Slashdot Mirror


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."

60 of 863 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory by Billosaur · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Don't lase me, bro!"

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    1. Re:Obligatory by Liselle · · Score: 5, Funny
      ThinkGeek Green Laser page: http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/lights/5a47/

      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.
      --
      Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    2. Re:Obligatory by king-manic · · Score: 3, Informative

      $250,000 and 20 years. Definitely an issue cruel and unusual punishment if they got that, imho. At best I can see them being hit with some negligence suit from the pilot from the damage caused. Unless their is a law in place preventing members of the public from illuminating aircraft in operation. If they can prove though, that the couple had the intention of causing the aircraft to crash, they may have a good reason to pursue trial. That is the maximum penalty. Maximum sentences aren't that common but it varies by judge. They may get off with $1000 fine and 360h of community service depending on the judge and the facts of the case. Unless there is a specified minimum sentence.
      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    3. Re:Obligatory by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    4. Re:Obligatory by Retric · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This seems over blown. Using a hand held laser pointer to target someones eyes at ~1/4 of a mile for long enough to do some form of damage is ridiculously small. Reading the story is sounds like the pilot noticed they where flashing a laser into they sky and decided to mess with them.

      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.

    5. Re:Obligatory by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > $250,000 and 20 years. Definitely an issue cruel and unusual punishment if they got that, imho

      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.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    6. Re:Obligatory by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Depends on the laser, but in general the hand-helds that are on the market are of a low enough power that the blink reflex by itself prevents any real injury. Wicked Lasers does sell some hand-helds that can be pretty dangerous at close ranges (and are horribly expensive), but working for a laser equipment integrator and having spent several years writing code to run all kinds of Class IV equipment from 1 watt UV lasers to 250 watt CO2 units and having used all kinds of smaller lasers for pointing/measurement applications, I'd be hard pressed to think of a situation where someone shining an average hand-held laser (even a green DPSS unit) directly at an aircraft would do more than very temporarily dazzle the pilot. I've unfortunately had the experience of taking some rather strong specular reflections from higher-power green units in my eyes (and no telling how many times I've been hit with IR) when equipment wasn't tagged out properly, but I've never experienced "significant pain and discomfort" and when I got my latest set of retinal photos taken earlier this year, they looked perfect.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  2. Re:Need a bit more background here by Albert+Sandberg · · Score: 5, Funny

    Was the laser attached to a missile launcher?

    or a shark?

  3. Good! by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Good! by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

  4. Re:What kind of laser? by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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".

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  5. Re:What kind of laser? by yakumo.unr · · Score: 5, Informative

    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/

    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."

  6. Re:What kind of laser? by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "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?

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  7. Laws != Justice by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Laws != Justice by Rary · · Score: 3, 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".

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  8. Umm.. by Hangin10 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Umm.. by wiredlogic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The biggest problem is that these incidents all happen at night and the beam is still bright enough to overload the retina of the pilot and force their iris to constrict. This effectively destroys their night vision and makes for a very dangerous situation until their eyes can recover. If you were the pilot you'd be pissed too.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  9. Filtering by SWad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can't they develop cockpit glass that will filter out that particular wavelength?

    1. Re:Filtering by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sure.

      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.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    2. Re:Filtering by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 4, Informative

      Can't they develop cockpit glass that will filter out that particular wavelength?

      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.

      --
      Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
  10. Re:I have some doubts by SLOviper · · Score: 3, Interesting

    FWIW... I have a friend who was lasered (is that a word?) during one of his cargo flights. With beam dispersion as it is on consumer-grade devices, you get quite a wide beam at 500+ feet. He described it as the entire cockpit turning green, so he closed his eyes. It would have been fairly easy to look out the window and radio the authorities with the approximate location, but he chose not to. With a powerful enough laser, it could definitely do damage to someones eyes, if not at least cause disorientation - something you definitely don't want when you're flying an aircraft.

    --
    In theory, theory always works in practice. In practice, theory rarely works. <><
  11. This is /. worthy news WHY? an observation by CodeShark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
  12. Re:what were their intentions? by Ngarrang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Bearded Dragon
  13. I had a laser shined at me while driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm glad these guys were arrested and I hope they get the book thrown at them.

