Slashdot Mirror


Man Who Pointed Laser At Aircraft Gets 30-Month Sentence

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."

31 of 761 comments (clear)

  1. Good. by ZorinLynx · · 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?

    1. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Of course a very remote secondary consideration is not blinding the pilot and causing a planeload of passengers to crash. A very remote consideration compared to getting my geek on.

    2. Re:Good. by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Informative

      yes, you can. I know people that have recently done so for their holography hobbies

    3. Re:Good. by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Funny

      Intelligence and Wisdom are two different things.

      Don't forget Charisma, Dexterity, Constitution, and Strength

    4. Re:Good. by lgw · · 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.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Good. by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is not the toddlers, or the magnets. The problem is the parents.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    6. Re:Good. by slashmydots · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe magnets shouldn't be so delicious then

    7. Re:Good. by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 5, Funny

      Eating magnets? What's the attraction in that?

    8. Re:Good. by SternisheFan · · Score: 5, Informative
      The problem today is that some of these handheld lasers are 10X more powerful than they're rated at.

      {Low-cost apparatus designed by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) researchers to quickly and accurately measure the properties of handheld laser devices has shown that nearly 90 percent of green pointers and 44 percent of red pointers tested were out of compliance with federal safety regulations.

      Green pointers, which rely on frequency-doubling optics, also emitted “unacceptable” levels of infrared light, reported the team led by NIST Laser Safety Officer Joshua Hadler. It also found one pointer delivering more than ten times the allowable output power in the visible region. Reporting the results of its study on 122 pointers at the International Laser Safety Conference taking place in Orlando, Florida, this week, NIST says that the apparatus has been deliberately designed to be replicated easily by other institutions.

      While anecdotal reports of green laser hazards have previously appeared in scientific journals and the media, NIST says its tests are the first reported precision measurements of a large number of handheld laser devices. The tests also showed, unexpectedly, that many red laser pointers are also out of compliance with federal rules as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). "Our results raise numerous safety questions regarding laser pointers and their use," the team's paper states.}

      http://optics.org/news/4/3/33

    9. Re:Good. by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oh you can still buy them, just not in buckyball form anymore. Head over to the United Nuclear website and look for the 10 pound rare earth magnets labelled "Extremely Dangerous Magnet"! Remember, it's not fun if it's not labelled "extremely dangerous!"

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    10. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    11. Re:Good. by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't want them to be banned by law, but people... DON'T USE GREEN LASER POINTERS FOR PRESENTATIONS.

      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.

      /gripe

    12. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't see anything in your post that absolves the parents from their responsibilities to watch their children. Especially if your children are at the age where they instinctively put things in their mouths, you need to watch them at all times. If your friend has loaded guns lying around his house, is it the gun's fault for going off when the child picks it up?

      -- green led

    13. Re:Good. by sFurbo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Most cheap "lasers" you buy are not true lasers, running on LEDs.

      How are LED lasers not true lasers?

      . I also wonder why it would need a focus lens to stay focused for ~100 ft (as per video from their web site).

      because of the size of the lasing medium. Given the smallest radius of the beam, which of course can't be larger than the exit aperture of the optics, or the size of the lasing medium if no optics are used, and the wave length, the minimum dispersion angle can be determined. IIRC, the dispersion angle for a LED laser is something like 30 degrees before the optics, because the lasing medium is roughly the size of the wavelength.

    14. Re:Good. by goodmanj · · 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.

    15. Re:Good. by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm going to take in seriousness something said in jest, but that's what geeks do... I read recently that the laser doesn't actually drill right through the cockpit window and quick-fry the retinas of the pilots, Rather, the beam splashes on the window, making it difficult or impossible to see out while the beam is in play. Which is still a really bad thing (and a phenomenally stupid thing to do at many levels) ESPECIALLY at low altitude approaching an airport, but is not exactly the same thing as smoking two sets of eyes and leaving the plane permanently pilotless. The article was making the case that the talk of permanently blinding pilots is conventional justice-system-driven hyperbole to make the crime seem worse than it is. (Which in my opinion is unnecessary. It's a stupid move that really could have dire consequences, so I'm ok with offenders going to jail. Eventually the word will get around.)

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    16. Re:Good. by KGIII · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't see anything in your post that absolves the parents from their responsibilities to watch their children. Especially if your children are at the age where they instinctively put things in their mouths, you need to watch them at all times.

      The fact is that what you suggest is literally impossible.

      If your friend has loaded guns lying around his house, is it the gun's fault for going off when the child picks it up?

      No, but that of the friend, and that of lax gun regulation that allows him to have guns in the first place.

      Please do not vote or breed. It is the parent's responsibility to ensure the environment the children is safe - always unless that responsibility is given to a caretaker. Even selecting a quality caretaker is a parent's responsibility. Stop trying to blame your ineptitude on inanimate objects.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    17. Re:Good. by asylumx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      but is not exactly the same thing as smoking two sets of eyes and leaving the plane permanently pilotless.

      I am a private pilot, and you should be aware that without the threat of lasers shining on your windscreen, 56% of fatal aircraft accidents happen during the takeoff, initial climb, final approach and landing phases of flight (where it's possible to shine one of these lasers). This represents approximately 6% of the total time of an average flight. Let me repeat: 56% of fatal accidents happen during the same 6% of a flight.

