|
|
| Donate for the Cryptome archive of files from June 1996 to the present |
20 June 1997: Link to text of amendment passed on June 19, 1997
19 June 1997
On June 19, 1997, the Senate voted 94 to 0 to approve the Feinstein Amendment to S.936, the National Defense Authorization for 1998 Bill. The amendment prohibits the teaching of bombmaking for criminal purposes.
The material below describes the amendment, debate of it and attempts to have it passed as part of other legislation.
A study requested by the Senate during the debate in 1996 on the availability of bombmaking information on the Internet was prepared by the US Justice Department and presented to the Senate in April, 1997.
See: http://cryptome.org/abi.htm
As a result of the Justice report the language of the amendment passed today varied from the version below.
[Congressional Record: June 28, 1996 (Senate)]
[Page S7269-S7277]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr28jn96-23]
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997
*****
Amendment No. 4428
(Purpose: To prohibit the distribution of information relating to
explosive materials for a criminal purpose)
Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of
Senator Feinstein and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Georgia [Mr. Nunn], for Mrs. Feinstein,
for herself, and Mr. Biden, proposes an amendment numbered
4428.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. . PROHIBITION ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION
RELATING TO EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS FOR A CRIMINAL
PURPOSE.
(a) Unlawful Conduct.--Section 842 of title 18, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subsection:
``(l) It shall be unlawful for any person to teach or
demonstrate the making of explosive materials, or to
distribute by any means information pertaining to, in whole
or in part, the manufacture of explosive materials, if the
person intends or knows, that such explosive materials or
information will be used for, or in furtherance of, an
activity that constitutes a Federal criminal offense or a
criminal purpose affecting interstate commerce.''.
(b) Penalty.--Section 844(a) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``(a) Any person'' and inserting ``(a)(1)
Any person''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Any person who violates subsection (l) of section 842
of this chapter shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 20 years, or both.''.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to propose an amendment, which
is co-sponsored by by Senator Biden, to prohibit teaching bomb-making
for criminal purposes.
First, I want to express my sincere appreciation to the managers of
this bill, Senators Thurmond and Nunn, and to the distinguished
chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Senators Hatch
and Biden, for their cooperation in accepting this important amendment.
My amendment prohibits the teaching of how to make a bomb if a person
intends or knows that the bomb will be used for a criminal purpose.
Additionally, the amendment prohibits the distribution of information
on how to make a bomb if a person intends or knows that the information
will be used for a criminal purpose.
The penalty for violation of this law would be a maximum of 20 years
in prison, a fine of $250,000, or both.
As my colleagues will recall, this amendment was accepted in the
Senate as part of the anti-terrorism bill last summer. Regrettably, the
House dropped it from their bill, and it was not restored in
conference.
I vowed then, on the floor of the Senate, to continue this fight, and
attach this amendment to the next appropriate legislative vehicle.
Today, that time has come.
[[Page S7272]]
Unfortunately, while Congress was failing to act, the need for this
law has, tragically, continued to grow dramatically.
Just yesterday, while I was working to add this amendment to this
bill, the Los Angeles Times ran a story, ``Internet Cited for Surge in
Bomb Reports,'' which demonstrated this need. I ask unanimous consent
that this article be printed in the Record following my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The Times detailed the recent alarming rise in
bombmaking incidents in my State of California: reports of possible
explosives to the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department have more than
doubled in the last 2 months; responses by the Los Angeles Police
Department to reports of suspected bombs shot up more than 35 percent
from 1994 to 1995; the LAPD found 41 explosives in 1995, more than
double the number 3 years earlier; and the Sheriff's Department
discovered 69 bombs last year.
What is especially troubling is that it appears that an increasing
number of these incidents involve children, who are getting
instructions for making these explosives from the Internet:
Four teenagers were arrested last week for a rash of pipe bombings in
Rancho Palos Verdes in May and June which destroyed four mailboxes, a
guard shack, and a car.
In Orange County, police say teenagers may have used the Internet to
help construct acid-filled bottle bombs in Mission Viejo and Huntington
Beach, one of which burned a 5-year-old boy when he found it on a
school playground.
Two-months ago, the Orange County Register reported that a North
Carolina teenager who posted ``The Anarchist Cookbook'' on his World
Wide Web page was told by a Dutch girl that she had used the recipes to
blow up a neighbor's car.
