Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Home Science Under Attack In Massachusetts

Posted by kdawson on Tue Aug 12, 2008 01:10 PM
from the and-the-yellow-phthalate-too dept.
An anonymous reader tips a guest posting up on the MAKE Magazine blog by the author of the Illustrated Guide to Home Chemistry Experiments. It seems that authorities in Massachusetts have raided a home chemistry lab, apparently without a warrant, and made off with all of its contents. Here's the local article from the Worcester Telegram & Gazette. "Victor Deeb, a retired chemist who lives in Marlboro, has finally been allowed to return to his Fremont Street home, after Massachusetts authorities spent three days ransacking his basement lab and making off with its contents. Deeb is not accused of making methamphetamine or other illegal drugs. He's not accused of aiding terrorists, synthesizing explosives, nor even of making illegal fireworks. Deeb fell afoul of the Massachusetts authorities for... doing experiments... Pamela Wilderman, the code enforcement officer for [the Massachusetts town of] Marlboro stated, 'I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation.' Allow me to translate Ms. Wilderman's words into plain English: 'Mr. Deeb hasn't actually violated any law or regulation that I can find, but I don't like what he's doing because I'm ignorant and irrationally afraid of chemicals, so I'll abuse my power to steal his property and shut him down.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] How Regulations Hamper Chemical Hobbyists 610 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Chemical & Engineering News just ran this story that relates how government regulations create a terribly restrictive atmosphere for people who do chemistry as a hobby. (A related story was previously posted.)" The article gives some examples of why hamfisted regulations are harmful even to those who aren't doing the chemistry themselves: "Hobby chemists will tell you that home labs have been the source of some of chemistry's greatest contributions. Charles Goodyear figured out how to vulcanize rubber with the same stove that his wife used to bake the family's bread. Charles Martin Hall discovered the economical electrochemical process for refining aluminum from its ore in a woodshed laboratory near his family home. A plaque outside Sir William Henry Perkin's Cable Street residence in London notes that the chemist 'discovered the first aniline dyestuff, March 1856, while working in his home laboratory on this site and went on to found science-based industry.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • And they say ... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by slashdotlurker (1113853) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:14PM (#24571835)
    ... that something is wrong with Kansas ?
    These hyper-red and hyper-blue states both have issues with people. The former set of control freaks try to make you a religion borg while the latter set of control freaks try their hand making you a state-uber-alles borg.
    • Re:And they say ... by richardellisjr (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:20PM
      • by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:25PM (#24572095)
        Amen to that! Wait a minute...
        • by ShieldW0lf (601553) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:34PM (#24572303) Journal

          Now, how is a fascist state supposed to function if people like this guy come along and teach people how to do for themselves? Fascist states need strong corporations, and strong corporations need helpless consumers. This guy is anti-American, and the cops knew it.

          How did they know? They felt it in their gut.

          • Re:And they say ... (Score:4, Informative)

            by bsDaemon (87307) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:53PM (#24572743) Homepage

            The "Corporation" in the "Corporate State" is a vertical trade guild -- ie, a Syndicate. Fascism is Guild Socialism mixed with Nationalism. Mussolini started out as a Communist, as his father had been. It is NOT the same thing as a corporation in the sense which most people think.

          • by budgenator (254554) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:57PM (#24572839) Journal

            No the part I find most troubling is

            Firefighters found more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes in the basement Tuesday afternoon, after they responded to an unrelated fire in an air conditioner on the second floor of the home. Chemist allowed to go home, sans his lab [telegram.com]

            it wasn't cop but firemen; traditionally fire fighters have held a special position and had abilities to enter buildings and perform activities that we have prohibited policeman from performing without a warrant, by doing things like this the firefighters are jeopardizing this trust and placing the ability to protect the public safety in danger.

            • Re:And they say ... (Score:5, Informative)

              by Lurker187 (127055) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:12PM (#24573143) Homepage

              Firefighters also have hazardous materials training, and often have to clean up what happens when hazardous materials are not handled properly. They saw something that concerned them, and they reported their concerns to someone who overreacted, but the overreaction is the sole responsibility of the State agency(s) involved, and in no way the firefighters' responsibility. There's plenty of blame to go around, let's not start flinging it indiscriminately.

            • Re:And they say ... by The Great Pretender (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:48PM
              • Re:And they say ... (Score:5, Interesting)

                by budgenator (254554) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:34PM (#24574557) Journal

                I'm a chemistry, by industry, by education and if I saw 1500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes sitting around full of chemistry stuff I'd want some authority to check it out.

                If you had said

                "I'm a Chemist, by training and profession and if I saw 1500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes improperly stored, full of chemicals I'd want some authority to check it out."

                your troll would have been much more effective, especially if you exclude fireman with a bit of hazmat training and building inspectors from being considered an authority.

              • by Derosian (943622) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:22PM (#24575241) Homepage Journal
                I'm a guncollectory, by industry and by education and if I saw a couple of pistols, rifles, and semi-automatics sitting around full of gunnery stuff I'd want some authority to check it out. My response to this is based simply on my understanding of what someone can easily do with guns and ammunition let alone ammunition bought special and assault equipment. However, I do have to wonder if the outrage at the fascist authorities would be replaced by support if the guy's name was Ali Akid Jabbabi or equivalent and he had an extensive(for home use) gun collection. Now ideally, our Mr. Deeb would have had an inventory[or the government] of everything and [would] have separated the guns appropriately for saftey[safety's] sake.

                Forgetting everything else that makes this comment seem worthless like your inappropriate use of the word chemistry and quickly followed up by your note of the "chemistry stuff", I'm sure you feel that the government has every right to search every single house at least once a year to make sure nothing illegal is going on inside, and if they find something which scares them even if it isn't illegal they can take it anyway, because it is best if the government watches our for our well being. After all what other reason would the government exist for?

                Go ahead mod me troll...
              • "great pretender"? by alizard (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @09:45PM
              • by famebait (450028) on Wednesday August 13 2008, @02:25AM (#24579513)

                I'm a chemistry,

                Are you, now. I'm a skepticism.

              • Re:And they say ... by clone53421 (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @10:23AM
              • Re:And they say ... by ubermiester (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @08:36PM
              • Re:And they say ... by sycodon (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @10:35PM
              • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
            • Maybe he was just saving his own urine! by wsanders (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:02PM
            • Re:And they say ... by cavis (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:14PM
            • Re:And they say ... (Score:5, Informative)

              by HangingChad (677530) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:15PM (#24574249) Homepage

              by doing things like this the firefighters are jeopardizing this trust and placing the ability to protect the public safety in danger.

              I'm a volunteer fireman and I can tell you all there have been briefings from Homeland Security and other agencies about looking for suspicious materials, not all of it terrorism related. And it's not just us. Mail carriers, delivery drivers, med techs, utility crews, anyone who might be on your property or in your house on any occasional basis.

              We do have to be alert for drug labs, but most of the times the cops find them first and have their own hazmat teams.

              My question would be if they were working a fire in a window unit on the second floor, what were they doing in the basement?

              The rules for household chemicals aren't always real clear. Sounds like the state and local officials over-reacted. Unless there's a specific regulation that covers some compound he was using, it appears like his property was seized without due process. Unless we've taken another step down the road to a police state I don't think you can just declare something looks dangerous and confiscate it. In which case I could walk into anyones garage and start seizing lawn fertilizer, gasoline, paint thinner, ammonia, insecticides and anything else you might normally have around the house. All that stuff looks dangerous to me.

            • Re:And they say ... by edittard (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @11:01AM
          • Re:And they say ... by mdielmann (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:29PM
          • Re:And they say ... by Quattro Vezina (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:57PM
          • How's it supposed to function? by kramer2718 (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:06PM
          • Re:And they say ... by hedwards (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:04PM
          • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • by FiloEleven (602040) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:26PM (#24572119)

        Well Richard, it seems my fellow Texans have been slacking! Let me just take a few minutes to tell you about Jesus, and the wonderful sacrifice he made for you...

        Only joking, of course. I'm not from Texas.

      • Re:And they say ... by jdb2 (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:31PM
      • by Ellis D. Tripp (755736) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:38PM (#24572405)

        On the other hand, you aren't allowed to own laboratory glassware in TX without a permit from the state and inspections from the cops....

        • The actual law (Score:5, Informative)

          by WillRobinson (159226) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:46PM (#24572589) Journal

          You had to make me look, as I was quite surprised about that law. But here it is: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/criminal_law_enforcement/narcotics/narcprecursor.htm [state.tx.us]

          • Re:The actual law (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Ellis D. Tripp (755736) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:56PM (#24572825)

            Yes, and notice the intentionally vague items list. A "flask heater"? An "adapter tube"? A "transformer"?!?!

            The whole idea here is apparently to make EVERYONE in TX a criminal, so that they can be charged with *something* any time the pigs want to....

            • Re:The actual law by damn_registrars (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:03PM
              • by mweather (1089505) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:15PM (#24573197)
                An armed man can mix whatever chemicals he damn well pleases.
              • Re:The actual law by lgw (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:17PM
              • Re:The actual law (Score:5, Insightful)

                by swillden (191260) <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:15PM (#24575137) Homepage Journal

                But as long as you carry at least one gun with you at all times, then you're OK, right? And the gun rack on the back of your pickup truck scores double, I've heard...

                Actually, Texas is one of only six states in the nation that bans openly carrying a firearm. In Texas, the ONLY way to legally carry a gun on your person is with a concealed carry permit. That means that in Texas, the constitutional right to bear arms is granted or not at the whim of the government.

                There is a growing movement in Texas to correct this situation. An on-line petition has collected nearly 23,000 signatures and several legislators have promised to introduce a bill to join the majority of the nation and allow open carry.

                It sounds like they need to go after the glassware restrictions next. Actually, what we really need to do as a nation is give up the ridiculous "war on drugs" which, to date, is the source of more civil liberties infringements than any other issue, including the "war on terror".

              • Re:The actual law by damn_registrars (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:25PM
              • by quacking duck (607555) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:38PM (#24574623)

                An armed man can mix whatever chemicals he damn well pleases.

                Well of course--it's quite hard for someone to mix chemicals if he has no arms...

              • Re:The actual law by Hercynium (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:03PM
              • Re:The actual law.. SORT OF by link-error (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @08:40PM
              • Re:The actual law by Tony (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @08:43AM
              • Re:The actual law by Shotgun (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @08:50AM
              • Re:The actual law by swillden (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @09:37AM
              • Re:The actual law.. SORT OF by swillden (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @09:38AM
              • Re:The actual law by Mateo_LeFou (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @01:50PM
              • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
            • Re:The actual law (Score:4, Informative)

              by camperdave (969942) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:48PM (#24573755) Journal

              "Chemical laboratory apparatus" means any item of equipment designed, made, or adapted to manufacture a controlled substance or a controlled substance analogue, including:

              There you go. Owning these things is not a problem unless they were meant to be used in a drug lab. So if it says "for producing crystal meth" on the box, then you need a permit. Otherwise you're free to use the flask for whatever.

