Re:Man's 'experiments' with explosives were lawful, court rules
by AstralStorm on Thursday March 12, 2020 @05:22AM
(#22555084)
Asbestos used to be in most homes. There was a good reason and a replacement for it, as well as good rules for disposal.
With high explosives, governments tend to go so far as to require a licence for handling. Fine for breaking that is enough of a deterrent. It's relatively easy to acquire, because otherwise that makes explosive use rather tricky to monitor.
Sales and widespread manufacturing is regulated separately.
Easier and cheaper to get than CFC gas license. Or the general chemical laboratory license required to do such experiments like synthesis. (You can go to a lab and practice there, with supervision. Much less silly, more expensive.)
They're of course limited by volume, just so you don't go building unlicensed rockets and mines.
With high explosives, governments tend to go so far as to require a licence for handling. Fine for breaking that is enough of a deterrent. It's relatively easy to acquire, because otherwise that makes explosive use rather tricky to monitor.
Sales and widespread manufacturing is regulated separately.
Easier and cheaper to get than CFC gas license. Or the general chemical laboratory license required to do such experiments like synthesis. (You can go to a lab and practice there, with supervision. Much less silly, more expensive.)
They're of course limited by volume, just so you don't go building unlicensed rockets and mines.