Couple Busted For Shining Laser At Helicopter 863
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 (Score:5, Funny)
"Don't lase me, bro!"
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
Text at the bottom of the page:
Hilarious.
Action Shot? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Obligatory (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Its pretty dangerous and examples need to be set.
Over here in Australia there are idiots who do it to aircraft which are landing.
No one has crashed yet but its only a matter of time.
Re:Obligatory (Score:4, Insightful)
Guess what, it was almost attempted murder, or at least negligent homicide (or whatever lawyers like to call being deliberately very reckless in risking someone else's life, unasked.)
Severe recklessness and/or attempted murder do carry high possible penalties, and rightly so. They could, and should, get a reduced sentence since "all's well that ends well" for a prank, but the option should still be there.
It wasn't too long ago that kids who stole a stop sign were up on murder charges because two cars biffed at the intersection it was missing from, leading to 4 deaths.
Advisory only, not mandatory (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/mediasources/20050113b [nacdl.org]
And just this month a 7-2 ruling in the Minbrough and Gall cases, related to crack cocaine sentencing guidelines, again they are advisory only, not mandatory. Here's a link from the LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-sentencing16dec16,0,1084405.story?coll=la-opinion-center [latimes.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Insightful)
Dazzling is enough (Score:4, Informative)
Having had afterimages for several minutes after being exposed to a specular reflection of a 5mW green laser in office-lit conditions (reflected from a whiteboard), I can sympathize.
It doesn't say the power of the beam - you can quite easily pick up green laser pointers on eBay that are advertised as 100mW or more (here in the UK, at least). Also, the copter is likely to be quite low, and you'd only want to try this at night so you could see the dot. The pilot's pupils would be dilated due to the darkness, so I can imagine quite a severe dazzling effect.
Re:Obligatory (Score:5, Informative)
Welcome to American law.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I really don't understand how this could possibly be wrong for a judge to do. These judges see so littl
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
IMO even standing on a runway and trying to annoy pilots it would be hard to do more than get them to notice you let alone randomly flashing a laser into they sky.
No one is that accurate with a laser pointer (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm saddened by the stupidity of these clowns. This is only going to l
Re:No one is that accurate with a laser pointer (Score:5, Informative)
Police helicopters do ground reconnaissance for most of their life so they have windows at or near the pilots' feet so they can see suspects, car chases, etc. on the ground more easily. Makes it dead simple for somebody to shine a laser beam up 500ft and right through the glass directly at the downward pointed eyes of the (co)pilot.
Re:No one is that accurate with a laser pointer (Score:5, Informative)
1 word: refraction
Note that helicopters tend to tilt forwards when moving forwards, and also that a lot of choppers have a very large portion of their front made out of "glass" (probably not glass, but something to that effect). A bit of refraction on the helmet lens and the glass front would be enough to turn it towards the eyes of the pilot, and any bit of interference along the way would probably spread the beam a bit, making it bigger than the pinpoint it usually is. Honestly, the extended disorientation/pain/discomfort the pilot claims don't seem that far fetched, especially when we're talking about night-time surveillance, and a laser (aka an "inordinately large amount of light") was (supposedly) shone into your eyes.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I could. When I'm taking pictures with a long telephoto lens on my camera, I can manage to keep the aiming point within a ten-foot circle at three miles. Strap a laser to the camera, and that corresponds to a ten-inch circle at a quarter-mile.
Some quick, back-of-the-envelope trigonometry tells me you're either an über-expert-rated sniper, or are exaggerating lightly. A radius of 5 feet over a distance of 3 miles leaves you with about .02 degrees off in either direction...
Re:No one is that accurate with a laser pointer (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
What kind of laser? (Score:2)
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Interesting)
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? (Score:5, Interesting)
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? (Score:5, Interesting)
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? (Score:5, Informative)
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 kind of laser? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, if you light up an aircraft 500-1000ft up in the air, and you turn off the light and walk/run out of the area, how the hell are they going to find and PROVE it was you that did this??
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Informative)
About the only question left for the court is did the couple shine it at the helicopter directly (in which case it was an intentional attack), or were they shining it in the sky and were just careless.
Yeah, if you used it in an open area, the cops might have more problems. OTH, it was a police helicopter, which are used to chase down suspects all the time.
