From: | Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org> |
Date: | Sat, 16 Nov 1996 20:01:24 -0800 (PST) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | UXO SOUVENIRS |
From: Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org> UXO SOUVENIRS Typically, one of the first "public" responses to the discovery of unexploded ordnance in a public area is for souvenir hunters, armed with metal detectors, to go out looking for shells, grenades, and other weapons. Data on UXO-related accidents is dominated by the explosions of such souvenirs, many of which are transported off-site to homes and businesses. An important protective response, therefore, would be to discourage or even prevent unauthorized collection of identifiable ordnance - on the assumption that it might include unexploded charges. The consequences of an explosion should be a sufficient deterrent, but it isn't. One might argue that collectors get what they deserve - and that their deaths would aid in the evolutionary process - but often the people injured or killed are not the collectors themselves. If there are laws outlawing the collection of unexploded military ordnance, they should probably be made more effective. If such laws do not exist, they should be considered. Does the federal government have the authority to legislate against such activity on its own property? Can it outlaw souvenir munitions collection at former defense sites? Lenny Siegel |
Follow-Ups
|
Prev by Date: Cleaning Up After the Cold War Next by Date: RANGE RESEARCH | |
Prev by Thread: Cleaning Up After the Cold War Next by Thread: Re: UXO SOUVENIRS |