            • Re:The actual law (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:08PM (#24574131)

              Yes, and notice the intentionally vague items list. A "flask heater"? An "adapter tube"? A "transformer"?!?!

              The whole idea here is apparently to make EVERYONE in TX a criminal, so that they can be charged with *something* any time the pigs want to....

              Yup. As it was in the past, so it is today.

              "Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens' What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

              - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, 1957

              "With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him."

              - former Attorney General and Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, 1940

            • Re:The actual law by soybean (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:02PM
            • Re:The actual law by ArsonSmith (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:57PM
            • Re:The actual law by dickens (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @09:18PM
            • Re:The actual law by WinPimp2K (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:43PM
            • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
          • by wcbsd (1331357) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:06PM (#24572993)
            An Erlenmeyer Flask? Are they kidding? I used to have one as a flower vase! Thank goodness I live in MA. Oh. Wait.
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:The actual law by djlosch (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:25PM
          • Re:The actual law by pruss (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @12:18AM
          • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:And they say ... by Skjellifetti (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:01PM
          • Re:And they say ... by mrchaotica (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:43PM
          • Re:And they say ... by KillerBob (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:23PM
          • Re:And they say ... (Score:5, Informative)

            by slarrg (931336) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:40PM (#24574651)
            Actually, it's almost impossible for a household not to be breaking this law. If you own a glass container and a heating device (say a coffee pot) and any substance such as allergy medicine or acetone (nail polish remover, anyone) then you have three items on the list and are in violation of the law. In addition, the law states that the act of owning any combination of three items proves intent to manufacture drugs. This law is so broad that everyone has a drug lab and the intent to produce drugs in Texas.
        • Re:And they say ... by parc (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:26PM
          • Re:And they say ... (Score:4, Informative)

            by russotto (537200) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:51PM (#24573823) Journal

            If you "consent to search", you've just thrown your Fourth Amedment rights down the toilet for now and forevermore. No more warrant required to search your place; you'ce already consented.

            • by parc (25467) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:52PM (#24574815)

              Try going to the site and _reading_ the search waiver. It includes a time limit on the search, location limitation, and specifically requires your presence for the inspection. Yes, some of these are for the convenience of the DPS (so they can arrest you), but the waiver is _not_ a waiver of all 4th amendment rights.

              No doubt this is a stupid law, but it is level-headed and appropriate when compared with the vast majority of laws we manage to pass around here.

          • Re:And they say ... by Skreems (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:23PM
          • Re:And they say ... by dosius (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:39PM
        • Re:And they say ... by Cid Highwind (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:01PM
        • Re:And they say ... by verbamour (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:35PM
      • Re:And they say ... by billlava (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:41PM
        • by prennix (1069734) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:54PM (#24572765) Homepage
          if only it worked that way in practice. Neither big party (D&R) is interested in keeping government out of our lives. (see FISA, Homeland Security, Patriot...)

          the old myth that the R's are anti-big government or fiscally conservative is sadly outdated.
        • Re:And they say ... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by JCSoRocks (1142053) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:59PM (#24572875)
          Seriously... "Red State" used to mean, "Leave me alone and keep the government SMALL." Apparently at some point that somehow got redefined to "ultra religious crazy people that no one in their right mind should agree with." Dunno when it happened but I wish it'd go back. Finding a small government candidate is nearly impossible now.
          • by ChristTrekker (91442) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:34PM (#24573549)

            Maybe the "leave me alone and keep government small" ppl happen to be religious types, and they get ridiculed on the latter point in order to demonize the former ideas by association. Just a thought.

          • Re:And they say ... by Mr. Slippery (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:38PM
          • Re:And they say ... by Hal_Porter (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:43PM
          • Re:And they say ... by lwsimon (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:11PM
          • Re:And they say ... by Kozz (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:25PM
          • Re:And they say ... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by civilizedINTENSITY (45686) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:32PM (#24574523)
            I attributed it (historically) to the Dixie-crats swinging over after the Civil Rights movement of JFK and LBJ.

            And after JFK signed the civil rights bills, I felt vindicated. But I was especially proud after the Voting Rights Act was signed into law by Johnson. Only later did I understand why LBJ said upon signing that he had just surrendered the South to the GOP for a generation, which was optimistic.

            In terms of the current rate of acceleration of this trend, according to the Washington Post: [washingtonpost.com]

            Now that the GOP has been transformed by the rise of the South, the trauma of terrorism and George W. Bush's conviction that God wanted him to be president, a deeper conclusion can be drawn: The Republican Party has become the first religious party in U.S. history.

            Since the election of 2000 and especially that of 2004, three pillars have become central: the oil-national security complex, with its pervasive interests; the religious right, with its doctrinal imperatives and massive electorate; and the debt-driven financial sector, which extends far beyond the old symbolism of Wall Street.

            President Bush has promoted these alignments, interest groups and their underpinning values. His family, over multiple generations, has been linked to a politics that conjoined finance, national security and oil. In recent decades, the Bushes have added close ties to evangelical and fundamentalist power brokers of many persuasions.
            ...
            Over a quarter-century of Bush presidencies and vice presidencies, the Republican Party has slowly become the vehicle of all three interests -- a fusion of petroleum-defined national security; a crusading, simplistic Christianity; and a reckless credit-feeding financial complex. The three are increasingly allied in commitment to Republican politics.

            ...

            Unfortunately, more danger lurks in the responsiveness of the new GOP coalition to Christian evangelicals, fundamentalists and Pentecostals, who muster some 40 percent of the party electorate . Many millions believe that the Armageddon described in the Bible is coming soon. Chaos in the explosive Middle East, far from being a threat, actually heralds the second coming of Jesus Christ.

            ...

            Besides providing critical support for invading Iraq -- widely anathematized by preachers as a second Babylon -- the Republican coalition has also seeded half a dozen controversies in the realm of science. These include Bible-based disbelief in Darwinian theories of evolution, dismissal of global warming, disagreement with geological explanations of fossil-fuel depletion, religious rejection of global population planning, derogation of women's rights and opposition to stem cell research. This suggests that U.S. society and politics may again be heading for a defining controversy such as the Scopes trial of 1925. That embarrassment chastened fundamentalism for a generation, but the outcome of the eventual 21st century test is hardly assured.

          • Re:And they say ... by Quattro Vezina (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:33PM
          • Re:And they say ... by StrategicIrony (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:12PM
        • Re:And they say ... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by JoeZeppy (715167) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:52PM (#24573839)

          That's true. Not all "Red-state" people are over-religious, or even religious at all. Often they share moral standards, but most often we just share a desire for the government to stay out of our lives!

          Yes, we don't want government to tell us that we can't terminate our pregnancies, smoke some marijuana for our cancer, end our own lives painlessly when terminally ill, have a homosexual relationship, call the police on our crazy neighbor with the collection of assault rifles... oh, wait.

          • Re:And they say ... (Score:4, Informative)

            by Obfuscant (592200) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:35PM (#24574577)
            Yes, we don't want government to tell us that we can't ... end our own lives painlessly when terminally ill,

            Move to Oregon, dude. The state will actually pay for your euthenasia even when it won't pay for treatment. How advanced is THAT!!

          • MOD PARENT UP, please by nhtshot (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:02PM
        • Re:And they say ... by eldepeche (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:58PM
        • Re:And they say ... by Walkingshark (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:38PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:And they say ... by couchslug (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:49PM
      • Re:And they say ... by TheoMurpse (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:54PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Texas Is Not a Very Red State by Doc Ruby (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:57PM
      • Re:And they say ... by azav (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:05PM
      • Re:And they say ... by jebrew (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:31PM
      • Re:And they say ... by VeNoM0619 (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @11:41AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • by gurps_npc (621217) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:24PM (#24572059)
      There used to be american kids studying home chemistry. We used to have kits to build rockets.

      Now, a bunch of silly fools that never took chemistry even in college are doing their best to outlaw what every intelligent child in the 60s and 70s did for fun.

      As a result, the US has not been doing groundbreaking chemistry in over a decade.

      Granted, computers are a big lure, but chemistry is the basis of our industry. We need to ENCOURAGE kids and adults to do chemistry, not prevent it with idiotic, foolish laws.

      If it is not more dangerous than fertilizer and diesel fuel, or styrofoam and gasoline, than it should be legal for a 16 year old kid to buy in the mail, without a license.

      Anythinge else is rank hipocracy and stupidity.

      P.S. I am not recommending a 12 year old do explosive experiments unsupervised, but I hate to tell you, THEY DO IT ANYWAY. They just go and get an aerosole can and a lighter, instead of ordering a kit.

      • by Darkness404 (1287218) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:34PM (#24572301)
        Computers also have stupid laws restricting them. What is a better way to teach kids about P2P? Either have them A) Learn about it or B) download from TPB and they will learn that way.
      • by sm62704 (957197) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:35PM (#24572325) Journal

        My dad took my chemistry set away when I almost blew the house up. But this 4th of july my old friend Mike's seventeen year old son showed me a brand new way of blowing stuff up; it's in one of my NSFW journals. Anyway, put a little "Works" toilet bowl cleaner in a plastic bottle, but a strip of aluminum foil in it, screw on the cap, shake it, toss it down and walk away and it waill react violently and noisily, louder than a shotgun blast.

        The kids are indeed doing chemistry.

        • Re:America used to be #1 by Fallingcow (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:45PM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by Chroniton (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:49PM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by bmwm3nut (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:53PM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by SupplyMission (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:08PM
        • by bmajik (96670) <matt@mattevans.org> on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:22PM (#24573317) Homepage Journal

          I was doing this as a teenager (the early 1990s) and ended up getting into a small bit of trouble over it.

          Basically, as a prank, we set off about 20 of these things outside of a kids window late at night. Using 2 liter bottles they really do sound like shotgun blasts. THe smaller 16oz bottles aren't as loud but we had plenty of them mixed in as well.

          Well, the kids parents didn't think this was very funny at all, and we all knew each other (these were "BBS acquantances") and we got hauled into the police station. Everyone's parents were also there.

          The cops were asking how we learned to do this. I fibbed a bit and said that we learned it in chemistry class... basically HCL and metal causes an acid-metal reaction, and releases a ton of gas. The principles of acid-metal reactions are certainly well-explained in HS chemistry, and that's what I said.