Re: What else is new? (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
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? (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
If it was a plane it'd be flying at anywhere from 100 feet/second on up, so beam exposure would be sub-millisecond on any given part of the plane (or cockpit). Since helicopters can fly slowly or hover, it's less certain how long an accidental exposure might be -- although presumably the whole point of a green laser is that's it's bright enough to see the beam reflecting off dust in the air. The pilot might be a little surprised to see a beam mat
Re: What else is new? (Score:5, Insightful)
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? (Score:4, Interesting)
Nobody was accidentally killed in this case but it could have been close. For example, compare RIAA fines against murder charges and you begin to realize it's not a level playing field
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Manslaughter isn't legal, but it also isn't murder. This is precisely because intent is taken into account, as it should be here. There should be one penalty level for "the helicopter wandered into my beam", another for "I didn't know it would mess them up", another for "hey, let's see if we can crash this helicopter", another for "finally, my premeditated plan to take that damn sheriff o
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Informative)
Absolutely positively not true. Laser sources that emit a non-visible beam fall in class IIIR, class IIIB or class IV which are the worst eye hazards regardless of power. ANSI Z136.1 specifies that non-visible class IIIR or higher laser beams must be enclosed to prevent laser radiation exposure to non-trained personnel.
I work around exposed class IV CO2 10600nm laser beams capable of putting out 100 watts (that's watts, not mW) of power. The beam is invisible to the human eye yet it is capable of cutting metal. "Not dangerous at all" is a serious understatement.
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Informative)
No, no, and... No!
A IIIa (now called 3R for the type of devices under consideration here) puts out less than 5mW. 5mW of green laser light doesn't magically contain more energy than 5mw of red laser light.
Humans perceive green light as much, much brighter because we have a higher sensitivity to it. But in terms of total power, 5mW equals 5mW equals 5mW.
That said, IIIB/3R can cause temporary eye damage, though it takes some effort to target it just in the right spot and for long enough (a quick random sweep across the eyes won't do it). But "disorientation" and "hours of discomfort", over 500ft away and through a window? No. Evil piggies just want to cry victim.
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Informative)
What you are neglecting is the retina absorption of laser radiation, which varies with wavelength. The human eye absorbs the most light energy in the 500-700nm wavelength range, which happens to be where green (532nm) and red (660nm) fall within. In the same amount of time, 5mW of 532nm laser energy will do more eye damage than 5mW of ultraviolet 400nm laser energy.
Incorrect. Any laser higher than class 1M can cause permanent eye damage. Laser eye injuries are extremely painful even at class II 1mW or lower levels. Class IIIR (formerly IIIa) lasers can produce no more than 5mW, but class IIIB lasers can produce as much as 500mW and can cause skin damage.
Lasers are not a controlled substance. One could purchase a class IIIB green laser that puts out 500mW of laser energy and really do damage to a pilot from the ground. If you think these people are exaggerating about their suffering, you are dead wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In the same amount of time, 5mW of 532nm laser energy will do more eye damage than 5mW of ultraviolet 400nm laser energy.
Not that I am planning, to, but does this mean you could make an ultraviolet (or infrared) laser that would damage someone's eyes without them seeing any light or understanding why it suddenly hurts so much? Is the blink reflex triggered by light, so you could bypass it with non-visible wavelengths and cause damage?
I'll order an array of those for my dark, gothic castle tower, then. Shine it over the villagers! They'll never know why it hurts so much to glance at my evil castle, they'll just know that over
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This sounds like a great toy for all these inflatable holiday balloons I see on people's yards now.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A 200mw green laser is no more / less powerful than it's red / blue / infrared counterparts
of the same power level. If the couple were truly evil, they would have used an infrared
lab laser with an output of 5-15 Watts. The officer wouldn't even know what happened until
his eyes 'popped'. Infrared is actually more dangerous because of the lack of the blink
factor. Shine a bright light in your eyes and you'll close them / turn away to deal with
it. Infrared you won't even realize you're in dange
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It was a GREEN laser, which puts out a lot more power than your standard red keychain ornament.
No, they don't actually put out more power-- they seem brighter because the eye is more sensitive to green than to red.
One of the advertised uses for a green laser is as a "sky pointer".
Green lasers are "sky pointers" because green light will scatter from the atmosphere better than red light-- so you get more of a "line" showing where you're pointing in the sky. (blue lasers scatter even better-- but the eye is most sensitive to green)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My guess is that it was something like this [thinkgeek.com], but it could have been something more powerful like this [thinkgeek.com]. Both are consumer devices, but both are still potentially damaging with sustained exposure.
If it was a consumer device I have a hard time buying it "causing pain and discomfort in his eyes for a couple of hours" so maybe I'm wrong. That or the FB
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Informative)
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: (Score:3)
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....
How does that work? With standard lasers, the beam of light is coherent and so is unlikely to be seen unless something in the air (water molecules, smoke, etc) provides something to reflect off of, otherwise the beam would remain invisible up until it hit a solid target and you would then see the red dot.
How does a green laser make itself visible where a red laser would not? Does a more intense beam require less "stuff" in the air to create reflections and thus a visible beam effect?
Re:What kind of laser? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The sun shines white, that's true. It appears yellow because the blue is scattered. By contrast the entire remainder of the sky appears blue (because the blue rays, while coming from the sun, have been scattered by absorption and re-transmission).
