If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Network World)   I have a plan. You aim a laser at an airliner. I'll turn you in. We'll split the $10,000 reward. Deal?   (networkworld.com) divider line 154
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

10457 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jun 2014 at 1:40 PM (12 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



154 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-20 03:58:32 PM

WTFDYW: Why are people responding to an obvious troll, that is Carousel Beast?


welcome to Fark?

I think he's asking for actual examples of where someone shining a laser at an aircraft caused an accident.  I don't doubt that doing so creates a serious hazard, but I have not heard of any specific examples either.
 
2014-06-20 03:59:52 PM

gfid: WTFDYW: Why are people responding to an obvious troll, that is Carousel Beast?

welcome to Fark?

I think he's asking for actual examples of where someone shining a laser at an aircraft caused an accident.  I don't doubt that doing so creates a serious hazard, but I have not heard of any specific examples either.


Trust me. He has a history. A long one.
 
2014-06-20 03:59:57 PM
A 19% decrease in reported envents? How often does this shiat happen?
 
2014-06-20 04:07:17 PM

gfid: I think he's asking for actual examples of where someone shining a laser at an aircraft caused an accident.  I don't doubt that doing so creates a serious hazard, but I have not heard of any specific examples either.


Up thread, I linked an example from this year where a laser strike incident disabled a Flight Paramedic, and rendered a rural air ambulance unable to complete it's mission. The risks of laser strikes are so severe that they warrant pre-emptive action to prevent them and punish people who do things asinine like lase air ambulances.

The Air Industry doesn't work on "Well, it's okay until an accident occurs, THEN we'll fix it". Aircrew Risk Management is a big deal, and so is preventing accidents before they occur. Because those accidents are overwhelmingly fatal to the aircrew, patient, and or passengers when they do.
 
2014-06-20 04:07:57 PM

praxis44241: A 19% decrease in reported envents? How often does this shiat happen?


About 3,000 times a year across the United States.
 
2014-06-20 04:14:43 PM
I got a better plan.  I aim a laser at an airliner.  Then I turn you in for it.  Then I keep the reward.  Then I take your credit cards, wife, pets, children, burn your house down, salt your fields, throw you off a cliff and claim the insurance money.
 
2014-06-20 04:14:58 PM

bigdanc: Carousel Beast: Three responses and not a one citing an accident of any kind. You know, like I asked for.

So this is SO DAMN DANGEROUS you can't do anythingore than link to "zomg catastrophe" articles. Really?

Is it bad? Absolutely - but this whole wave of crap is nothing more than regurgitated "you could put an eye out!" hysteria.


I'm ATC.  This is a big deal.  We don't need a death toll to know it's extremely dangerous.  Most pilots fly by visual reference when they're low and if they can't see, they can't fly.  These laser attacks happen -by in large- during what we call critical phases of flight aka when an aircraft is low and slow and flying visually.  It wouldn't take much of a panic to cause a stall and crash.

The fact that we in the aviation industry are extremely well trained and prepared for just about any conceivable eventuality is probably the lion's share of the reason there haven't been any accidents.

But sure, you know better than me and the pilots in that video.


Luckily it's still legal to shoot the control towers. Easier too. Traffic controllers don't needs to see, do they?

/sarcasm
 
2014-06-20 04:16:23 PM
Interestingly, all the articles linked to talk about airplanes landing or taking off around airports and/or helicopters.

Which makes sense since it would be exceedingly difficult (meaning impossible) to hit the cockpit window of a 747 when it is at 39k altitude. One of the articles that people are quoting here calls lasers "no distraction" and "indistinguishable from background lights beyond 11,712 ft".

I am all for coming down hard on people aiming lasers at planes/helicopters but let's be clear that this is only an issue around airports and helicopters flying over cities and residential areas.

I wonder if Farkers ever read the stuff they link to? Keep up the good derp and you get a price if you can hit the cockpit window of this at cruising altitude of 35k ft.

cdn-www.airliners.net
 
2014-06-20 04:21:44 PM

hinten: I am all for coming down hard on people aiming lasers at planes/helicopters but let's be clear that this is only an issue around airports and helicopters flying over cities and residential areas.


Medical and Police, as well as transit helicopters typically fly at altitudes of 500' in rural, open terrain or 1000' minimums in uneven terrain or city controlled airspace settings to perform their missions, and are granted exemptions to minimum altitudes as necessary to perform their duties when flying.
 
2014-06-20 04:22:57 PM

hinten: Interestingly, all the articles linked to talk about airplanes landing or taking off around airports and/or helicopters.

Which makes sense since it would be exceedingly difficult (meaning impossible) to hit the cockpit window of a 747 when it is at 39k altitude. One of the articles that people are quoting here calls lasers "no distraction" and "indistinguishable from background lights beyond 11,712 ft".

I am all for coming down hard on people aiming lasers at planes/helicopters but let's be clear that this is only an issue around airports and helicopters flying over cities and residential areas.

I wonder if Farkers ever read the stuff they link to? Keep up the good derp and you get a price if you can hit the cockpit window of this at cruising altitude of 35k ft.

[cdn-www.airliners.net image 850x573]


If your laser is powerful enough, hitting the windshield isn't really that hard. Jut keep it pointed at the aircraft and the beam will likely wander across the windshield on its own.
 
2014-06-20 04:24:25 PM

Tobin_Lam: If your laser is powerful enough, hitting the windshield isn't really that hard. Jut keep it pointed at the aircraft and the beam will likely wander across the windshield on its own.


The danger is also not just to the pilot. ANVIS-9 goggles are pretty expensive. And so is treatment by an opthamologist for laser burns on crew member's eyes.

I'm pretty good at my job, but it's hard to care for a patient when I'm blind.
 
2014-06-20 04:26:45 PM
If you think that pointing a laser at someone on the ground isn't a big deal, it is easy to find stories of people getting charged with assault and battery simply from lasting a police car. Lasers are a big deal. It is like saying knives aren't a big deal, I know what I'm talking about because the blade in my Swiss Army knife is only 1" long.
 
2014-06-20 04:27:51 PM

SpdrJay: I have been wanting to buy a laser forever but couldn't think of a single legitimate thing do with it.


play with your cats/dogs
 
2014-06-20 04:33:22 PM

SpdrJay: I have been wanting to buy a laser forever but couldn't think of a single legitimate thing do with it.


You shine it on someone's junk you are interested in to let them know you are tech savvy and interested in their junk.
 
2014-06-20 04:39:29 PM

Tobin_Lam: If you think that pointing a laser at someone on the ground isn't a big deal, it is easy to find stories of people getting charged with assault and battery simply from lasting a police car. Lasers are a big deal. It is like saying knives aren't a big deal, I know what I'm talking about because the blade in my Swiss Army knife is only 1" long.


Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?
 
2014-06-20 04:44:56 PM
This is actually a crazy enough plan to work.

If you make it look like a TOTAL frikkin accident.  So, that way there would be no actual conviction.
Like, you create the event.  Let the cops start an investigation and offer a reward.  Turn in your buddy as the culprit.  But have the investigation show that it was an accident and there is no need to continue.

I think the major flaw in this plan is that most rewards are not paid unless they result in a conviction.
 
2014-06-20 05:04:02 PM

AndreMA: Tobin_Lam: If you think that pointing a laser at someone on the ground isn't a big deal, it is easy to find stories of people getting charged with assault and battery simply from lasting a police car. Lasers are a big deal. It is like saying knives aren't a big deal, I know what I'm talking about because the blade in my Swiss Army knife is only 1" long.

Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?


Generally speaking, officers who use the threat of lethal force (such as pointing a firearm at someone, laser or not) in situations where it is not necessary would be subject to significantly more serious charges than simple assault.

The situations where people have been charged with assault and battery for pointing lasers at officers usually happen because the perpetrators intentionally pointed them at an officer's face in an attempt to deliberately blind them. Not really much different than throwing acid or poking them with a stick other than the ability to do it from a greater distance.
 
2014-06-20 05:06:28 PM

topcon: As noted above, you can cheaply buy or build 2 WATT+ (not miliwatt) lasers these days.


american-buddha.com

40 Watts?  Hey, just what you see, pal.

/Not that the T800 cared about cheap
 
2014-06-20 05:08:19 PM

BStorm: ReverendJynxed: wxboy: GoldDude: wxboy: GoldDude: So what if I point a regular presentation style (low-energy) laser pointer at the side of the plane as I am boarding?  Can I turn myself in for the $10K?

I suppose so.  But is 10 years in PMITA prison (payout presumably only happens upon conviction) really worth a paltry $10 grand?

They claimed it was $10K for info that leads to an arrest.
If I can prove there is nothing wrong with my actions, I can collect the $10K and sue for false arrest.

I think your main difficulty there is going to be doing enough to get arrested without doing enough to get convicted.

Leave a bunch of star charts around, software open to plot out a few constellations etc. and have a telescope in the yard. You were studying astronomy.

Pointing lasers at what is clearly an aircraft for long enough to get the attention of someone on board would probably not be considered 'studying astronomy', and trying to claim you didn't realize it was an aircraft would likely just reinforce the idea that you weren't really studying astronomy, seeing as how one of the first lessons is "telling the difference between aircraft and astronomical objects".


It was dark, I thought it was a star and I was trying to fix it's location to continue research. Perhaps a a new comet. My glasses broke.
 
2014-06-20 05:09:01 PM

BStorm: AndreMA: Tobin_Lam: If you think that pointing a laser at someone on the ground isn't a big deal, it is easy to find stories of people getting charged with assault and battery simply from lasting a police car. Lasers are a big deal. It is like saying knives aren't a big deal, I know what I'm talking about because the blade in my Swiss Army knife is only 1" long.

Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Generally speaking, officers who use the threat of lethal force (such as pointing a firearm at someone, laser or not) in situations where it is not necessary would be subject to significantly more serious charges than simple assault.

The situations where people have been charged with assault and battery for pointing lasers at officers usually happen because the perpetrators intentionally pointed them at an officer's face in an attempt to deliberately blind them. Not really much different than throwing acid or poking them with a stick other than the ability to do it from a greater distance.


Unfortunately the determination of what is "necessary" is often in the hands of the same organization that used the force to begin with. There's no shortage of police-shot video of drug raids where even after everyone is prone on the floor with hands visible, red dots are playing on them.
 
2014-06-20 05:13:43 PM

hinten: Interestingly, all the articles linked to talk about airplanes landing or taking off around airports and/or helicopters.

Which makes sense since it would be exceedingly difficult (meaning impossible) to hit the cockpit window of a 747 when it is at 39k altitude. One of the articles that people are quoting here calls lasers "no distraction" and "indistinguishable from background lights beyond 11,712 ft".

I am all for coming down hard on people aiming lasers at planes/helicopters but let's be clear that this is only an issue around airports and helicopters flying over cities and residential areas.

I wonder if Farkers ever read the stuff they link to? Keep up the good derp and you get a price if you can hit the cockpit window of this at cruising altitude of 35k ft.

[cdn-www.airliners.net image 850x573]


What's your point? Takeoff and landing are exactly the times when this is both most likely and most dangerous. I don't really care if it's impossible to cause a distraction at 35k feet, because that's when the plane is just plowing along on autopilot, and even something that blinds the pilots for several minutes wouldn't be a safety risk.

Also, the vast majority of the population lives within about 10 miles of an airport of some kind.
 
2014-06-20 05:18:10 PM

AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?


Lasers used in gun sights don't diffuse like a laser pointer does. They remain highly focused within their effective range. And police are taught to aim at the center of mass, not the face. They also don't use them to disable someone.
 
