Man Who Pointed Laser At Aircraft Gets 30-Month Sentence 761
coondoggie writes "In a move federal prosecutors hope sends a strong message to the knuckleheads who point lasers at aircraft for fun, a California man was sentenced to 30 months in prison for shining one at two aircraft. According to the FBI Adam Gardenhire, 19, was arrested on March 29, 2012 and named in a two-count indictment filed in United States District Court in Los Angeles that said he pointed the beam of a laser at a private plane and a police helicopter that responded to the report."
Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's because of idiots like this that we can't have nice toys. Laser pointers get banned and people who buy them get looked on with suspicion. All because some morons think pointing them at aircraft is a good idea.
How about we punish the idiots, and let the rest of us have our toys?
Re:From the article: (Score:5, Insightful)
"let's give pilots kevlar body suits in a suitcase, if someone sprays the cockpit with bullets they can open the suitcase and put the suits on"
Re:From the article: (Score:5, Insightful)
How about we put the onus for not being an asshole on the people who could cause the damage in the first place, not on those who might (in addition to their passengers) become victims of it?
Lasers can cause eye damage or blind a pilot pretty immediately, without time to put on goggles.
This is a good verdict. Society works if people are not assholes to each other; when they start being assholes, you need laws and enforcement to motivate them not to be.
Sounds reasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
I am perfectly okay with this.
Re:All those old laser devices (Score:5, Insightful)
Hardware hackers can also pop down to the nearest gun shop, pick up a .30-06 hunting rifle, and start potting away at airplanes, injuring or killing the pilot, hitting a fuel line, or otherwise causing it to fall down go boom.
People generally don't because it's understood that (a) doing so is malicious and destructive, and (b) there are laws prohibiting it with very severe punishment as consequences.
There are a lot of things in this world that are potentially dangerous weapons, including high-powered lasers. Banning them isn't the answer, but making it very clear that they're dangerous and that you're not to treat them like toys definitely is.
Lets have background checks (Score:0, Insightful)
I want my toys, why ban them in the name of some safety issue. Then only the government can have them. Background checks should work if they are so dangerous. I would like to see why background checks won't work, perhaps the gun owners would be interested also.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Intelligence and Wisdom are two different things.
Sentence is too long (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
misuse of sentencing (Score:5, Insightful)
Sentencing should be for punishment/rehabilitation and not to "send messages."
That kind of shit needs to go away. That's why we have "hackers" getting put away longer than rapists, or issues like Aaron Schwartz.
Re:Sentence is too long (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sentence is too long (Score:3, Insightful)
Punishment fetish wins again (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok this guy did something monumentally stupid which, most certainly should serve as example for others. Done. Now whats with the 30 months in prison? Why must this guy be a felon? Now unable to leave the country, unable to vote in most places, unable to own a firearm.... all for something stupid that, he is unlikely to ever do again.
The punishment fetish in this country really needs to be checked, punishments are totally out of whack with crimes when we have people losing their rights indefinitely over something which, while it could have been disasterous wasn't, and more would have been served (and just as useful an example set) by using it as a teaching moment than by ruining this guys life and making crime one of his best options going forward.
But hey, the harsh punishment crowd can go stroke themselves over it, so someone benefits.
Re:misuse of sentencing (Score:3, Insightful)
There are a lot of reasons for punishment. Deterrence is a valid reason. The possible harmful consequences of this action are extreme. This kind of reckless behavior could easily result in multiple deaths. I think a little bit of extreme deterrence is warranted.
Aaron Schwartz's behavior might've hurt someone's profits someday, and really didn't hurt anybody. It took up the time of a few admins who decided to try to stop him and that's about it. There is no societal need for a high level of deterrence there.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the term "idiots" could be applyed for you too...
The 19yo "idiot" who beamed the laser directly on a place is perhaps a total idiot, but could be a total super math freak and perhaps he works in a lab near you...
I'm a programmer, so I'm not an "idiot" when facing computer... but... I can easily be considered an idiot while doing something else...
you know, it's kinda relative, since we're all idiots in somes areas.
No, if you're "an idiot" anywhere, you're an idiot. Good judgment and personal responsibility has little to do with education or subject matter.
All of us have a duty to think about the consequences of our actions, and to help remediate the negative outcomes of anything we do. Good intentions count for nothing; making a real effort to limit the harm our action cause to others is what makes an adult.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is not the toddlers, or the magnets. The problem is the parents.