          One of the moms was like "WHY ARE THEY TEACHING THIS KIND OF THING IN SCHOOL?" and got all emotional about it. I continued lecturing: "actually, this is simply basic chemistry, and it is important that kids are taught this kind of thing. we chose to use this knowledge to be mischevious" blah blah blah.

          A few years later we heard of kids doing the same stuff and they got in _way_ more trouble over it. Times and attitudes have changed and this kind of stuff isn't funny anymore (well, it is, but not many people who matter think so).

          The happy ending of this story is that I made one more of these things for a practical project / application talk in a later HS chemistry class. The class got to go outside and watch me set one of the things off. As long as I was able to explain the chemistry sufficiently and keep the class interested in chemistry, the teacher was all for it.

          My father in law's mom was a science teacher; he'd give her a list of stuff to order periodically and she'd get it for him without asking questions. He blew up the kitchen table once. Another time he set a forest on fire with a frenell lens and some magnesium. He ended up getting a Chemical Engineering degree later in life and these days is one of the foremost industry experts at what he does. Nobody ever got hurt and society is certainly better for his contributions as an adult.

          It's important to let kids be kids. Curiosity is the most important thing in a child, and one reason that I'll be homeschooling my son. He's too important to let "them" ruin his future.

          • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:31PM (#24574509)

            Probably the best teacher I ever had was a Chemistry professor at the University of Washington. "Wild" Bill Zollar. Fantastic storyteller. Anyway, he was telling us about his time as an undergrad at the University of Alaska. He was majoring in Chemistry to he could graduate in time to take a trip he'd won to Hawaii. Well, he ended up being responsible for reacting left over WWII sodium metal to get rid of it. As we all know sodium metal + water = exothermic and sometimes BOOM. (This is how we knew this would be a good story.) So he and his TA are up late doing this. And the TA says "Hey want to see something cool?" So they take a chunk of sodium metal and throw it in a fountain. BOOM! Splash. Yay! So the TA says, more or less, "Ok goodnight. Have fun doing this increadibly tedious job, unsupervised, by yourself, in the middle of the night, in the middle of nowhere. I'm sure nothing will go awry." So here he is with untold kgs of sodium metal, reacting little slices of it with water. There's no one to go ride bikes with, and he's a smart young man with apparently poor impulse control. So he soaks some rags in oil, and wraps up a few bricks of sodium metal. Binds them up. Puts them in his car and proceeds to drive out to the nearest dam. So he stops the car over the water, tosses the parcel off and proceeds to drive away. Nothings happening, "Mission Accomplished." Before he gets across the water a 400 foot column of flame which must have lit up his car is busy burning down some guys outhouse on the bank behind him. Of course he went on to do other things, like thermite a trolly to it's tracks outside Harvard while he was at MIT, and then all kinds of important and extremely valuable work.

          • Re:America used to be #1 by StrategicIrony (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:52PM
          • Re:America used to be #1 by gnuman99 (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @01:53AM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by 32771 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:35PM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by RaguMS (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:42PM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by subxero37 (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:38PM
        • Pretty dammned dangerous by mbessey (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:40PM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by Deltaspectre (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @02:08AM
        • Re:America used to be #1 by sm62704 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:29PM
        • 6 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • by Nerdfest (867930) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:39PM (#24572419)
        Thanks to the school system, I don't this this science stuff is going to be a problem in another 10 years or so.
      • by LWATCDR (28044) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:48PM (#24572627) Homepage Journal

        We still have model rockets.
        Estes is still in business. Sure the kits are dumb downed but very few kids will take the time to build a complex model these days. I wonder how few kids these days even build balsa models.
        It is just to easy to buy FSX or an airhog.
        Not only that but do you know how hard it is to find a field these days?
        Oh well. But then when I was a kid I had to live with the three books on airplanes or rockets they my local library had.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:53PM (#24572741)

        The problem is that the stupid people aren't dying anymore.

      • Re:America used to be #1 by mikael (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:03PM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by Ksevio (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:10PM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by r_newman (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:25PM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by vvaduva (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:31PM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by nasor (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:27PM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by wilec (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @10:48PM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by MarginalWatcher (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @04:23AM
      • Re:America used to be #1 by ErikZ (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @08:30AM
      • 6 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • by Lumpy (12016) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:35PM (#24572307) Homepage

      Honestly the only solution to the Hyper red and Hyper blue is to shine a lot of Hyper white light on them. These "security and Fraidycat freaks go scattering when they have a bright light shining on them.

      I really hope someone uncovers Pamela Wilderman personal information and posts it so that everyone here can voice their concerns to her on her home phone, email, work phone, cellphone as well as other Police officials that did not right away reprimand her and fire her for home invasion.

    • by ivan256 (17499) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:41PM (#24572461)

      Exactly. The far left and the far right both have exactly the same goal: To tell others how to live their lives. They only way they differ is in how they think people's lives should be lived.

      Interestingly enough, people I meet from both sides are typically keen on telling you how they think others should live, but not too keen on being told how to live themselves.

      • Re:And they say ... by budgenator (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:05PM
      • Re:And they say ... by jabithew (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:28PM
      • Re:And they say ... by nickhart (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:29PM
        • Re:And they say ... by russotto (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:57PM
        • Re:And they say ... by TubeSteak (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:59PM
        • Re:And they say ... by Curunir_wolf (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:14PM
        • Re:And they say ... by toddhisattva (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:49PM
          • Re:And they say ... by nickhart (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:18PM
            • Re:And they say ... by Jesrad (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:56PM
              • by nickhart (1009937) <(nickhart) (at) (gmail.com)> on Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:29PM (#24576043) Homepage

                This value comes from the improvement of the efficiency it causes.

                Efficient? Capitalism? Have you been spending your profits on ganja?

                Look at the health insurance system in the US. Hundreds of different insurers, all with their own little bureaucracies and red-tape (ironically designed not to provide care, but to DENY it). Each has their own marketing departments and collection of overpaid executives. Every clinic and hospital in the US has to navigate this maze of bureaucracies in order to get paid, which wastes countless hours and dollars. Medicare spends 7% of its budget on overhead, whereas private insurance companies spend 15-30%. Collectively the people of the US spend as much on health care as a single-payer system would cost, and yet we have 50 million uninsured people and 18,000 die premature deaths every year due to lack of coverage. A marvel of efficiency at getting the capitalists paid, but not at healing people.

                Or consider the millions of out of work people in the US. It's not that there isn't any work to be done--there's plenty of stuff that needs working on: fixing our crumbling national infrastructure, repairing levies, building mass transit systems, schools, hospitals... the list goes on. Yet none of that happens because it wouldn't be profitable for the capitalists who have all the money. Efficient at making a handful of parasites rich, but not efficient at providing necessary public services.

                What about the 6 million children who die of hunger and treatable illness worldwide each and every year? UNICEF estimates it would cost $80 billion annually to feed them all--a figure that is a fifth of the US's annual military budget (and not including supplemental budgets for our wars or interest payments on those debts). The government would rather pay companies to not grow food or destroy their surpluses than to feed the hungry.

                Or consider the billions of people who will never get a chance at a decent education. There could be Einsteins, Bachs and geniuses all over the world who will never be allowed to achieve their potential because capitalists are loathe to spend money on educating people any more than is required for them to work in their factories and offices.

                So much human potential is squandered and so much misery is caused all in the name of profit and "efficiency." The only thing capitalism is efficient at is ruining lives and generating profits for those parasites at the top who perform no labor but reap the rewards of others' labor. Thanks, but no thanks.

              • Re:And they say ... by Jesrad (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:24PM
              • Re:And they say ... by sjames (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @06:24PM
              • Your ideas.... by jeephistorian (Score:1) Thursday August 14 2008, @01:53PM
              • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
            • Re:And they say ... by PhilipPeake (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:03PM
            • by jabithew (1340853) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:45PM (#24576229)

              The capitalists need us to create their profits, but we don't need them.

              Unfortunately, we rather do. Labour cannot labour without capital, so capital is actually a key part of adding value. After all, a workman without capital is simply unemployed.

              Also, if the state can't own capital, then who can? If it's held in common, then some way of administering capital (i.e. allocating it in the best way) would have to be implemented. It could be a person (in which case you'd have a monopsonistic capitalist, fantastic) or some sort of communal administration, or a state as most people prefer to call it. In reality, the worker benefits more from competitive sale of capital (i.e. many capitalists) and from the use of price signals to assign capital (after all price is the place where people can't afford to lie).

              The old myth that capital doesn't add value is based on a discredited economic theory; the labour theory of value, which states such more or less by definition. However, the LTV fails to explain observed economic facts (e.g. why does coffee cost more in a station than from the same brand 200m away?) This is why economists have switched to the marginal utility theory of value, which makes more sense a priori anyway to me.

            • Re:And they say ... by melikamp (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:53PM
            • Re:And they say ... by marco.antonio.costa (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @07:14PM
            • Re:And they say ... by slashdotlurker (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @08:06PM
            • Re:And they say ... by supertjx (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @09:24PM
            • Re:And they say ... by jagdish (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @10:51PM
            • Re:And they say ... by Jesrad (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @01:15AM
        • Re:And they say ... by ivan256 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:54PM
        • And I say BullS*** by bobKali (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:59PM
        • Re:And they say ... by Blakey Rat (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:52PM
        • Re:And they say ... by marco.antonio.costa (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @07:23PM
      • by CodeBuster (516420) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:43PM (#24573659)
        Indeed, Ron Paul (for example) in his Revolution [amazon.com] laments the loss of free thinking and Liberal (classically Liberal or what we now call Libertarian since the term Liberal has been hijacked by the far left in much the same way that Conservative has been hijacked by the neocons on the far right) citizens in the mold of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Patrick Henry who would be utterly appalled with the present state of affairs in the nation that they bequeathed to us. Unfortunately, for those of us Americans with an IQ greater than our shoe size, the vast majority of people want to be told how to live because they are too stupid, too ignorant, and too foolish to take care of themselves and the few intelligent politicians, almost without exception, use their gray matter advantage to manipulate rather than to educate the populace. Really, I am beginning to despair for the future outcome of our great American experiment because too few people now understand the true basis of American values or else they choose to ignore them as quaint anachronisms unfit for our modern times.
      • Re:And they say ... by Joe Tie. (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:43PM
      • Re:And they say ... by ArsonSmith (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:51PM
      • Re:And they say ... by paulgrant (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:34PM
      • Re:And they say ... by StrategicIrony (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:00PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Oh shut up, it's one small town's small-time comptroller, not a vast conspiracy by hyperblue states.

    • by hey! (33014) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:59PM (#24572861) Homepage Journal

      Well, you're the victim of a bad article summary.

      There's no problem with experimenting, the issue is how much chemicals you can store of on your site and dispose of through municipal services like trash removal and sewer without a permit.

