Sure it’s an embarrassing oversight. If the explosives are of the type described, there really was little or no risk. One of the reasons C4 and similar explosives are used is because they are highly stable. You can light it on fire and it won’t go off, it takes a high velocity explosive to set it off in the first place.
That being said, dumb move on someone’s part. You’re not supposed to lose stuff like that.
This is what “second chances” are for, ain’t it?
Even though there may have been no risk of accidental detonation, C-4 is still an expensive, controlled substance that they really don’t want some kid taking home like it was silly putty. If they’re that careless with their boom, what other dumb mistakes are they making?
Is “explosive training material”, training material that IS explosive, or training material FOR explosives.
They make simulated C-4 and Semtex and other explosives for training purposes. It looks and feels like the real thing, but is as harmless as modeling clay explosive wise.
A quick search reveals that even for K-9 training that they have Inert Explosives with scent cavities where you can place simulant scents, not needing the real thing.
http://x-test.com/AllSites/4/Assets/sec07.pdf
http://i2.wp.com/tripwireops.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/K9-Device-Intro1.jpg
So it seems to me:
-
It is very possible that the material used was 100% harmless and we can all just relax.
-
If it WAS real explosives, it begs the question WHY train with real explosives when there are inert training tools available, even for K-9 training.
-
If there WAS a legit reason for using real explosives for a training mission, then how could you fail so bad at inventory control of said explosives?
dislodged from the container? yeah okay if you were looking for a way to sound dumb and technical at the same time you could dislodge something from a container and not be incorrect.
Also this is why we need talking dogs. Doubtless one of the creatures was telling them about the dislodging and was probably frustrated at being rewarded and such even though no one removed the dislodged.
This situation is indicative of a lack of consequences and accountability. Any environment with consequences and accountability would have quickly either formally or informally developed inventorying before and after the exercise.
With something as potentially dangerous as even very stable explosives, the inventorying would require at least two people on both ends.
Even if the explosives were fake, they still cost money and should have been inventoried before and after.
I thought I made that clear with:
That being said, dumb move on someone’s part. You’re not supposed to lose stuff like that.
I’d say odds on for it being the real deal, Loudoun sheriffs referred to it as “explosive material” and both agencies refer to it as very or incredibly stable. While non-explosive materials do qualify as “incredibly stable” I know I wouldn’t bring up the descriptive of “stable” if I were in their shoes, were it non-explosive material, because I wouldn’t have to.
But that’s me, they were dumb enough to lose it so could be the answer to Q. 2 could be “Cause our dogs have big brass balls just like our bros and we train with live rounds Chest Bump” or that there is some technical reason real deal is preferable.
As for Q.3, at least their response is to shut it down and review replace or implement real inventory controls. Someone wants to misplace a package of post-its or a stapler who give a damn, but inventory of weapons and explosives really ought to tally.
Why the hell are school district resources being used in this way at all? Get your own f-ing bus.
The feds “borrowed” a dog (very cute American bulldog/mastiff mix?) from an animal shelter in Seal Beach in late 2001/early 2002 to see if he could be trained for government work. I think everyone assumed that they adopted Bubba, but six weeks later he returned* with an annoying habit of going for your feet. The shelter actually paid for Bubba’s retraining so he could be adopted. So yeah, @kuangmk11, the feds often leave civilians to clean up their messes with the assets that they borrow.
*He passed his working-at-heights test and he passed his conveyor belt test, but he failed the all important working-on-a-conveyor-belt-at-heights test.
“K9 inert training devices” doesn’t mean dead doggies, does it? Or are they just resting?
So long as it never went about 50 mph, I suppose…
It’s like those creepy CPR-training mannequins; but more German Shepard shaped. Sometimes we stash one in a dark closet and wait for somebody to stumble across it. Gets 'em every time.
Such explosives are pretty stable. You can play with it as with a putty, you can even throw it into a fire or light it up and it will burn. In 'Nam, troops were using the filling of landmines as cooker fuel, as it was easier to get the mines than the fuel. In WW2, Russians did the same with bombs to keep warm.
In such a small amount, and without an initiator, I’d say it is harmless.
Nice to know they’re keeping us safe!
Wait, is this the April Fools Day post?
“K9 inert training devices” are inert devices for training live doggies.
Sounds like you want “inert K9 training devices”, which are live training devices to train inert K9s. Aisle 7.
Though I recommend against it, because:
So if a brown kid makes a clock or tries a rookie chemistry experiment, they’re expelled and discussions are had about actual arrest, but if gun-toting adults do something similar, no biggie, right?
and even if fake, the inventory procedures should be the same as the real stuff, to reinforce those procedures as habit.
