Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Explosives Camp

Posted by samzenpus on Thu Jul 05, 2007 12:53 AM
from the if-you-love-something-blow-it-up dept.
theodp writes "How about a summer camp where you get in trouble for not blowing things up? Students with a passion for all things explosive and proof of US citizenship pay a $450 fee to attend Summer Explosives Camp, 'We try to give them an absolute smorgasbord of explosives,' quipped a professor at the University of Missouri-Rolla, which offers a minor in explosives engineering. Here's the brochure (PDF), kids!"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Kaboom (Score:4, Funny)

    by bruce_the_loon (856617) on Thursday July 05 2007, @12:56AM (#19750951) Homepage
    Need I say more, cousin Osama. You buy the plane ticket, I'll get the passports.
    • Safety isn't first (Score:5, Insightful)

      by vargasman (1077465) <.vargasman. .at. .gmail.com.> on Thursday July 05 2007, @02:25AM (#19751395)
      Did anybody else catch that safety was number 2?

      1. How to prime and shoot dynamite.
      2. Safety precautions when handling explosives.
      3. Where explosives are used.
      4. The curriculum and department of Mining Engineering at UMR.
      5. What careers are available that are explosive related.
      6. How underground blasts work.
      7. How explosives are used in industry.
      8. How to set up and shoot off a fireworks display.
      • by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday July 05 2007, @04:24AM (#19752025)
        That's because safety information has more punch when you're able to show what happens when you do NOT heed them. So after step one, the intro to step two is most likely "See, kids, and this happens when you forget to..."
      • by joe-a-dad (1124145) on Thursday July 05 2007, @07:10AM (#19752693)
        Anonymous Coward,

        As a father whose daughter asked to go last year and was accepted, SAFETY was the first and foremost emphasis. Not only did my daughter have a "blast" (pun intended) it built up her confidence and now she has chosen engineering as her major. She will be attending UM-Rolla next year as a freshman. The course was not only very well done with lectures and practicum, it was done on an campus that refuses to be politically correct. Would be terrorists were weeded out. Some child threatened to blow up a building from the middle east and he was deported 12 hours later. I think they know a lot about safety.
        • by Rorschach1 (174480) on Thursday July 05 2007, @10:15AM (#19754373) Homepage
          To be fair, the building from the middle east was in the country illegally anyway.
        • by eck011219 (851729) on Thursday July 05 2007, @10:15AM (#19754381)
          How do you deport someone in the program if one of the requirements is U.S. citizenship? Where do you deport them TO?

          I know you can have joint citizenship, but can you be subject to immediate revocation of your American citizenship AND immediate deportation without a hearing? More to the point, can you do that to a minor?

          I don't mean to call your statement into question (okay, I guess I do, but I don't mean it as a personal attack) -- this just doesn't seem to add up somehow.
  • by Bo'Bob'O (95398) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:00AM (#19750977)
    Can I go?
  • by ghoul (157158) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:02AM (#19750985)
    Why is US citizenship required? Its especially funny as the professor conducting the camp is a Briton and not a US citizen. And its not like mines us explosives only in the US. People come to the US from all over the world for the best education available. Why would you think a foreigner who wants to be a mining engineer is not a valid candidate?
    • by jd (1658) <[moc.oohay] [ta] [kapimi]> on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:21AM (#19751091) Homepage Journal
      Stop. Think. A Briton is in America, wanting American citizens - and only American citizens - to play with extremely dangerous explosives. There can be only one explanation. Revenge for The A-Team and Knight Rider.
    • Mining explosives is a very specialised subject. The object is to produce shock waves with no blast and no fire (think about it.) You want to break up rock or minerals with the absolute minimum of side effects, using the absolute minimum amount of energy necessary and raising as little dust as possible, not only because of health and safety risks but because any other approach adds cost. If you want to be a mining engineer, you learn explosives at mining school not summer camp. And you learn it, mostly, fro
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          You're erroneously assuming that Universities in the US get a significant source of their income from the federal government.

