[ WP ] After the incident , you were taken by the police , who were surprised you actually had not broken any laws . Congress was called into an emergency session to correct the oversight .

If there's one thing politicians hate, it is unscheduled sessions with mandatory attendance. Unscheduled sessions were annoying, but if you had something better to do, you could simply not attend. Sessions with mandatory attendance were also a bit annoying, but at least you knew about them in advance and could plan the rest of your week accordingly. 
 
 Mandatory unscheduled sessions did n't happen too often, but when they happened they usually were a huge headache for everyone. Seldom an issue was important enough that immediate action was required. So if immediate action was important, it usually meant shit was about to, or already had, hit the fan. 
 
 The following is a shortened transcript of such a session, a joint meeting, necessary to discuss the aftermath of the proverbial feces hitting something that was much less a fan than it was a turbine. 
 
 -- - 
 
 > Friday, April 13, 2018 
 > 
 > U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Homeland Security, joint with the United States National Security Council. 
 > 
 > The committees met, pursuant to call, at 14:28, in 
 > Room 108, Theodor L. Surland [ Chairman of the Homeland 
 > Security committee ] presiding. 
 > 
 > [ Call of all present members, check of attendance, all members accounted for ] 
 > 
 > Chairman Surland: The room will come to order. 
 > The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the possibility of a threat by weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of domestic terrorists, agents of foreign nations operating within our borders or individuals that may not pose a threat to our nation by themselves, but by extension, due to the lack of training and security necessary to handle weaponry of this classification. 
 > I now recognize myself for an opening statement. 
 > Before we begin, I hope the members of congress had the opportunity to acquaint themselves with the details of the case Sullivan? 
 > [ The chairman eyes the members of congress before proceeding ] 
 > I see too many people scrambling through their files for my liking. Due to the nature of this meeting and the implications to the security of our nation, I will make time for a quick recap of the situation: 
 > Three days ago, Tuesday April 10, the self-proclaimed anti-militaristic peace activist John Sullivan managed to trick a dangerous goods transport to keep their charge unattended for a moment. Members of Sullivan's activist group then used this opportunity created by him to remove the hazardous material transported, fill it into containers of their own, and escape with it. 
 > The material in question was Sarin. 
 > 
 > [ The chairman reprimands several congressmen for their shouts of disbelieve and refusal to quieten down ] 
 > 
 > Yes, I said Sarin. Banned in the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, we still have n't managed to get rid of all of our stockpiles. This is n't the point of this meeting though. Actually it is related to the ban, but we will get to that in a minute. 
 > 
 > The reason why we are having this emergency session is the fact that Mr. Sullivan managed to get his hands on these canisters of Sarin, transport them somewhere else, and not break a single law while doing so. As we speak, Mr. Sullivan is already back on the streets, as are the other members of his activist group. 
 > 
 > [ More shouts of anger and disbelief ] 
 > 
 > This meeting today is to address the obvious problem and legal loophole that the case Sullivan uncovered, a loophole which is an enormous threat to the security and safety of our nation. 
 > 
 > Mr. Sullivan found that a combination of several problematic formulations of our laws allows people to remove weapons of mass destruction and other items deemed illegal by a legally binding convention from the grasp of our military or any organization overseeing their disposal without legal repercussions. 
 > 
 > The loophole works as follows: It starts with the definition of theft, which is as follows: 
 > 
 > [ The chairman uses the projection system to show a slide containing several legal definitions ] 
 > 
 > Definition of theft 
 > a: the act of stealing; specifically: the felonious taking and **removing of** personal **property** with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it 
 > b: an unlawful taking ( as by embezzlement or burglary ) of property 
 > [... ] 
 > 
 > This definition is then combined with the definition of'property', which is as follows: 
 > 
 > Definition of property 
 > [... ] 
 > a: something owned or possessed; specifically: a piece of real estate 
 > b: the exclusive **right to possess**, enjoy, **and dispose of a thing**: ownership 
 > c: something to which a person or business has a legal title 
 > d: one ( as a performer ) who is under contract and whose work is especially valuable 
 > e: a book or script purchased for publication or production 
 > 
 > Furthermore Mr. Sullivan then went further and used the definition of'thing' for his advantage: 
 > 
 > Definition of thing 
 > [... ] 
 > 4 
 > a things plural: **possessions**, effects pack your things 
 > b: **whatever may be possessed or owned** or be the object of a right 
 > c: an article of clothing not a thing to wear 
 > d things plural: equipment or utensils especially for a particular purpose bring the tea things 
 > 
 > I think you can see where I'm going with this. Last but not least he pointed out the Chemical Weapons Convention from 1997, which banned chemical weapons. 
 > 
 > As such Mr. Sullivan was able to remove the weapon from us, because this unfortunate wording of our laws regarding theft allowed him to dispose of things that are n't allowed to be owned without him needing to own them himself. With his activist group removing the Sarin from its container and putting it into containers of their own, we could n't even arrest them for stealing the containers. 
 > 
 > I hope I have made myself clear to why this oversight needs to be rectified.
