deaths during the Troubles were the result of booby trap bombs, the vast majority of them laid by the Provisional IRA. Middle East During the Al-Aqsa Intifada, some Arab-Palestinian groups made wide use of booby traps. The largest use of booby traps (between 2000 and 2005, the period of the Intifada) was in the Battle of Jenin during Operation Defensive Shield where a large number (1000-2000 according to Palestinian militant captured in Jenin during the battle ) of explosive devices were planted by insurgents. Booby traps had been laid in the streets of both the camp and the town, ready to be triggered if a foot snagged a tripwire or a vehicle rolled over a mine. Some of the bombs were huge, containing as much as 250 lb (110 kg) of explosives. To counter the booby traps, anti-tank and anti-personnel mines the IDF sent armored D9 bulldozers to clear the area out of any explosive device and booby trap planted. The IDF D9 bulldozers were heavily armored and thus did not sustain any damage from the explosions, which were triggered by them as they pushed forwards. Eventually, a dozen D9 bulldozers went into action, razing the center of the refugee camp and forcing the Palestinian militants inside to surrender. Gallery As a rule, most purpose-made military booby-trap firing devices contain some form of spring-loaded firing pin designed to strike a percussion cap connected to a detonator at one end. The detonator is inserted into an explosive charge e.g. C4 or a block of TNT. Triggering the booby trap (e.g. by pulling on a trip-wire) releases the cocked firing pin which flips forward to strike the percussion cap, firing both it and the attached detonator. The resulting shock-wave from the detonator sets off the main explosive charge. Civilian use and legal ramifications Booby traps have been applied as defensive weapons against unwelcome guests or against non-military trespassers, but most jurisdictions consider the practice illegal. Many US states have laws specifically against the setting of booby traps and case precedent generally holds the property owner criminally and civilly liable. The highest precedent for this is People v. Ceballos, 12 Cal. 3d 470 (1974), which was heard before the Supreme Court of California which gave the following remarks when rendering its verdict: Allowing persons, at their own risk, to employ deadly mechanical devices imperils the lives of children, firemen and policemen acting within