Re:From the article: (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you, with how many people seem to think that it is the responsibility of the victim to make sure that they are properly protected against idiots, it is nice to hear some sanity.
I personally think 30 months is too short. And the man should have been charged with attempted murder once for every person in each aircraft.
People need to become more conscious of their actions. If you know something "fun" that can kill people, you should still be charged with attempted murder, even if you were too stupid to realize your actions could have resulted in death.
But, you do end up in a grey area of what is a stupid attempt, and what is an honest mistake. However, in this case, it was obviously not a mistake, it was just stupid "fun".
As for his statement that he didn't know it was dangerous only leads to the fact that people are continuously using things without understanding what it is that they use. All laser pointers come with warnings. Even if his friend removed the label before letting his friend use it, the friend should also be responsible for notifying his friend of the dangers.
There is also the fact that this kid was not aware of the fact that it was illegal.
Now I know I am getting old, but the repeated use of the "I didn't know" defense sickens me every time I hear it in the news. What level of stupidity is required for people to do something they have no idea what they are doing?
I have been slowly getting my niece into astronomy, and now I have to deal with keeping up with these idiots causing new laws getting created, so I then have to research them, so that I can continue to teach her how to look at the stars responsibly, and while, it is obvious to keep pointers out of flight paths, now, before going to a new place I need to make sure I am more than 10 miles away from any registered airport.
Re:Good. (Score:2, Insightful)
I am a commercial pilot who has been "lased" twice - this idiot certainly deserves at least 30 months.
The article doesn't mention the wattage of the laser, though I understand that 500mW or 1W lasers can permanently blind people. This guy should've been charged with two counts of attempted manslaughter, IMHO.
Re:From the article: (Score:5, Insightful)
And what exactly is the "practical solution" for keeping laser light out of windows which are designed to give pilots the best possible view outside? Any new materials I don't know of that keep laser light out but let other light through so pilots can still see the ground at night?
I don't think it's "overbearing" to make it illegal to shine lasers at aircraft.
I do think the punishment is a bit harsh for a 19 year old first offender who probably had no idea that what he was doing was so dangerous.
Wow, 30 months! (Score:2, Insightful)
If he had played football and raped somebody, he would have received a far more lenient sentence.
Re:Good. (Score:4, Insightful)
Justice or Revenge.
It seems to me 30 Months (2 1/2 years) of prison for someone being a knuckle head is over the top. Yes what he did was dangerous, and he should be punished. But I could see 2 Weeks prison as justice.
This guy was 19 years old. That 2 1/2 years cost him a good opportunity to get a college education, once he gets out his life is in screwed.
2 Weeks of prison he probably wouldn't do it again.
Re:Punishment fetish wins again (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed - for doing something dumb (not intending to harm anybody) he gets more than someone who committs assault on a peace officer and fleeing arrest... so they people trying to commit crimes get a (relative) slap on the wrist, and the people causing possible harm (no actual harm) due to lack of judgement gets three years.
Sounds like a great system!
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that the magnets are small and easily missed by parents, especially if they've fallen on the floor at a friend's house.
The fact is that at some point, you do have to recognize societal responsibilities, these aren't always obvious without benefit of hindsight.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've had to sit through a number of powerpoint presentations in darkened rooms where a green laser pointer was too bright. If red is too dim, it's the batteries.
Occasionally I've been in presentations where someone was using a dry erase whiteboard as a screen. Never do that with a laser pointer. If they had tried to do it with a green laser, I would have walked out. That shit is reflective.
Last gripe: people, you really shouldn't need to use a laser pointer on every single slide. Scientists are horrible at this. "If I am not making little circles around random places on the screen at all times, they'll think I'm not a real scientist!" Text should speak for itself, if you're pointing at text, you probably have too much to be of any use, or are nervously pointing unnecessarily. If you have images and you want to direct someone's attention at a small part, you could put arrows on it pretty easily, but that's the one time you need a laser pointer, that's typically only one or two times a slideshow from my experience.
Re:Sentence is too long (Score:5, Insightful)
I just believe we should try to bring the young back into society where they can be constructive, at least give them the chance, before sending them on to learn to be a real criminal.
