Freedom of speech vs. dangerous information

[marglar]

California

I've found a company on the internet that sells "exploding targets" that you can use during target practice to give feedback that you've hit your target. These are "binary explosives" that don't actually become an explosive until they are mixed. According to the atf documents, citizens can mix and use binary explosives for personal use and it is legal.

I've created a document (ebook) that gives the very simple details of how to create these targets yourself and show some videos of people using these targets and having fun on my website. I've labeled the document clearly that it is for entertainment purposes only and that nobody should create these targets unless they've consulted with a professional.

However, I've received an email saying that what I'm doing has extreme liability and that if someone hurts themselves or others in making these targets that I would be liable.

Am I liable?

 

[You Are Guilty]

California

I've found a company on the internet that sells "exploding targets" that you can use during target practice to give feedback that you've hit your target. These are "binary explosives" that don't actually become an explosive until they are mixed. According to the atf documents, citizens can mix and use binary explosives for personal use and it is legal.

I've created a document (ebook) that gives the very simple details of how to create these targets yourself and show some videos of people using these targets and having fun on my website. I've labeled the document clearly that it is for entertainment purposes only and that nobody should create these targets unless they've consulted with a professional.

However, I've received an email saying that what I'm doing has extreme liability and that if someone hurts themselves or others in making these targets that I would be liable.

Am I liable?

Probably. Google "ultrahazardous activities".

 

[seniorjudge]

However, I've received an email saying that what I'm doing has extreme liability and that if someone hurts themselves or others in making these targets that I would be liable.

Buy a hundred million dollars worth of liability insurance just to make sure.

 

[marglar]

I'm not understanding how an ebook discussing how exploding targets are made would be considered a hazardous activity. I don't sell the actual targets, nor the materials to make them. But, other companies do...

To me, I'm simply exercising my freedom of speech to describe how such things are made as I found a number of people on the internet asking because purchasing the targets is so expensive.

I read about ultra-hazardous activities and these are all based on physically doing something specific like keeping a wild animal or a dog that is known to be a danger to others, transporting dynamite, etc. I'm just not sure that this applies as recipe books for explosives (i.e. "Poor Mans James Bond") have been around forever.

I don't mean to be argumentative and I do honestly appreciate the feedback. I'm simply trying to sort all of this out.

 

[CdwJava]

Having freedom of speech does not absolve you of liability for your actions.

You can ALWAYS be sued. Whether someone will win or not would depend on a whole lot of factors.

- Carl

 

[racer72]

To me, I'm simply exercising my freedom of speech to describe how such things are made as I found a number of people on the internet asking because purchasing the targets is so expensive.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with what you are doing. The right to free speech only applies to restrictions put in place by the government, it is not give one the right to diseminate information, legal or not, that could cause harm.

 

[You Are Guilty]

I am not a CA lawyer, so I am couching my replies with some "wiggle room", however, most states I know of have held that explosives are "ultrahazardous". Here's the CA law on the issue (note that it is ultimately up to a judge to determine whether you'd be liable, but you certainly could be sued):

An activity is ultrahazardous if it "(a) necessarily involves a risk of serious harm to the person, land or chattels of others which cannot be eliminated by the exercise of the utmost care, and (b) is not a matter of common usage." (Luthringer v. Moore (1948) 31 Cal.2d 489) An activity is a matter of common usage if it "is customarily carried on by the great mass of mankind or by many people in the community." (Luthringer v. Moore, supra, 31 Cal.2d 489)

Using the term "abnormally dangerous" rather than "ultrahazardous," the Restatement sets forth six factors which are to be considered in determining how to classify the activity. They are:

"(a) existence of a high degree of risk of some harm to the person, land or chattels of others;

"(b) likelihood that the harm that results from it will be great;

"(c) inability to eliminate the risk by the exercise of reasonable care;

"(d) extent to which the activity is not a matter of common usage;

"(e) inappropriateness of the activity to the place where it is carried on; and

"(f) extent to which its value to the community is outweighed by its dangerous attributes." (Rest.2d Torts, § 520.)

