Curious about the rifle used. Last article I was reading was about the huge fuss reporters made about at .50 caliber rifle getting themselves all worked up...when it turned out it was a black powder rifle that had been found.
That is even scarier. That means the guy was likely fairly close when he shot it. If it was launching shrapnel as far as they say, he was likely in the radius of the shrapnel and just got lucky.
All things eventualy have incidents like this happen. Some individual always wants bigger and bigger. Have to out do thier last best one each time. Eventualy it gets out of hand.
Things in a ready to go format don't weed out the people that can't do a little thinking first.
That means the only barrier left on idiots is cost. If it is too affordable then you are sure you have trouble.
Tannerite precursor chemicals might be legal, but making an explosive device is often illegal.
That essentialy means making any reactive target can be interpreted as a felony offense. It is just not often enforced that way, but if it is in an enclosed container that ruptures from detonation you have created an explosive device.
Technicaly many fireworks could be considered an explosive device as well. Whether it is a paper container or a metal container exploding, it is still an explosive device reading the law. It is just not interpreted that way by those enforcing it, but there is quantity limitations.
In fact one of the only things given exception to the explosive laws is ammunition. Many other things that go boom are illegal explosives per statute, and without a license or for use in things like oil drilling, construction, etc can be prosecuted.
However when enough people do something that it becomes commonplace and accepted, like use tannerite, people often stop realizing it is technicaly illegal.
Being perfectly legal to sell as seperate chemicals does not mean it is legal to mix, put in an enclosed container, and blow it up. Many much more powerful explosives can be made from legaly sold chemicals.
So since it is technicaly illegal, that means they could charge this guy, and anyone else regardless of the size of the explosion. Big explosion, tiny explosion, still illegal manufacture and use of an explosive without the proper license and arguably in a reckless manner.
I hate to see everything outlawed because people go overboard, but my understanding is the use of this material is already a crime and is just not enforced.
In fact anything intentionaly made that explodes in a container could be interpreted as an explosive or explosive device, and manufacturing it... (mixing the tannerite components with the intent of using it as an explosive reactive target is manufacturing the explosive.)
I am sure some people will come along and say it is perfectly legal because it is legaly sold and the manufacture says it is legal, and they have seen it legaly used dozens of times at events with law enforcement officers in attendance.
Well for a similar argument I will refer you to
http://www.pyramydair.com/site/articles/silencers/
airgun "silencers". They are illegal, yet rather common, and sold by many manufacturers. That does not mean you cannot be charged with a felony offense at any time for possessing one. Thier manufacturers will assure you they are perfectly legal, that you can use them as you wish as long as you don't use them on a firearm because a silencer is defined as "a device intended to muffle the report of a firearm", and they are not designed or intended for use on a "firearm" so not "silencers". That is true.
Yet they can be attached or adapted for use on a firearm and by definition they could be illegal silencers per ATF regulations if law enforcement simply declare you in violation. Being charged for having an illegal unregistered and unserialized silencer, and having such a device as evidence against you would be a pretty tough case to fight. Your whole argument would be that the very device they have is not legaly what they say it is (and can function as) because you didn't intend it for use on a firearm. I don't know of anyone who has won that argument.
If your argument was you were using Tannerite as a reactive target, that shows you intended to use it as an explosive. The law does not say you have to have any malicious intent for it to be illegal. Simply intending for it to explode makes it illegal. Making explosives to blow things up for fun, even the harmless reactive target is not to my knowldege legal.
It was not manufactured by someone with a license if you mix the two parts together yourself and don't have a license. That is the point at which is was manufactured.
If you were taken to court with exploded items or targets as evidence, pictures of mixed, and evidence of unmixed compounds, and charged with manufacturing explosives I honestly don't see how you would not be guilty.
"I legaly bought it on the internet for that purpose" would be a hollow argument. Legaly purchasing chemicals no matter how they are advertised does not excuse committing illegal actions by you at a later date even if simply using them as advertised.
You can purchase everything necessary to do many many illegal things. Parts to convert firearms to full auto are sold for that purpose in magazines. Doing so (or even possessing the parts to do so and having such a firearm) is illegal. Would you argue you legaly purchased it?
Being able to legaly purchase the parts or components to create something does not mean you can legaly create it. If tannerite was legal to mix and put into a container before causing it to explode, then a pipe bomb would be legal as well. If a pipe bomb is legal then making grenades is legal, yet they are not and get the feds involved rather quickly.
:banghead: