i think it is done

A few days back, I wrote about the inconsistencies of certain individuals fearing people with firearms, but not fearing people with significantly more-destructive materials and equipment. At the time, I touched on such common things as flour and gasoline, and branched into a few more-esoteric substances like bottled O2 and acetylene.
So how about cooking spray? You know, like Pam or any of its countless other imitation substances? Teflon-haters love it, grillers appreciate it, bakers almost cannot live without it (at least if they do not like Crisco or its equivalents), and even folks up north have a use for it. But surely it is an innocuous, safe substance, capable of causing no more harm than a little hardening of your arteries, right?
Not so much, really.
Both the driver of the semi and the pickup truck escaped without injury, but it is looking like the bridge will require $1,500,000 to repair. Slippery puns aside, considering the remains (or lack thereof) of the semi that was actually carrying the cooking spray, is there any doubt that, properly employed, this substance could be a disastrous bomb in the making – one that could be assembled at little cost, and with no notice given to the authorities?
So, are those individuals who are leaping to hysterics over law-abiding citizens owning firearms doing the same about law-abiding citizens owning cooking spray? Comparatively speaking, a firearm is certainly incapable of completely destroying a bridge, so in terms of destructive power, the cooking spray might almost win… and yet there is no hue and cry. One can only hope those poor souls who fear inanimate objects being in the possession of average citizens will one day consider their fear, and compare it to other similar fears, and realize how baseless and unfounded it really is. Until then, we can only help them along their path.