Re:Good. (Score:0, Insightful)
There have since been two further reports of 12 year old children from Sydney and Melbourne suffering severe injuries.
Please, do the world a favor and stop trying to prevent darwinism. It has served man kind well in the past, and we need it more than ever today.
Re:Good. (Score:3, Insightful)
In WA, Princess Margaret Hospital reports there have been 33 cases of children swallowing magnets since 2006 and four were admitted to hospital for treatment. In April 2012, a two year old boy underwent emergency surgery to remove 27 small magnets from his stomach.
I added the emphasis above, but this is from your article. The magnets were not harming children. Parents that allowed their children to play with adult toys unsupervised harmed the children.
If your logic was true, every company producing kitchen knives is responsible for children that get cut when fishing through the knife drawer while the parents are not looking. Every company producing cleansers (including lye) is responsible for children that get sick or die from ingesting the cleaners, and not the parents for keeping the cleaners out of reach of children.
Re:From the article: (Score:5, Insightful)
The law is stupid because the idea that laws serve as an effective deterrent is stupid.
No it isn't.
Remember when they passed that law against __________, and now no one does __________ anymore?
smoking in indoor public places
driving without a seatbelt
leaving dog poop on the pavement
corporal punishment in schools
child labour
If "laser strikes" are now a potential safety hazard, and the government wants to "do something" about them, they should start requiring pilots to wear appropriate safety gear to protect themselves against laser strikes.
So, your answer to the problem of, say, graffiti would be to coat every wall with teflon, instead of punishing those responsible? How about mandatory burkas instead of those silly anti-rape laws?
Re:Punishment fetish wins again (Score:5, Insightful)
all for something stupid that, he is unlikely to ever do again.
Doing it twice isn't a pattern, and it's not like blinding a pilot is putting anyone's life at risk. It's far more important to preserve our freedom!
You're absolutely right. Punishment is blown way out of proportion in this country. Look at explosives, for instance. Yeah, there's some risk to explosive chemicals, but just because some guy throws a lit stick of dynamite at a crowded building, then another at the responding police car, is no reason to lock him up for 30 months, especially if the sticks didn't actually explode. While it could have been disasterous, it wasn't, and someone could have walked over the shocked and fainted bystanders, past the dynamite, and just asked the guy not to do it again. Surely he'd learn the error of his ways.
Lasers, like explosives, firearms, revolving credit, and cars, are just dangerous toys. When someone does something reckless and still doesn't kill people, they should be applauded for their courage. Everyone of lesser courage and luck will recognize their clear inferiority, and would never try to duplicate the risky stunt. Deterrent punishment is only useful in a society where people copy each other mindlessly, and clearly everyone in the United States is too smart for that.
Re:Good. (Score:1, Insightful)
2 Weeks of prison he probably wouldn't do it again.
2-1/2 years in prison at 19, he probably won't do that again, but I'm sure he'll learn some useful pointers on what next to do. Maybe neither justice nor revenge, but just part of the plan to maintain an incarcerated underclass to fuel the prison-industrial-complex. Of course the law enforcement and judiciary have plausible deniability too.
Re:Crewel and unusual punishment (Score:4, Insightful)
"By "sending a message" they are by their own admission, using an unusual punishment."
Why do you assume that? The message they're sending could just as well be that this is a fairly new crime, and hence the decision is that this is actually the standard punishment for this sort of crime going forward. There needn't be an assumption that the punishment is unusual, on the contrary, this could be normal punishment for this sort of crime going forward.
You can only reasonably jump to the conclusion you have if there have been a decent number of equivalent cases whereby they gave lesser sentences and if hence this particular case stands out. There haven't been enough cases yet for that to be true.
Re:Good. (Score:4, Insightful)
Completely agree. It's an issue, so if they want to make a point, put the guy in jail for a week or two. More than a day but less than a month.
A 30 month sentence is not appropriate for being a douchebag. This is essentially just making an example of the guy and is unjust--the punishment doesn't fit the crime at all. Because of that, I hope this knucklehead appeals and gets off scot free.
Re:From the article: (Score:5, Insightful)
What kind of accuracy would be required to hit a pilot in the eye from 100m away? The pupil has a radius of probably 5 mm.
Simple trig fails because a laser doesn't project an infinitesimal point, especially at 100m. And even if it did, you only need to hit your target for a moment to cause temporary blinding. Just the dazzle of a powerful laser as it reflects off various surfaces (or refracts through the glass) within the cockpit is probably enough to disorientate a pilot, so you don't even need to aim anywhere near their eyes.
