Sciencemadness Discussion Board - FBI's stance on amateur energetic's

FBI's stance on amateur energetic's

Luftwaffe - 11-11-2011 at 16:16

I was browsing through youtube when I came across an interesting video condemning the home experimentation of energetic's. They outline it as an issue more serious than terrorism. They categorize all experimenters as either young kids or immature adults.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=7BSxsTbjOVs

Although I agree it is a problem that there are kewls out there detonating kilos of AP in a park or turning themselves into spaghetti sauce because of lack of safety, there description is a generalization of all people who experiment with energetic's whether they are safe or not. I dare say that energetic's can be done safety using proper safety procedure/precautions. In general it seems like the typical video where it outlines that all home chemists cook meth and in this case, all energetic's experimenters are terrorists.

AndersHoveland - 12-11-2011 at 03:42

It was once common for 11 year old boys to go off on their own with a rifle in Finland and many parts of Sweden. It taught them about responsibility. Yet today in many places, any adult who even owns a gun is often considered a potential threat to society.

These types of hobbies are potentially dangerous, and there needs to be proper education. Whether guns or explosives, severe injury or death could result. But I would hate to see our countries become nanny-states, where the government decides which activities are too dangerous for us. Improvised weapons are not always bad. It should not be the government that is paranoid about its citizens, but rather the citizens that should be paranoid about the government taking away more individual liberties. Many of our countries were able to function completely satisfactorily for many years when guns and explosives were easily available. What has changed today so much that the people can no longer be trusted? Phrasing it a different way: people integrated into society with decent jobs and houses can be trusted.

A society without guns (and explosives) will only be as safe as its government and police forces. The past clearly shows us that local governments and police cannot always be trusted. In any case, one wonders how much any government can be trusted when there are people involuntarily dying from exposure to cold outside (the "homeless").

[Edited on 12-11-2011 by AndersHoveland]

bahamuth - 12-11-2011 at 06:11

Think this goes deeper than just home explosives and guns.

Keeping knowledge potentially able to break an oppression by a government from the people is commonly used as a means to control the masses..

Chemistry was targeted since it could be used to make drugs, this has not helped abit in controlling drugs. Just making it harder to experiment for both scientists and amateurs. Though lots of synthetic approaches to the same compounds has been discovered in the wake of the restrictions.

Then the chemistry got it yet again because of terrrorists blowing planes in the air and other isolated incidents. The list goes on...

Could probably create a list going miles, but if we stop there and reflect on the issue at hand, playing with the slightly paranoid thought of governments controlling the masses by censoring knowledge we can extrapolate a pattern, atleast I suspect this.

Restictions are a good thing as stupid kids or grownups won't get easy access to potentially dangerous stuff, explosives or not. But they need to be slack, just to get the impulsive ones of the "scent", the convicted ones get what they want anyways. And most are caught in the middle, the same place as most sensible people are, batteling fear mongering put out by ignorant governments and officials, using hours on paperwork just to get 50g of red P or any other red-listed chemical ordered, (atleast this is how it's like in the university where I used to work) so most just give up.

I used to be proud of being an amateur experimentalist in the field of chemistry, nowdays I dare not even mention to friends that I play with chemicals sometimes...

neptunium - 24-1-2012 at 15:52

same here,...not long ago chemistry set were available to kids along with electronic and astronomy set...
now you`ll be hard pressed to find any descent kit out there
check out the video on the subject of Robert B Thompson

http://blog.makezine.com/2008/07/01/robert-bruce-thompson-on...

i had this converstion many times with some friends who dont care about science but are curious enough to visit my modest personal lab...
one of them told me once that if some one would break into my house and steal my chemicals how could i be sure he/she would use it responsibly like me?

I can only assume that thieves are probably not looking for chemicals or glassware .
assume is the key word here...

[Edited on 24-1-2012 by neptunium]

Aqua_Fortis_100% - 24-1-2012 at 16:43

This is so sad.. Note that the video and related link ( http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2009/december/nief_121009 ) are from end of 2009... Now they probably are much more hungry to try rule out this quite interesting and mind rewarding hobby.

If wasnt pyrotechnics when 10's old, I certainly not would have even 1% interest in chemistry of that I have today... It grew also my interest in physics and natural earth sciences too, precious metal refining and other cool knowledge.

