rockets as terrorist weapons

Ever hear of a potato gun. In the Midwest, pumpkins get blown great distances in the fall. If I have to pick, amateur rocket or potato gun, I'll take the rocket any day. Potato guns and mortars are relatively easy to make and you don't have to use a premade shell. What is really scary is instead of working with us to catch idiot terrorists intent of using rockets, the agency does its best to hurt the hobby. So, instead of terrorists opting to use something that can be traced they opt to use something that can not be traced. Never forget, it was the idiots in government that laced Marijuana which pushed people into designer drugs which are all but impossible to stop. We, now, have a designer drug epidemic all but impossible to stop. Of the two Marijuana is far more benign.

I found the ATF FAQ on potato guns the other day. If you make a tennis ball cannon (like we did all the time) that shoots 'flaming tennis balls' (like we did occasionally), it's considered a destructive device. I'm sure I wouldn't have been the only 12 year old in prison for being a terrorist had we not been saved by the conversion to aluminum cans.

Joel. phx

Rider Truck Rental's are still available, and unfortunately, the most potent terrorist delivery conveyance ever used in the US, until 911. To this day, almost every time I see a Rider rental truck, I wonder... But, can you fathom outlawing such vehicles' it would be preposterous. The point I'm trying to make, any vehicle can be made into a weapon of terror, by a determined individual/group and, IMO, rockets, that are unguided, are not even a close 9th place on the list...

Fred

Bill VanRemmen wrote:

And when nothing happens because it falls in a parking lot and doesn't hurt anyone, Shumer will look like an idiot, even if he gets some TV time out of it. Tthe simplest and most obvious reason is the terrs. operating in the US want a real and effective strike. They are not 2 bit amateurs like the ones in Palestine. As you point out the attacks in Israel have caused minimal casualties and little fear. Why would they do something that would most likely do no harm when there are far simpler attacks that would be a thousand times more effective, and induce much more fear? A series of car bombings at shopping malls or a series of package bombs at strip malls would be far simpler, easier to carry out and a billion times more deadly and effective than your and that idiot WOR's desperate fear of an inconsequential terrorist rocket attack. A crop duster spraying an inocuous material would cause an enormous panic if no one could trace the plane. Heck psychosomatics would cause some reactions even if the material sprayed was water from a crop duster.

The terrs. are not going to waste their time on such a useless and ineffective tactic here. After all, cars are already moving bombss, with a potential explosive (gasoline) in them. Why not use them instead of an exotic method that won't hurt anyone? I've been surprised that the car bombings (suicide or remote) hasn't happened already. It's easy, spectacular, causes many deaths and is very effective. No need for ridiculous fantasy plans for rockets that don't hurt anyone.

"The nearly 6-foot-long (180-centimeter) missiles, propelled by a mixture of sugar, oil, alcohol and fertilizer..."

So much for cotton candy, kerosene, adult beverages, and gardens...

Stating the obvious. Rockets as weapons truly suck, especially unguided rockets.

Jerry

I hope you are right, but I still say that it CAN happen, because whatever you think of the "level" of terrorists in Palestine, the Qassam is an existence proof that rockets can be used as terrorist weapons. Whether they are an EFFECTIVE weapon is very debatable, but since when has that sort of thing been of interest to the press?

Once again, I am not arguing for any sort of government regulation here. Somehow I doubt the Qassam is powered by Aerotech. Propellant regulation is about as effective at keeping propellant out of terrorist hands as gun control or drug laws. But, if we go around saying "it can't happen here" and it does, we're done. Perhaps a better way to answer these arguments is something along the lines of, "anything , including rockets and rocks, can become a weapon in the hands of a terrorist, but hobby rockets would make really lousy weapons because ..." Probably wouldn't fit in a sound bite, though.

Bill the Geek

Apparently

I agree. But as an instrument of terror, they might be more effective, especially if they got "lucky" and actually hit something.

Effective or no, it would still put us in a bad spot with the press.