2014-06-20 05:21:32 PM

hardinparamedic: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Lasers used in gun sights don't diffuse like a laser pointer does. They remain highly focused within their effective range. And police are taught to aim at the center of mass, not the face. They also don't use them to disable someone.


Pointer lasers on guns are <5mw.  Not even really dangerous to you even if pointed at your eye.
 
2014-06-20 05:22:47 PM

AndreMA: BStorm: AndreMA: Tobin_Lam: If you think that pointing a laser at someone on the ground isn't a big deal, it is easy to find stories of people getting charged with assault and battery simply from lasting a police car. Lasers are a big deal. It is like saying knives aren't a big deal, I know what I'm talking about because the blade in my Swiss Army knife is only 1" long.

Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Generally speaking, officers who use the threat of lethal force (such as pointing a firearm at someone, laser or not) in situations where it is not necessary would be subject to significantly more serious charges than simple assault.

The situations where people have been charged with assault and battery for pointing lasers at officers usually happen because the perpetrators intentionally pointed them at an officer's face in an attempt to deliberately blind them. Not really much different than throwing acid or poking them with a stick other than the ability to do it from a greater distance.

Unfortunately the determination of what is "necessary" is often in the hands of the same organization that used the force to begin with. There's no shortage of police-shot video of drug raids where even after everyone is prone on the floor with hands visible, red dots are playing on them.


My first thought is you're a Carousel Beast alt (or less likely, friend/cohort/copycat), but it's entirely possible you're simply unable to tell the difference between police abusing their authority and police lawfully using reasonable precautions in what is still a potentially dangerous situation.

Either way, the situation you're talking about has little to do with the original topic so you're on your own to figure it out from here, sparky.
 
2014-06-20 05:24:08 PM

hardinparamedic: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Lasers used in gun sights don't diffuse like a laser pointer does. They remain highly focused within their effective range. And police are taught to aim at the center of mass, not the face. They also don't use them to disable someone.


In most of the videos I'm referring to, the laser was swinging wildly around... not something most people would called "aimed". Perhaps practice diverges from training.

I somehow bet that if I were to shoot a policeman in the foot -- even if it was clear that I was attempting to wound rather than kill -- I'd still be convicted of attempted murder. Not that I'd ever do that, of course.
 
2014-06-20 05:25:35 PM

topcon: hardinparamedic: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Lasers used in gun sights don't diffuse like a laser pointer does. They remain highly focused within their effective range. And police are taught to aim at the center of mass, not the face. They also don't use them to disable someone.

Pointer lasers on guns are <5mw.  Not even really dangerous to you even if pointed at your eye.


That's why I was careful to specify "similarly powered" -- and as hardinparamedic pointed out, I should also have specified "similar collimation"
 
2014-06-20 05:26:28 PM

Combustion: Calmamity: Why isn't the reaction to this "Oh look, some asshole is pointing a laser at us. What a dick.What's for dinner?"

Umm excuse me?? There are CHILDREN on that plane!! Maybe UNBORN CHILDREN!! Think of them!!!


I assure you, I was thinking of the children. That's why I was pointing the laser pointer at the plane full of the noisy little shiat factories.
 
2014-06-20 05:28:20 PM

AndreMA: and as hardinparamedic pointed out, I should also have specified "similar collimation"


That's the word I was looking for.
 
2014-06-20 05:30:06 PM

Tobin_Lam: hinten: Interestingly, all the articles linked to talk about airplanes landing or taking off around airports and/or helicopters.

Which makes sense since it would be exceedingly difficult (meaning impossible) to hit the cockpit window of a 747 when it is at 39k altitude. One of the articles that people are quoting here calls lasers "no distraction" and "indistinguishable from background lights beyond 11,712 ft".

I am all for coming down hard on people aiming lasers at planes/helicopters but let's be clear that this is only an issue around airports and helicopters flying over cities and residential areas.