Quote: Originally posted by bahamuth

I used to be proud of being an amateur experimentalist in the field of chemistry, nowdays I dare not even mention to friends that I play with chemicals sometimes...

True, me too. People tend to think you are going to make drugs and blow up things, like k3lws..Legitimate amateur chemists and other hobbists/experimentalists are already under attack from media/government :mad:

[Edited on 25-1-2012 by Aqua_Fortis_100%]

neptunium - 24-1-2012 at 17:04

i've always felt isolated and lets face it there isnt too many of us !
but thanks to the internet and site like SM i had a renewed interest in chemistry and the urge to share and experiment with people like myself!
lets hope we can make this last !

entropy51 - 24-1-2012 at 18:37

Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland

Hunting with firearms was also quite common in the part of the U.S. where I grew up a half century ago.

And three of my high school classmates and one relative suffered severe, debilitating gunshot wounds, one fatal. Little accidents like putting the gun down to cross a fence and the hunting dog knocked the gun over resulting in a serious wound to the hunter.

My brother was standing in his driveway enjoying a nice fall day on the first day of deer hunting season, when a hunter in the adjacent forest let fly a blast, wounding my brother in the abdomen, and nearly killing him.

FIrearms and explosives are not suitable playthings for adults, let alone teenage boys.

Anders, your social and political commentary is quite uninformed.

Magpie - 24-1-2012 at 20:22

I don't think the government should be telling us what risks we can or cannot take when just our own safety is at stake.

All forms of human activity involve some risk. Even just sitting in front of the TV. "Experts" are now saying this is as bad for your body as smoking.

We take quite some risk everytime we drive our cars. Even if you are an excellent driver you cannot control the actions of the other drivers. They may be drunk, high, asleep, or just suffering from senility.

Every action is the result of a risk/benefit analysis, performed by the risk taker. Who is the government to tell us that firecrackers are too unsafe yet at the same time let almost anyone drive an automobile.

My brother isa 65yr-old avid hunter and fisherman. Last year he swam 100ft in an ice-cold lake to secure a boat that had been improperly tethered. If the boat would not have been secured he and his partner would have had to spend the night in a snowed-in wilderness. He chose to do something very risky based on his own analysis. He has also been accidentally shot with a few BB's during a pheasant hunt. It didn't slow him down one bit. He would rather be shot dead than give up fishing and hunting, as he lives and breathes this hobby.

jamit - 24-1-2012 at 21:38

In this election year in the US, which party is most likely to restrict our freedom to practice our hobby? Philosphically, the Republicians are more for individual freedom and less government interference... Whereas the Democrats are more about government control and political correctness. Whoever wins probably nothing will change, but I rather go with the Republicians just based on principle and philosophy.

I agree with you Magpie, we have the right to determine our own risk including practicing chemistry at home, so long as it does not danger the safety of others. We determine what is dangerous risk and not the government! Don't forget to vote, wherever you stand politically.

Raptureisbliss - 24-1-2012 at 22:10

Fact: The government is and always will be the epitome of contradictions. You can please all of the people some of the time; some of the people all of the time; but, you can't please all of the people all of the time. [JFK, Lincoln]

You are right. We should be entitled the right to participate in activities where potential risks of injury to the self are involved; however, our rights cease to exist when there is potential collateral damage. One caveat: if the collateral damage is accepted by those to whom it is a risk, the activity becomes a mutual agreement of benefits which outweigh risk.

Cars may be an example of the latter. 90+% of the people operate them- our society is literally dependent upon them; consequently, we enter a mutual societal agreement that the benefits of freedom of operation outweigh the risks of potential negligence.

Fireworks, though, are a different story. I would say that currently more than 50% of people oppose unanimous and "free" distribution of fireworks because of their cataclysmic potential, a destructive potential that infringes upon the safety of others whom are not in mutual consent of their use.

I feel like, at least in regards to chemical acquisition, we are beginning to lose the middle ground though. Does this stymie creativity; or will creative minds, by their very definition, defy the regulations, adapt and overcome?

jamit - 24-1-2012 at 22:36

Raptureisbliss@
Your points are well taken. I agree with you that our hobby is under assault along with privileges we once took for granted. If firework goes, then so will our ability to obtain the chemicals necessary to make them. The inevitable conclusion: home chemists will be forced underground even more, and maybe, or perhaps I should say, it is only a matter of time before the government shuts down sciencemadness and other 'potentially' dangerous forums. Democracts and any socially inclined political party or political liberals will surly take away our rights in the near future.