What an electron absorbs in energy, it will retransmit some time later.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I use mine primarily to point things out while documenting buildings, and went with the weakest green laser just for a little bit more safety.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dumb. Asses. (Score:2, Insightful)
Put one of these powerful green lasers in the hands of an idiot and see that the first thing they'll do is shine it on somebody's face.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, do they not realize that they're *also* a nuisance to people on the ground?
Re:Dumb. Asses. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
See, these people would have a lot more of my sympathy if they had first advocated a change in Police Department policy, and then when the majority of their fellow community members declined to support their cause they moved out of that community to a community that agreed with their preferences, and the Bakersfield PD helicopter followed them to that new community and continued to harass th
Re:Dumb. Asses. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Dumb. Asses. (Score:4, Interesting)
Good! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is why TV should be banned long before marijuana.
They hit a pilot (Score:3, Interesting)
The article didn't seem to indicate what kind of laser they used.
I also wonder how bad they where effected if they where still able to find the laser. That is just a point of curiosity. Certainly shining a laser of any significant power at an aircraft is to be frowned upon. Obviously excluding vehicles of war.
This is what they used (Score:2, Informative)
So... don't buy one of these pens or you might shine it at a chopper at night by accident and then spend 20 years in the slammer or pay a quarter mil or whatevs. Though for forking over that much dough for a stupid laser pen to begin with, a $250,000 fine may ironically be appropriate.
Don't lase me bro! (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes they shoudl be punished (Score:3, Insightful)
First time offense? 5-10G and a year of community service.
Make it hurt, but don't destroy them.
I had a laser shined in my eye (Score:2, Redundant)
I fail to see why this story made slashdot. I read a newspaper article last year IIRC about a fellow getting jailed for shining a laser at a commercial air liner, which would be far more dangerous than shining it at a police helicopter. Well, to anybody but the guy with the laser anyway.
The danger, of course, is that the pilot will be blinded or disoriented and could crash the vehicle. After the surgery on my r
Laws != Justice (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Laws != Justice (Score:4, Informative)
"The helicopter was at 500 feet, so the distance from laser to cockpit was at least 500 ft, and probably more than 1000 considering the angle needed to enter the cockpit rather than bounce off the bottom of the helicopter."
Not necessarily. When the article says they were flying at 500 ft, it is most likely quoting the official report which came from the pilot. To a pilot, "flying at 500 ft" means flying at 500 ft above sea level (altimeters measure altitude using barometric pressure, which indicates altitude above sea level, and therefore can't possibly know where the actual ground is). So, if, for example, ground level was actually at 200 ft above sea level, the helicopter would only be 300 ft above the ground. This is probably not an unrealistic altitude for a patrolling police helicopter.
It's also not necessary to shine it at much of an angle if the helicopter was banking in a turn and the pilot was looking into the turn, as a pilot might logically do when turning, and also looking down, which a police pilot on patrol might logically do.
The article also doesn't state that it's a 5mW laser, just that it's a hand-held green laser. There are much more powerful hand-held green lasers than 5mW available.
The article does not give enough information to write this off as "more green-laser hysteria".
Most likely not your ordinary pointer (Score:3, Interesting)
Umm.. (Score:5, Insightful)
At 500 feet (152.4m):
1.5 + (152.4 * 1.2) mm = 18.438cm
Roughly
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For all the "oops, it was an accident" types, consider that anyone using a laser beam outside at night is doing it TO LOOK AT THINGS - you will NOT miss an airplane with its flashing beacons and strobe lights. This
Re:Umm.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this in "your rights online"?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Filtering (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Filtering (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, you can get lasers in at least three colors, probably more. And it's significantly hard to filter out just one wavelength, without filtering neghboring wavelengths as well. Which would mean in this case they would want to filter out green. The color of treetops, and grass, and overall a significant portion of the Earth's surface.
And of course, following that logic, you'd want to filter out the other main colors that lasers come in. Red are extremely common, and blue are just starting to get on the market. So we'll filter both of those out.
You know what would be a good filter at this point? Polished steel. It'd reflect that laser right away, and convently blocks all the colors mentioned.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
First of all, there are not "at least three colors". Very few laser diodes (cheap ones, especially) lase at wavelengths less than 600 nm. There are green lasers at 532 nm (so here's one color to block), and I suppose apparently there are blue laser pointers [thinkgeek.com] now. But since those things cost an arm and a leg, it doesn't need to be blocked. Most red lasers lase at something close to He-Ne wavele
Re:Filtering (Score:5, Informative)
I am a laser engineer at work (trained to work with dangerous high power class IV lasers) and can tell you that there are limitations to this approach.
