>The suspects are being investigated for negligent arson, which is punishable by a fine or up to five years in prison, according to BBC News. Police noted in the statement that the women are “infinitely sorry” for the damage they may have caused.
Politicians, and people in general obsess over guns, as in, it's the ultimate weapon in the commonly avaible civilian arsenal
But REALLY gasoline... ARSON
During a revolution/civil war I would MUCH MORE fucking worry about arson than gun attacks if I were a politician
Try to bring down a building with 9 or 7.62, or 5.56 bullets, not going to happen, even with 6 million bullets you don't take down a 3+ stories concrete building
However with arson...
https://youtu.be/I-eHRTF5TEk?t=11
Magad... Once started it's game over for the entire building in about half an hour even if firefighters are already on the site, it's fucked, it's unstoppable
And against armored vehicles... You better have the models equiped to face arson, because otherwise it's game over in one strike https://youtu.be/py-4TdJ-P0A
...
And evidently the whole crime scene has been burned to the ground, normal, it's arson
And the worst part, is that you can't confiscate gasoline, or ban gasoline the entire economy rlies on it to function
This is a given, but it also completely diminishes any chance of having soldiers on foot. A few Molotovs into a riot shield line and they're done. Blind in their vehicles and no eyes on the ground.
If they did ban gasoline though, people can always distill alcohol as a cheap back up.
Absolutely
And I find that quite curious, that terrorists don't resort that much to arson
I mean imagine the following, a dozen of small cells, across a given country, comprised of let's say 3 to 5 committed individuals, loosely connected, and one night, bam, they all start to set buildings on fire, like idk, tax office, post office, super market, libraries, you name it, forests also
Pfffff
The potential for destruction is massive, and the risks of getting caught or noticed, are much smaller than with firearms or explosives
It's just bizarre terrorists don't resort to it, while they called for it, but nobody claimed the latest fires (notre dame, california, etc)
Bizarre. Even if they were to go with explosives they could add some type of accelerant to it. That way anybody not killed in the initial blast, but stunned and trapped in rubble, would burn. Plus there's the added property damage.
Might be because most people plotting terrorist attacks come from countries where the majority of buildings are entirely stone. Not as effective there.
(post is archived)