Quoting the last paragraph:

If you interpret that as a "yes," we'll have to agree to disagree.

Cecil Adams of The Straight Dope answered the headline's question here.

Is that anywhere near Ubekibekibekibekistanstan?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blank-firing_adaptor

I didn't get that impression. Further, on The Colbert Report on 2013-01-22, the director called torture "reprehensible," and indicated that the depictions were included in order to avoid whitewashing history.

Only way to take a pill Commander Taco's ever heard of.

Thank you for taking the time to answer all of my questions—patiently, promptly, plainly, and pro bono. Despite my anti-imaginary-property leanings, in my book*, I say that you, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar. :o)

* My book, entitled "Slashdot Comment History of User cffrost (885375) with Addendums" is hereby released into the public domain. No rights reserved.

I framed my question based upon the understanding that under US law, everything anyone creates that can be considered a "work" (for example, these comments) is protected by copyright from the time the work is created... Am I mistaken, or does the registration process merely serve to codify/insure the rights-holders' claims?

Napalm B is made with polystyrene—most Tupperware products are made from polypropylene, which is insoluble in gasoline.

Adding heavier petroleum distillates only serves to lower the gasoline's energy density and its ability to dissolve/stably mix with the gelled polystyrene—find something else to do with your Vaseline.

A hole in your plastic bomb casing tight enough to form a proper seal wouldn't allow your newspaper fuze to burn through to the interior.

By "fertilizer" I'm guessing you're talking about ammonium nitrate, in which case you'd want to add diesel fuel or nitromethane to your shopping list... COTS fertilizer from Walmart isn't a proper explosive.

Not unless "mustard gas" is your name for chloramine, the antiseptic commonly used to disinfect municipal water supplies.

At whose discretion is the delineation of what constitutes a single "work?"

To elaborate: If a P2P user is sued for allegedly sharing (for example,) two albums of equal play-length and file size*, each in its own monolithic archive file (e.g., .rar), but one album contains ten tracks and the other is a single-track DJ set, would a court more likely consider this two, or eleven works/infringements? If the latter is the norm, couldn't, say, a publisher sue for each chapter/recipe/etc. contained in an book, and so forth?

Not necessarily... In the case of the first situation, I imagine that revealing one of these devices to a boyfriend or girlfriend would not be pleasant, at least not unless/until the patient's S.O. responded with acceptance. I included the latter situation due to the reported supplemental abuses experienced by some passengers reliant on various medical device(s), at the hands of TSA thugs.

Sure, but the same benefits can be achieved via do-it-yourself nasogastric intubation, using a length of latex tubing and a hand-pump from the hardware store. No surgery, no inter-abdominal infection vector, no awkward situations in the bedroom or airport, and a total investment equivalent to a plateful of cheeseburgers.

Yup. I wanna look like a fucking jackass, but it costs too much money.

So does this one. Well, sorta... but mine's more fun to watch.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but that's not necessarily true. Collusion between US federal and state governments against Americans is generally increasing.

For a few examples of what I'm talking about, please see some of the incidents of abuse listed under criticisms of fusion centers on Wikipedia.