      Details in the article are a bit thin, but nobody is getting raided in Massachusetts for doing chemistry set scale stuff.

    • Re:And they say ... by Veretax (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:02PM
    • Re:And they say ... by b4upoo (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:08PM
    • Re:And they say ... by gad_zuki! (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:10PM
    • by Omestes (471991) <`omestes' `at' `gmail.com'> on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:20PM (#24573275) Homepage Journal

      There is no such thing as a red or blue state. Its a media construct, that somehow became confused with a statement of truth. Look at the voting margins between Dems and Reps in any so-called Red or Blue state, and you'll be hard pressed to find a margin greater than 10%. The Red vs. Blue thing, if anything, is probably showing that people are moving more towards the middle, but this would remain invisible, since the lunatic fringes of each ideology are louder than the growing horde of moderates.

      Arizona, for example, is a VERY "red" state. But... We have a Democratic governor (who strongly endorsed Obama, almost to the point of quitting to help him), and around half of our counties have very liberal tendencies. Outside of Phoenix, two out of three of our "big" cities are very Democratic.

      Sadly the Electoral system isn't very good for showing diversity of opinion, which leads to both polarization and moderation being shown as "red" or "blue".

      Also... Red doesn't always equal religious... Only 43% of people in Arizona described themselves as religious in the 2000 census. Not to say that the remainder are atheists, but obviously not religious wackos either.

    • Re:And they say ... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Random BedHead Ed (602081) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:32PM (#24573503) Homepage Journal

      Mod points be damned - I'll ditch them to get in on this thread. There's nothing about this story that is intrinsically left- or right-leaning, despite the temptation to apply that often imaginary dichotomy to everything under the sun. It's also not some indication that both liberals and conservatives are out to destroy chemistry as we know it, violating our rights as they go along. I ask the Libertarians to at least tentatively withdraw your attack dogs. Let's examine what we know.

      The meat of the case against Mr. Deeb is in this statement, which was not fully quoted in the summary because it comes from the MAKE article, which truncates it:

      Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboro's code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws.

      That's from the source article in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette. It indicates that this wasn't just some dude with a home chemistry set and a nifty hobby; Deebs was doing "research and development." This doesn't make him dangerous, but it's entirely possible that he really was violating local zoning laws. Neither the MAKE article nor the Worcester Telegram & Gazette article specifies which zoning laws were violated, nor which chemicals were involved.

      So this may be a case of law enforcement overstepping its authority (and either liberalism or conservatism run amok, depending on whose adherents you think are more likely to try to convince us that chemists in basements are scary), but it may also be a case of Marlboro's "code enforcement" officers following perfectly valid (albeit annoying) zoning laws. Whether or not the laws are overly strict, I don't see anything in this article to indicate that Deeb's fundamental rights were violated ... except the bit about a lack of warrant. The MAKE article has this to say about that alleged Fourth Amendment infraction:

      In effect, the Massachusetts authorities have invaded Deeb's lab, apparently without a warrant, and stolen his property. Deeb, presumably under at least the implied threat of further action, has not objected to the warrantless search and the confiscation of his property.

      However, the original Worcester Telegram & Gazette article doesn't say anything about the absence of a warrant, and the MAKE article does not cite any other source. If that allegation is true, the Marlboro authorities have some explaining to do. But these sources are too limited to know for sure. I did a search on Google News and found this article [metrowestdailynews.com], which was the only one about these events that I cound find. While it also mentions that Deeb is cooperating with authorities, it doesn't mention warrants. Fourth Amendment violation? Who knows. Let's all get on with what we were doing before this "firestorm" erupted and reconvene when we have something solid and legitimate to complain about.

    • Re:And they say ... by I cant believe its n (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:50PM
    • by Hoi Polloi (522990) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:56PM (#24573911) Journal

      Maybe if you RTFA you would've seen that the issue wasn't his interest in chemistry. The problem was that they came to put a FIRE OUT and found ~1500 bottles of chemicals that could've posed a major fire hazard. This was in a residential neighborhood (e.g. close houses), not an industrial park.

    • Re:And they say ... by A nonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:26PM
    • hyper-blue? by alizard (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @08:51PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • by cybrpnk2 (579066) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:14PM (#24571847) Homepage
    Chemistry for chemistry's sake has been banned all along. Check out this article [about.com] on how to get your banned pdf copy of one cool 1960s chemistry book with some not-so-cool experiments...
  • Typical (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lastchance_000 (847415) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:14PM (#24571857)

    Sounds like the actions of typical small-minded, small-town bureaucrats who are skilled mainly in keeping and expanding their power.

    • Zoning gone wild. by twitter (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:22PM
      • Re:Zoning gone wild. by Jarjarthejedi (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:35PM
      • Found a Picture... (Score:4, Informative)

        by GogglesPisano (199483) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:43PM (#24572517)

        Pretty much what you'd expect [boston.com]. Looks to be your garden variety petty bureaucrat, overly impressed by her little bit of power.

      • Re:Zoning gone wild. (Score:5, Informative)

        by tha_mink (518151) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:46PM (#24572577)

        When the officer says, "This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation," he's implying a zoning violation. It can be answered with, "This is not what we consider to be a customary neighborhood nuisance." Zoning laws should protect people from things like junk yards, car dealerships and noisy manufacturing. Going after this man is a stretch of those intentions.

        It's like anti FUD with you people. He broke a zoning law. If you read the article, particularly the part where it says...

        Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboro's code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws. "It is a residential home in a residential neighborhood," she said. "This is Mr. Deeb's hobby. He's still got bunches of ideas. I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation. ⦠There are regulations about how much you're supposed to have, how it's detained, how it's disposed of."

        ...you'd see that he had *WAY* too much stuff in his home AND was breaking the zoning laws by conducting scientific research in a residential neighborhood. I hate the government too, but what I hate more is idiots that spread half-truths. This is one of the latter cases. Print the whole story and it seems like a no brainer, but print half a story, and it feeds the no-brainers.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:46PM (#24572595)

        Yes, it does look like a zoning problem. But the typical first response to a zoning issue is the issuance of an injunction, not the seizure of large amounts of property. A reasonable response would be a court order to move it out of his house within 30 days.

        • Re:Zoning gone wild. by initdeep (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:11PM
        • Re:Zoning gone wild. by bws111 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:14PM
        • by houstonbofh (602064) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:23PM (#24573331)

          Yes, it does look like a zoning problem. But the typical first response to a zoning issue is the issuance of an injunction, not the seizure of large amounts of property. A reasonable response would be a court order to move it out of his house within 30 days.

          Seizure and destruction of large amounts of property.

      • Re:Zoning gone wild. (Score:5, Informative)

        by caesar-auf-nihil (513828) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:47PM (#24572619)

        Not all zoning is dumb. In this case, with as large as chemical fuel load he had in the home, if his house went up it would likely take out the other houses nearby. Zoning helps ensure that when you work on work that is potentially flammable/explosive you minimize the risk to nearby objects.
        I AM a fire safety researcher, and I know just how flammable most chemicals can be, especially since it looks like he was doing organic chemistry, which is what I have my doctorate in. I assure you his house (and no one's is) is rated to address the fire risk that would have eventually happened. The fact that he had a fire in his AC tells me that all the fumes from his operation were starting to condense in there and then got activated by a spark in the fan motor.
        Since I'm a chemist I'm not happy with how he got treated, but still, he should have known better. While I greatly admire the older chemists for their ability to just tinker, research and work non-stop in the lab, there's a reason why the death rate among chemists has dropped, and its because we don't work like this guy does.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:59PM (#24572879)

        Jackson County Michigan just got rid of such a petty bureaucrat. She was an animal control officer that put a pig farmer out of business because his pigs were in the mud. Well, the problem is that mud is necessary for pigs well being, it helps them keep from getting sunburned and it cools them. This same officer then (about a year or two later) raided a horse farm because she didn't like the way the horses looked (remember these horses are livestock not pets). A vet friend of mine looked at the horses and didn't see anything wrong - yet the county found some lackey vet to say that there was a sick horse in the herd (a very common occurence when you have more than 2 horeses). The upshot of this story is that the animal control officer no longer has her job and the county is getting sued for the value of the horses they confiscated and sold at auction. I would expect that this ordinance officer will meet the same fate when the agrieved party hires an attorney and sues both her personally (for civil rights violations) and the city/county for other things. These things have a way of working themselves out.

      • by AndersOSU (873247) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:04PM (#24572959)

        Zoning laws also keep neighbors from toxic gases, explosions, and contaminated ground water.

        I've got mixed feelings about this. From the news article it would appear that everything Deeb did was on the up and up. If you are responsible and safe you don't pose a threat to your neighbors.

        That said, it wasn't as if the authorities entered Deeb's house on a routine basement chemistry lab inspection. They found his lab while responding to a (unrelated) fire. Even if all the chemicals in the basement were ordinarily benign who knows what the environmental consequences would have been had a fire ravaged his basement.

        There's a reason industrial sites have contact with the fire department and State EPA. Deed almost certainly didn't.

      • by hey! (33014) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:06PM (#24573013) Homepage Journal

        I think you've got this situation well characterized. The question is, how much? You can do a little light manufacturing in your house, after all, without getting a zoning variance.

        Likewise a little chemistry is not a problem, but at some point you should have the proper permits to discharge your waste into the sewers (which will probably require inspections), and you really should hire a private trash hauler to deal with your refuse.

      • Re:Zoning gone wild. by donaggie03 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @11:02PM
      • Re:Zoning gone wild. by johannesg (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @04:33AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Typical (Score:5, Informative)

      by Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:36PM (#24572329)
      Liked blog is crap. Here is the real story:
      http://www.telegram.com/article/20080809/NEWS/808090323/1007/NEWS05 [telegram.com]

      "Firefighters found more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes in the basement Tuesday afternoon, after they responded to an unrelated fire in an air conditioner on the second floor of the home.

      Vessels of chemicals were all over the furniture and the floor, authorities said. The ensuing investigation involved a state hazardous materials team, fire and police officials, health officials, environmental officials and code enforcement officials. The Deebs were told to stay in a hotel while the slew of officials investigated and emptied the basement. "
      • Re:Typical by TheLostSamurai (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:52PM
        • Re:Typical by NotBornYesterday (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:31PM
      • Re:Typical (Score:4, Interesting)

        by R2.0 (532027) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:27PM (#24573397)

        "The ensuing investigation involved a state hazardous materials team, fire and police officials, health officials, environmental officials and code enforcement officials."

        I'm reminded of a fireworks shoot I worked 2 years ago. It was raining on and off all day, but the sponsor insisted, despite the contract, that we go on. The fire marshal agreed with us that the situation was unsafe, but he wasn't willing to pull the plug because he didn't want to piss off the county supervisor.