All Senators and Representatives should be concerned about this, for
these incidents are occurring across the country. Wherever there is a
computer and a phone line, this danger is present.
In February, in upstate New York, three 13-year-old boys were charged
with plotting to set off a homemade bomb in their junior high school,
using bomb-making plans which they had gotten off of the Internet.
Yesterday's Los Angeles Times article reported that computer-
generated guides proved a common link in bombs built recently by
teenagers from the streets of Philadelphia and Houston to rural Kansas
and upstate New York.
These incidents aren't just limited to dangerous teenage pranks
either. One of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers was arrested with
manuals in hand.
My amendment gives law enforcement another tool in the war against
terrorism--to combat the flow of information that is used to teach
terrorist and other criminals how to build bombs.
This information is not something that one would use for a legitimate
purpose or information that can be found in a chemistry textbook on the
back shelf of a university library.
What my amendment targets is detailed information that is made
available to any would-be criminal or terrorist, with the intended
purpose of teaching someone how to blow things up in the commission of
a serious and violent crime--to kill, injure, or destroy property.
In researching this issue, I came to find that specific and detailed
information on how to make a bomb is distributed far too widely. It's
available on the Internet, in books, in magazines, and by mail order.
According to terrorism expert Neil Livingston, there are more than
1,600 so-called mayhem manuals--books with titles like ``The Anarchist
Cookbook,'' ``The New Improved Poor Man's James Bond,'' ``How To
Kill'', and ``Exotic and Covert Weapons''.
Let me provide some examples of the type of information I am talking
about:
The ``Terrorist's Handbook'' is available by mail order and on the
Internet. Just recently, my staff downloaded a copy of it from the
Internet; Mr. President, you could do the same thing today.
The ``Terrorist's Handbook'' begins by saying:
``Whether you are planning to blow up the World Trade
Center, or merely explode a few small devices on the White
House lawn, the ``Terrorist's Handbook'' is an invaluable
guide to having a good time. Where else can you get such
wonderful ideas about how to use up all that extra ammonium
triiodide left over from last year's revolution.
The Handbook goes on to give step-by-step instructions on what to do:
Acquiring chemicals: ``The best place to steal chemicals is
a college. Many state schools have all of their chemicals out
on the shelves in the labs, and more in their chemical
stockrooms. Evening is the best time to enter a lab building,
as there are the least number of people in the building. . ..
Of course, if none of these methods are successful, there is
always section 2.11 [Techniques for Picking Locks].''
It then tells the reader how to pick a lock.
The Handbook lists various explosive recipes using black powders,
nitroglycerine, dynamite, TNT, and ammonium nitrate. And, it provides
explicit instructions for making pipe bombs, book bombs, light bulb
bombs, glass container bombs, and phone bombs, just to name a few.
Phone bomb: ``The phone bomb is an explosive device that
has been used in the past to kill or injure a specific
individual. The basic idea is simple: when the person answers
the phone, the bomb explodes. . .. It is highly probable that
the phone will be by his/her ear when the devise explodes.''
Light Bulb bombs: ``An automatic reaction to walking into a
dark room is to turn on the light. This can be fatal, if a
lightbulb bomb has been placed in the overhead light socket.
A lightbulb bomb is surprisingly easy to make. It also comes
with its own initiator and electric ignition system.''
Yet another handbook contains detailed schemes and diagrams for a
zippered suitcase booby trap, and a shower head booby trap, triggered
by the pressure of turning on the water.
One of the more appalling descriptions of bomb making involves baby
food bombs. The following information was taken from the Bullet'N Board
computer bulletin board off the Internet:
Babyfood Bombs: ``These simple, powerful bombs are not very
well know even though all the material can be easily obtained
by anyone (including minors). These things are so f---ing
powerful that they can destroy a car. . .. Here's how they
work.
``Go to the Sports Authority or Hermans sport shop and buy
shotgun shells. At the Sports Authority that I go to you can
actually buy shotgun shells without a parent or adult. They
don't keep it behind the little glass counter or anything
like that. It is $2.96 for 25 shells.''
