Man's Home Lab confiscated for "doing science in a residential area"(blog.makezine.com)
blog.makezine.com
Man's Home Lab confiscated for "doing science in a residential area"
http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2008/08/home_science_under_attack.html
41 comments
No he wasn't. The government themselves said that everything he had was "no more dangerous than typical household cleaning products."
The only law he was breaking, according to your own source, was "doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws."
The only thing they had him on was doing science. He wasn't working with anything remotely dangerous.
The only law he was breaking, according to your own source, was "doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws."
The only thing they had him on was doing science. He wasn't working with anything remotely dangerous.
It doesn't necessarily matter that he wasn't working with highly dangerous or toxic chemicals. My roommate works in quality at a medical devices company, and many of the regulations they deal with have to do with things like proper labeling, storage, disposal and the like. And their product is chemically inert.
While I'd hope that chem regulations aren't quite as stringent as pharma or biomedical, it isn't unfathomable that the guy broke some or many of them. Unless someone here is knowledgeable of the relevant regulatory environment (which I'm certainly not), it's unfair to make any accusations based on a blog post and a terse newspaper story.
While I'd hope that chem regulations aren't quite as stringent as pharma or biomedical, it isn't unfathomable that the guy broke some or many of them. Unless someone here is knowledgeable of the relevant regulatory environment (which I'm certainly not), it's unfair to make any accusations based on a blog post and a terse newspaper story.
> It doesn't necessarily matter that he wasn't working with highly dangerous or toxic chemicals.
It does if you're arguing safety.
If you're not arguing safety, what is the rational basis for shutting the guy down? Other than, of course, he didn't have a permit to do safe science.
It does if you're arguing safety.
If you're not arguing safety, what is the rational basis for shutting the guy down? Other than, of course, he didn't have a permit to do safe science.
Home chemistry and a medical device company are two completely different things. Medical devices and pharmaceuticals fall under FDA regulations which require quality control, proper labeling, auditing etc. As far as I know this man was not working on a medical product or pharmaceutical and as such does not fall under any FDA regulations.
This is just one more example of "The War on the Unexpected", very well written on by Bruce Schneier.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_war_on_the...
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_war_on_the...
No, it's not.
If you consider facts from the original article, you might realize that authorities were in fact 100% right. They discovered that some guy was running effectively a chemical lab in a residential area. Was he disposing the waste correctly ? Did he have an exhaust system in place ? Was he complying with fire safety regulations ? Etc, etc.. Zoning bylaws exist for a reason, and this is a textbook emergency situation. So they did respond appropriately - they evacuated the guy and cleaned up the place. Also note how he was asked to stay in the hotel, not arrested or prosecuted.
Here's the original article for a reference - http://www.telegram.com/article/20080809/NEWS/808090323/1008...
If you consider facts from the original article, you might realize that authorities were in fact 100% right. They discovered that some guy was running effectively a chemical lab in a residential area. Was he disposing the waste correctly ? Did he have an exhaust system in place ? Was he complying with fire safety regulations ? Etc, etc.. Zoning bylaws exist for a reason, and this is a textbook emergency situation. So they did respond appropriately - they evacuated the guy and cleaned up the place. Also note how he was asked to stay in the hotel, not arrested or prosecuted.
Here's the original article for a reference - http://www.telegram.com/article/20080809/NEWS/808090323/1008...
No. From your article:
> no more dangerous than typical household cleaning products.
Should all household cleaning products be banned for places without industrial grade ventilation systems too? Zoning bylaws exist because their is not sufficient proven danger for these regulations to exist as State or Federal laws.
> no more dangerous than typical household cleaning products.
Should all household cleaning products be banned for places without industrial grade ventilation systems too? Zoning bylaws exist because their is not sufficient proven danger for these regulations to exist as State or Federal laws.
>Should all household cleaning products be banned for places without industrial grade ventilation systems too?