        So we shoot, and there is stuff bursting right over our heads because the charges got wet, and going up in the tubes, and blowing up on the ground. But we finish the show in the pouring rain, and then we need to clean up - also in the pouring rain. And we're finding all sorts of unexploded pyro on the ground, but it's dark as 6' up a well diggers ass, so we try our best. We get done at 6:00 AM and then drive back to the magazine to drop off all of the crap that just didn't go off.

        Then my boss gets a call from the fire marshal - it seems we missed a 3" ball and a few stars, and he is DEMANDING that we come back and retrieve them (remember, this is the guy who KNEW this was going to happen but didn't have the balls to do his job). Our boss tells him to fuck off and call back when we get some sleep. 2 hours later he calls back - he's called out the BOMB SQUAD to handle it, and that's the last show we'll ever do in this town, blah, blah, blah. Response? "What makes you think we want to come back to your pissant town, you little shit?"

        Fast forward to this year - we get the call to do the show again, because last year's went so well! And before the boss could hang up, they say "BTW, everyone involved with last year's fiasco has been fired".

        I didn't shoot the show, but I heard it went well.

        • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Sunday August 17 2008, @11:37PM
      • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:04PM
        • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Sunday August 17 2008, @11:07PM
          • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @12:22AM
            • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @10:46AM
              • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @01:17PM
              • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @01:46PM
              • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @03:46PM
              • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @06:01PM
              • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Monday August 18 2008, @11:11PM
              • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Tuesday August 19 2008, @12:56PM
              • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Tuesday August 19 2008, @04:14PM
              • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Tuesday August 19 2008, @06:54PM
              • Re:Typical by vrmlguy (Score:2) Wednesday August 20 2008, @07:43AM
              • Re:Typical by fm6 (Score:2) Wednesday August 20 2008, @11:51AM
    • Incompetence rather than malice by Roger W Moore (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:38PM
    • Re:Typical by pha7boy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:25PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by fractalus (322043) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:15PM (#24571859) Homepage

    This is what the environment of hysteria is doing to the US.

    Who exactly is terrorizing us these days? Seems like our "elected officials" just want us to be scared all the time so we won't really think about what's going on.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:37PM (#24572371)

      In 30+ years of life, the only people who have directly terrorized me are police officers.

      I live in the United States of America.

      • by wolf12886 (1206182) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:08PM (#24573051)

        I wish I had mod points for this, I've had the same experience.

        Also, I'm just going to f***ing say it, I'm not the least bit afraid of some guy building a bomb or buying an "assault weapon", and killing me with it. Yes, it could happen, but I could also be struck by lightning, get hit by a car, or any number of other things (all of which would probably be more likely), taking chances is simply part of life.

        What I am afraid of is our growing police state. Right now its disarmament of the population, and overly restrictive laws that can be enforced at the governments discretion, all made possible by the gradual repealing and (appalling) reinterpretation of protections designed to guard us against this sort of thing, God knows where all this is going.

        Come to think about it, I'd feel a hell of alot safer if all my neighbors possessed bombs and actual assault weapons (select fire).

      • Re:Is anyone surprised? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @08:41PM
    • Re:Is anyone surprised? by godless dave (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:42PM
    • Re:Is anyone surprised? by Sir_Real (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:42PM
    • Re:Is anyone surprised? by winomonkey (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:09PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Call the FBI? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bryansix (761547) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:15PM (#24571861) Homepage
    SO call the FBI and complain that the local police entered and arrested you without a warrant. Call the local and national media. Make a big stink about it. Start a website. The Massachusetts police are morons and they need to be put in their place.
    • Re:Call the FBI? by Dog-Cow (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:16PM
    • by larry bagina (561269) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:17PM (#24571923) Journal
      post it on slashdot?
    • Re:Call the FBI? (Score:5, Informative)

      Indeed. Massachusetts, allow me to introduce you to the fourth amendment:

      >i>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

      This fellow needs to make sure that the local authorities are smacked down. HARD.

    • Re:Call the FBI? by teknopurge (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:21PM
    • All that will get accomplished... by Nick Driver (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:21PM
    • Re:Call the FBI? by Qzukk (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:23PM
    • Re:Call the FBI? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by richardellisjr (584919) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:32PM (#24572251)

      The article doesn't say anything about him being arrested, just that the police were called and a hazmat team was called. From the article it doesn't sound like he was arrested at all just told to stay in a hotel until the cleanup is done.

      As for confiscation of his chemicals, it sounds like he had way more chemicals than he should need, and wasn't storing them properly. TFA also says that some were potentially explosive and doesn't mention his qualifications.

      Now a lot of people here will be screaming because his property was taken but keep in mind that no illegal search was made (the chemicals were found during an unrelated fire by the fire department), his housing area wasn't zoned for this (do they actually zone housing areas for chemical work?), some of the chemicals were potentially explosive, he had lots of chemicals some in large quantities, he wasn't arrested just asked to leave during the cleanup, his qualifications sound like a hobbyist not a professional.

      I don't know about you but I'm not sure I'd want a hobbyist with an extremely large amount of potentially explosive material (stored improperly) doing "experiments" next door to me and my family.

      • Re:Call the FBI? by Jarjarthejedi (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:40PM
      • Re:Call the FBI? by mrchaotica (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:37PM
      • Re:Call the FBI? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by LionMage (318500) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:26PM (#24574427) Homepage

        As for confiscation of his chemicals, it sounds like he had way more chemicals than he should need[...]

        So the government is in the position to decide how much of something a person needs in their home? "Hey, this guy's a Mormon and he's hoarding a year's worth of food in his home! Nobody should need to keep a year's worth of food in his home!" (Many of my Mormon friends routinely keep that much food on hand, and I'm told this is common.) "Hey, this guy's an audiophile and he's got scads of speakers and amplifiers all over the place! Nobody needs that much consumer electronics in his home!" Or, particularly relevant to people in places like Arizona (where I live), "Hey, this guy has a huge gun collection! Nobody should ever need more than one firearm! Heck, who needs guns at all, unless they're in law enforcement?"

        If you want to argue about proper storage, fine. But don't start talking about what you think someone needs or doesn't need. That's not for you to decide.

        TFA also says that some were potentially explosive and doesn't mention his qualifications. [...] his qualifications sound like a hobbyist not a professional.

        He's a retired chemist. That's plenty of qualification in my book!

        In case you missed it, the first five words of TFA were:

        Victor Deeb, the retired chemist[...]

        How is it that you could miss the very first sentence of the article and say you don't see any mention of his qualifications, and then turn around and make the claim that you think you know what his qualifications "sound like"?

      • Re:Call the FBI? by jwiegley (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:26PM
      • Re:Call the FBI? by ObsessiveMathsFreak (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:26PM
      • Re:Call the FBI? by hot soldering iron (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @09:59PM
      • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Call the FBI? (Score:4, Informative)

      by kmcarr (1185785) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:39PM (#24572407)
      First I want to make it clear that I am not "taking the city's side" but how can a post be insightful when it makes it abundantly clear that the poster never read the linked article. (Yes, I know this is /.) His home was originally entered by firefighters because of an air conditioner fire, they don't need a warrant when you ask them in to please keep your home from burning down. In the normal course of their duties the firefighters observed, in plain sight, what they reasonably believed could be hazardous materials. They contacted the appropriate authorities. Second, Mr. Deeb was NEVER placed under arrest or even taken into police custody. He and his wife were asked to stay at a hotel (or some other location) while DEP and hazardous material crews cleared the home.
    • Re:Call the FBI? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by pixelpusher220 (529617) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:45PM (#24572553)
      from TFA:

      "Mr. Deeb declined to comment yesterday. Authorities say he has patents pending and had been using his basement as a science lab to conduct experiments, possibly for many years.
      Firefighters found more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes in the basement Tuesday afternoon, after they responded to an unrelated fire in an air conditioner on the second floor of the home.
      Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboroâ(TM)s code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws."

      so the firefighters were at the house legally and found the stuff (he may have told them about it to make them aware of the chemicals when fighting the fire) and the 'residential' community in question has zoning laws that prevent people from developing A-bombs and other such crazy stuff; i.e. serious research and development.

      This was not just a small backyard tinkerer. He has patents pending and is a retired chemist.

      Right or wrong, ff you don't like the zoning laws, change them or move.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Thus the saying... by Notquitecajun (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:15PM
  • Chemicals (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jmpeax (936370) * on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:15PM (#24571877)
    While I agree that this seems rather overzealous on the part of authorities, the original article [telegram.com] mentions something that may be fair:

    There are regulations about how much [of various chemicals] you're supposed to have, how it's detained, how it's disposed of.

    Depending on the specifics of what this guy's dealing with, he may be subject to rules regarding the safe disposal of certain chemicals, etc.

  • How Dismal (Score:4, Insightful)

    by clang_jangle (975789) * on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:16PM (#24571891)
    I wonder how long before people in possession of scary "hacking software and equipment" are subjected to similar intrusions? Welcome to the NewUSA, where all knowledge is classified.
    • Re:How Dismal by xenn (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:23PM
      • Re:How Dismal by gparent (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:30PM
    • Re:How Dismal by slashdotlurker (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:24PM
    • Re:How Dismal (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Cheerio Boy (82178) * on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:31PM (#24572223) Homepage Journal

      I wonder how long before people in possession of scary "hacking software and equipment" are subjected to similar intrusions? Welcome to the NewUSA, where all knowledge is classified.

      This has already happened once to a friend of mine who collects large systems and does component-level development.

      The local HOA lady called the cops because he had so many computers that "He must be doing something illega! Look at all those wiiiires!"

      • Re:How Dismal by Pyrion (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:47PM
        • Re:How Dismal by Cheerio Boy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:54PM
          • Re:How Dismal by drxenos (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:49PM
            • Re:How Dismal by Cheerio Boy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:55PM
        • Re:How Dismal by Belial6 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:50PM
        • Re:How Dismal by TheoMurpse (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @01:55PM
    • Re:How Dismal by Etcetera (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @01:36AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • What I want to know... by PJCRP (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:16PM
  • by WrongMonkey (1027334) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:17PM (#24571907)
    If you have enough laws, then anyone is a criminal. They'll either claim its a violation of zoning ordinances, environmental hazard or an OSHA violation.
  • Police State by CranberryKing (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:17PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by ceswiedler (165311) * <chris@swiedler.org> on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:17PM (#24571919)

    From TFA:

    "Mr. Deeb's home lab likely violated the regulations of many state and local departments, although officials have not yet announced any penalties."

