Couple Busted For Shining Laser At Helicopter

coondoggie sends us to another Network World piece, this one about a couple charged with shining a green laser into the cockpit of a police helicopter. The FBI and the US attorney's office charged the California couple under a federal statute. They could end up paying a $250,000 fine and doing 20 years of jail time. "The complaint states that on November 8, 2007, at about 10:55 p.m., a green laser beam illuminated the cockpit of a Kern County Sheriff's Department helicopter, which was flying at 500 feet during routine patrol in Bakersfield, California. When the light hit the cockpit, it disoriented the Kern County Sheriff's pilot, causing pain and discomfort in his eyes for a couple of hours, the FBI said in a statement."

Obligatory

"Don't lase me, bro!"

Re:Obligatory

ThinkGeek Green Laser page: http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/lights/5a47/ [thinkgeek.com]

Text at the bottom of the page:

Warning: Green lasers are very powerful. Pointing at aircraft may land you in jail. Without a Monopoly card to get you back out. Use it wisely.

Hilarious.

Action Shot?

Who else is hoping someone got a picture of these two being arrested so that they can add it to the ThinkGeek product page as an action shot?

Re:Obligatory

Yeah I faced 90 days in jail and a 500$ fine for not having a rabies tag for my dog. I showed the judge proof that i vaccinated him after the ticket and the judge dismissed it.

Welcome to American law.

Good!

I hate the police as much as anyone, but that's not cool. Unless the helicopter is spotting pot farms, in which case an anti-aircraft missile should be used instead.

Re:Good!

At what point does it become immoral for the police to "do their job"? At what point does it become not-immoral to use deadly force to prevent them from (immorally) taking away your life or liberty?

I'm not saying that point exists in regards to marijuana, but it's something to consider. As freedoms are gradually taken away, at some point it is NOT immoral to use deadly force against the people with guns who are trying to take away your freedoms. That point lies somewhere in-between our current system and Stalin's (or Hitler's). Mind you, there's a LOT of gray area in-between. I'm just saying, it's important to remember that this point does exist, and "just doing their job" only goes so far.

Enforcement of draconian anti-marijuana laws is immoral. Not as immoral as arresting people based on their political persuasions, but immoral nonetheless.

Laws != Justice

Part of the problem is that Laws have become so stict that it prevents exersizing justice. Is the action illegal... Yes does it deserve 20 years and 5 years of pay, no. What would be more fare would be $5,000 fine. for a first offence. These huge life killing fines are unjust for the crime that are caused forcing the person into jail (for people who are not a continued danger to society) or Paying huge sumes of money will only make the problem worse... Oh a person commited a Crime Put him in Jail for 1/3 of his life and make sure when he gets out he can't pay any bills... That'll make sure he won't comment a crime again... a $5000 fine will be enough for the person to feel it and not willing to try again, but yet will be able to live his life as a productive and law abiding citizen.

Umm..

Alright, let's see here. An average divergence for a class 3B green laser is around 1.2mRad, with a (on the large side) 1.5mm aperture.
At 500 feet (152.4m):

1.5 + (152.4 * 1.2) mm = 18.438cm

Roughly .6 ft diameter which, while probably larger than the distance between eyes, I'd have
to say people that aim at planes and helicopters have really good aim. While the heli pilot could
easily have been hurt if this laser was of the higher powers one can easily get around the web
(ie 200mw), a plane is much further up, the cockpit would merely be green, the pilot would not
be hurt. Remember that energy decreases with area. It's probably a distance squared type thing, but
my physics is rusty.

Is it really that hard to NOT shine a laser at a helicopter? I mean the thing takes up maybe 30'' of arc of 180deg of sky... Idiots.

This is /. worthy news WHY? an observation

We can probably agree that at first glance, the FBI going after this couple because the pilot of the helicopter had a headache for several hours seems like using a jackhammer to swat a fly. But consider: lasing an aircraft (putting a laser on an aircraft) for any reason is a federal offense, making it the FBI's domain. [FYI the reason it is a federal offense to begin with is that the air space over the country is not considered "state property", otherwise you could have a California Aviation Administration, a Nevada Aviation administration, etc. etc. and all of the aviation systems need to work together]. Coupled with the fact that virtually everything you can do with an aircraft can have an interstate commerce connection, making it Federal vs. state anyway)

Anyway, this has to be considered a significant offense for two reasons reasons, the first being the one they quote: disorient a pilot and you put the pilot and any one in the neighborhood of the craft in danger. Think of the response if you dropped a paint filled balloon from an overpass onto a vehicle on a busy freeway, same type of thing. The second reason is similar: because lasers are damn straight sighting mechanisms and reflect back to an observer in an electronically or optically observable manner, anything from a high powered rifle to an anti-aircraft gun or missile can be targeted on the aircraft resulting in a significantly higher probability of a hit.

What the law can't do is say "well, there's no harm to doing ___X___" if every time someone does ___X___, other people are put at risk. Which is why "driving under the influence" is a crime even if no one got hurt. Maybe the couple doesn't deserve a huge fine and twenty years in jail. But they did the crime even inadvertently and there has to be a measurable penalty as a deterrent to other idiots doing the same thing.

My question is, are we readers on slashdot so reactive to anything the government does that we tacitly give permission and headline space to all of the idiots of the world who get in trouble for doing what they ought to have known they shouldn't?

Re:Need a bit more background here

Was the laser attached to a missile launcher?

or a shark?

Re:Need a bit more background here

...or a shark launcher?

=Smidge=

Re:Need a bit more background here

Only Duke Nukem knows for sure!

Re:What kind of laser?

It was a GREEN laser, which puts out a lot more power than your standard red keychain ornament. One of the advertised uses for a green laser is as a "sky pointer".