    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.

    1. Re:I had a laser shined at me while driving by trawg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No offense, but maybe you should wait until you're almost killed by careless idiocy like the GP was before you say something like this. I was walking home one night and some idiot kids were drinking on the roof of the shopping center near where I live. They saw me walking underneath and threw a half-full beer can at me from 4 stories up. It missed me by a matter of feet.

      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?

  14. Re:Need a bit more background here by Smidge204 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...or a shark launcher?

    =Smidge=

  15. Re:What kind of laser? by Franio · · 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.

  16. Re: What else is new? by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  17. Re:Need a bit more background here by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Only Duke Nukem knows for sure!

  18. It may not be a crime, but maybe still liable by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  19. Re: What else is new? by ByOhTek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?
    --
    Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  20. Re:What kind of laser? by icepick72 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'm not arguing one side or the other, but there is a such thing as "Negligent Homicide": is the killing of another person through gross negligence or without malice.


    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 ... the law.

  21. Re:What kind of laser? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Informative

    It was a GREEN laser, which puts out a lot more power than your standard red keychain ornament. Technically, that is not true. Red laser pointer, green laser pointer, all the commonly sold models put out less than 5mw of energy. The green lasers LOOK stronger because the human eye is more sensitive to green. But it is the power level that causes damage, not how bright it looks. Else, infra-red lasers, being completely invisible to the human eye, would not be dangerous at all.
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  22. Re:And the charge was... by sm62704 · · Score: 3, Funny

    There should be a price for stupid, rude, reckless behavior.

    There is. Welcome to the internet!

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  23. Re:Dumb. Asses. by Applekid · · Score: 4, Funny

    Chief: Do not be alarmed. Continue swimming naked.

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  24. Re:What kind of laser? by e4g4 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    --
    The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
  25. Re:What kind of laser? by blueskies · · Score: 4, Informative

    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?
  26. Re:What kind of laser? by Scorchio · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Misdemeanor? Are you sure about that?

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

  27. Action Shot? by TheLostSamurai · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

    --
    I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
  28. Re: What else is new? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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. :(

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  29. No one is that accurate with a laser pointer by GreenSwirl · · Score: 4, Informative

    I agree and I call shenanigans on the cops. Try and point a laser pointer at a stationary object that far away. You can't hold it still enough. Even if a helicopter was hovering in place, I'll bet that the victim pilot couldn't hold a beam on something as small as a helmet visor inside a cockpit from a quarter-mile away for anything longer than a fraction of a second. Wahhhhhhhh.....

    1. Re:No one is that accurate with a laser pointer by Blkdeath · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are they piloting the jet from Wonder Women where the entire craft is invisible? Is there no instrumentation underneath them that would block such a straight line from the shaky hand of the laser holder?

      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.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    2. Re:No one is that accurate with a laser pointer by xouumalperxe · · Score: 4, 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.

    3. Re:No one is that accurate with a laser pointer by wronskyMan · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't think this would be unconstitutional - the Supreme Court has ruled that time place and manner restrictions are constitutional - otherwise I could write political messages in the side of your car with my key. Besides, light shows are perfectly legal - all you have to do is notify the FAA of the location/time so they can issue a NOTAM telling pilots to watch out for laser activity. Seen NOTAMs for rock concerts, etc. all the time during flight planning.

      --
      --- You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad- Neal (not Cowboy) Boortz
  30. A good topic for mythbusters by e-scetic · · 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.

    1. Re:A good topic for mythbusters by russotto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The complaint doesn't allege that the pilot's eyes were illuminated. Only the cockpit. Most likely scenario, IMO, is that they were screwing around, the helicopter flew through the beam. The pilot got pissed off and tracked them down, and then embellished the complaint to make a Federal case about it. Standard scumbag police procedure.

  31. Re:What kind of laser? by LiENUS · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A white stick works just as well and can also be used to hit morons with laser pointers over the head. A 40 ft white stick is a lot harder to point at a constellation with than a 6 inch laser pointer.