    If they discovered that you were keeping 200 cats in your home under extremely unsanitary conditions, they would do the same thing: move all of the cats to a shelter somewhere, and charge you with violating local health regulations once they had assessed the entire situation. I think it's a little bit of a kneejerk reaction to say that they're "ignorantly and irrationally afraid of chemicals" and "abus[ing] power to steal his property".

    Would you rather they just ask him "hey, is any of this dangerous?" and leave when he says "no"? There are reasons why we regulate stuff like chemicals (you have to have a permit just to own / use some professional beauty products), and if he wasn't following whatever the local regulations were, then it's his fault.

    Now, if it turns out he was indeed following all local / state laws, then the authorities certainly owe him an apology at least.

    • Re:What's the big deal? by jedidiah (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:22PM
    • by DanWS6 (1248650) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:24PM (#24572079)
      i[Now, if it turns out he was indeed following all local / state laws, then the authorities certainly owe him an apology at least.]i

      Yeah, I bet they will slap their wrists and say they are very very sorry and it'll never happen again too.

      I have a computer. One of those new fancy technology machines that store "files" on it. The local cops should come take it because I may or may not have "illegal" files on it. Once they analyze it they should possibly give it back depending on how they feel. Or they could just keep it. Oh they should also do this without obtaining one of those pesky warrant things. That will help save them time. It won't bother me at all because it's not an invasion of my privacy if it keeps the world safe from evil.
    • by keytoe (91531) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:26PM (#24572107) Homepage
      That's all well and good - and I have no problem with that. It's the lack of any due process (eg, getting a warrant) that is troubling in this case.
      • by ShadowRangerRIT (1301549) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:34PM (#24572297)

        Read TFA (the original article, not the sensationalist link):

        Firefighters found more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes in the basement Tuesday afternoon, after they responded to an unrelated fire in an air conditioner on the second floor of the home.

        (emphasis mine)

        The discovery wasn't a random home invasion, simply the result of doing their job. Much like police can bust you for murder if they see a dead body in your back seat after pulling you over for speeding, the firefighters reported a potentially unsafe violation of zoning and other laws.

        Now if it turns out no laws were broken and they still destroy his property, that's screwed up.

    • by Seakip18 (1106315) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:30PM (#24572183) Journal

      If we went by rule of law, every SINGLE house in America would violate at LEAST one local, county, state or federal regulation, code, law, etc.

      Per your post, how many cats is enough to make it enough too much? I know you would create an unsanitary condition, just when is the judgment call made to do so?

      I'm not even going to get into warrant less entry and search.

    • by gurps_npc (621217) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:35PM (#24572317)
      First, they investigated based on the fact that they thought anyone with that much stuff LIKELY violated the law.

      In other words, they don't know a law he violated, they just knew that we have lots of laws and they disliked what he did so they investigated.

      They even CONFISCATED STUFF without yet finding any real law breakage. How would you like it if someone said, you know your car is full of tons of dangerous explosives, then they confiscate and say "We likely think we MIGHT find something illegal on it."

      Would you be satisified if they returned it three days later? Would you be satisfied if they returned MOST of it 3 days later, but kept parts of it saying "We haven't definitely found anything illegal yet, but we want to keep looking?"

      A reasonable response would have been to let the police look around for ONE HOUR. If they want to take stuff, or even stay for more than one hour, they should have got a warrant.

      There are a ton of 'not really laws'. that the government does not enforce unless they dislike you. I won't bother to mention the president and his little "arrested but not charged for cocaine" thing.

      I WILL bother to mention the fact that large chemical companies ROUTINELY break the law and no one does anything about it. They get a pass from an inspector after a promise of "we'll fix it later".

      The citizen was trying to be nice and proove he did nothing wrong. I'm sure he expected a quick once over and nothing. He knew he was doing nothing seriously wrong.

      But instead he got shafted by a stupid government

      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:What's the big deal? by Quiet_Desperation (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:39PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by Kadin2048 (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:42PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • by Kohath (38547) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:46PM (#24572599)

      What's the big deal?

      This is yet another example of the end of freedom, that's what. This is one set of people deciding that you are making the wrong choices with your freedom and they need to make all your choices for you from now on.

      They want to choose
      - your hobby,
      - what games you can play,
      - whether you can smoke,
      - what you can drink,
      - what you can eat,
      - what kinds of cars you're allowed to drive,
      - how fast,
      - where you can live,
      - how you celebrate the 4th of July,
      - how much money you can make,
      - how much money you can pay your employees,
      - how you raise your children,
      - what jokes you can tell at work,
      - the precise mix of fuel in your gas tank,
      - what health care you are to be allowed,
      - who you can rent housing to,
      - what's on your cable TV,
      - and what days you can water your lawn.

      What's the big deal? Why don't we all just make exactly the choices you might make and then we'll never have a problem?

      And the worst thing: the only "solution" people talk about is getting "person C" to be in charge of making everyone's choices for them instead of "person D".

    • The big deal is 4th amendment by Khyber (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:47PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:49PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by Overzeetop (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:51PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by +Newander+ (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:44PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by Just Some Guy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:27PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by untaken_name (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @06:12AM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by woztheproblem (Score:3) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:36PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by kmcarr (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:44PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by onecheapgeek (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:45PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:What's the big deal? by _anomaly_ (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:45PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by omris (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:05PM
    • Re:What's the big deal? by bws111 (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:49PM
    • 11 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • I miss freedom (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Attackinghobo (1212112) * on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:18PM (#24571931)
    Don't you?
  • by PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:18PM (#24571933) Journal
    This is just another representation of the government attempting to control the lives of citizens under the guise of protecting the masses.

    Although he could be using his home chemistry lab to do illegal things, the government should not be allowed to enter and seize on the ability to do wrong, only on the reasonable suspicion.

    If the ability to cause problems was a legitimate reason to stop someone from practicing their hobby, then what about gun enthusiasts? What about drunks? And what about people with cars?

    I don't care if you have a home chemistry set, just don't blow up my house.

    Once you infringe on my rights, you're in the wrong - and that applies equally to the government!
  • He didn't conform! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Alain Williams (2972) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:18PM (#24571935) Homepage

    This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation.

    So his ''crime'' was to do something slightly different from the rest of the population.

    Then I got to thinking: What is normal, what does Mr average do in his spare time ? Does this mean that anyone who does anything except: watch TV, visit shopping malls or go to the pub is weird and so under suspicion ?

    I think that I'll put my walking boots on and think about it on a long stroll .... drat - that'll put me under the microscope :-)

  • by PenguinX (18932) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:18PM (#24571937) Homepage

    There are always people with authority and the stupidity to use it. So he's been shut down, yes it's terrible - and illegal - and unconstitutional. Perhaps the best way to show your outrage: buy his book: at $29 bucks, why not? That way, just in case justice is not done, he will be able to be well financed to return to his work.

  • by LWATCDR (28044) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:19PM (#24571947) Homepage Journal

    The EAA had the same fight about home builders.
    For those that don't know the EAA represnts people that build their own airplanes or restore old ones. At least one town made it illegal. The EAA usually fights such things and often wins.
    Too bad there isn't an EAA for Chemistry.
    BTW I am a member of the EAA :)

  • Massachusetts... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by EEBaum (520514) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:20PM (#24571967) Homepage
    Probably thought he was developing a new kind of hoax device [wikipedia.org].
  • Welcome to the club. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by bryanp (160522) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:21PM (#24571977)

    There have been similar problems for those who handload ammunition. "Oh my god, this man had 12 pounds of gunpowder in his garage! And look at all this ammunition! It's an arsenal of destruction!"

    And no, that's not hyperbole. It's happened. Generally only in places like California or Massachusetts, with their high proportion of Gun Fearing Weenies(tm), but not exclusively.

  • Warrants? We don't need no steenking warrants! by sm62704 (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:21PM
  • Proper Property (Score:3, Insightful)

    by delire (809063) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:21PM (#24572003)

    This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation.

    Since when has there existed a reference standard for how people should live in their own homes? Who's home is it, his or the State's?

    How many posts would it take for someone to use the word 'totalitarian', I wonder, were this story to have originated from a Communist country?

  • Sue, sue, sue! by Paracelcus (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:22PM
  • Dang! by the eric conspiracy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:22PM
    • Re:Dang! by mitgib (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:56PM
      • Re:Dang! by the eric conspiracy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:04PM
  • Bet you the code dude by JohnnyGTO (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:23PM
  • The Creature lives Igor by gilbertopb (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:23PM
  • There's worse things than terrorists by hyades1 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:24PM
  • Wow. by afxgrin (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:24PM
    • Re:Wow. by blueg3 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:32PM
      • Re:Wow. by Fulcrum of Evil (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:51PM
        • Re:Wow. by blueg3 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:13PM
      • Re:Wow. by nsayer (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:05PM
        • Re:Wow. by blueg3 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @07:32PM
          • Re:Wow. by nsayer (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @03:05AM
    • Re:Wow. by Fulcrum of Evil (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:38PM
    • Re:Wow. by clone53421 (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @09:57AM
      • Re:Wow. by afxgrin (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @12:03PM
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:24PM (#24572073)
    The following link is to the "inspections" division of the city where the zealot works. Phone numbers and emails are listed. Just an FYI http://www.marlborough-ma.gov/Gen/MarlboroughMA_Inspection/index [marlborough-ma.gov]
  • Patiently awaiting the follow up story... by Manfre (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:25PM
  • BS editorializing (Score:5, Informative)

    by OzPeter (195038) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:26PM (#24572123)
    The summary text

    "Allow me to translate Ms. Wilderman's words into plain English: 'Mr. Deeb hasn't actually violated any law or regulation that I can find, but I don't like what he's doing because I'm ignorant and irrationally afraid of chemicals, so I'll abuse my power to steal his property and shut him down."

    appears nowhere in the linked article, yet kdawson has chosen to sensationalize by adding his own words and making it look as if they were part of the article.

    In fact the article actually states:

    "Mr. Deebâ(TM)s home lab likely violated the regulations of many state and local departments, although officials have not yet announced any penalties. "

    • Re:BS editorializing (Score:4, Informative)

      by skyshard (1067094) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:34PM (#24572293) Homepage
      actually, that quote is from the MAKE article/guest post thing by Robert Bruce Thompson: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2008/08/home_science_under_attack.html [makezine.com]

      [...]Pamela Wilderman, the code enforcement officer for Marlboro, stated, "I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation."
      Allow me to translate Ms. Wilderman's words into plain English: "Mr. Deeb hasn't actually violated any law or regulation that I can find, but I don't like what he's doing because I'm ignorant and irrationally afraid of chemicals, so I'll abuse my power to steal his property and shut him down."
      In effect, the Massachusetts authorities have invaded Deeb's lab, apparently without a warrant, and stolen his property[...]
    • Re:BS editorializing by ShadowRangerRIT (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:36PM
    • Re:BS editorializing by synth7 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:40PM
    • Re:BS editorializing (Score:4, Informative)

      by rufey (683902) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:54PM (#24572775)
      That statement did appear in the makezine.com link however. The Slashdot summary was quoting from there, not the actual news story on the Telegram's site.