We need to fight against this government attempt to control the Internet and our right to pursue freedom of cooperative knowledge.

The Internet and forum like sm has done wonders that no one could have imagined several decades ago. When I was a kid in the 70's all the chemicals were available to me , but I trade it all for what's available now... To be able to cooperate and learn from fellow amateur chemists all over the world...what an amazing tool the Internet is! This is wroth fighting for... So vote and hope and fight for freedom against all government interference!

[Edited on 25-1-2012 by jamit]

neptunium - 25-1-2012 at 07:23

well said Jamit,
if SM ever gets shut down i hope it will pop up somewhere else !

quicksilver - 25-1-2012 at 08:49

The FBI post on uTube may be DIRECT response to some of the unbelievably stupid posts that had been placed their over the years. I am sorry to say that often times it is the unproductive activities themselves that result in restrictions.
The classic "display of an explosion" on uTube have been so ill thought out that many have even included paved roads in their backgrounds! uTube is not the place to get dependable information on certain aspects of energetic chemistry or related subjects.

This is akin to finding road-signs shot-up and then discovering that area closed to hunting or shooting. The abuse of the site was foremost in directing negative exposure toward the activity in general.

No one would get information from such a source when peer-reviewed textbooks & journals are available.
However the fact remain that if one listens closely the word that arises from the law enforcement video is "immaturity". Making explosions is only entertaining for so long. The science behind the chemistry is a wonder that provides education, employment, and contribution to many other venues. The mis-use of the object has ALWAYS lead to it's restriction. A simple example is Lasers in Australia after idiots projected them at aircraft.

Many objects have dual-use potential. The mind and hands that yield that object may fuel reactions to curtailment that is a simplistic answer to a problem. However it's never as simple as "us or them". If hobby chemistry becomes lost to the public there will be more than enough blame to go around!

neptunium - 25-1-2012 at 11:39

the behavior of some shouldnt hurt the majority of others.(in a perfect world) . but since Utube was established (2005) the authority have kept an eye on it and nobody could blame them .
however, when a 14 years old blow a hole in his uncle"s garage on the week end it should be looked at as irrelevant , let the EMPs deal wih his ass when he hurt himself.
for the rest of us there SHOULDNT be ANY fall out! ( in a perfect world)
are we (sciencemadness) heating for a shut down?
i cant wait for the day FOX news reports us as wannabe terrorist and meth cook.
but like it or not it probably will happen....

Aqua_Fortis_100% - 25-1-2012 at 17:36

http://youtu.be/0vcoLE3JYQM

This kind of 'extra-class' military training courses seems to be now pretty commom in US, right?
Im wondering how many of these soldiers that have done training in this field that now are retired or quite from US army (or older soldiers) are now enjoying energetic's hobby and give store-bought pyrotechnics to their kids to play around... And unlike other amateur they got their "HE knowledge" directly from the own gov itself! ha!

[Edited on 26-1-2012 by Aqua_Fortis_100%]

Fusionfire - 26-1-2012 at 12:38

Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland

It was once common for 11 year old boys to go off on their own with a rifle in Finland and many parts of Sweden. It taught them about responsibility. Yet today in many places, any adult who even owns a gun is often considered a potential threat to society.

These types of hobbies are potentially dangerous, and there needs to be proper education. Whether guns or explosives, severe injury or death could result. But I would hate to see our countries become nanny-states, where the government decides which activities are too dangerous for us. Improvised weapons are not always bad. It should not be the government that is paranoid about its citizens, but rather the citizens that should be paranoid about the government taking away more individual liberties. Many of our countries were able to function completely satisfactorily for many years when guns and explosives were easily available. What has changed today so much that the people can no longer be trusted? Phrasing it a different way: people integrated into society with decent jobs and houses can be trusted.

A society without guns (and explosives) will only be as safe as its government and police forces. The past clearly shows us that local governments and police cannot always be trusted. In any case, one wonders how much any government can be trusted when there are people involuntarily dying from exposure to cold outside (the "homeless").