I wonder if Farkers ever read the stuff they link to? Keep up the good derp and you get a price if you can hit the cockpit window of this at cruising altitude of 35k ft.

[cdn-www.airliners.net image 850x573]

If your laser is powerful enough, hitting the windshield isn't really that hard. Jut keep it pointed at the aircraft and the beam will likely wander across the windshield on its own.



You are talking out of experience or out of your ass? Please indicate at what angle you have to stand to the airplane cruising at 35k ft.
 
2014-06-20 05:34:02 PM

hinten: You are talking out of experience or out of your ass? Please indicate at what angle you have to stand to the airplane cruising at 35k ft.


Most strikes on passenger jets are on critical, sterile cockpit phases of flight, like take-off and landing. The exact time where you need to be able to see, and NOT go into inadvertent IFC or be blind.
 
2014-06-20 05:40:24 PM
Whatever the level of danger, it's a dumb thing to do. Let's hope it's a passing fad like dropping bricks and rocks from bridges was a number of years ago here (well, in MA where I lived at the time). That caused a number of serious injuries and fatalities.
 
2014-06-20 05:54:55 PM

hardinparamedic: gfid: I think he's asking for actual examples of where someone shining a laser at an aircraft caused an accident.  I don't doubt that doing so creates a serious hazard, but I have not heard of any specific examples either.

Up thread, I linked an example from this year where a laser strike incident disabled a Flight Paramedic, and rendered a rural air ambulance unable to complete it's mission. The risks of laser strikes are so severe that they warrant pre-emptive action to prevent them and punish people who do things asinine like lase air ambulances.

The Air Industry doesn't work on "Well, it's okay until an accident occurs, THEN we'll fix it". Aircrew Risk Management is a big deal, and so is preventing accidents before they occur. Because those accidents are overwhelmingly fatal to the aircrew, patient, and or passengers when they do.


Okay, I'm not reading whole threads today, but I did look for and found your link.

I don't know how people even find the time to do that.  Putting aside the risk to the pilot and the people on board - imagine if you or a loved one was being airlifted to a hospital with a life-threatening condition - I think it would be boring to sit around outside waiting for aircraft to go by and it would probably even be hard to hit the cockpit with your little laser pointer.

Lock any asshole that does this up for 25 years - at least
 
2014-06-20 06:29:35 PM

AndreMA: hardinparamedic: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Lasers used in gun sights don't diffuse like a laser pointer does. They remain highly focused within their effective range. And police are taught to aim at the center of mass, not the face. They also don't use them to disable someone.

In most of the videos I'm referring to, the laser was swinging wildly around... not something most people would called "aimed". Perhaps practice diverges from training.

I somehow bet that if I were to shoot a policeman in the foot -- even if it was clear that I was attempting to wound rather than kill -- I'd still be convicted of attempted murder. Not that I'd ever do that, of course.


That's an entirely different kind of situation. We aren't talking about those kinds of situations.
 
2014-06-20 07:05:58 PM

Tobin_Lam: AndreMA: hardinparamedic: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

Lasers used in gun sights don't diffuse like a laser pointer does. They remain highly focused within their effective range. And police are taught to aim at the center of mass, not the face. They also don't use them to disable someone.

In most of the videos I'm referring to, the laser was swinging wildly around... not something most people would called "aimed". Perhaps practice diverges from training.

I somehow bet that if I were to shoot a policeman in the foot -- even if it was clear that I was attempting to wound rather than kill -- I'd still be convicted of attempted murder. Not that I'd ever do that, of course.

That's an entirely different kind of situation. We aren't talking about those kinds of situations.


Aiming a laser at a police car (an arrestable offense) is entirely different from aiming a laser at an aircraft (also an arrestable offense)? I see them as rather analogous and was comparing it with another instance where lasers are aimed at people without good cause.

I don't find those entirely - or even substantially - different situations. I'll take your arbitrary declaration and that there's some fundamental difference as a concession.
 