What I understand is that if you use those products without having a single idea of what they are made of because you have a limited scientific understanding then you are ok.
However if you are educated and dare to know what you are doing then using those same products makes you a danger to society and you most be stop.
What I understand is that if you use those products without having a single idea of what they are made of because you have a limited scientific understanding then you are ok.
However if you are educated and dare to know what you are doing then using those same products makes you a danger to society and you most be stop.
It takes time to understand that these chemicals were in fact no more dangerous than cleaning products. As I said above, a chem lab in a residential neighborhood is a major public safety concern as it may end up costing lives. The only safe way of handling it is to dismantle it first and analyze its contents second.
How is that related to "stored hundreds of chemicals in his house" and "more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes" ? This is hardly a "chemical set". It sits firmly in "WTF" category, especially if you are charged with protecting public safety.
Consider the context. An usually large amount of potentially dangerous chemicals in a residential area is an emergency situation. They responded accordingly - eliminated potential danger first, analyzed it second.
And before you downmod me again, imagine yourself living next door to this "chemist" or sharing a graywater supply with him. Then ask yourself if you still think authorities were wrong in their "overreaction".
Consider the context. An usually large amount of potentially dangerous chemicals in a residential area is an emergency situation. They responded accordingly - eliminated potential danger first, analyzed it second.
And before you downmod me again, imagine yourself living next door to this "chemist" or sharing a graywater supply with him. Then ask yourself if you still think authorities were wrong in their "overreaction".
That man is a chemist. I'd personally think a chemist's "chemistry set" would contain a little bit more than a teenager's. What difference does it make if it was contained in vials, jars or boxes? What else would you contain chemicals in? What if you had a rack of rackmounts you picked up on craigslist serving as a distcc farm, or something else and someone broke into your basement and accused you of "hacking" or some other absurd charge because they had no idea what one would do with all that computing or something that 'looked' like it was dangerous.
What seems like "too many" to someone who isn't involved with hobbyist chemistry (or whatever he's involved with) is completely unimportant. You show me a law on the books that limits your hobbies and if you find a law that fits that and is reasonable, I'd agree with you.
If I was an EE hobbyist and built a small tesla coil (which many people do), I wouldn't want people living next door giving me the looks and trying to shut me down because it doesn't look kosher to /them/.
They didn't respond to any chemical-related threats, or a chemical fire, nor did he have a criminal record, so I'd disagree completely with you that there's any concern for worry.
I love it how people take it upon themselves to decide what is acceptable and what isn't.
What seems like "too many" to someone who isn't involved with hobbyist chemistry (or whatever he's involved with) is completely unimportant. You show me a law on the books that limits your hobbies and if you find a law that fits that and is reasonable, I'd agree with you.
If I was an EE hobbyist and built a small tesla coil (which many people do), I wouldn't want people living next door giving me the looks and trying to shut me down because it doesn't look kosher to /them/.
They didn't respond to any chemical-related threats, or a chemical fire, nor did he have a criminal record, so I'd disagree completely with you that there's any concern for worry.
I love it how people take it upon themselves to decide what is acceptable and what isn't.
"This is hardly a "chemical set". It sits firmly in "WTF" category, especially if you are charged with protecting public safety.
A couple of posts earlier you said this is _not_ an example of "war on the unexpected", now you argue that because people in charge say "wtf?" when they hear what he's doing, they should shut him down just in case - in the interests of public safety.
Which is exactly the point of the "war on the unexpected" discussion.
"Consider the context. An usually large amount of potentially dangerous chemicals in a residential area is an emergency situation."
No, it's not. A swimming pool is an unusually large amount of potentially dangerous chemical - someone could die of asphyxiation if they accidentally inhaled even a very small fraction of it! Ban DiHydrogen Monoxide! Fearmongering for everyone!
A couple of posts earlier you said this is _not_ an example of "war on the unexpected", now you argue that because people in charge say "wtf?" when they hear what he's doing, they should shut him down just in case - in the interests of public safety.
