the bombs would have killed dozens had it not been for other people on the scene immediately addressing their injuries.
what is a "weapon of mass destruction" then, if not the legal definition?
basically there's a few different versions of it. there's the strategic real politic view where yeah, some goddamn pressure cooker bomb isn't mass destruction. but then there's a view from the point of criminal behavior, and this certainly did cause mass destruction on civilians. we're not going to war over these WMDs, we're charging someone with a crime. i think they meet different standards. one is the state level and the other is individual. states with WMDs mean states with nukes or chem or bio weapons. individuals includes explosive devices no matter how small