2014-06-20 07:42:05 PM

hinten: Tobin_Lam: hinten: Interestingly, all the articles linked to talk about airplanes landing or taking off around airports and/or helicopters.

Which makes sense since it would be exceedingly difficult (meaning impossible) to hit the cockpit window of a 747 when it is at 39k altitude. One of the articles that people are quoting here calls lasers "no distraction" and "indistinguishable from background lights beyond 11,712 ft".

I am all for coming down hard on people aiming lasers at planes/helicopters but let's be clear that this is only an issue around airports and helicopters flying over cities and residential areas.

I wonder if Farkers ever read the stuff they link to? Keep up the good derp and you get a price if you can hit the cockpit window of this at cruising altitude of 35k ft.

[cdn-www.airliners.net image 850x573]

If your laser is powerful enough, hitting the windshield isn't really that hard. Jut keep it pointed at the aircraft and the beam will likely wander across the windshield on its own.


You are talking out of experience or out of your ass? Please indicate at what angle you have to stand to the airplane cruising at 35k ft.


Assuming  no intermediate  clouds, I can easily see to the ground from 45,000 ft. (Max altitude for jet I fly). At night it is possible to distinguish individual light sources. So normal intelligence can conclude that if normal light can reach to that altitude, coherent light  can too.
 
2014-06-20 07:43:19 PM

Carousel Beast: While your attempt at framing the debate is laudable, you addressed absolutely nothing I actually said in any of my posts.



You said the following, which I was addressing.  It's not put your eye out hysteria.

"Is it bad? Absolutely - but this whole wave of crap is nothing more than regurgitated "you could put an eye out!" hysteria. "
 
2014-06-20 07:58:58 PM
pilots should wear an eyepatch like a pirate so only one eye gets affected
 
2014-06-20 08:37:29 PM
How stupid to you have to be to actually get caught doing this?
 
2014-06-20 09:01:48 PM

AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?


You don't see a difference between pointing a laser pointer at a vehicle and a person?
 
2014-06-20 09:19:19 PM

trappedspirit: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

You don't see a difference between pointing a laser pointer at a vehicle and a person?


I see a strong similarity between pointing a laser at one vehicle (an aircraft) that contains people, a different sort of vehicles (police car) that contains people, and people.
 
2014-06-20 09:30:42 PM

AndreMA: trappedspirit: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

You don't see a difference between pointing a laser pointer at a vehicle and a person?

I see a strong similarity between pointing a laser at one vehicle (an aircraft) that contains people, a different sort of vehicles (police car) that contains people, and people.


Pointing a laser at someone and pointing it at a window they are using at night are completely different things. It is extremely obvious when you are in a vehicle but you may never even notice a laser pointed at your body.
 
2014-06-20 09:52:41 PM
I'm a pilot. Never been lased. I believe almost all strikes are intentional not accidental as some might think. There simply aren't enough lasers out there randomly flashing upward to catch airplanes. The sky is 99% empty, even near airports. These farkers are aiming. Don't have to hit your eye. Simply lighting up the cabin is distraction enough when landing at night. Don't kid yourself, most planes cannot land themselves. That bit is still done by the pilot.
 
2014-06-20 10:00:55 PM
It is America. Just give everyone on the plane laser pointers so they can shoot back. Should be easy for the cops to catch someone on the ground that just got blinded 5 minutes earlier.
 
2014-06-20 10:16:58 PM

davynelson: How stupid to you have to be to actually get caught doing this?


It's not that hard for a pilot to trace a laser back to the source. Especially if they have been trained to do so (A lot of aircrew are ex-military).

This thread:

Pilots/Aircrew: This is why lasers are bad to point at aircraft.
"Learned" Scholars: It can't be that bad! Show me ONE crashed airplane! I mean, this is just another panic.
Pilots/Aircrew: Yeah, this is what can happen, and we're trying to prevent some asshole from crashing a plane.

old.onefte.com
 
2014-06-20 11:14:14 PM

Tobin_Lam: Pointing a laser at someone and pointing it at a window they are using at night are completely different things. It is extremely obvious when you are in a vehicle but you may never even notice a laser pointed at your body.


