It seems as if the legislature of California attempted to prohibit such devices. Section 12301.a.6.
12301. (a) The term "destructive device," as used in this chapter, shall include any of the following weapons:
...
(6) Any sealed device containing dry ice (CO2) or other chemically reactive substances assembled for the purpose of causing an explosion by a chemical reaction.
Yet, I fail to see how this could possibly cover "dry ice bomb" as I've defined it above and as many have practiced it. The mechanical explosion from the ruptured bottle is not due to a chemical reaction of any sort. The CO2 is still CO2, just in a different phase.
Either I'm misreading their intent, or some legislators missed the mark.
No comments:
Post a Comment