Re:Good. (Score:3, Insightful)
We should probably lighten up those drunk driving laws too. It's not like those people ever repeat their crimes [nbcnews.com]... oh, wait.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
-- green led
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, yeah, because you can't catch everyone. If the punishment is a week in jail and you're very unlikely to get caught, plenty of people are going to do this. If you have a small chance of spending years in jail, non-idiots will think twice and not do it. I hope he spends every day of it in jail and a bunch of similar morons decide to find their fun in other ways.
Re:Good. (Score:1, Insightful)
The fact is that what you suggest is literally impossible.
No, but that of the friend, and that of lax gun regulation that allows him to have guns in the first place.
Re:Good. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:From the article: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
We punish a crime based on the foreseeable consequences of the crime, not on the simplicity of the act. This guy really could have crashed an airliner, killing hundreds. Pointing a laser at a plane is easy, but so is pulling a trigger.
"Not intending to harm anybody"? (Score:4, Insightful)
"For doing something dumb (not intending to harm anybody)"
What, precisely, do you think he had in mind when aiming a laser pointer in the cockpit of an airplane lining up for a landing? "Harmless", my a$$.
This was a serious violent crime. Period. End of story. The fact that his crime failed to have the intended result doesn't mean he gets a slap on the wrist.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
Or you for allowing your toddler to be able to pick up a loaded gun. When I take my small children to friend's houses that are not normally prepared for toddlers, I watch them like a hawk. I move knick-knacks and glasses that they can easily knock over and break. I move bowls of hard candy and TV remotes. If there was a gun on the coffee table, I sure as hell would move it too. I certainly don't let the wonder around by themselves and if they pick something up off the floor I grab them and find out what it is. Fishy stuff out of a toddler's mouth is sometimes gross, but not hard. It's called being responsible.
Fact: People without small children do not recognize the stupid things small children will do. It is the parent's responsibility to know what their child is capable of and react accordingly.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
We've been through this argument before.
"Why should 100,000 people be denied the fun of playing with their toys just because a dozen toddlers go to the hospital and one or two of them die as a result?"
"It's not the manufacturer's fault, it's not the toy's fault, it's the parents' fault for not supervising their toddlers properly. Irresponsible parents absolve us of all responsibility."
"I want to play with my toys and I'm willing to see a couple of toddlers die as a result as long as I can blame their death on their parents' responsibility."
That argument doesn't play too well, even in the freedom-loving United States (much less nanny-state Europe and Australia). All you have to do is bring up one set of parents whose toddler died and that brings people back to reality.
When manufacturers try that in product liability cases, the juries don't buy it and hit them with big damage awards. "I knew some toddlers were dying but I'm a libertarian and it serves them right for having irresponsible parents" is not a successful trial strategy. And when government agencies ban these products, the (elected) politicians back them up. And the voters back them up.
You've lost that argument. If anyone is on the high school debating team and wants to continue it, I'll leave it to you.
Re:Good. (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you a parent? Theoretically, I agree with what you're saying; most of the time, this probably is due to crappy, apathetic parenting, but in reality, it's impossible to track a child literally 24/7 even if you're the most careful loving parent in the world. It only takes a literal second for a child to suddenly find something you didn't know was there (esp if at a friend's house) , and while you're answering the phone or whatever, he pops in his mouth and swallows. Chance plays a part in everything.
Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you bring your toddler over to a friend's house, and see a plastic squirt gun and a teddy bear on the coffee table --- double-check that the squirt gun is really a squirt gun, and it's no problem, right?
After your toddler blows her head off, you realize that the teddy bear was a loaded custom-designed teddy-bear-shaped semi-automatic pistol with the safety off.
That's the problem with the magnet systems --- they look like fairly harmless kids' toys, so unless a parent already *knows* how dangerous the clusters of shiny marbles in their geeky friend's apartment are (like they would know a gun-shaped gun is), they're unlikely to be sufficiently protective of their child until a few days too late.
Re:Good. (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact is that humans have managed to survive in a dangerous world with lots of things that would kill little kids for hundreds of thousands of years. Yes, there are ways of protecting kids as a parent. It's people like you who'll bring about the idiocracy.