          If you attend a state school, without actually having lived in that state, you pay an arm and a leg to go there, just like the international students do. If you grew up in a state without a good public university system, you're pretty much screwed. Students in Virginia get a much better deal than those in Wyoming.

          Many colleges in the US are also privately owned and operated, which m
      • by Quietti (257725) on Thursday July 05 2007, @02:27AM (#19751401) Journal

        Right, so it's OK for USA to teach its kids about explosives? Imagine the outcry if someone heard about a similar program taking place, say, in Iran. I can already see the headline we would be getting: "Iran training dozens of kids into becoming terrorists with an expertise in explosives."

        This is the same sort of fuzzy logic we see with USA possessing nuclear weapons and yet demanding that Iran be prevented from ever having any.

        • by Capt James McCarthy (860294) on Thursday July 05 2007, @04:44AM (#19752117) Journal
          "Right, so it's OK for USA to teach its kids about explosives? Imagine the outcry if someone heard about a similar program taking place, say, in Iran. I can already see the headline we would be getting: "Iran training dozens of kids into becoming terrorists with an expertise in explosives."

          This is the same sort of fuzzy logic we see with USA possessing nuclear weapons and yet demanding that Iran be prevented from ever having any."

          Uh, I seriously doubt that they are deomonstrating how to create a 'human bomb' and are more along the lines of how explosives work. Experts in the field are always needed. Think demolishion, mining, or construction. Iran has these types of training schools already. They have construction and mining as well you know.

          And as for the argument 'the US has them and no one else can' really doesn't work. What the hell is the US supposed to say: "We have nukes, so lets give them to every nation in the World." I don't think so. Kumbaya politics never worked and never will. (unless you live in Star Trek world) People want to 'play nice' with other nations, yet they still have their gun of choice under their pillow, or house alarm, or large dog(s) because they can't even trust someone from their neighborhood breaking into their home.
          • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2007, @02:58AM (#19751567)

            The US doesn't have religious radicals that go blow themselves up because someone made fun of Jesus.

            Oh really... [religioustolerance.org] In particular, note the column "Bombing, Arson, Attempted Bombing or Arson".

  • Wtf? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by doyoulikeworms (1094003) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:04AM (#19750995)
    If you were going to blow shit up, Osama style, you would certainly NOT need to go to a childs' educational camp to do it. More power to people making science more interesting for kids.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      You say that, but the most recent terrorists in London were incompetent [theregister.co.uk] and could have learned a lot from such a camp.

      (Not that I'm advocating banning such camps, just pointing out not all terrorists have access to proper training.)
  • by weighn (578357) <(weighn) (at) (gmail.com)> on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:05AM (#19750999) Homepage
    can't wait to see the end-of-camp group shots - powder smudged faces, bandages, tattered clothing hanging from severed limbs...ah, the memories!
  • Obviouthly it's a technical thchool and not anything near the ivy leagueths... The brothure acthually stateth that the deadline for applicanth is April 1th.

    Yes. The 1th.

    Not the 1st. Becauth they're not that type of inthituthun. Dammit, Jim, they're miners, not phythithiths!

  • Screw the Boy Scouts! No one needs to know how to tie a frickin' knot, nor do we need to know how to build a stupid soap box car.

    Lets create the Urban Scouts, where children will learn how to pick locks, phone phreak, hack computers, and social engineer.
  • Not so fun (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Uruz 7 (986742) on Thursday July 05 2007, @03:06AM (#19751623) Journal
    Blowing things up really isn't all that fun. I was a demo guy in the Army and for the most part it was a pain in the ass. I do like the feeling when the wave of energy passes through your body but we always hunkered down and never actually witnessed an explosion because of the danger factor. And in Iraq it was a lot of hard work to pile up shell after shell of UXOs or captured IED components in 130 degree heat.

