Because then as soon as you have a single layer of black powder granules on the screen, the microscopic chips won’t fall through the screen anymore.
The rest of your post seems to think I have an opinion on whether taggants should be used or not. I don’t. I just picked on your post somewhat unfairly because this thread seems to be a fact-free zone. The other side also has problems,in that people still need to be safely able to use explosives without taggants changing their reactivity and that the bombers in this case were caught without the need for taggants, and that the cost of the taggants program is listed as over 260 million dollars in the ancient book I linked - it would be more costly now due to inflation.
I’m not on a particular side in this debate, I’m just annoyed by the fact-free nature of it.
A few thoughtful responses have (tentatively) convinced me that the taggants program is impractical for it’s cost, and I thank the people who’ve actually tried to keep things factual (pitting aside).
But I have yet to be convinced that the most vocal proponents on either side are anything but twats.
Blaming the NRA for preventing taggants in gunpowder is like giving Jeffrey Dahmer a ticket for unhygienic food storage. I quite take the point, this is much too small a matter when we are talking about an organization and men who make a very good living selling Darkness.
Their ghastly influence on our politics is Leviathan, this taggant stuff is the parasite clinging to a minnow’s asshole.
I want to thank you for that $260m cite, I had not noticed it before but it’s definitely helpful. Sorry to the pro-taggant side, but that just seems too expensive to me for something that I think would generate little benefit. It’s sort of like those ballistic registries of firearms, Maryland has had one for ages and to my knowledge was so bad that at one point the Maryland state police openly asked that it not be expanded.
Also thanks for the information on separating taggants from black powder, I don’t believe that a negative of the taggant program would be that it could be easily defeated. It doesn’t sound like the average person could easily separate taggants from powder.
What you’re imputing to me offers no resemblance to any position I’ve taken in this thread (or elsewhere). I simply cannot imagine how a rational person could take my contributions to this thread, which amount to “costs are important when considering policy”, and conclude from them that I’m some libertarian monster.
Okay. Now you’re just lying, I mean, totally making stuff up. I didn’t “dismiss any action”; I didn’t even dismiss this purported action. I mused that it didn’t seem like an effective deterrent but might be an effective aid to law enforcement. That’s it. Totally.
Please do not make up lies about other posters.
This from an individual who’d lie and spread insults just because he suspects they might be from an opposing political party.
I should qualify that I’m not a chemist or expert on tagging/explosives. I’m a biologist, but my work revolves around separating industrially useful algae from other microbes - so I do know a bit about trying to separate microscopic objects from each other in useful quantities.
I just think people should back off from extreme positions and be willing to spend five minutes Googling to make sure they bring something useful to discuss.
Sorry for the interruption - return to your regularly scheduled Pit stuff.
Shake the screen. Rotate the screen. This isn’t rocket surgery. The actual method would depend on the type of taggant used. Small particles go over here, large particles go over there. Blue taggants to the left, red taggants to the right.
People have been seperating/sifting coins, gravel, grabage, sand, diamonds, lead shot, gases, liguids, eggs, sewage, etc. for eons.
… that you are willing to hear, blinded as you are by laughably simplistic partisan hatred as you so plainly are. Unfortunately reality has its own ways that do not depend on stroking your self-image. Adults know that.
That’s certainly a more comforting thing to tell yourself than that it’s possible somebody with a different set of attitudes, for instance that human life has more than economic value, just might have a point. But ultimately you’re no more honest than your somewhat more articulate comrade.
You have presented exactly zero unrefuted facts in support of that position. However, as is common for the arms-fetishist cohort, that is unnecessary and even gets in the way - your ideology, or perhaps it’s simply your fetish and your hate, drives your statements of “facts”.
I suspect anyone who was worried about being traced wouldn’t bother with that approach. They’d just make their own taggant-free black powder from scratch, or switch to another substance (such as gasoline or propane) to make their bomb.
