Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society最新文献_第5页

The Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 1989年的生物武器反恐法案

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 2020-12-04 DOI: 10.4324/9781003123644-24

D. Mcbride

引用次数: 0

Provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Bill 反恐怖主义条例草案的条文

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 2020-12-04 DOI: 10.4324/9781003123644-27

E. Palmer, Keith Perine

引用次数: 0

September 11: Global Solidarity 9月11日:全球团结

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 2020-12-04 DOI: 10.4324/9781003123682-38

Z. Bauman

引用次数: 0

United States Use of Biological Warfare* 美国使用生物战*

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 2020-12-04 DOI: 10.4324/9781003123644-7

Willam H. Neinast

引用次数: 1

Biological Terrorism: Legal Measures for Preventing Catastrophe 生物恐怖主义:预防灾难的法律措施

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 2001-03-22 DOI: 10.4324/9781003123644-29

B. Kellman

{"title":"Biological Terrorism: Legal Measures for Preventing Catastrophe","authors":"B. Kellman","doi":"10.4324/9781003123644-29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003123644-29","url":null,"abstract":"Biological terrorism is a truly despicable subject, raising nightmares of primal fear. Disease -- plague, smallpox, and other decimating maladies -- is dire trauma embedded in humanity's collective consciousness. Now, when the threat of thermonuclear holocaust may be ebbing, a few zealots or criminals can kill thousands (or more) and destabilize social order by revealing that no government, even that of superpower America, can protect its citizenry. A biological attack means that everyone is vulnerable. This is terrorism nonpareil. This Article's agenda is modest: Set forth legal initiatives that might reduce the risks of bioterrorism, recognizing that those initiatives must be combined with nonlegal policies. For example, more money to develop sensors and to train medical personnel could be advantageously spent without proposing or amending legislation or regulations. Legal initiatives should be seen, therefore, as only part of a larger policy response to reduce terrorism opportunities, strengthen detection, focus resources, and deter those terrorists who are averse to harsh penalties.(1) The agenda here is also overt. Law's contribution to preventing bioterrorism, though limited, is crucial. And time, unfortunately, is not on the side of the angels. This Article, therefore, is a call to action. Part I of this Article synthesizes the vast literature on bioterrorism,(2) describing various diseases that could be used and how those diseases might fulfill different objectives. Part II and Part III develop this Article's thesis that threats of bioterrorism call for a two-dimensional set of carefully tailored policies to reduce biological threats, but do not justify radical new overtures. Proposed regulatory modifications can restrict the availability of useful materials and equipment and increase the cost and likelihood of detection. Part II advances a regulatory agenda, mindful to not over-burden the bio-pharmaceutical industry, that would raise barriers to obtaining pathogens and weaponization technology. Since these regulatory measures are not perfectly prophylactic (i.e. terrorists might still gain deadly agents), modifications of law enforcement policies should detect, investigate, and stop terrorists who overcome the regulatory barriers and prepare weapons. Part III discusses the unique problems that clandestine biological terrorism presents for law enforcement and recommends measures to better identify bioterrorism threats without overstepping civil liberties and privacy rights. Put simply, the best strategy is two-pronged: Deny access to biological weapons capabilities, and-if capabilities are obtained -- apprehend the terrorist before attack. Legal measures offer no guarantee for preventing bioterrorism, but the measures described here might substantially diminish risks when combined with enhanced pathogen-relevant research and development, improved planning and communication among officials, and advanced intelligence capabilities. Many topi","PeriodicalId":279937,"journal":{"name":"Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117120133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 10

The Chemical Weapons Convention: Political and Constitutional Issues 化学武器公约:政治和宪法问题

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 1998-03-22 DOI: 10.4324/9781003123682-22

R. Rotunda

{"title":"The Chemical Weapons Convention: Political and Constitutional Issues","authors":"R. Rotunda","doi":"10.4324/9781003123682-22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003123682-22","url":null,"abstract":"While 160 nations have signed the Chemical Weapons Convention (\"CWC\"), only 75 countries have ratified it thus far. On April 25, 1997, after years of political maneuvers, the U.S. Senate finally added the United States to the list, after a vote that was considered too close to call until shortly before ratification. 1 Although the final Senate vote was a lop-sided 74 to 26, the period prior to ratification witnessed a great deal of jockeying, as liberal supporters of the treaty criticized their conservative opponents.2 This liberal support was a little surprising because there are important objections to the treaty based on the Fourth Amendment, which liberals, in other contexts, have supported. Obviously the goal of the CWC-removing the terror of chemical weapons-is laudable, but its procedures raise important questions under the Bill of Rights, particularly under the Fourth Amendment, regulating searches and seizures, and the Fifth Amendment, guaranteeing no taking of property without just compensation. Some proponents of the CWC have responded to the constitutional argument by attacking the motives of those who raise these constitutional questions, accusing them of really being \"glued to a 'we're No.1' mentality.\"","PeriodicalId":279937,"journal":{"name":"Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1998-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134542432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Jihad and the Constitution: The First Amendment Implications of Combating Religiously Motivated Terrorism 圣战与宪法:第一修正案对打击宗教恐怖主义的影响

Bioterrorism: The History of a Crisis in American Society Pub Date : 1996-03-01 DOI: 10.2307/797178

Joseph Grinstein

引用次数: 0