Or it may hit you in the eye. There's probably a greater chance of that from a range of 10'-20' in a police raid than there is of any strike on the glass of a moving vehicle at much greater (hundreds to thousands of feet) range. And the light scattered on the glass that enters your eye will be of much lower intensity than a direct hit.
 
2014-06-20 11:39:26 PM

AndreMA: trappedspirit: AndreMA: Wouldn't police laser gun sights painting peaceful, non-resisting people then be excessive force, if pointing a similarly powered laser at a police car is considered assault?

You don't see a difference between pointing a laser pointer at a vehicle and a person?

I see a strong similarity between pointing a laser at one vehicle (an aircraft) that contains people, a different sort of vehicles (police car) that contains people, and people.


Yeah, the similarity is...wait for it...a laser.  Are we playing lowest common denominator?  I didn't know that show was still on air.  So, what's the difference between a person becoming momentarily blinded and the operator of a multi-ton vehicle becoming momentarily blinded?
 
2014-06-20 11:40:44 PM

aseras: Luckily it's still legal to shoot the control towers. Easier too. Traffic controllers don't needs to see, do they?


touche:P
 
2014-06-21 12:18:13 AM

AndreMA: Tobin_Lam: Pointing a laser at someone and pointing it at a window they are using at night are completely different things. It is extremely obvious when you are in a vehicle but you may never even notice a laser pointed at your body.

Or it may hit you in the eye. There's probably a greater chance of that from a range of 10'-20' in a police raid than there is of any strike on the glass of a moving vehicle at much greater (hundreds to thousands of feet) range. And the light scattered on the glass that enters your eye will be of much lower intensity than a direct hit.


So what if you get hit in the eye? You're going to be on the ground in handcuffs with no opportunity to crash a vehicle into someone else. A laser intentionally aimed at an aircraft is far more likely to hit the cockpit glass than someone accidentally getting hit in the eye from 20' away when the aim point is several degrees away from the eye. That glass lighting up bright green is going to have far greater consequences than the police accidentally lasting your eye. I have an idea. Go get a friend to point a laser at you while you drive towards a tree at night. Then get your friend to pointed a loaded gun at you with a laser sight. Let us know which one blinded you.
 
2014-06-21 01:33:30 AM

hardinparamedic: hinten: You are talking out of experience or out of your ass? Please indicate at what angle you have to stand to the airplane cruising at 35k ft.

Most strikes on passenger jets are on critical, sterile cockpit phases of flight, like take-off and landing. The exact time where you need to be able to see, and NOT go into inadvertent IFC or be blind.


Your point, I made it.
 
2014-06-21 01:59:07 AM

Tobin_Lam: AndreMA: Tobin_Lam: Pointing a laser at someone and pointing it at a window they are using at night are completely different things. It is extremely obvious when you are in a vehicle but you may never even notice a laser pointed at your body.

Or it may hit you in the eye. There's probably a greater chance of that from a range of 10'-20' in a police raid than there is of any strike on the glass of a moving vehicle at much greater (hundreds to thousands of feet) range. And the light scattered on the glass that enters your eye will be of much lower intensity than a direct hit.

So what if you get hit in the eye? You're going to be on the ground in handcuffs with no opportunity to crash a vehicle into someone else. A laser intentionally aimed at an aircraft is far more likely to hit the cockpit glass than someone accidentally getting hit in the eye from 20' away when the aim point is several degrees away from the eye. That glass lighting up bright green is going to have far greater consequences than the police accidentally lasting your eye. I have an idea. Go get a friend to point a laser at you while you drive towards a tree at night. Then get your friend to pointed a loaded gun at you with a laser sight. Let us know which one blinded you.


what dafuq?  I would hope my friend wouldn't aim a loaded gun at me even if I asked him to.
 
Displayed 50 of 154 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report