The computer bulletin board posting then provides instructions on how
to assemble and detonate the bomb. It concludes with, ``If the
explosion doesn't get'em then the glass will. If the glass doesn't
get'em then the nails will.'' Here are some more examples of individual
postings from the Internet:
``Are you interested in receiving information detailing the
components and materials needed to construct a bomb identical
to the one used in Oklahoma? The information specifically
details the construction, deployment and detonation of high
powered explosives. It also includes complete details of the
bomb used in Oklahoma City, and how it was used and could
have been better.''--posted April 23, 1995.
``I want to make bombs and kill evil zionist people in the
government. Teach me. . .. Give me text files!. . .. Feed my
wisdom, Oh great one.''--posted April 25, 1995.
The foreword to the book ``Death by Deception: Advanced Improvised
Booby Traps'' states:
Terrorist IEDs [improvised explosive devices] come in many
shapes and forms, but these bombs, mines, and booby traps all
have one thing in common: they will cripple or kill you if
you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
In this sequel to his best-selling book ``Deathtrap'', Jo
Jo Gonzales reveals more improvised booby-trap designs.
Discover how these death-dealing devices can be constructed
from such outwardly innocuous objects as computer modems,
hand-held radios, toilet-paper dispensers, shower heads,
talking teddy bears, and traffic cones. Detailed
instructions, schematic diagrams, and typical deployment
techniques for dozens of such contraptions are provided.
Other titles of books that teach people how to make bombs include:
``Guerrilla's Arsenal: Advanced Techniques for Making Explosives and
Time-Delay Bombs''; and ``The Advanced Anarchist Arsenal: Recipes for
Improvised Incendiaries and Explosives.''
Enough is enough. Common sense should tell us that the First
Amendment does not give someone the right to teach someone how to kill
other people.
[[Page S7273]]
The right to free speech in the First Amendment is not absolute.
There are several well known exceptions to the First Amendment which
limit free speech. These include: obscenity; child pornography; clear
and present dangers; commercial speech; defamation; speech harmful to
children; time, place and manner restrictions; incidental restrictions;
and radio and television broadcasting.
I do not for one minute believe that the Framers of the Constitution
meant for the First Amendment to be used to directly aid the teaching
of how to injure and kill.
In today's day and age when violent crimes, bombings, and terrorist
attacks are becoming too frequent, and when technology allows for the
distribution of bomb making material over computers to millions of
people across the country in a matter of seconds, some restrictions on
speech are appropriate. Specifically, I believe that restricting the
availability of bomb making information, if there is intent or
knowledge that the information will be used for a criminal purpose, is
both appropriate and required in today's day and age.
My amendment is an important, balanced measure to confront the
problems presented by today's rapid growth in technology, and I am
extremely gratified by its adoption today.
I yield the floor.
Exhibit 1
[From the Los Angeles Times, June 27, 1996]
Internet Cited for Surge in Bomb Reports
computers: police and sheriff's officials say web sites provide
youngsters with information on making explosives
(By Eric Lichtblau and Jim Newton)
Los Angeles explosives experts have seen an alarming rise
in bomb calls over the last several months, and they think
they know the main culprits: youngsters on the Internet who
are learning to make bombs by scanning computer sites with
ominous names like ``the Anarchists Cookbook'' and ``Bombs
and Stuff!''
Reports of possible explosives to the Los Angeles Sheriff's
Department have more than doubled in the last two months.
More troubling, the percentage of suspicious devices that
turn out to be real explosives--especially homemade pipe
bombs--has grown even more drastically.
The Los Angeles Police Department has noted a similar rise
in bomb reports, reflecting a nationwide trend that experts
blame on newfound computer access to explosives recipes.
``A lot of the [cases], we're finding out, are kids getting
the information off the Internet,'' said Lt. Tom Spencer, who
heads the sheriff's arson/explosives detail. ``We're very
worried, to be honest . . . It's frightening.''
Sheriff's officials believe that information from the
Internet was used in a rash of pipe bombings in Rancho Palos
Verdes in May and June that destroyed four mailboxes, a guard
shack and a car. Four teenagers were arrested last week in
the explosions.
In Orange County, meanwhile, police said the Internet may
have aided vandals in building acid-filled bottle bombs in
Mission Viejo and Huntington Beach. A 5-year-old boy was
burned by one of the bombs on a school playground in an April
attack that led to the arrests of four teenagers.
