No, it's not.

If you consider facts from the original article, you might realize that authorities were in fact 100% right. They discovered that some guy was running effectively a chemical lab in a residential area. Was he disposing the waste correctly ? Did he have an exhaust system in place ? Was he complying with fire safety regulations ? Etc, etc.. Zoning bylaws exist for a reason, and this is a textbook emergency situation. So they did respond appropriately - they evacuated the guy and cleaned up the place. Also note how he was asked to stay in the hotel, not arrested or prosecuted.

Here's the original article for a reference - http://www.telegram.com/article/20080809/NEWS/808090323/1008...

No. From your article:

> no more dangerous than typical household cleaning products.

Should all household cleaning products be banned for places without industrial grade ventilation systems too? Zoning bylaws exist because their is not sufficient proven danger for these regulations to exist as State or Federal laws.

>Should all household cleaning products be banned for places without industrial grade ventilation systems too?

What I understand is that if you use those products without having a single idea of what they are made of because you have a limited scientific understanding then you are ok.

However if you are educated and dare to know what you are doing then using those same products makes you a danger to society and you most be stop.

It takes time to understand that these chemicals were in fact no more dangerous than cleaning products. As I said above, a chem lab in a residential neighborhood is a major public safety concern as it may end up costing lives. The only safe way of handling it is to dismantle it first and analyze its contents second.

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistry_set

How is that related to "stored hundreds of chemicals in his house" and "more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes" ? This is hardly a "chemical set". It sits firmly in "WTF" category, especially if you are charged with protecting public safety.

Consider the context. An usually large amount of potentially dangerous chemicals in a residential area is an emergency situation. They responded accordingly - eliminated potential danger first, analyzed it second.

And before you downmod me again, imagine yourself living next door to this "chemist" or sharing a graywater supply with him. Then ask yourself if you still think authorities were wrong in their "overreaction".

That man is a chemist. I'd personally think a chemist's "chemistry set" would contain a little bit more than a teenager's. What difference does it make if it was contained in vials, jars or boxes? What else would you contain chemicals in? What if you had a rack of rackmounts you picked up on craigslist serving as a distcc farm, or something else and someone broke into your basement and accused you of "hacking" or some other absurd charge because they had no idea what one would do with all that computing or something that 'looked' like it was dangerous.

What seems like "too many" to someone who isn't involved with hobbyist chemistry (or whatever he's involved with) is completely unimportant. You show me a law on the books that limits your hobbies and if you find a law that fits that and is reasonable, I'd agree with you.

If I was an EE hobbyist and built a small tesla coil (which many people do), I wouldn't want people living next door giving me the looks and trying to shut me down because it doesn't look kosher to /them/.

They didn't respond to any chemical-related threats, or a chemical fire, nor did he have a criminal record, so I'd disagree completely with you that there's any concern for worry.

I love it how people take it upon themselves to decide what is acceptable and what isn't.

"This is hardly a "chemical set". It sits firmly in "WTF" category, especially if you are charged with protecting public safety.

A couple of posts earlier you said this is _not_ an example of "war on the unexpected", now you argue that because people in charge say "wtf?" when they hear what he's doing, they should shut him down just in case - in the interests of public safety.

Which is exactly the point of the "war on the unexpected" discussion.

"Consider the context. An usually large amount of potentially dangerous chemicals in a residential area is an emergency situation."

No, it's not. A swimming pool is an unusually large amount of potentially dangerous chemical - someone could die of asphyxiation if they accidentally inhaled even a very small fraction of it! Ban DiHydrogen Monoxide! Fearmongering for everyone!

> How is that related to "stored hundreds of chemicals in his house" and "more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes" ? This is hardly a "chemical set". It sits firmly in "WTF" category, especially if you are charged with protecting public safety.

I know folks who have about that in canned food. Are they a danger?

"imagine yourself living next door to him"

In my imagination I'm not peering through his basement window going "Oh no, things I don't understand and which therefore they must be 'potentially dangerous'! This an emergency!"