    Have you ever been blinded by a driver who didn't dim his headlights? Now imagine something about 5 times as bright. And pointed at the underside of your car.
  32. Re:What kind of laser? by pla · · Score: 4, Informative

    It was a GREEN laser, which puts out a lot more power than your standard red keychain ornament.

    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.

  33. Re:Need a bit more background here by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 4, Funny

    > Only Duke Nukem knows for sure!

    And it will take him forever to tell us.

    --
    Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
  34. Re:Dumb. Asses. by tm2b · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, in the real world you should take the helo's tail number and complain to the FAA. The FAA does go after aircraft that fly too low, community noise complaints are something they take seriously - and that includes bumping heads with local police departments.

    --
    "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
  35. I own one of these by JRHelgeson · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've owned one of these lasers for a little over two years now. It is nothing short of amazing to hold in your hand and press the button on what is nothing more than a pen sized laser pointer that will illuminate an object over 40 miles away. When you first take hold of one of these at night, the desire to point out any and every object you can see with your naked eye is overwhelming. It takes a better man than I am to resist that temptation. Then if you have the opportunity to illuminate a moving object? It is a very natural desire, I've felt it. Its like seeing a car accident and avoiding the temptation to even look. It is easy to criticize.

    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.

    --
    Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
  36. Re:Dumb. Asses. by morcheeba · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes... I fly with them occasionally, and they are very aware of this. We had a call for something serious in a neighborhood next to an outdoor festival -- they purposefully kept away from the festival so that it wouldn't disturb it and wouldn't look like they were monitoring it. I know all the cops who fly in our city (it's just a handful), and they're all very professional. Hope the same's true in your city -- flying the helicopter is a privilege; they don't just stick any bozo in it.

  37. Re:What kind of laser? by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I'm just curious, how the HELL do these people get caught??

    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??

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  38. Re:What kind of laser? by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 3, Informative

    actually just the opposite. You can see the beam because it is absorbed more than the red one ... and then retransmitted, which has the effect of scattering the beam.

    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.

  39. Re:What kind of laser? by RodgerDodger · · Score: 4, Informative

    *sigh* Try RTFAing for a change... the helicopter pilot and observer traced the visible-light beam (by the backscatter) back to the house of the defendants. A subsequent search (with warrant) found the green laser pointer. The couple then admitted that they were using it on the night in question.

    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.

    --
    "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
  40. Advisory only, not mandatory by cbunix23 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Supremes issued a 5-4 ruling back in 2005 that sentencing guidelines are not mandatory, they are advisory only. IANAL either, but here's a link from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers:

    http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/mediasources/20050113b

    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

  41. Speaking as a retired military... by IonOtter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We had this guy on our ship. A real "shipwreck" if there ever was one. He got the idea to paint the officer of the deck on the ship next to us with his laser pointer. Said officer of the deck was wearing his summer whites, and this brilliant red dot blooms on his chest. It was amazing! The OOD dropped to the deck, drew his side arm and began shouting "SNIPER ON THE PIER! SNIPER ON THE PIER!" Their ship went to security alert, the security teams were deployed and began fanning out on the ship and the pier, and then OUR ship went to security alert. By the time it all got sorted out, Seaman Shipwreck had been hauled off to the brig and later had himself the Big Chicken Dinner (Bad Conduct Discharge). So yeah, firing lasers at official vehicles, ships or planes is a good way to earn yourself a Darwin Award, either by measure of return fire or being put in prison long enough for it to no longer matter.

    --
    [End Of Line]
  42. Re:What kind of laser? by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 4, Informative
    I am a laser engineer at work (I work with dangerous class IV lasers) and have taken laser safety courses.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    --
    Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
  43. Re:What kind of laser? by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 5, Informative
    I am a laser engineer at work (I work with dangerous class IV lasers) and have taken laser safety courses.

    Else, infra-red lasers, being completely invisible to the human eye, would not be dangerous at all.

    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.

    --
    Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
  44. Dazzling is enough by seanellis · · Score: 3, Informative

    Pain I'm skeptical of too, and I bow to your superior experience in this regard, but even temporarily dazzling a pilot over a city is serious.

    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.