    You can have the demo camp. I want a $450 camp where you just lay on a beach and get drunk with beautiful women. Where's that brochure?
  • Illegal (Score:3, Informative)

    by fozzmeister (160968) on Thursday July 05 2007, @03:29AM (#19751743)
    Britain/Europe is working on making publishing information on how to make bombs illegal. Burn the books, Burn the books!

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/art icle2023030.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
    • by ghoul (157158) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:00AM (#19750979)
      The application deadline is on April Fool's day? Isnt that a blast?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Yea, and not only was the deadline April Fool's Day, but even if this somehow managed to not be a joke the course dates were June 3 - 9 and June 17 - 23. There'd be Explosives Camp alumni by now!
    • Re:Bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)

      by servognome (738846) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:11AM (#19751027)
      Suppose somebody named McVeigh, or Cho attends.
      Anybody could be a terrorist.
      • Re:Bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Professr3 (670356) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:22AM (#19751099)
        I can build a bomb without going to a silly camp. With enough determination, I could destroy anything I chose. When will people stop thinking "oh, if we just shut down all the 'dangerous' activities, we'll all be safe from terrorists"? It was communists, now it's terrorists - there's always a boogeyman.
        • Re:Bad idea (Score:4, Interesting)

          by servognome (738846) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:30AM (#19751131)

          When will people stop thinking "oh, if we just shut down all the 'dangerous' activities, we'll all be safe from terrorists"? It was communists, now it's terrorists - there's always a boogeyman.
          I totally agree. Sorry, my point was to refute the racism in the post that I replied to.
          In fact the people who go to the camp would have a greater appreciation of the dangers of explosives and be safer than those idiots on YouTube with the anarchists cookbook.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Agreed. It's completely silly.

          Yes, knowledge is dangerous. But ignorance is *MUCH* more dangerous.

          Humans in the world today overwhelmingly suffer and die as a result of *lack* of knowledge. (or to some degree, lack of *application* of knowledge)

          I live a *much* safer life because I live in a country where there are experts on explosives, poisons, dangerous creatures, radioactive substances, cancerous agents and firearms.

          Any idiot can figure out how to make a fertilizer-bomb. If anything amazes me with the Lo
    • Re:Bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:21AM (#19751095)
      Why would a terrorist in possession of explosives need to be educated in how to use them to blast off the side of an open pit mine? You don't exactly need any special training to set off explosives in a suicide bomb attack (making explosives on the other hand would need special expertise).

      It is extremely sad that science and chemistry are being destroyed in the name of "fighting terrorism". Explosives, chemistry and other "dangerous terrorist activities" are used extensively in many industries. Most people are completely oblivious to this fact, and don't have a clue about how 'heavy industries' work. Therefore they continually do stupid things like call for a ban of chemistry in school or a ban of explosive substances needed for mining and other industries. School chemistry is already so useless and watered down (mostly because of the threat of litigation if something goes wrong) that I fail to see how there will be enough chemists in the future within mining and manufacturing industries.
          • The Glasgow (for want of a better word) "bombers" suffered more lack of knowledge than stupidity: They were doctors, who managed to get British accreditation. http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/07/02/britain- b ombings.html [www.cbc.ca] Fair to assume they're capable of intelligence. In this case, they were operating (no pun indented) outside their field. I think we've seen the last 'A-Team Propane Tank' attack. Presumably those that go in their footsteps won't make the same mistake. If they'd been able to source and use
    • Re:Bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)

      by value_added (719364) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:23AM (#19751103)
      We should not take chances with this. Lives are at stake.

      It's this kind of reflex thinking that would encourage someone to get enrolled and attend classes wearing a turban muttering occasional Allahu Akbar under his breath. Just for laughs.

      Lighten up. The country is filled with people who drive cars, own and carry guns, have arguments with their ex-wives, hold a grudge against the IRS, hate the President, or work at the post office. I'd be more worried about the sheer numbers of people in any of those groups before I'd worry about someone who wants to pursue what could be described as a slightly juvenile interest or hobby.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Suicide bombers are normally not trained in the manufacture of explosive devices and in many cases all that is required of them is devotion (fanaticism) to press a button or throw a switch to set the explosive off. I would even go as far to say that they don't really have any idea what the explosive will do to their body assuming you can find all the body parts.