[Edited on 12-11-2011 by AndersHoveland]

Once when I was on placement in a foreign country that is very allergic to public ownership of guns (i.e. the police and army have them all) I caught a burglar in my house red handed.

I had to fight with him and chase him out of the house.

20 mins after being called the police arrived, sleepy and not interested. Why should they be? It is not their belongings and it is not their life. By that time anything could have happened.

Thank God I wasn't some vulnerable old person or woman with a burglar/rapist/murderer in the house.

killswitch - 31-1-2012 at 17:49

Quote: Originally posted by Fusionfire

Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland

I assume cricket bats were legit though, right? (In the future, remember that an unopened can of beer or soda is made of metal and full of dense, incompressible liquid).

entropy51 - 31-1-2012 at 19:47

Quote: Originally posted by killswitch

I assume cricket bats were legit though, right? (In the future, remember that an unopened can of beer or soda is made of metal and full of dense, incompressible liquid).

Beer is neither dense nor incompressible. The Anders Fan Club could benefit from a guest lecturer on physical properties of water.

[Edited on 1-2-2012 by entropy51]

killswitch - 31-1-2012 at 20:31

Quote: Originally posted by entropy51

Quote: Originally posted by killswitch

I assume cricket bats were legit though, right? (In the future, remember that an unopened can of beer or soda is made of metal and full of dense, incompressible liquid).

Beer is neither dense nor incompressible. The Anders Fan Club could benefit from a guest lecturer on physical properties of water.

[Edited on 1-2-2012 by entropy51]

"Density" is a measurable property. "Dense" is a relative term.
And as for your second point:

"The low compressibility of water means that even in the deep oceans at 4 km depth, where pressures are 40 MPa, there is only a 1.8% decrease in volume."

By all means call me out for using an absolute term as a conversational shortcut.

entropy51 - 1-2-2012 at 07:55

Bromine and mercury are dense liquids. Water is not.

I'm glad you discovered that water has a finite compressibility, which means that it is not incompressible.

Conversational shortcuts are OK, unless they change the meaning, as did yours.

GreenD - 1-2-2012 at 08:59

All of my chemical interest is in the making and understanding of drugs.

that is far "darker" than energetics.

Bot0nist - 1-2-2012 at 09:02

Hey, at least your honest.

GreenD - 1-2-2012 at 09:34

Quote: Originally posted by Bot0nist

Hey, at least your honest.

unfortunately I have the notion that honesty will keep me from prison (sigh).

I am not interested in becoming a dealer or in anyway giving harmful substances to society. I forget what they call it, pharmo-something, but it is the practice of using substances on the self in order to evaluate their use. Of course this can be extremely paradoxical with stronger substances.

(I'm sure my IP will be stored in some FBI website from this post)

entropy51 - 1-2-2012 at 17:10

Quote: Originally posted by GreenD

I'm sure my IP will be stored in some FBI website from this post

They've had your IP for a long time, and they didn't just store it. But it was a joint DEA-DHS task force, not the FBI.

When I was about 14 years old I was talking to the pharmacist who supplied my chemicals about making chloral and he pointed out that it was not legal to do so. I said I wasn't going to administer it to anyone. He pointed out that it didn't matter what my intent was, manufacture or posession was a felony.

I still think that was good advice. I can't understand why so many people think they are above the law.

neptunium - 1-2-2012 at 20:08

Quote:

When I was about 14 years old I was talking to the pharmacist who supplied my chemicals about making chloral and he pointed out that it was not legal to do so. I said I wasn't going to administer it to anyone. He pointed out that it didn't matter what my intent was, manufacture or posession was a felony.

good times!! did he still sale you chemicals ?

entropy51 - 2-2-2012 at 06:05

Quote: Originally posted by neptunium

good times!! did he still sale you chemicals ?

Oh yes. He realized that I was much too innocent to be trying to get into trouble. If it hadn't been for those pharmacists I probably wouldn't have been able to make a hobby out of chemistry. Maybe even better than selling chemicals, they would loan me their college chemistry books.

[Edited on 2-2-2012 by entropy51]

neptunium - 2-2-2012 at 10:27

wow! those days are long gone...