to know why that person is more fit than myself to decide what I read and write."

 

We must also concider the "common good" besides your needs to read about how to build a bomb. I think a panel of experts should decide what info is too dangerous for general distribution. This web site has moderators decide what should be deleted. I think the best way to enforce such a law is for the panel of experts in the field to simply delete such material from the internet, rather than trying to track down who posted it.

 

"A panel of experts" is too vague. I need the name of a specific person. Who makes the ultimate decision about my reading and writing habits, and why are they more fit than myself in doing so?

 

BTW, the "common good" is exactly what you betray every time you censor someone, and the censor you advocate would also be telling the administrator of this site how it should be run. Who is qualified to do that?

[Arete]

Yes, you are right, but a pipe bomb (or a pressure cooker bomb) is the smallest, most efficient way to get a bang that hurts and kills a lot of folks.

 

 

I have both a 9 pound propane cylinder here, and a pressure cooker. Similar size.

 

However, the point is that "Don't mix x and y. It will explode and be bad" is the same information as "Mix x and y and leave it somewhere near lots of people".

[arc]

If anyone thinks that information about bombs can be kept away from those who want to build a bomb I think you are closing the barn door after the horse is gone. When I was kid, almost 50 years ago we were building explosives out of various home supplies just for fun. Too little too late I am afraid...

Isn't it strange how the world has changed. Back around 1970 when I was around 9-10 my best friends were two brothers whose parents kept their son's 22's, a 30-06 and a 30-30 on an open rack with the ammo in an unlocked drawer below its lower shelf. The guns hung on the boy's wall between there beds. They were taken down many times by them and passed around to me and others for inspection.

 

Around that time I had achieved a pinnacle in my cannon development, the 5 previous had led up to this copper beauty.

It was made from the arm of an industrial spot welder my dad had scraped. It possessed all of the refinements that the previous 5 cannon had revealed through many firings over several years in my parents 3/4+ acre suburban backyard. This had the improved breach formed of silver solder, the earlier model used lead that blew out the back after a half dozen shots.

It had a tapered barrel that I had turned down using a drill press retooled as a makeshift lathe. We loaded it like the others with powder from too many black cats to count, pushed in a cotton ball, packed it with a Lincoln log and slide a sawed off piece of outboard motor drive shaft down the barrel.

 

We set it out where all the others had fired, pointed at the shed with a scrap wood pile at its side. The large stack of mixed lumber with 7-8 sheets of plywood leaning against it was our back-stop. The cannon looked small like the others had sitting in the green lawn on its wood block carriage. It's wheels, stolen from a model train undercarriage, sat on a section of track screwed to a piece of plywood. We knelt down and while my friend blocked the wind I lit the fuse borrowed from one of the many firecrackers. We turned and ran like hell.

 

We ran to the back of the yard spun around and dropped prone watching for the two foot long plumb that announced in moments it would fire. The boom was huge. The discharge of smoke went half way to the target, you could see the plywood compress then bounce forward. As we jumped up the neighbors door opened, I enjoyed that look he and the others gave me when I did this. The projectile went through like a drill, leaving a ring of powder burnt slivers radiating out from the hole centers. After clearing the plywood it sawed through a 2x4 and halved the 1x4 that was on top of it.

 

Besides the many cannon there was later crossbows, a flame thrower that shot 25-30 feet, a BB machine gun hooked to an industrial air compressor, it's rate of fire made an MG-42 look like a muzzle loader and many other none dangerous but still entertaining projects. This industrial childhood I lived was driven by a desire to build and invent not to needlessly destroy or harm. I did these things because making things blowup is dangerous and to a kid like I was that was fun.

 

Anyone up for Bomb camp?

[zapatos]

Isn't it strange how the world has changed. Back around 1970 when I was around 9-10...

Great story! +1

[Raider5678]

When I was 7 I read a book. It mentioned a civil war cannon. I researched how the cannon worked by asking my dad how a ball would shoot from the end of a barrel. He explained in a simple manner. He said compact ******** was lit, and it burned quickly, resulting in the ball shooting out of the end. The next year in 3rd grade they asked us to make a 3 step tutorial on anything. If your reading his you probably know what I did. I explained it simply too. Take a can. Place ******** *****. Light it. Now that's a simple bomb, and I got it from basic understanding of something that I was taught. I ironically 2 years later in history they taught us how a civil war cannon worked in a simple diagram. Restriction the knowledge is pretty much impossible. As for an atomic bomb? Only a few people know how to make it, and they won't put it on the internet. Give it some time though.

[waitforufo]

Before there was the internet, there were these things called books. Words and pictures printed on paper and bound together. In fact they used to sell these sets of books called encyclopedias that were just chock full of information. The user interface wasn't as nice as google, but if you knew the alphabet you could get the hang of the pretty quickly. I remember finding the recipe for black powder and ammonium nitrate/fuel oil in an old set of encyclopedias in the library. Oh yeah, the library. That's the place were they kept books that you could borrow for free. Those library encyclopedias even had handy tips on how to fuse your home made explosives and how large a charge you would need to do useful things uproot a tree stump, soften dirt prior to digging, or blow up beaver dams to open up new farming land.

 

What I'm trying to say is that I think the cat is already out of the bag.

[MigL]

Even crude atomic bombs are simple to make.

The hard part is getting the enriched fissionable material.

 

Anyone with high school level science education should be able to make a chemical bomb.

And anyone who has 3rd yr University level Nuclear Physics should know how to make an atomic bomb.

 

Thermonuclear devices ( fusion ) are a different story.