More use of surveillance cameras at public events would be both less expensive and more effective at solving crimes (and not just bombings) than a gunpowder taggant program would be. If we want to do something, why not choose something effective?
And you think the grocery store isn’t tracking how much and what salt they sell? There is more information in what was sold and where than people know. Even cash transactions create a log in the computer and what was bought with it is right there. So, Im agreeing that its like buying salt in the grocery store. And if you went in the grocery store to just buy salt, that would be useful information. If you bought with a credit card they would know who bought it. If you paid cash, that would be useful information.
This isn’t about creating a single thread of flawless evidence going back to a single killer. It’s about connecting pieces and putting together a story that’s corroborated by every other bit of evidence they have. The bombers had cell phones. Those cell phones have been traced all over. Did somebody buy gun powder consistent with a taggant when their cell phones were in the area? Did any security cameras get pictures of this and who were they with at the time? It could help locate accomplices and possibly prevent future attacks.
And all of this is done simply and easily, but the hillbillies don’t want us tracking their powder cuz da gummit gonna take ur guns.
There you go, poisoning the well. I’m perfectly fine with the philosophy behind taggants, but I don’t see how it’s worth $260m (many years ago, much higher with inflation) of the public’s money to implement this program. You are painting a very unrealistic picture of the type of inventory and purchase tracking that is used to solve crimes. Very few crimes in history are solved by police combing through store sales records. If this was some amazing and highly effective means of solving crimes there’s a lot of other crimes that we could have been solving using this method in the past (drug manufacturing is a big one.)
Yes, police do use such resources from time to time, but I feel in your post here you’ve exaggerated both how easy it is for police to even figure out where to go and how easy it’ll be to sort through information and pinpoint what’s important. That’s not to say a taggant would never be useful, it’s just to say that the utility you could derive from it is probably very low, and if it is very low then we need to seriously question that utility relative to its cost.
This has nothing to do with hillbillies or guns, if anything hillbillies would be a lot more worried if you were tracking large purchases of sugar.
It’s like the Maryland “Ballistic Fingerprint Registry”, that ended up costing several million dollars and ultimately even the State police asked that it not be expanded because it was a bear to maintain/work with and wasn’t really doing much good. That doesn’t mean such a registry is worthless or will never solve crime, it just means maybe it isn’t cost beneficial relative to the benefit it brings police. I think you can say that regardless of your ideological position on anything.
Not many. Just these terrorists who showed everyone how to do it. It seems like some preventative measures would be prudent.
You’re right that wasn’t fair. The gun lobby has gone to such extremes these days that its difficult to avoid the characiture.
If there are any crimes where such investigating measures will be taking place, it will be terrorism particularly because it has preventative value in finding recourses accomplices and influences that could prevent further attacks.
I don’t know where your numbers came from on cost. Detection limits have dropped, so less taggant would be needed than in the past. It’s such a small amount that materially it should be negligible. For my plan, I haven’t priced the isotopes. They are pricey per gram, but a gram will go into 220,000 lbs of black powder at its highest concentration. If that sort of program cost 220 m then it’s because they are selling a lot of gunpowder. It should be a very minor cost.
Ok I did just price the calcium isotopes, and they are out of range even for the quantities I’d want to use. Admittedly, I didn’t look for wholesale or anything, but we would need to find cheaper isotopes. There could be more of a cost than I anticipated.
You’re kidding, right? Information about how to make black powder pipe bombs has been readily available for decades. There’s nothing new happening here.
Taggants (like video cameras) are not really a preventive measure. They might make it easier to catch bombers after the fact ( although I seriously question that), but they won’t stop bombings from occurring.
True, unless we’re talking about the suicide/martyr-to-the-cause type who don’t care if they die or are quickly caught. They seem to be more common today than they used to be (but are probably still a minority of bombers).
Fortunately the truly dangerous Unibomber types, who are both competent bomb makers AND clever, are rare. Most bombers aren’t that smart, thank God, and that’s why they’re caught.
