General Discussion

Marr

(20,317 posts)

11. Who is calling pressure-cooker bombs "weapons of mass destruction"?

Mon Apr 22, 2013, 07:02 PM

Apr 2013

I'm asking sincerely. If people are really doing that, the term has lost all meaning. I mean, even those mythical chemical weapons Hussein was supposed to have shouldn't have been deemed "weapons of mass destruction". I thought that term was strictly for nuclear devices.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why is a pressure-cooker bomb a "weapon of mass destruction" but [View all] no_hypocrisy Apr 2013 OP

Because the weapons industry buys Congress Narraback Apr 2013 #1

^^^ Exactly^^^ etherealtruth Apr 2013 #23

Cuisinart and Presto can't compete. nt hay rick Apr 2013 #30

In one. Sinks it. Robb Apr 2013 #33

There is this black ball ... Newest Reality Apr 2013 #2

Just a thought, but the bomb is anonymous while a shooter is generally hedgehog Apr 2013 #3

Only if the shooter commits suicide or is killed on the scene. Gormy Cuss Apr 2013 #29

cause we're a fucking insane nation? spanone Apr 2013 #4

I had the same thought last week... Isoldeblue Apr 2013 #5

Lord, I misread this for a moment Aerows Apr 2013 #6

Guns are legal to possess. Bombs are not. n-t Logical Apr 2013 #7

So, then Newest Reality Apr 2013 #8

No, because there's a specific definition of WMD under US criminal law. You should read it. (nt) Posteritatis Apr 2013 #20

Pressure cookers are legal. Warren Stupidity Apr 2013 #44

Who said a 'pressure cooker bomb' is a WMD? Jenoch Apr 2013 #9

The US Code. dems_rightnow Apr 2013 #10

Who is calling pressure-cooker bombs "weapons of mass destruction"? Marr Apr 2013 #11

This message was self-deleted by its author dairydog91 Apr 2013 #16

The US Code defines it dems_rightnow Apr 2013 #18

Well, a "destructive device" is not the same as a "weapon of mass destruction". Marr Apr 2013 #21

It is, yes. dems_rightnow Apr 2013 #27

Holy cow, so it is. I stand corrected. Marr Apr 2013 #28

No. This definition dates back to 1994 onenote Apr 2013 #43

So Bush was right ...... oldhippie Apr 2013 #38

Because "WMD" implies large-scale weapons. dairydog91 Apr 2013 #12

because neither are galileoreloaded Apr 2013 #13

Because there are no lobbyists for pressure cookers malaise Apr 2013 #14

Perhaps it is because a WMD will usually injure/maim/kill a large number of victims all at once, bike man Apr 2013 #15

WMD has a specific definition. Xithras Apr 2013 #17

So then we DID find WMD's in Iraq? Scuba Apr 2013 #36

Adam Lanza versus the Boston Bombers HockeyMom Apr 2013 #19

Tell that to the people tasked with the clean up of those childrens bodies at Newtown VanillaRhapsody Apr 2013 #22

You can't use a bomb to hunt LeftInTX Apr 2013 #24

Well you sure can use them to fish. Warren Stupidity Apr 2013 #45

Because a single 'shot' from it can injure multiple people/property. How hard is this reallY? The Straight Story Apr 2013 #25

It isn't. GreenStormCloud Apr 2013 #26

Because a pressure-cooker bomb is NOT a WMD derby378 Apr 2013 #31

Apparently an RPG is a weapon of mass destruction neverforget Apr 2013 #32

maybe not in your experience, but as the page you link indicates onenote Apr 2013 #41

Slaughtering 20 children and 6 adults with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle is NOT "mass destruction" El Fuego Apr 2013 #34

If cooker bombs are WMDs, then we found a whole bunch of WMDs in Iraq and Bush is a hero. Scuba Apr 2013 #35

The term has different definitions in different statutes onenote Apr 2013 #40

And the media is careful to always point out this distinction. Scuba Apr 2013 #42

That describes the problem of redefining WMDs to a T derby378 Apr 2013 #49

WMD discussion is "off the table", we must "look forward" just1voice Apr 2013 #37

Because it fits within the definition adopted by Congress in 1994 and an assault weapon doesn't. onenote Apr 2013 #39

Hyperbole. rrneck Apr 2013 #46

pressure cooker bombs aren't meant to save lives. ileus Apr 2013 #47

Neither are. Trying to make either one such is a lie. TheKentuckian Apr 2013 #48