And nationwide, computer-generated guides proved a common
link in bombs built recently by teenagers around the country,
from the streets of Philadelphia and Houston to rural
enclaves of Kansas and upstate New York.
Some bookstores and libraries have long provided printed
information on homemade bombs--one such manual was found this
week in Torrance after a 23-year-old man allegedly blew out
three windows at his parents' home with a 10-inch-long pipe
bomb. But the Computer Age has cast the explosives' net far
wider, experts say.
LAPD spokesman Cmdr. Tim McBride said: ``There is a lot of
verbiage on the Internet, where people are becoming * * *
more aware of what it takes to put a bomb together.''
Indeed, a quick scan of computer sites reveals wide access
to site offering enlightenment on a wide range of bombs, some
cast in a serious, academic tone, others in an aggressive or
even hostile bent. ``Don't be a wimp. Do it NOW!!!'' urges a
file on ``making and owning an H-bomb.''
One popular site, the Anarchists Cookbook, lists no fewer
than 19 chapters related to explosives, from ``Making Plastic
Explosives From Bleach'' to a ``Home-Brew Blast Cannon'' and
``A Different Kind of Molitov [sic] Cocktail.''
USC terrorism expert Richard Hrair Dekmejian believes that
users of such technology are often troubled youths who,
without intervention, could become involved in more serious
violence along the lines of the Oklahoma City, World Trade
Center or Unabomber attacks.
The Internet's bomb-making intrigue offers an outlet for
troubled youths who are ``bored and alienated,'' he said in
an interview. ``This is very, very serious. This is a new
epidemic, and I see the problem getting worse,'' Dekmejian
said.
The numbers in Los Angeles seem to prove him right.
Both the LAPD and the Sheriff's Department--the main
agencies that handle bombings in the area--have seen marked
increases in the last several years in reports of
suspicious devices. Last year, responses at each
department shop up more than 35% over 1994, reaching 972
calls to the LAPD and 595 to the Sheriff's Department.
Each report of a suspected bomb automatically triggers a
response by a bomb squad.
The rise has been even more drastic at the Sheriff's
Department in the last two months. The bomb detail, which had
been averaging about 30 calls a month, handled 68 assignments
in April and 62 in May.
LAPD officials attribute the rise in part to the public's
increased awareness and sensitivity to the threat posed by
bombs, especially after terrorist bombings in Beirut, New
York City and Oklahoma City, among other attacks.
For that reason, an abandoned briefcase may be more likely
to generate a call to police today than it was a few years
ago. But the trend goes beyond public alertness, officials
say, and the number of actual explosives discovered has gone
up significantly as well.
The LAPD found 41 explosives in 1995, more than double the
number three years earlier. And the sheriff's discovery of
explosives rose about 10% over that same period, to 69 bombs.
The rise was particularly sharp in 1995 at the Sheriff's
Department, with the number of bombs 50% higher than in the
previous year.
The Sheriff's Department and its 26 bomb technicians
recently began using a new 4\1/2\-inch-high robot to ferret
out possible explosives. Much smaller than its predecessors,
it can be used to roam under trucks or through theater aisles
to inspect suspicious items.
But technology can be a double-edged sword, and Spencer
says his people remain hamstrung as long as the Internet
provides free recipes for disaster.
``We can't do anything because there's a freedom of speech
mandate that says people can put on the Internet what they
want, and people will access if if they want to access it,''
he said. ``The way to stop it is for parents to monitor what
their kids are doing.''
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I stand in strong support of the Feinstein-
Biden amendment, which would make it a Federal crime to teach someone
how to make a bomb if you know or intend that it will be used to commit
a crime.
This seems pretty simple and straightforward to me. Many Americans--
no, I think most Americans--would be absolutely shocked if they knew
what kind of bone-chilling information is making its way over the
Internet.
You can access detailed, explicit instructions on how to make and
detonate pipe bombs, light bulb bombs, and even--if you can believe
it--baby food bombs.
Let me give you just a small sample. A guy named ``Warmaster'' sent
this message out over the Internet about how to build a baby food bomb.