      Given that these are already the most stressful parts of the flight for the pilot, adding stress like not being able to see is insanely bad news. If this had happened at night, it could have temporarily blinded the pilot, long enough to lose control of the plane on the initial climb and stall it out. If it had happened on the final approach or landing, especially on a windy day, the pilot would have missed the runway and likely cratered.

      Picking nits about whether the pilot was permanently blinded or not won't matter so much once everyone aboard (and likely some on the ground) are dead because of the incident.

      Reference: http://planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm

  2. Re:From the article: by iggymanz · · 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"

  3. Re:From the article: by fuzzybunny · · 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.

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  4. Sounds reasonable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am perfectly okay with this.

  5. Re:All those old laser devices by fuzzybunny · · 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.

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  6. misuse of sentencing by X0563511 · · 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.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  7. Punishment fetish wins again by TheCarp · · 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.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  8. Crewel and unusual punishment by bussdriver · · Score: 5, Interesting

    By "sending a message" they are by their own admission, using an unusual punishment.

    Sure, this is an interpretive call on the meaning of "unusual" and judges are extremely unlikely to limit their own power by using a broad definition, just as they are unlikely to limit their power by using a narrow definition.

    Apparently, California's prison lobby has not been deterred by the budget problems and overcrowding. We have the technology, house arrest for 30 months would be more reasonable.

  9. Re:From the article: by rfolkker · · 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.

  10. Re:From the article: by michelcolman · · 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.

  11. Re:From the article: by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Informative

    I would bet that the pilot would have plenty of time to see the dot and grab the protection after he sees it, are there even any documented cases of a pilot being blinded by a laser? How many compared to reports of beams on aircraft? (also of note, passengers being blinded, while not life threatening to the whole plane, is still bad and unconscionable)

    I have flown with colleagues who have been hit by a laser and who were blinded for a few minutes, having to transfer control to the other pilot but fortunately without permanent eye damage. It's a very sudden flash without warning. Laser light is very focused, so you don't see any "dot" until it's pointed directly at you.

    Even worse, I have heard of at least one pilot who has actually lost his license due to permanent eye damage after a laser strike. What a fun game, isn't it?

    Taking precautions against them, especially small, cheap precautions (like door locks and protective glasses) which are effective against some of the more common problems, makes sense....

    If only there was a way of keeping laser light out and letting other light in so the pilots can still see the runway at night... Yes, even with all the modern electronic guidance systems, being able to look outside is still one of the very basic safety features of any aircraft.

  12. Re:Sentence is too long by Tynin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At no point should the justice system try to make an example out of anyone. Law should always be dealt evenly. The severity of punishment does nothing for deterrence, the only thing that helps serve as a warning is consistent enforcement of the law. To punish one person more than others so others take notice, has never worked, and is more of a sign of seeking vengeance than rehabilitation. Additionally, those who would do bad things likely aren't studied in criminal law and past case history to know if anyone has been made an example of whatever stupid thing they are about to do, so no warning to others is ever realistically possible. Gone are the days when a small community would get together to exact a punishment on an offender, and only in those small communities could setting an example work.

    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.

  13. Re:From the article: by wonkey_monkey · · 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?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  14. Re:This wasn't a laser pointer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nobody is pointing scientific lasers at aircraft.

    What this is all about is direct-diode lasers. Wicked Lasers takes these high-powered diodes, backs them up with a small power source and places them in a pointer housing. Voila: "Commercial-grade laser"

    Laser power has gotten DRASTICALLY higher in recent years, specifically with the advent of high-powered direct-diode lasers which much more portable than any type of laser tech previously available.

    Anything over 1mW (or somewhat higher as long as its firmly ensconced in an enclosure that prevents direct access) is not considered eye-safe (class 1).

    Classes 2 and 3 (and the associated sub-classes) cover lasers between 2mW and 500mW. Lasers in this class can cause permanent damage very quickly, however the blink reflex (at roughtly 250ms) is fast enough to prevent such damage.

    Anything over 500mW (1/2 Watt) is considered Class 4. There is no Class 5.

    Class 4 means various things: Permanent instantaneous eye damage (blink reflex is not fast enough to prevent damage). Clearly, the "pointers" coming from overseas fall into the Class 4 category. While these diodes may not be waveform stabilized enough to find use in holography, they are plenty powerful to do some real damage if not handled correctly. Owning a hand-held device capable of output power in excess of 1 watt requires proper handling and respect.

    Gov't enforcement on import of high-powered lasers is lax. Enforcement of their usage falls to the various state radiological boards, and the FDA at the Federal level. Any operator must possess a federal variance in order to run public laser exhibitions indoors, an additional FAA clearance is required to run outdoors, also any laser display device must be covered separately under a device variance (which ensures the device contains proper safety labels, keyswitch interlocks, registration with gov't entities, etc.) before it can be considered legal for "professional" use.

    As a laser show professional, I'm just awaiting the day someone does something really stupid which results in catastrophe and ruins it for the rest of us. The US already has some of the most stringent regulations in the world covering allowable exposure and prohibiting certain types of effects (audience scanning, etc) from being used. Enjoy the pretty lights while you can, before some bozo prompts a crackdown.