      It is usually a skilled technician or chemist who is the one who actually oraganises the manufacture of the explosive for the suicide bomber and i
      • by dballanc (100332) on Thursday July 05 2007, @01:43AM (#19751205)
        So we should deprive kids of safety and proper handling knowledge just in case they decide to turn on us right? Unlicensed? How do you think you get licensed, magic? They get licensed by receiving the proper training and various checks... which is exactly what this is... atleast in introductory fashion.

        If those 'kids' got a little 'inspiration' they could find far more dangerous information in a public library. I've got an old chemistry book from 1902, copies or similar books are no doubt common. That book reads like a Betty Crocker cookbook. I'd much rather interested kids receive real training and experience than try some of the stuff they could cook up on their own.
          • by modecx (130548) on Thursday July 05 2007, @03:02AM (#19751587)
            First of all, they're not kids. They're at least young adults: junior and senior high school students who are interested in enrolling at the university. These are kids who are interested in going to a school that concentrates on engineering, which happens to be one of those schools that has a focus on, or at least a general slant towards, (golly gee) stuff related to mining. Secondly, they do not walk away with a license to work with explosives, nor any of the hundred or so papers and certificates which one must have to acquire or brew said materials. Thirdly, it's not like they plop a stick of dynamite, or a brick of c-4 into a ten year old's hands and say "have fun". Most of the high powered events are demonstrations, and the "kids" get to figure stuff like "how much ANFO do have to put into this hole to do the job", and see if they were right or wrong.

            Finally, teaching these kids about the stuff that class presents has to be statistically about one-hundred-thousandth the danger level of not sufficiently teaching them about more mundane stuff, like driving, for instance.
          • by edittard (805475) on Thursday July 05 2007, @03:59AM (#19751889)

            What I'm saying is that kids should not be licensed to work with explosives at such a young age.
            If it's mentioned in the article that the attendees will qualify for any kind of license or permit, can you point out where? I didn't see it.
          • by Fire Dragon (146616) on Thursday July 05 2007, @04:48AM (#19752139)
            I know this is way too much thinkofthechildren, but as a kid, I nearly blew my hands of several times, and I dont want my kids to do what I did.

            Can't really think any of friends at kids didn't nearly blow of fingers or eyes. You end up getting yourself injured with stuff like explosives when you have no idea what you are doing. Blowing things up teaches you how things blow up and how to set the fuse. I'd rather teach my kids the knowledge that I learned while doing bad stuff than have them getting same scars and keep them in one piece.

            Getting the information how to do things is pretty easy from books and net, learning how to do it safely has to be learned from the hard way, hopefully by somebody else, or to be teached. I'd rather by teaching my kids how to handle napalm than taking them to hospital after "ooops, it does burn, thow some water on it".

            • by Agripa (139780) on Thursday July 05 2007, @09:18AM (#19753715)
              I have to admit that the various safety lessons I had concerning firearms did not really stick until my best friend shot me through the hand when I was 16. Granted, it was an air rifle but it still did go completely through my hand and operating my motorcycle clutch on the way back to camp was not a trivial exercise. After that, I was nervous even when paintball guns were not pointed in a safe direction.

              Now when I teach firearms safety, I have the student teach me back and I question the reasoning for each rule just to verify as much as possible that they understand and to force them to do extra consideration. The mindset when working with dangerous technology needs to include the foresight into what could go wrong. Understanding the context of each safety rule is very helpful.
      • by Mr. Freeman (933986) on Thursday July 05 2007, @04:00AM (#19751891)
        There's one huge problem you seem to have completely left out of your post. YOU CAN'T BUY EXPLOSIVES WITHOUT PROPER LICENSING/PERMITS/ETC. And as someone said, this course doesn't give you a license to posses/obtain explosives. (I don't believe you can even hold said license until you're 18 anyway.)

