If you keep reading it is infact a modified firearm
The weapon of mass destruction charge was brought against Routh over a fully-automatic machine gun he had, according to the News & record.
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
36 points (90.9% liked)
Ask Lemmy
26734 readers
1480 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So Iraq definitely had weapons of mass destruction ^^
Mission Accomplished!
"We know where the are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." - Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense while being publicly questioned on the validity of claims of WMDs in lead up to invasion of Iraq.
Rumsfeld of the "known knowns".
I just saw this post that clarified it was a fully automatic machine gun. Weapon of mass destruction sounds like a nuke, but from a legislative perspective, I can see how a fully automatic machine gun would qualify.
Maybe he just owned land with oil reserves in the ground?
If it reaches you how to add, subtract, divide, multiply, and such.
No wait... That's a weapon of math instruction.
I would define it as any weapon which would be overkill (no pun intended) if you were to get them for any purpose aside from destruction, such as if you excused its possession on account of self-defense. One could say a regular handgun suffices as a tool of self-defense, you could take one shot and prevent the advancements of a perpetrator. To get something like an automatic gun of war or a flamethrower, supposedly for purposes of protection, is the self-defense equivalent of parents catching a small child eating all the cake while nobody is looking only to excuse themselves with "but I was hungry".
The US government now uses it to charge people indiscriminately. I see the term in my local headlines once a month, at least, where someone gets tagged with this BS charge.
As one person said I used to think ‘dear God they must have a nuke in the basement’ but anymore you find out the person just had a sawed off shotgun or possibly the parts for a homemade silencer and a prosecutor got an instant hard on.
That was the traditional meaning of the word, yes. However it has been horribly misused to push headlines and in the legal arena it has been used to push for harder penalties on what would be considered traditional weapons.
It's a pet peve of mine because it dilutes the word, but home made preasure cooker bombs have been called WMDs in the US and people seem OK with it.