      After reading the makezine.com story and then reading the actual news story on the Telegram's site, its apparent that the makezine.com's intention was to sensationalize a story that otherwise most no one would have a second thought about.

      I wouldn't want this kind of chemistry lab next to my house. There was a fire in a second floor air conditioning unit which the fire department responded to, and it was then that the chemistry lab was found. What if the fire had gotten out of control? Who knows what kind of mess that would have caused not only for the house it was in, but for the entire neighborhood.
    • Re:BS editorializing by OzPeter (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:09PM
    • Re:BS editorializing by scipiodog (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:31PM
    • Re:BS editorializing by shma (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:21PM
    • Re:BS editorializing by FormOfActionBanana (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @07:01PM
    • Re:BS editorializing by donaggie03 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @11:15PM
    • Re:BS editorializing by drunkahol (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @06:40AM
    • Re:BS editorializing by clone53421 (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @09:59AM
    • Re:BS editorializing by sabt-pestnu (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @12:25PM
    • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • by Quirkz (1206400) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:27PM (#24572133) Homepage
    From the article: "Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws."

    After reading the article, I'm pretty unimpressed with the selective quoting in the blurb. Not only were laws broken, but from the description of the house, it sounds like there was at least a little reason to want to investigate, if perhaps not launch a cleanup. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.
  • double-check your translation by Mr. Slippery (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:27PM
  • Should move to Rural Missouri by BigGar' (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:27PM
  • $10 for his legal defense by pseudorand (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:27PM
  • by Bob9113 (14996) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:30PM (#24572195) Homepage

    This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation.

    I find it troubling that hobbyists are less trusted than corporations (assuming that these same experiments, performed by a corporation, would pose no problem - which I think the above quote pretty clearly implies). First, it is a really stupid idea from the American economy standpoint - we've made a lot of hay in this country's history on garage hackers (think: personal computer, for example). Second, what exactly makes corporations (which are made up of individuals) more trustworthy than non-corporate individuals? Timothy McVeigh? USAMRIID Anthrax. This is utterly stupid, and clearly the result of a panic'd mind more concerned with a pretense of safety than with the success of this great nation.

  • City comment link by PottedMeat (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:31PM
  • Long live the King by Rubikon (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:33PM
  • Atlas needs to shrug already by Quiet_Desperation (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:34PM
  • This Code Enforcement Officer... by dcollins (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:34PM
  • Firefighters found more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes in the basement Tuesday afternoon, after they responded to an unrelated fire in an air conditioner on the second floor of the home.

    Vessels of chemicals were all over the furniture and the floor, authorities said. The ensuing investigation involved a state hazardous materials team, fire and police officials, health officials, environmental officials and code enforcement officials. The Deebs were told to stay in a hotel while the slew of officials investigated and emptied the basement.

    Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboro's code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws.

    "It is a residential home in a residential neighborhood," she said. "This is Mr. Deeb's hobby. He's still got bunches of ideas. I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation. ... There are regulations about how much you're supposed to have, how it's detained, how it's disposed of."

    Mr. Deeb's home lab likely violated the regulations of many state and local departments, although officials have not yet announced any penalties.

    "He's been very cooperative," Ms. Wilderman said. "I won't be citing him for anything right at this moment."
     

    Really, the above is a bit far from the inflamitory accusations of ironshod goosestepping that the blog author insinuates.

    There is a difference between having a hobby bench and doing 'science' and running a chem lab. One is harmless, the other is only harmless when you take the proper safety percautions.

  • be normal, very normal by markhahn (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:37PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Then I saw little Tiffany. I'm thinking, y'know, eight-year-old white girl, middle of the ghetto, bunch of monsters, this time of night with quantum physics books? She about to start some shit, Zed.

    Men in Black

  • lets get serious here... by Danathar (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:37PM
  • by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:38PM (#24572379)
    As usual on Slashdot, what the submitter says happened and what the article says happened aren't the same.

    According to the article:
    A fire broke out on the 2nd floor of the subject's home. In the process of responding to this, firefighters found a LOT of chemicals, about 1500 different ones to be exact. The home was not zoned to be a chemical lab, so doing so much chemical work there violated zoning laws.

    So while it's quite fun to blame "evil" governments, had a fire not broken out nothing would have happened. And nobody who's railing about the government seems to have any smart ideas on how a home user is going to properly dispose of chemical waste in a legal and environmentally sound way. For all we know he was just dumping stuff down the toilet, which probably isn't legal.
  • Ms. Wilderman's Contact info by scubamage (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:38PM
  • Adventures in Childhood Chemistry by florescent_beige (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:38PM
  • This is where nanny state bureaucracy takes you by FireStormZ (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:44PM
  • Industrial chemical lab by Skapare (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:44PM
  • Interesting Cut by shma (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:46PM
  • by DigitalReverend (901909) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:48PM (#24572635)

    I contacted Ms. Wilderman, who actually answered her phone. http://www.marlborough-ma.gov/Gen/MarlboroughMA_Inspection/index [marlborough-ma.gov]
    Pamela A. Wilderman Code Enforcement Officer 508 460-3765

    She stated that the fire department was called for an apparent fire on the 2nd floor of Mr. Deeb's home. This allowed the firemen entry into the house. Upon further investigation (of the basement for a 2nd floor fire) the firemen discovered the chemicals and brought in the authorities.

    Ms. Wilderman said "We have zoning laws for this purpose, the firefighters were called into what they thought was a single family residence only to discover unmarked chemicals in the basement, he had a chemistry lab down there, in an area zoned residential". I informed her that I had an electronics lab, and beer brewing equipment in mine to which she made the comment "I bet your neighbors are thrilled about that". Of course I don't think my neighbors even know because they all mind their own business.

    Anyway this brings up a series of questions. Were the chemicals truly unmarked? Mr. Deebs is a retired chemist, surely he would practice some type of protocol. Second, if his activity is not illegal where is the justification of not only seizing the items, but then stating they will be disposed of. Will Mr. Deebs be reimbursed. What if they went into the basement and discovered a person to hand loads his own ammunition? It is a perfectly legal hobby practiced by shooters all over the country. Would they have seized those items?

    Finally, I would love to hear Mr. Deebs story on this. His reputation is being destroyed over a simple hobby.

  • Guess she'd have a real problem with Thomas Edison by jays8088 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:48PM
  • I get that paper, and I dont see the article! by Analog_Manner (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:50PM
  • So what is a valid home business in Massachusets? by ahfoo (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:51PM
  • Bad Summary (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ian Alexander (997430) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:54PM (#24572769)

    Pamela Wilderman, the code enforcement officer for [the Massachusetts town of] Marlboro stated, 'I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation.' Allow me to translate Ms. Wilderman's words into plain English: 'Mr. Deeb hasn't actually violated any law or regulation that I can find, but I don't like what he's doing because I'm ignorant and irrationally afraid of chemicals, so I'll abuse my power to steal his property and shut him down.'"

    Actually, if you'll read the full quote, she finishes with: "⦠There are regulations about how much youâ(TM)re supposed to have, how itâ(TM)s detained, how itâ(TM)s disposed of." and the article continues with: "Mr. Deebâ(TM)s home lab likely violated the regulations of many state and local departments."

    So, even though he wasn't actively being a terrorist or doing anything wrong with the chemicals, there are still rules about how you're supposed to handle it and where and he apparently didn't abide by them well enough.

    Regarding the lack of a warrant, to the best of my knowledge, if you have something illegal sitting out in plain sight and a law enforcement agency is there on other business, they don't really need a warrant to get at it.

  • by FellowConspirator (882908) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:55PM (#24572781)

    Even the newspaper article linked by the person making the sensational claim doesn't support the claim. The story appears in several places and the facts in each don't support the thesis that "Home Science is Under Attack".

    The chemist in question had a fire in his house. While the fire department was responding to the fire, they happened upon the lab with an unusually large array of chemicals and equipment. They asked the man what he was doing with them and he noted that he was a retired chemist, doing his own development at home now, and was even patenting and marketing some of the things he developed.

    The fire marshall was concerned that the lab might pose a fire hazard and contacted the DEP per the usual protocol, and they went through and checked it out. They notified the town of the situation, who noted that he was doing commercial chemical R&D (by his own admission, he was) in a residential area in violation of applicable zoning laws. The DEP was required to "close" the lab and clean up any chemicals for which there's a prescribed disposal procedure (e.g., you're not supposed to pour large quantities of it down the sink).

    The guy broke zoning laws and he got caught because of an unrelated fire in his house. That's it.

  • by hey! (33014) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:56PM (#24572813) Homepage Journal

    According to the newspaper article "most likely" violated numerous state and local regulations. Nobody is tossing out specifics because the town isn't planning to issue a citation. At issue is "how much you're supposed to have, how it's detained, how it's disposed of" in a residential area. So the issue isn't "experimenting", it's storage, processing and disposal at a facility not zoned for those purposes.

    Common sense will show you that the scale of experimentation makes a difference. Making a few quarts of biodiesel or a few bars of soap, that's home experimenting. Making a thousand gallons of biodiesel or a thousand pounds of soap is an industrial process. There isn't a precise line between chemistry set stuff and industrial production, but it's there. Making four gallons of beer a week is a lot for a home brewer, but making a hundred gallons a week probably means you've "crossed some line".

    The story doesn't really give us enough details to know whether the raid was justified, or served any public purpose. That depends on what they expected to find, why the expected to find it, and what they actually found, none of which is at this time public knowledge. We don't even know what level of government initiated this, it appears it was the town.

    One thing that's almost certain is that the search did not require a warrant. It is what is legally called an "administrative search". According to the dictionary an administrative search is "an inspection or search carried out under a regulatory or statutory scheme esp. in public or commercial premises and usu. to enforce compliance with regulations or laws pertaining to health, safety, or security. One of the fundamental principles of administrative searches is that the government may not use an administrative inspection scheme as a pretext to search for evidence of criminal violations."

    So the health inspector doesn't need a warrant to check on the crazy lady who has 200 cats in her house, which is a code violation even if its perfectly permissible for her to have 2 cats, or even 20. Likewise I can have a dog or two, but I can't run a kennel in a densely populated suburban neighborhood unless I have a zoning variance (and possibly pay commercial tax rates).

    You can argue that there shouldn't be such thing as zoning regulations. And its probably true that there are many places where there is little or no purpose to them. But zoning laws and administrative searches are NOT unconstitutional, at least by the interpretation of the Constitution that has held sway for a century or more.