        But you know what, let's pretend that explosives are widely available. You have two cases:
        Case 1:
        Kids have explosives. Kids do not go to this course and thus have no training. They play with explosives and blow themselves up.

        Case 2:
        Kids have explosives. Kids go to this course and thus DO have training. They know how to safely use them and thus don't end up killing themselves.

        Attempting to restrict information is never a good idea if that same information is already available in any form. For example, all of this information is already in a book or on the Internet somewhere. Restricting it just leaves an aura of curiosity around it.

        I don't understand your argument of "The safety training these kids get will be unlikely to stick". Why would the safety training not stick? I find it interesting that a lot of people are willing to believe that kids immediately think that being safe is bad or "uncool". The belief that kids won't be safe simply because it involves safety is completely unfounded and more likely a result of your own fear than anything else.
        • by skulgnome (1114401) on Thursday July 05 2007, @05:24AM (#19752267)
          Quite right. Kids are good at following instructions, as long as those instructions make sense. Going completely over the top on the safety stuff leads to (deserved) disrespect towards those instructions and then, in some cases, may lead to the stupider kids doing stupid shit. But in the general case, kids are very very interested in their own safety around dangerous shit.

          My country, shop classes in upper secondary and high schools teach kids basic tasks like how to operate very real, very serious tools from bandsaws to circular saws and lathes, welding (arc and two-gas), metalworking (the typical item made is an oversized spoon for throwing water in a sauna) and various techniques of soldering electronics components. Yet the number of accidents is very low, generally due to the quality of teaching is high across the board but most of all because kids 1) learn rather quickly and 2) with the exception of the dumb ones, have a very good instinct for self-presevation especially around tools that are designed so that they can be operated safely. I assume things are very similar in the US, at least in some of the more progressive states.

          There's nothing I see as being particularly dangerous in a "miner jr." camp compared to a circular saw that'll cheerfully take off both of your hands at the wrist if you fuck up well enough. At least proper explosives are close as can get to inert until triggered, preferably from a healthy distance and then some. Hell, a mining explosives camp sounds like just the thing for children of mining families; not many places to train when you're young for the kind of thing your parents did.
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              The thing is, nobody knows that. Or rather they didn't, till you opened your big fat mouth.

              This is the most popular type of explosive used when making car bombs. They've known it for years. McVeigh used this. It's been on prime time news.

              There's more to it than what he said. The details are available in various manuals; both chemical and terrorist.

              I've heard that some farmers mix some up themselves to assist with stump removal and such.
      • But on the other hand, it is illegal without a licence, and for a very good reason, and to give this knowlegde to unlicenced kids?

        I think this is a terrible attitude, and it's sad.

        You need a license to buy explosives, not to learn about them. One of the precepts of our entire society is that information isn't sectioned off into little 'need-to-know' chunks, controlled by cabals or trade organizations.

        You can't practice medicine without a license either, but nobody goes around trying to lock up all the first-aid manuals or anatomy textbooks. We don't let random individuals set up shop as Professional Engineers and start greenlighting bridges, but anyone who wants to can go and read about finite element analysis [colorado.edu]; there's no secrets there.

        Turning society into a series of closed, medieval-Masonic-ish 'knowledge cults' isn't going to help us in the long run. And frankly, if that sort of secrecy is what's required to "protect" society from terrorists, I seriously question the value of what you're preserving.
        • by Gordonjcp (186804) on Thursday July 05 2007, @02:35AM (#19751451) Homepage
          It seems they don't want the competition.

          Well, it's bad for business. I'm amazed that the far-right fundie Christian crazies don't actually align with the far-right fundie Muslim crazies. After all, they want pretty near the same thing and the fundie Muslim crazies can do a better job of the abortion clinic bombings, and cheaper. Why not just outsource?
    • I kinda doubt it (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Moraelin (679338) on Thursday July 05 2007, @03:04AM (#19751607) Journal
      I kinda doubt that the CIA can't find better training than this. Mind you, I'm not from the US, but I thought each army has their own engineers branch which offers more in-depth knowledge about demolitions and military use of explosives than a summer camp. Including how to safely get rid of the explosives if, say, the convoy you were expected didn't pass that way. I'd think CIA would have no problems getting a trainer from the army or navy and organizing their own training.