As explained in comment (f) to section 520, the several factors are to be considered together; establishment of one factor alone is usually not sufficient to categorize an activity; several factors will ordinarily be required.

Whether an activity is an ultrahazardous activity is a question of law for the court to decide. (Edwards v. Post Transportation Co. (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 980).

 

[marglar]

So, I can see if you are selling the components to create the exploding targets that this would be a huge liability.

Is providing an overview of how such targets are made equally liable? Books on various explosives have been around for years. Does anyone have specific examples of how providing this kind of information can be liable? Am I liable for what someone does with information I provide? I'm not selling targets, but only information about how they are made...

I sure appreciate all of these replies! Everything is very helpful!

 

[tranquility]

The point people are trying to make is that, while the first amendment will not permit the government to stop you from publishing, you may be held responsible for any damages which result. More importantly, you can be sued. And, defending a suit is expensive.

An example of the issues get back to "The Anarchist Cookbook". People had tons of problems with the thing and wanted to stop it from being published. Yet, a simple Google search points out many wed sites with the information. More recently, (I don't remember the exact name.) there was a book on assinating or killing for hire. At one point someone used the techniques in the book to kill and the publishers/authors were sued. I don't know the result, but the suit itself must have cost thousands upon thousands to defend.

 

[Just Blue]

The point people are trying to make is that, while the first amendment will not permit the government to stop you from publishing, you may be held responsible for any damages which result. More importantly, you can be sued. And, defending a suit is expensive.

An example of the issues get back to "The Anarchist Cookbook". People had tons of problems with the thing and wanted to stop it from being published. Yet, a simple Google search points out many wed sites with the information. More recently, (I don't remember the exact name.) there was a book on assinating or killing for hire. At one point someone used the techniques in the book to kill and the publishers/authors were sued. I don't know the result, but the suit itself must have cost thousands upon thousands to defend.

From the beginning of this thread I was thinking of that case!!

The name of the book was (I think) "Hit Man"...and both the publisher and the author were sued. The Plaintiff won and collected over a million dollars...And this was back in the late 80's I believe...

OP: If some kid....13, 14 years old were to make one of these devises, you can bet you bottom dollar that his parents will be suing you for everything you have and will ever have.

Write a e-book on how to make a Pound Cake....much less dangerous and with almost no liability...well unless it's my mothers recipe....shudder.....

 

[xylene]

I believe that some are exaggerating the liablity risks because of the emotional nature of explosives information in these 'times' and the high profile of 'murder for hire manual' show trials and the like....

First and most importantly - Bombmaking information is extremely commonplace on the internet. This includes amatuer crap and semi-pro e-books for sale and for free. Is that really because there are many liability suits devastating the 'dumb information' website category? While some paternalist reactions might think this is a defense, its just pointing out the reality. Unless your are an arab or palestinian sympathizer sending medical aid to Iraq - the government is not likely going to go after you criminaly (plus you are correct about these materials being ATF 'blessed'). Your civil liablity might be higher than say a tennis manual - your probabilty of being sued, and even more so be sued successfully are rather low.

I will suggest that what you are doing is a bit foolish, and also juvenile. Explosive materials are not toys. I take issue with your charachterization of them as such.

 

[tranquility]

I essentially agree with Xylene. I think it unlikely you could be criminally charged for what you write on this matter. I also think it is unlikely you could be successfully sued. But, there is risk and liability has been found in the past in similar situations. Especially if the audience are friends in a local area, I think risk increases.

 

[xylene]

I think the situation with the "Hitman" book is not completely analogus.

1) In the Hitman case, Paladin press agreed to settle without admission of liability. - so no real precedent was set.

2) The plantiffs suing Paladin had deep pockets and insurance reasons... etc.

3) I might suggest that part of the goverments ruling and the plantiffs doggedness might be a grudge over an extremist publishing house...

4) The material in Hitman had no legitimate use. It was a crime manual.

Making simple binary explosives is quite legal and and has many legal uses - including practice targets. Playing with them is still a bit dumb...