Here's how his message goes:
These simple, powerful bombs are not very well known even
though all the materials can be easily obtained by anyone
(including minors). These things are so [expletive deleted]
powerful that they can destroy a car. The explosion can
actually twist and mangle the frame. They are extremely
deadly and can very easily kill you and blow the side of the
house out if you mess up while building it. Here's how they
work.
And then the message goes into explicit detail about how to fill a
baby food jar with gunpowder and how to detonate it.
The thing about this bomb,
The message observes,
Is that the glass jar gets totally shattered and pieces of
razor sharp glass gets blasted in all directions.
Warmaster's recipe also elaborates on how you can make the bomb more
effective still:
Tape nails to the side of the thing,
It says.
Sharpened jacks (those little things with all the pointy
sides) also work well. The good thing about those is any side
it lands on is right side up. If the explosion doesn't get'em
then the glass will. If the glass don't get'em then the nails
will.
Now, I'm not making this stuff up.
And what this amendment says is that if Warmaster gives his recipe to
some young kid--intending or knowing that the kid will go build one of
these bombs and blow it up over at the local school playground--then
Warmaster should be put behind bars.
Right now, that's not a Federal crime. It should be--no ifs, ands, or
buts.
I take a back seat to no one when it comes to the first amendment,
and the protection of our most cherished rights of free speech.
But there is no right under the first amendment to help someone blow
up a
[[Page S7274]]
building. There is no right under the first amendment to be an
accessory to a crime. And there is nothing in the first amendment that
says we must leave our good sense at the doorstep.
This is not the first time that Senator Feinstein and I have tried to
put this crime on the books. We tried to add it back to the terrorism
bill in April. But our Republican colleagues derailed our effort.
Evidently, there were those on the House side who didn't like this
provision--who for some reason didn't think that intentionally teaching
someone how to build a bomb should be a crime.
I'm glad that our Republican colleagues here in the Senate have come
to their senses. And I hope--and urge--that they will do all that they
can to make sure their House counterparts do the right thing this time.
This amendment is simple and straightforward. If you're one of these
guys who has made a name for himself writing manifestos like ``The
Terrorist Handbook'' or ``How To Kill With Joy''--and if someone comes
to you and says: ``Tomorrow morning, a group of police officers is
going to be meeting in the 5th Street precinct--and I want to blow it
up.''
And if you then say: ``Here you go--I've got just the recipe for
you.''
It seems to me that that should be a crime. And I'm glad the Senate
has seen fit to join Senator Feinstein and me in our effort to make it
a crime.
Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, this amendment has been cleared with the
Judiciary Committee. It is not in our jurisdiction, but it has been
approved by both Senator Hatch and Senator Biden. So I urge support of
the amendment.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the amendment has been cleared. I urge its
adoption.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 4428) was agreed to.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Congressional Record: September 9, 1996 (Senate)]
[Page S10036-S10047]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:cr09se96-38]
*****
Amendment to Prohibit Criminal Bomb-Making Instruction
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to express my great concern and
disappointment with the conferees named by the other body who insisted
on striking section 1088 of the Senate's DOD authorization bill.
Section 1088, an amendment by Senator Biden and myself would have
prohibited teaching bombmaking for criminal purposes.
As my colleagues will recall, this amendment was accepted in the
Senate as part of the antiterrorism bill last summer in addition to
being part of the Senate DOD authorization bill. Regrettably, as
happened this time, the other body dropped it from the bill.
The bombing in Centennial Olympic Park is only the most recent pipe
bombing. In just 10 days, from July 21 to July 31, my staff found seven
newspaper accounts of bombing incidents.
A 15-year-old boy, in Irving, TX, blew off three fingers with a bomb
he learned to make using the Anarchist's Cookbook from the Internet.--
Dallas Morning News, July 26, 1996.
A high school student from Providence, RI, assembled a foot-long bomb
after obtaining instructions from the Internet.--Newsday, July 28,
1996.
A 16-year-old boy from Plainview, TX, lost a finger when a homemade
bomb exploded. The Bomb was made using information from the Internet.--
Newsday, July 28, 1969.
In Pennsylvania, three teenagers carrying a list of 20 ingredients
needed to build a bomb were arrested after breaking into the Penncrest
High School chemistry lab. They downloaded this list from the
Internet.--Chicago Tribune, July 23, 1996.