Which is exactly the point of the "war on the unexpected" discussion.
"Consider the context. An usually large amount of potentially dangerous chemicals in a residential area is an emergency situation."
No, it's not. A swimming pool is an unusually large amount of potentially dangerous chemical - someone could die of asphyxiation if they accidentally inhaled even a very small fraction of it! Ban DiHydrogen Monoxide! Fearmongering for everyone!
> How is that related to "stored hundreds of chemicals in his house" and "more than 1,500 vials, jars, cans, bottles and boxes" ? This is hardly a "chemical set". It sits firmly in "WTF" category, especially if you are charged with protecting public safety.
I know folks who have about that in canned food. Are they a danger?
I know folks who have about that in canned food. Are they a danger?
"imagine yourself living next door to him"
In my imagination I'm not peering through his basement window going "Oh no, things I don't understand and which therefore they must be 'potentially dangerous'! This an emergency!"
In my imagination I'm not peering through his basement window going "Oh no, things I don't understand and which therefore they must be 'potentially dangerous'! This an emergency!"
The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government. ~ Tacitus, 117CE
I'm curious if writing software at home would violate the no "research and development" in a residential area rule ...
This is one reason why science is getting extinct. What happened to garage science and the DIY chemistry kits? DIY Biology is essentially a non-started due to regulations. I loved blowing up stuff when I was a kid, and doing silly experiments at home and that's one reason I got fascinated with science.
The authorities might have been working within the law, but the law itself is all wrong. There has to be a way to encourage garage science, not make it more difficult.
I consider myself a "garage scientist" these days. The garage just happens to be my laptop and a set of virtual servers.
The authorities might have been working within the law, but the law itself is all wrong. There has to be a way to encourage garage science, not make it more difficult.
I consider myself a "garage scientist" these days. The garage just happens to be my laptop and a set of virtual servers.
This is one reason why science is getting extinct.
That is a little hard to believe. The rate of scientific progress is, if anything, continuing to increase. As a society, we are increasingly dependent on science and technology. Science education has long been a priority of the educational systems in most first world countries (for better or worse). And as for "science at home", it is pretty hard to argue that it's under attack, a single anecdote about someone in Massachusetts notwithstanding.
That is a little hard to believe. The rate of scientific progress is, if anything, continuing to increase. As a society, we are increasingly dependent on science and technology. Science education has long been a priority of the educational systems in most first world countries (for better or worse). And as for "science at home", it is pretty hard to argue that it's under attack, a single anecdote about someone in Massachusetts notwithstanding.
I agree that extinct is too strong a word. Let's call it "science is having a tough time" (and that it is). How many kids do you know who'd like to spend their holidays doing garage science (or adults for that matter)?
Overall, I wouldn't agree that "science is having a hard time", either. I don't think trends in PhD production are consistent with your argument (PhD production is basically at an all-time high). The Internet and the computer revolution are also compelling examples of how important science and technology are: in addition to being a useful tool for science itself, they have motivated a lot of people to go into scientific/technical careers.
Science is not just about formal degrees. It's about curiosity and interest as well. I don't see myself having conversations about science at too many bbq's, at least not in a non-scientific audience. I wonder how many people here know about the Broad institute or care about the HapMap project. I just get the sense that science today is either formal or not at all and sheer intellectual curiosity is missing.
Do you really think that the situation was significantly different in the past?
I don't know. Were there ever all that many?
(Although I know plenty of adults who might spend their holidays doing garage science, if it weren't for the fact that they already get paid to do it as a day job.)
(Although I know plenty of adults who might spend their holidays doing garage science, if it weren't for the fact that they already get paid to do it as a day job.)
Not in this country. The facilities might be better, but I don't see any encouragement for curiosity and discovery, and I know enough people who've found out that doing DIY Biology might get them labeled as "dangerous people". Maybe I am just old and crusty.