  • Let her know how you feel by dyob (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:57PM
  • When are they going to discover a new continent? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:57PM
  • by WindBourne (631190) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:58PM (#24572855) Journal
    40 years ago, this man was considered the norm. We did chemical experiments in our house. NOBODY thought it was bizarre. This man writes a book on how to learn about chemistry at home and they raid his home without a warrent?????? Here in America, We have entered a VERY dark age.
  • This just in by ackthpt (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:58PM
  • They came first for the amateur chemists... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:59PM
  • customary home occupation by OrangeTide (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:59PM
  • From TFA: They're calling it R&D-Violates Zon by TechForensics (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @01:59PM
  • Lawyer Up! by Spacepup (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:03PM
  • by thepacketmaster (574632) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:05PM (#24572983) Homepage Journal
    The poster wrote:

    Pamela Wilderman, the code enforcement officer for [the Massachusetts town of] Marlboro stated, 'I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation.'

    The actual article says:

    Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboro's code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws. It is a residential home in a residential neighborhood," she said. "This is Mr. Deeb's hobby. He's still got bunches of ideas. I think Mr. Deeb has crossed a line somewhere. This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation. ... There are regulations about how much you're supposed to have, how it's detained, how it's disposed of."

    Either the poster didn't properly read, or he/she just considers zoning bylaws useless. For those that do think zoning bylaws serve no point, let me reference the recent propane explosion [cnn.com] that occured in the middle of a Toronto residential neighbourhood, leaving two people dead and hundreds of homes damaged, and is now the subject of a zoning review [thestar.com]

  • Perhaps it's just me, but... by edremy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:06PM
  • Makes perfect sense by xednieht (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:06PM
  • Look at the other side of this... by bradgoodman (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:07PM
  • Proper use by moteyalpha (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:09PM
  • A little perspective. by camperdave (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:10PM
  • by failedlogic (627314) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:29PM (#24573443)

    A few posters have noted that there was a fire in the household etc. Regardless, as a kid, I grew up in the "new age" of computers. A Commodore 64 in-hand, I played video games on it and did a bit of programming. I had a huge interest in science. But, like many other kids, were were generally more fortunate than our parents and our toys were more expensive and significantly less educational and a huge was of time: video games and cable TV. No less than straight-A's from grade school to high school.

    My father had chemistry sets and Meccano toys when he grew up. I had access to Meccano parts and motors but I grew bored and tired of it. Instead video games and TV.

    My father and I are on equal footing in terms of IQ. He's a doctor. I studied in science at university-level but I grew frustrated with Chemistry and Biology simply because it didn't come "naturally". Perhaps that's an excuse. Whatever. Not important to my argument. I think not having chem set was one reason. I don't regret what might have been - I didn't want to be a doctor after all. But, this society is probably turning away a lot of brilliant minds. Banning learning tools - books, chem sets, etc. is a bad, bad move. Maybe I could be an astrophysicist if I'd not had video games and cable TV. If not me, then some other would-be Nobel Prize winner.

    So, I think before any governments go banning or raiding people's homes for chemistry sets - whatever the reason - they should consider the effects of this on society and the education system. For parents that *know nothing* about Chemistry, they are not going to buy little Johnny a chemistry set because all the negative attention its getting in the media makes them think he's going to take the house down. See Dihydrogen Monoxide hoax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrogen_monoxide_hoax [wikipedia.org].

  • by Arccot (1115809) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:30PM (#24573459)
    Uggg... more knee jerk reaction to a pretty obvious case of prudent police work.

    There's a fire in his house. The fire dept. and police come, and put out the fire. In the process of putting out the fire, they notice hundreds of vials of chemicals. Not in a rack, not on a shelf, not even on a table, but all over the place. On the floor, on furniture, everywhere. No reasonable chemist would be dumb enough to do that with any chemicals.

    What would you want the police to do? Walk out without doing a little due diligence? There's a good chance he is storing these chemicals unsafely, and he is endangering his life and possibly others as a result. So they call in the experts to clean it up. And then they take a look at what he's done wrong, and probably will give him a fine and a slap on the wrist.

    It's amazing how many Slashdotters don't even bother to do a bit of research before coming to their black-and-white conclusion about how The Man is bad and this poor fellow is being an upstanding citizen with his rights violated. How dare the police invade this man's home! It's an attack on science! They hate the science!

    RTFA!

    There are alot of Slashdotters that seem to take pride in their critical thinking, intelligence, and analysis skills. Honestly, alot of you really don't demonstrate it very often here. It's more like a lynch mob than a bunch of intelligent people discussing issues.
  • Messed up by Ted Freeman (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:34PM
  • The original poster is being a bit disingenuous by flibbidyfloo (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:44PM
  • Slanted by kellyb9 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:51PM
    • Re:Slanted by zerOnIne (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:57PM
  • Ooh, Scary (Score:3, Funny)

    by zerOnIne (128186) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:55PM (#24573887) Homepage

    It's Massachusetts. We don't like your science and technology very much over here.

    You know, after ten years of living here, I still tell people I'm "originally from Maine" so as not to get lumped in...

  • Listen to them by Sloppy (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:06PM
  • ATTN SLASHDOT EDITORS: by jay-be-em (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:11PM
  • Yet another moronic move by my city officials by kadehje (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:16PM
  • This behavior is a national threat by X86Daddy (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:19PM
  • What is Wrong With Slashdot these days? by ramtin3 (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:29PM
  • by JustNiz (692889) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:33PM (#24574545)

    He's lucky they didn't hang him as a witch.

  • Suspicion by nurb432 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:41PM
  • For All you People Supporting the Government.... by Yinepuhotep (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:50PM
  • Pro-government morons. by Yinepuhotep (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:55PM
  • So, what was he doing? by seanonymous (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @03:55PM
  • The found it because there was a fire at the house by bigbigbison (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:01PM
  • So we're not allowed to have geeky hobbies anymore by Doug52392 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:02PM
  • Founding fathers (Score:3, Informative)

    by Atrox666 (957601) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:06PM (#24575003)
    Well when the INHERENT freedoms of the founding fathers were being tread upon by the "Lawful Authorities" they started shooting them. I'm not suggesting it as a recourse only stating that it is a traditional and patriotic American solution.
  • Chemicals by chaz373 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:17PM
    • Re:Chemicals by rally2xs (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:16PM
  • Deeb? by Drogo007 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:19PM
  • a matter of public record by tuckerbeck (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @04:45PM
  • I would be afraid . . . by pablochacin (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:01PM
  • theEddieCurrents (Score:3, Interesting)

    by theEddieCurrents (1343525) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @05:59PM (#24576355)
    Through family associations, I was able to go to a wonderland place as a kid, the chem lab at an oil refinery. I was given the most excellent glassware and stuff that they were replacing. Top line gum rubber hose, fittings - on and on. I had a a "lab" in my basement that was, as you might imagine, pretty amazing. I messed with lot's of things; gun powder and such, acids, bases, wow. You could buy sulphur, saltpetre, ribbons of copper, zinc, magnesium, brass tubing, glass tubing ... all the the Newberry's Dime Store! They had a huge selection of chemical wares in little glass bottles with blue and white labels. This article really made me float back 45 years and once again I was standing, transfixed in front of the huge wall of little jars, imagining what I could make. I run networks now days but my experiences with chemicals and labs were some of the best times I had as a kid. I went electronics but ... what could I have made?? Anyone that would have shut me down is unthinkable and wrong. I endangered no one but myself, if at all. I was very careful. My parents applauded and supported my efforts - they supported everything creative that I did and they were the best. So ask Ms. Wilderman what 6.02 x 10 to the 23rd is? If Pam can't answer, she shouldn't complain.
  • Worcester? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Illbay (700081) on Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:02PM (#24576389) Journal

    Here's the local article from Worcester...

    See how bad things have gotten? In today's climate, they'd never have been ABLE to invent Worcester-shire Sauce.

  • Neigbors complained ... by PPH (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:20PM
  • MassCops Forums by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:31PM
  • Next Step by MRB Constant (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @06:49PM
  • A similar thing happened to me by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @07:19PM
  • Great, I'm next... by thorkyl (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @08:19PM
  • in Worchester? MOVE NOW.

    That "not a customary home occupation" test can be applied to anything VCs are likely to fund. So get out now before the city shuts you down for not doing something that's within the rather limited comprehension range of their code enforcement officer. "You're programming computers? EVIL HACKER, I'm calling the police right now! You've crossed an invisible line!!!" Alternative energy? "Algae is dangerous! I have to clean it out of my pool every week. And you're growing the stuff? The Department of Homeland Security knows how to deal with your kind!" Otherwise, assuming you stay out of jail or Gitmo, you'll have to watch your competitors in saner jurisdictions pull ahead of you while you try to get your hardware and data files away from the city.

    There are reasons why even left-wing Democrats joke about the "People's Republic of Massachusetts". If this kind of nanny-state crap becomes prevalent in MA, even MIT's chemistry classes are likely to turn into high-school style 'comment and take notes on the experiment you'll be watching on video' crap. Though more likely, they'll simply find a saner state to move to.
  • Loose Translation by Larryish (Score:1) Tuesday August 12 2008, @10:00PM
  • ASSachusetts..... by IHC Navistar (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @10:21PM
  • by slider3618 (1211542) * <apothecary_01@earthlink.net> on Tuesday August 12 2008, @11:35PM (#24578725)

    This drives me crazy. My hobby is microscopy, and it is nearly impossible to get the supplies I need - and I am a pharmacist. After pondering this dilemma, I started carrying a number of chemicals, and repackaging them in smaller portions for the group of people who share my interest, and I charge cost for them. Every time a health inspector or Board of Pharmacy inspector comes in I have to explain and justify why I carry these "exotic items". I used to get Nitric acid from the local pharmacy when I was a kid just by saying it was for my chemistry set. Things have sure changed.

  • What do you expect? by jridley (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @07:22AM
  • Responding to a Fire... by YuriPup (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @07:32AM
  • Read the regulations? Anyone? by kismet666 (Score:1) Wednesday August 13 2008, @12:38PM
  • No warrant, no evidence? by argent (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:15PM
  • Re:In the name of being "safe" by Darkness404 (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @02:15PM
  • Re:SOME home chemistry DOES need regulation... by mweather (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @09:26PM
  • Re:Home Science Under Attack In Massachusetts by mweather (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @09:28PM
  • Re:He's a WITCH! WITCH!!! WITCHHHH!!! by Miseph (Score:2) Tuesday August 12 2008, @11:42PM
  • Re:Happened to me in Valdosta, GA. by clone53421 (Score:2) Wednesday August 13 2008, @10:18AM
  • 40 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2