In Rancho Palos Verdes, CA, sheriff's officials believe information
available over the Internet was used in a series of pipe bombings which
destroyed four mailboxes, a guard shack and a car. Four teenagers were
arrested in this case.--Los Angeles Times, July 27, 1996.
In Orange County, CA, police believe four teenagers used the Internet
to get instructions on building acid-filled bottle bombs. One of those
bombs burned a 5-year-old boy at a school playground in April.--Los
Angeles Times, July 27, 1996.
A 23-year old man, from Torrance, CA, used a 10-inch-long pipe bomb
which blew out three windows in his home. He obtained the bomb making
instructions from a manual on homemade bombs.--Los Angeles Times, July
27, 1996.
[[Page S10041]]
In addition to the explicit explanations on how to make all sorts of
bombs, the Terrorist's Handbook, downloaded by my staff from the
Internet, also encourages criminal behavior. Let me read a section
entitled, ``Checklist for Raids on Labs.''
In the end, the serious terrorist would probably realize
that if he/she wishes to make a truly useful explosive, he or
she will have to steal the chemicals to make the explosive
from a lab.
This section ends with the needed lists of solid and liquid chemicals
needed to make most bombs.
This amendment would have prohibited the teaching of bomb making if a
person intends or knows that the bomb will be used for a criminal
purpose. Additionally, the amendment prohibits the distribution of
information on how to make a bomb if a person intends or knows that the
information will be used for a criminal purpose.
This information is not something that one would use for a legitimate
purpose or information that can be found in a chemistry textbook on the
back shelf of a university library.
What my amendment targets is detailed information that is made
available to any would-be criminal or terrorist, with the intended
purpose of teaching someone how to blow things up in the commission of
a serious and violent crime--to kill, injure, or destroy property.
This provision could give law enforcement another tool in the war
against terrorism--to combat the flow of information that is used to
teach terrorist and other criminals how to build bombs.
Some question the constitutionality of this provision. Common sense
should tell us that the first amendment does not give someone the right
to teach someone how to kill other people.
The right to free speech in the first amendment is not absolute.
There are several well known exceptions to the first amendment which
limit free speech. These include: Obscenity; child pornography; clear
and present dangers; commercial speech; defamation; speech harmful to
children; time, place and manner restrictions; incidental restrictions;
and radio and television broadcasting.
I do not for 1 minute believe that the Framers of the Constitution
meant for the first amendment to be used to protect the teaching of
methods to injure and kill.
However, knowing that there would be concern over the first
amendment, I carefully crafted this amendment with constitutional
scholars. I'd like to read you some of what they said about this
amendment.
I think the language . . . is about as tight as it could be
. . . the reasonable-knowledge, explosive materials, and
furtherance-of-a-criminal purpose language is all clear
enough; these are legal terms of art and unlikely to be found
void for vagueness.--Richard Delgado, University of Colorado
at Boulder.
The rigorously-protected talk anticipated by the first
amendment is, in brief, political discourse, in the widest
sense of that term. This kind of talk does not include
routine commercial speech (including advertisements),
pornography and obscenity, planning for criminal activity,
and related forms of expression. Commonsense distinctions
should be apparent here. These distinctions would rule out
anyone's instructing others in how to make explosives,
especially when it is known to the instructor that the
explosives being talked about are to be made and used by his
students as part of an illegal enterprise.--George
Anastaplo, Loyola University of Chicago.
Some civil libertarians attempt to immunize virtually all
talk from government regulation, but a stable community would
be difficult if not impossible if this should ever become the
rule. Others have gone so far as to justify actions,
including some violent actions, as forms of expression that
are entitled to freedom-of-speech protection. But even these
theorists are reluctant to argue that blowing up public
buildings should be considered a form of expression protected
by the First Amendment.--George Anastaplo, Loyola University
of Chicago.
In today's day and age when violent crimes, bombings and terrorist
attacks are becoming too frequent, and when technology allows for the
distribution of bombmaking material over computers to millions of
people across the country in a matter of seconds, some restrictions are
appropriate. Specifically, I believe that restricting the availability
of bombmaking information, if there is intent or knowledge that the
information will be used for a criminal purpose, is both appropriate
and required in today's day and age.
My amendment to this bill was an important, balanced measure to
confront the problems presented by today's rapid growth in technology,
and I am extremely disappointed that it was removed during conference.