"This is not what we would consider to be a customary home occupation."
Right, because that's an entirely valid reason for a search and seizure. The guy should give the ACLU a call. This case is right up their alley.
Right, because that's an entirely valid reason for a search and seizure. The guy should give the ACLU a call. This case is right up their alley.
In other news, startup founder arrested for using his garage in an attempt to displace an entrenched competitor.
I'm terrified of how likely it is we'll see that headline for real some day.
with a handle like "biohacker," your phone is probably already making funny noises...!
Garb for trendy terrorists:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/store/imgs/stand_back_square_0.png
http://imgs.xkcd.com/store/imgs/stand_back_square_0.png
I think it's important to note that home cleaning products are not innocuous. Combine the wrong types together and you can have a deadly situation. So their saying that they were no more dangerous than home cleaning products is not really saying they are without danger.
Terrible, sensationalist headline.
Was "doing science in a residential area" an actual quote? If not, why is it in quote marks?
Was "doing science in a residential area" an actual quote? If not, why is it in quote marks?
It was in the article linked off this one:
"Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboro’s code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws."
"Pamela A. Wilderman, Marlboro’s code enforcement officer, said Mr. Deeb was doing scientific research and development in a residential area, which is a violation of zoning laws."
In our country you cannot do any research without a license! The law does not specify whether doing math or theoretical physics qualifies as research and anywayz it doesn't matter because no one is doing any.Hello! we're africans. Why think when you can run the marathon? And you westerners are bringing the aid,right? Well,better go and train. See ya!
I'd expect this in a southern state perhaps, but.. Massachusetts? What the hell?
Coming from the South, I'd say it really would depend. Making shit in your garage or shed is practically a God given right in the South. I encountered more people there who regularly made things than I have in bigger cities. I think people would feel toying around is certainly all right if done on your own land and in a way that your screw up will only cost you your own life or property. That said community tolerance of tinkering is related to cultural norms. Things that are really "bad" will get people against you (eg better booze is fine work where better meth is certainly not).
Honestly, I'd guess the article's kind of regulation or enforcement is probably more correlated with population density than anything else. The more packed in people get the more concerned everyone is about someone mucking up the finely tuned dance.
Honestly, I'd guess the article's kind of regulation or enforcement is probably more correlated with population density than anything else. The more packed in people get the more concerned everyone is about someone mucking up the finely tuned dance.
Both of these also happened in Massachusetts
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/01/boston.bombscare/ and
http://boingboing.net/2007/09/21/mit-student-arrested.html
I have a friend who owns a home in Marlboro, the town in the article. He's had multiple issues with neighbors bringing up zoning laws. Apparently the bushes between homes on his block can only be 48 inches high (or something like that.) No motorcycles can be left overnight in the driveway. Etc.
In a town where people call the cops on their neighbors for not pruning their hedges, I can totally see the SWAT team raiding a guy's house for doing chemistry experiments in the basement.
In a town where people call the cops on their neighbors for not pruning their hedges, I can totally see the SWAT team raiding a guy's house for doing chemistry experiments in the basement.
After living here for 3 months and experiencing laws such as the ridiculous liquor-sales regulations, I quickly realized that while there happens to be an anomalous preponderance of smart, progressive-thinking people here, it is still at heart (or at least in law) a very Puritan state.
It's a target-rich environment. If you want to find a state with the greatest concentration of people who love to build odd things in their basements... visit Massachusetts.
I'm sure that if we transplanted all the scientists and engineers in MA to any other state we'd see at least the same number of incidents like this.
I'm sure that if we transplanted all the scientists and engineers in MA to any other state we'd see at least the same number of incidents like this.
Neither source is all that complete, but the original article indicates this guy was violating zoning law, as well as safe handling and disposal regulations. I'm a scientist, and I sympathize, but it's unfair to claim "home science is under attack" from the available evidence.