Re:What kind of laser?

"One of the advertised uses for a green laser is as a "sky pointer".

So, what if these people were using it 'as advertised', to point to sky objects, and this pilot flew INTO their beam? Is that still a chargeable crime? Do they have to prove intent of these people trying to shine it at the helicopter to cause damage or pain to the pilot?

Re:What kind of laser?

Even shooting a laser through a public space (meaning anywhere outdoors) in the US is considered a misdemeanor. Pointing at a police office is a more serious crime because they may mistake it for a gun.

So while 'sky pointing' is advertised as a feature, it doesn't actually mean that it may be used that way.

Re:What kind of laser?

Misdemeanor? Are you sure about that?

They're a popular accessory for stargazers, as seen here [telescopes.com]. Obviously, shining them at people/aircraft is a bad thing, but I didn't think their proper use was illegal.

Re:What kind of laser?

can't see much non-classroom legitimate use for laser pointers. "sky pointer" is just stupid.

Either you have zero imagination or you just woke up at 2:00 PM to post that comment.

Those lasers are powerful enough to show up (ie: a green line) when pointing out stars and constellations to your significant other or children.

I'm not really sure how a laser would bring down a plane though. Do you really think the pilots are up there doing dives and loops and such?

Re: What else is new?

So, what if these people were using it 'as advertised', to point to sky objects, and this pilot flew INTO their beam? Is that still a chargeable crime? Do they have to prove intent of these people trying to shine it at the helicopter to cause damage or pain to the pilot?

That's the problem. Green lasers are powerful, and they are very bright (intrinsically, plus the sensitivity of our eyes to green). If you misuse them, you can hurt somebody with them. What else is new?

I own one myself, and use it as a pointer for astronomy. It works really well. I am careful where I point it. I am careful who I allow to use it.

If I deliberately pointed it at an aircraft to try to distract the pilot, that would indeed be A Bad Thing.

If an aircraft accidently happened to wander in to the path when I was showing somebody where M31 or Comet 17P/Holmes was, is it a crime? I don't think so.

...laura

It may not be a crime, but maybe still liable

If an aircraft accidently happened to wander in to the path when I was showing somebody where M31 or Comet 17P/Holmes was, is it a crime? I don't think so.

It may not be a crime, but you may still be liable for the incident. It is probably your responsibility to not illuminate aircraft. Much like it is a shooter's responsibility to make sure downrange is clear. You may set up a target in the desert and intend to shoot only at the target, but if you hit someone/something a mile downrange you are responsible.

It is a virtual certainty that if a crash results you will be sued into oblivion.

Re: What else is new?

If an aircraft accidently happened to wander in to the path when I was showing somebody where M31 or Comet 17P/Holmes was, is it a crime? I don't think so.

Aircraft don't suddenly appear, they move across fairly predictable paths.

If an aircraft were moving towards the area you were shining the laser, would you turn it off, or keep it shining?

Re: What else is new?

Well for the laser to shine into the cockpit and hit the pilot in the eye then it couldn't have been directly above them. The article says the helicopter was at 500 feet -- it would have been impossible to miss if that was anywhere near them. So it was likely quite some distance away, and over a city, so it's not an unreasonable supposition that they could neither hear nor see the helicopter.

However also according to the article, one of the couple said that they had been "taking turns shining the laser around watching the tracers in the sky."

Waving a green laser around at a relatively low angle at the horizon in a populated area just for kicks seems pretty irresponsible. If you want to do that just point it at the ground nearby where you know it's safe (and makes neat patterns on the grass =D). This is a far cry from pointing at the night's sky to point out stellar objects, especially since normally astronomy is done away from a city where the lights of a police helicopter would be obvious, and you aren't waving the laser around so the odds of someone moving -into- the beam are pretty minimal (as opposed to here, where they were sweeping large swaths of sky).

I'm not sure this should be a criminal offense in this instance, but a pilot was injured and could have been blinded, and people do need to learn how to use lasers responsibly before the gov. decides to take them away from us. :(

Re:What kind of laser?

These are generalisations but :

Presentation pointers are red, very low powered, you can't see the beam without some kind of mist, you can get them for under five pounds in the UK all over the place, normally smaller than a pen, but thicker.

Green lasers are more powerful, you can see the beam in clear conditions, they cost an awful lot more ( somewhere between 100 - 200), are much larger, closer to say, a couple of coke cans stood on end, and can cut through a polystyrene cup....

Or at least that was the case the last time I looked maybe a year ago, I just took the first google hit that caught my eye and unsurprisingly they've got smaller and cheaper now : http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/lights/5a47/ [thinkgeek.com]

heh, the thinkgeek page even specifically points out "Warning: Green lasers are very powerful. Pointing at aircraft may land you in jail. Without a Monopoly card to get you back out. Use it wisely."

Re:What kind of laser?

I believe that the reason you can see a green laser beam is because that wavelength of light is not readily absorbed by water molecules in the air, thus some fraction of the beam is reflected. In the case of a red laser, water molecules readily absorb red and infrared light (case in point - if you go scuba diving greater than ~30 ft down, and cut yourself, you bleed green - all the red light from the sun is absorbed by that depth) and thus the beam is less visible.

Re:what were their intentions?

From the article, they claim, "...Snow told investigating agents that she and Dooley were standing in the driveway on November 8 and "taking turns shining the laser around watching the tracers in the sky.""

If they are telling the truth, then this was a horrible accident. If they are telling a lie to protect themselves from harsher punishment, then harsher punishment they should get. Unless a third person can come forward and state that harmful intent was desired, then the judge will have to go on the sworn testimony of the two.

Re:Dumb. Asses.

Chief: Do not be alarmed. Continue swimming naked.