The filter material at most laser wavelengths would not be clear. My laser safety goggles for 532nm green lasers are dark amber, 660nm red laser goggles are blue. Not practical for navigating aircraft around obstacles.
There is no single filter that is effective for all wavelengths of lasers (green, red, co2, etc).
Also the optical density for a single filter - the blocking capability of the filter - is not the same level across different wavelengths. And optical laser filters do not block the laser beam, they reduce the energy level. Prolonged exposure even with laser safety goggles will still cause eye injury; the object of the goggles is to reduce the energy long enough to account for the reflex time of turning your eyes away from a laser beam and thus avoiding eye injury. This does little good in a cockpit when someone maliciously aims a laser beam at an aircraft.
There is also the hazard of refracted and reflected beam energy. The beam will be refracted as it strikes the cockpit glass and its energy may or may not be attenuated, and there is also the hazard of beam reflections off of objects in the cockpit. The danger of stray beams in this condition is very real and it may be near impossible - while affixed to the pilot seat via seat belt - to avoid exposure to any laser beam. There is also the remote possibility of the refraction of the glass having a focusing effect on the laser beam and exposing the pilot to higher w/cm^2 laser energy at the wrong place.
I have never experienced a laser eye injury, but have been told in laser safety training that they are extremely painful.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nah, I think credit card companies and phishers are responsible for that natural selection goal.
This is /. worthy news WHY? an observation (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
I had a laser shined at me while driving (Score:4, Interesting)
I was driving along the highway one time at night 2 years ago, and a laser beam was shined into my car. For all you guys that think that the pilot is bullshitting, you guys are idiots. The laser flashed me for a split-second, and even though the laser went through the car windshield or whatever (I'm not sure where it came from) I was totally blinded. I was able to safely pull over, but had I been driving fast or in the middle of traffic, I probably could have easily killed my wife and my two kids. One eye was worse than the other but it got better, but as a precaution, my wife drove the rest of the way, but I was infuriated that this happened, and that some dumbass with a laser pointer could have killed me.
We need laws like that so people who attempt to blind people piloting planes, helicopters, cars, or whatever go to jail and learn a good lesson.
Re:I had a laser shined at me while driving (Score:4, Interesting)
People should be completely and utterly aware of their actions at all times if there's even a slight chance they might affect the safety and health of other people. I've read too many stories about people getting injured and killed by asshole kids throwing rocks at cars to think that there shouldn't be REALLY serious repercussions for crimes like this, REGARDLESS of whether they hurt someone or not.
What's the difference between intended almost-manslaughter and manslaughter?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is exactly what pilots are trained to do.
If pilots are unable to reorient after that "tiny amount of time" with the aid of their instruments, or experience vertigo when flying solely on instruments, I submit that they are not medically fit to be flying. This is a basic component to being a pilot.
A good topic for mythbusters (Score:3, Interesting)
Sorry, not buying it. The odds of shining a narrow focus beam directly into a pilot's tiny pupils, over a great distance, likely through a floor/door/visor, etc. are just too incredible.
I've got choppers flying around me here and I just can't see it happening. Literally. Who the hell has such good eyesight they can aim a laser that well without something like a telescope, binoculars or a viewfinder? The article doesn't say but if these aids weren't present then I'm simply not believing it.
I know about morons shining these things at planes on final approach but those are people standing directly in the path of planes with the noses down just well enough to provide direct line of sight AND the pilots are looking in their general direction at the landing lights, so it's a bit more plausible - but still hard to believe.
Re:A good topic for mythbusters (Score:4, Insightful)
I own one of these (Score:5, Informative)
When my wife took hold of the laser, we were driving in the car in SoCal and she illuminated a mansion up on a hill and exclaimed "This thing is AWESOME!" which was one of the only times in memory she has shown avid approval of any of my "toys". Then she said "I can see why people want to shine this at flying objects."
If you illuminate any of the reflective street signs with the laser, it is amazingly impressive. The entire sign, regardless of size, illuminates so blindingly bright that you cannot look at it. Do this at a street sign over a freeway and you could easily cause an accident.
To avoid the temptation not to play with one of these is too great. I sympathize with this couple completely.
Speaking as a retired military... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Need a bit more background here (Score:5, Funny)
or a shark?
Re:Need a bit more background here (Score:5, Funny)
=Smidge=
Re:Need a bit more background here (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Need a bit more background here (Score:5, Funny)
And it will take him forever to tell us.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:what were their intentions? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Truth or Consequences (Score:3, Insightful)
The judge [or jury] isn't obliged to believe that you are telling the truth. Even when you are under oath. Even when your testimony is not directly contradicted. His only obligation is to make a decision based on the evidence as a whole. How many Ge
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The correct phrase is:
"Hey, Hold my beer and watch this."
- Roach
Re:And the charge was... (Score:4, Funny)
There is. Welcome to the internet!