Bill the Geek (who is beginning to remember why he stayed in "lurk-only" mode for so long...)

See following story for reality check chicken little.

It's not so much that it _couldn't_ happen, but that it's not very likely to happen. And most importantly, NONE of the ATF's regs could ever prevent it from happening since it's a simple task to make your own propellent and avoid the permit process altogether.

Shhh, facts are very annoying to Quislings like WoR and other chicken littles.

No more than you can give me a good reason why a U-Haul truck might not be the truck of choise, if there is another Timothy McVey, on the loose, in the future.

And if it happens, or hopefully before it happens, some one will rat the individuals out.

It

As I an others hav said, weapons can be made out of almost anything you can imagine. Where does it stop. The best solution is deterrent capital punishment, meted out without mercy, on those who commit or conspire to commit those types of acts, regardless of what bleeding heart liberals have to say.

Fred

Oh, now I understand. There is only one terrorist in the country and he wanted to blow up a mall and the goverment got him.

Oh, goody. Nothing bad will ever happen again.

Bill the Geek... who does not believe the sky is falling, but gets really peeved that some people can't understand that it is a bad thing to go around telling the press that something absolutely can't happen, when it is already happening in other parts of the world.

Well, if you want to be so precise, you haven't shown any evidence that hobby rockets are being misused. The Qassam rocket is not a hobby rocket nor does it use a commercially manufactured hobby rocket motor. It's all home-made, and anyone wishing to build one in this country would be completely unaffected by the ATF's idiotic regulations on our hobby.

Still, I do agree in principle that we should be careful about what arguments we use to make our case in the press. Back when we were trying to get Enzi's bill passed, a lot of folks were saying that the ATF was going to require background checks and permits for Cub Scouts doing Estes rockets. IMHO that exaggeration hurt our credibility.

Understand what? That there is evil out there? Yes.

But I didn't see any mention of "APCP", "rocket" or "motor" anywhere in the article.

So, what's your point? (I'm sincere, not being a smart aleck.) Are you saying our hobby rocket motors do or do not pose a realistic terror threat?

BTW, I think the guy that wrote the article was my roommate in college. If I can ever figure out how to reply to it, I will.

Doug

I am not promoting anything. I am observing that rockets HAVE BEEN used as weapons. I am NOT suggesting that any sort of regulation will in any way impact the terrorists. I am simply trying to point out that when dealing with the press, it is a bad idea to tell them that rockets CAN'T be used as weapons when they ARE BEING used as weapons. It makes us look STUPID and sets us up to look even worse when one is used on US soil.

PS, try decaf...

Bill the Geek

I did not intend to imply that hobby rockets have been or are being misused, though the Qassam could be considered a variant of an "amateur" rocket. I do not think any ATF regulations will matter one whit to some terrorist wanting to build himself a rocket. I do not think that regulating propellant has any value whatsoever.

FINALLY someone who actually got my point. THANK YOU!!!

Bill the Geek

Bill, currently now in the middle east, cars are being used to deliver explosive payloads that are killing people. Here in the US, a truck was used the same way, rest their soals.

People did not clamer to ban trucks, or cars in the middle east.

It's how we let others decide that matter, as the vechile use to deliver is not the issue, the payload is.

It shows my original contention, which was terrs. in the US are not going to waste their time using hobby rocket motors (of any variety) using a delivery system that is chancy, minimally threatening and difficult to pull off with little chance of success. They are going to follow plans that are useful, have a maximum effect and are reasonable to carry out. One of the main ones I pointed out was setting off bombs in shopping malls, I didn't know that this article was going to be posted today, the timing was extremely fortuitous. The other was a campaign of car bombs. Simple,easy, maximum damage, impossible to predict, almost impossible to stop (unless we deport all nonreisdent Middle Easterners. You did notice the person in the article was in immigration violation, just like most of the 9-11 hijackers).

Why futz around with rockets that wander off anywhere when you can put BP, 20 gallons of gas in a car and radio detonate it where you want to?