← Back to context

Comment by jayrot

1 month ago

The best is when they use flimsy arguments about needing to "make an example" or "discourage this behavior" or "create a deterrent", as if people in these situations are even aware they're doing anything wrong.

25 comments

jayrot

Reply
potato3732842  1 month ago

The message being sent is "even if we can't prove intent we still can completely ruin your life"

  • motorest  1 month ago

    [flagged]

    • HelloMcFly  1 month ago

      > For those arguing the guy is just massively dumb and naive, are you aware this depicts the character as even more dangerous to himself and society?

      No, because he hasn't done anything actually dangerous to society, it's not like he bought anything that can be weaponized. Is he a danger to himself? Only insomuch as his actions have put him at risk of going to jail.

      I'm not saying there should be no consequences, but the idea he is a danger to himself or society is totally absurd.

      1 reply →

motorest  1 month ago

> (...) as if people in these situations are even aware they're doing anything wrong.

Does this excuse even fly? I mean, do you actually believe that a guy who is a self-described "science nerd" with enough interest in chemistry to sought to get a sample of each element of the periodic table would somehow skip any and all references on how the element is subjected to nuclear proliferation restrictions?

  • piokoch  1 month ago

    I would say that "nuclear proliferation" is about not letting North Korea or Israel getting nuclear weapons [1], not chasing random guy who tried to purchase infinitesimal amount of plutonium.

    [1] As we know, both efforts failed.

  • GoblinSlayer  1 month ago

    >investigators were aware he had obtained this material and it was in a very small quantity.

    It was a small quantity. For comparison Trinity had 6 kg of plutonium.

SpicyLemonZest  1 month ago

Awareness that you're doing something wrong is a spectrum. Obviously this guy wasn't intending to build a nuclear bomb, but I'm extremely skeptical that a science nerd could get to the point of building a periodic table collection without learning that plutonium is dangerous and heavily restricted. (The source article doesn't cover this, so just to make sure we're on the same page: plutonium is _not_ any more legal to export from the US than it is to import into Australia, and whoever sold it to this guy was almost surely breaking the law too.)

  • AuryGlenz  1 month ago

    I don’t think it’s crazy for someone to know that you can buy uranium and not realize the full difference between that and plutonium.

greenavocado  1 month ago

The Royal Australian Air Force shut down airspace over an air force base to test fire a “high-powered” single-shot .50 caliber rifle. They are a parody of themselves.

  • defrost  1 month ago

    The RAAF didn't test fire, nor did they "shut down" the air space.

    Politicians and the police staged an air field adjacent test firing for media that carried risks that caused restricted, and warning notices to be issued for the air space.

      A Department of Defence spokeswoman said the activity was supported by Defence.

  “For safety, Air Force used a notice to airmen and provided air traffic control for a period of time in the vicinity of the area,” she said.

  “At no time were RAAF Base Pearce’s flying operations impacted. The activity was coordinated between WA Police and Defence in accordance with standard procedures.”

  National Shooting Council vice president told News Corp the demonstration was an “orchestrated media event to create fear in the community ... they were clearly told it was too risky but they went ahead anyway”.

  “There was a very, very high risk of ricochets and therefore injury to members of the public, press and police attending because of the type of targets they were shooting at … they were very lucky to get away with it with no-one being injured, killed or worse for this little sh.t show,” he said.

    ~ https://thewest.com.au/politics/state-politics/raaf-base-pea...

    ^^ NOTICE: this is from two years past in 2023 .. The Western Australian newspaper website has wrapped this with a masthead with todays date (2025). If you search on the story there are several links from 2023 referencing this .. I cannot fathom why The West has done this to date other than it's a rag with a monopoly in a small state and they can't be arsed to do a good job here.

    • ultrarunner  1 month ago

      As a pilot, if I see a notam "that caused restricted … notices to be issued"-- especially in a military context-- I would be very comfortable describing the affected airspace as "shut down". I'm probably missing something as your link to an apparently low quality story is also paywalled. Maybe they're referring to the fact that the military almost always exempts itself from its TFRs, so technically it wasn't completely "shut down", but by that definition no airspace is ever shut down.

      1 reply →