Footage Captures Man Accused Of Building Chemical Weapon Inside Walmart Store

[lostinblue 1,989]

Footage Captures Man Accused Of Building Chemical Weapon Inside Walmart Store

OXNARD (CBSLA.com) — Dramatic video has been released of a man who police say stands accused of building a chemical weapon inside a Walmart store in Oxnard.

The man wearing all black is initially seen in the security footage from June 18 blending in like any other shopper.

But, authorities say, he didn’t come to the store to shop, but to build a chemical weapon.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/07/20/footage-captures-man-accused-of-building-chemical-weapon-inside-walmart-store/

But we were told by folks on this site that a bomb is hard to build ..

[ready4ONE 5,400]

He was unsuccessful in getting the bomb to go off. I'm guessing that speaks to your snarky question regarding hearing it's difficult to build a bomb.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

You assume. Either it failed to go off as he intended, or perhaps he had enough of a delay set to get safely away, and it was defused in time.

He was unsuccessful in getting the bomb to go off. I'm guessing that speaks to your snarky question regarding hearing it's difficult to build a bomb.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

You assume. Either it failed to go off as he intended, or perhaps he had enough of a delay set to get safely away, and it was defused in time.

I don't assume anything. Fact, he was unable to get the bomb to go off. The why is both irrelevant and not speculated at by me.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

The article I read said something about him plugging it into an electrical socket and departing the area, then an evacuation happened shortly thereafter. What if it was designed to go BOOM in an hour? Fact... We don't know yet. Just know it was a "chemical weapon". Maybe it wasn't designed to go boom. Maybe a slow leak of toxic fumes?

I don't assume anything. Fact, he was unable to get the bomb to go off. The why is both irrelevant and not speculated at by me.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

The article I read said something about him plugging it into an electrical socket and departing the area, then an evacuation happened shortly thereafter. What if it was designed to go BOOM in an hour? Fact... We don't know yet. Just know it was a "chemical weapon". Maybe it wasn't designed to go boom. Maybe a slow leak of toxic fumes?

Fact - bomb not successfully set off.

Fact - nobody said what was alleged by the snarky comment per se, but to respond to the comment, a loaded gun would have been far easier to inflict wounds and kill people. Nobody has said that it's impossible to make a bomb, nor do damage with one. The comment was supposed to be clever.

Fact - comment was not clever, and in fact the bomb in the OP shows that building a bomb and its successful use is indeed more difficult. (Than the unsaid alternative and much more popular gun.)

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

You win. I had no idea you were an EOD expert.

(Psssst...... It wasn't a bomb. But don't let that lead you astray.)

Fact - bomb not successfully set off.

Fact - nobody said what was alleged by the snarky comment per se, but to respond to the comment, a loaded gun would have been far easier to inflict wounds and kill people. Nobody has said that it's impossible to make a bomb, nor do damage with one. The comment was supposed to be clever.

Fact - comment was not clever, and in fact the bomb in the OP shows that building a bomb and its successful use is indeed more difficult. (Than the unsaid alternative and much more popular gun.)

[ready4ONE 5,400]

You win. I had no idea you were an EOD expert.

(Psssst...... It wasn't a bomb. But don't let that lead you astray.)

Earlier in this thread you weren't sure, I know that I am not given enough information to know if the device was supposed to explode or simply spray chemicals. Not lead astray at all by your attempt to add gravitas to ywt another misguided thread. Whatever it was supposed to do, it failed.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

You're right, neither of us built it so neither know for sure how it was intended to work. Or not work. But what I DO know for sure is that your comment towards LIB, calling him "snarky", was uncalled for. Lighten up, amigo.

Earlier in this thread you weren't sure, I know that I am not given enough information to know if the device was supposed to explode or simply spray chemicals. Not lead astray at all by your attempt to add gravitas to ywt another misguided thread. Whatever it was supposed to do, it failed.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

You're right, neither of us built it so neither know for sure how it was intended to work. Or not work. But what I DO know for sure is that your comment towards LIB, calling him "snarky", was uncalled for. Lighten up, amigo.

His yes posters don't think it is obvious that he is attempting to get reactions with his every post. This thread is no different and I stand behind my assessment that the comment he added was snarky. Perhaps my pointing that out was also snarky.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

IMO, your saying so was.

I am not sure I have ever seen LIB attack anyone here on VJ, though he/she is often attacked by others. He provides links, people are free to read (or not; I think often certain posters don't bother), yet they attack him. He sometimes posts the silly memes that we all do, but mostly, he simply posts links to actual events. Show me another CEHST user who keeps it so professional and with lack of emotion? I know I am not able to keep my emotion out of my posts as he/she does.

His yes posters don't think it is obvious that he is attempting to get reactions with his every post. This thread is no different and I stand behind my assessment that the comment he added was snarky. Perhaps my pointing that out was also snarky.

[GandD 5,966]

Well, we all try but yanno, the bar........ It's just so high.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

His yes posters don't think it is obvious that he is attempting to get reactions with his every post. This thread is no different and I stand behind my assessment that the comment he added was snarky. Perhaps my pointing that out was also snarky.

Who doesn't post with the expectations of a reaction.Who doesn't sometimes get snarky. Certainly not You or I.

[Rob L 3,811]

Who doesn't post with the expectations of a reaction.Who doesn't sometimes get snarky. Certainly not You or I.

Who says snarky is bad?

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Who says snarky is bad?

Not me . A good snark is ok by me once in a while. With a good Samich joke here and there.

Snark 24 7 gets old as does post after post after post on the same subject

That's why I steer clear of race and relgion subjects

Edited July 24, 2016 by Nature Boy Flair