Originally posted by ColdEye Sorry, I am not versed with making explosives.
Any Farmer can tell you the above... same way they can tell you about firtilizers... And any Sugar Refinery will share their concerns about spontaneous explosion of sugar dust and what they do to prevent it...
Its not about being versed in making explosives at all unless you suggest all Flour Mill employees, Farmers and Sugar Cane Workers are explosive experts ?
Its simple science.. its not complicated, its not involved, and its not even about going out of your way to know about it.. Its just science...
And as for negative effect: Thats not the discussion here, nor is it the point. As demonstrated, the gun didn't spend 9 years writing a manifesto and 2 years setting up front companies to legitimatise the purchase of fertilizer to make the explosive device... So I doubt not having a Gun would have changed that at all... It just means we would have seen 3 or 4 or 5 devices.... Or even worse... Something else entirely! What if he'd decided to mount a Gas attack on the downtown ? Its scientifically as complicated in crude forms as the explosive... Suddenly nut jobs everywhere decide thats a way to go for a few years... How the hell you going to defend against *that* ?
Please - feel passionate about gun control. But don't for a second think that changing some laws would
prevent acts like this occuring... The only thing that would change that is preventing the
MAN from acting...