From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: the usual
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Distribution: na
Lines: 45

arc@cco.caltech.edu (Aaron Ray Clements) writes:

>I was under the impression that to obtain fissionable materials (i.e.,
>plutonium or reactor/weapons-grade uranium) one was required to obtain
>a federal permit to own such materials.

	No, you merely have to start working on yellowcake or else
devise a system to get it from other sources.  BTW: the DOE handles
reactor fuel, and merely leases it to reactors.  The NRC certifies these
reactors.  The military have their own sources.  A private citizen has
none of these official sources.

>Actually, why bother looking it up?  From the material we covered last
>term (in 10 weeks) of Ge/Ch 127 (Nuclear Chemistry), I could *derive*
>what it would take to build a bomb.

	That's freshman-level chemistry.  Big deal.  Can you make it
work?  That's PhD-level physics.  Big difference.

>  And as far as the explosive charge,
>I (as a chemist) could synthesize a variety of explosives from commonly
>available chemicals in the garage if I felt like.  The electronics 
>behind the detonator and the shaped charges are a little trickier,
>however . . . but not impossible using a few "tricks of the trade."
>And if I really wanted to be nasty, I could include a core of 
>hydrogen and deuterium . . .

	So you admit that there's no law that could stop you?  Physics
aside, could you make one if you had the funds and time?  The answer
is yes.  So, do we lock you up now because of this?  Surely you can
see where the comparison with anti-gun laws comes into play here?

>Of course, the hardest part is getting the fissionable material
>to start with, and living long enough to put a bomb together. 
>(Plutonium has some *nasty* properties . . .)

	Precisely why it's not as readily utilized as you seem to have
been lead to believe.  BTW: 98% U235 is far better for home-made bombs
than trying to use plutonium.  The laws of physics make the creation of
a device without serious manufacturing facilities very low in probability.

< Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu viking@iastate.edu >
<  ISU only censors what I read, not what I say.  Don't blame them.  >
<     USENET: Post to exotic, distant machines.  Meet exciting,      >
<                 unusual people.  And flame them.                   >