      If nothing else, reading TFA, it doesn't seem like it would make that useful training for 007-like or terrorist use of explosives. Stuff like how to safely blow up a side of quarry, or better yet, how to make a spud gun, are useful for mining or respectively entertainment, but don't translate well into how to do that much else with explosives.

      Or, rather, not much that you couldn't already google. I mean, you can look up ANFO [wikipedia.org] on Wikipedia, and that's the main explosive used by the mining industry. If you can buy the ammonium nitrate and wanted to make a car bomb with that, you don't really need courses in how to drill the holes and calculate the dosage to blast a rock face in a quarry.

      Also, about CIA use, again, I may be wrong about America, but it seems to me that:

      1. People aren't that interchangeable between mining jobs and covert ops type jobs. Just knowing how to drill a hole and prime a stick of dynamite doesn't also make you want to go abroad and blow up some Arabs. Between making a decent risk-free living at home and going and risking your life abroad for better pay, most people would choose the first.

      2. And it doesn't mean you even could, probably. About 95% of the people have this interlock in the brains against being _too_ mean to other people. About 3% are sociopaths, and don't. And there are a few more in between. So, really, statistically chances are higher that you'd be in the "nice guy" category, not in the "sociopath" cathegory.

      The army has had millenia of figuring out how to (A) drill people into executing some stuff mechanically against cardboard targets or with blanks, until it becomes reflex by the time they have to do it against live targets. (B) Instill an "us vs them" theme and some groupthink notions of duty, honour, patriotism, etc, to help get people pull the trigger even if they don't really want to. (C) Getting people in a situation in which, one way or the other, it's your ass if you don't cap that other guy. Now that really helps get people to pull the trigger. (D) Creating a whole organization and hierarchy for dissipating responsibility, so noone from the guy who mines pitchblende to the general who orders the strike to the pilot who drops the atom bomb on Hiroshima feels particularly responsible for it all.

      And it still gets a lot of people waking up in cold sweat for the rest of their lives, a.k.a., Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder [wikipedia.org].

      Heck, even some of the war atrocities are, ironically, traceable to the fact that man wasn't designed to kill man. People either get to (A) break down not understanding why the other guys shoot at him, what's wrong with them? Are they savage animals? and/or (B) get caught in that grouphink trap, thinking everyone else around is brave and fearless and all patriotic, and do dumb things to hide the fact that personally they're scared shitless.

      Anyway, a lot of those only work in a group, and only work in a situation where it's short term "it's either them or me" and no easy way out. It doesn't quite apply to a lone killers.

      Briefly, it might be a lot easier easier to first select with someone without scruples and give them explosives training, than to convert a peaceful mining engineer into a commando trooper.

      3. The last person you'd want in the army or some secret service is some "Explosions are cool, Beavis!" type who makes spud guns or blows stuff up when they're bored, and wears a "I [heart] explosives" t-shirt. You'd probably want someone a lot more mentally stable than that.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          In a nutshell, because the 3% who don't have the scruples, at some point managed to manipulate everyone else into going to death for the greater glory of those 3%.

          It also seems to have started with (A) religion, and (B) missile weapons. Whatever prehistoric record (fossils, cave paintings, etc) we have seems to be mostly about hunting animals, until the bow is invented. Then we start having paintings of groups of archers, led by some shamen with some relics/totems/etc, shooting at each other.

          I don't think e
    • Re:UMR (Score:4, Funny)

      by MadCow42 (243108) on Thursday July 05 2007, @05:55AM (#19752373) Homepage
      >> Missouri Institute of Science and Technology, or MUST for short

      If THAT is how you spell or make acronyms in Missouri, I'd be looking out of state for school too. :)

      MadCow.