ADVERTISEMENT

What should happen to this kid?

I know, you often wonder, is Trad being intentionally obtuse or is he an idiot. The truth is sadder. He actually manages to convince himself that the moronic things he's arguing are true.
Take this case. A simple pocket laser pointer that wouldn't damage your eye if it were to be shined in it for a moment, as addressed by his pasted story, could in no way be powerful enough to light up the cockpit of a plane flying a mile or so away. Those are bigger, more dangerous lasers that are popular with idiot 20-somethings and can be found all over YouTube burning crap and causing other sorts of mayhem. But acknowledging that they are different defeats his argument, so his brain rejects it out of hand and forges ever on, searching for more and more links to "prove" his point. He's still trying to "prove" that his carton a day smoking habit isn't dangerous.

Why do the balloons have to be black??? Seems racist to me.
 
Why?

I'll help:

Is it to convince HIM not to do it again?
- If yes, could it be done any other way?
Is it to convince OTHERS not to do it?
- If yes, could it be done another way? Will this influence other people? Will other people find out?

These questions should be the first things you ask yourself in determining an appropriate punishment.
If he was walking in the park away from an airport and happened to catch a plane that would be an accident. Shining a laser into the sky around airport where it hits a plane and the control tower while it might be an accident it might also not be. I think 5 years would be way to long but 30 days would not be.
 
You are old enough to be living on your own at 14, regardless of what our society has decided. Hell, probably before that. Romeo and Juliet were, what, 13?
Romeo and Juliet, for one thing, were fictional characters. Additionally, they each committed suicide because of a misunderstanding - but not before Romeo killed a guy. So they probably are not shining examples of teenagers being ready to live on their own.
 
Romeo and Juliet, for one thing, were fictional characters. Additionally, they each committed suicide because of a misunderstanding - but not before Romeo killed a guy. So they probably are not shining examples of teenagers being ready to live on their own.

trust him, he plays a lawyer on HROT
 
[QUOTE="The Tradition, post: 1824677, member: 32399"]Why don't we hear about such injuries in non-aviation settings? There are laser pointers used in all sort of settings. If they were really this great threat to eye health, why are they allowed at all?

And what about cats? Are there thousands of blind cats out there, victims people getting them to chase the laser all over the room?[/QUOTE]

During the pissing match that followed did this question get answered? You'd think there'd be a few laser caused car crashes every year. What is it about a cockpit?
 
During the pissing match that followed did this question get answered? You'd think there'd be a few laser caused car crashes every year. What is it about a cockpit?

Nah, they'd prefer to attack me rather than answering a simple question.
 
[QUO
latest
TE="Hawk and Awe, post: 1830437, member: 12786"][QUOTE="The Tradition, post: 1824677, member: 32399"]Why don't we hear about such injuries in non-aviation settings? There are laser pointers used in all sort of settings. If they were really this great threat to eye health, why are they allowed at all?

And what about cats? Are there thousands of blind cats out there, victims people getting them to chase the laser all over the room?[/QUOTE]
 

You should probably read your own link more closely:

Another offense includes a three-car collision, where a young man pointed a laser light into the car ahead of him and startled the driver, causing him to slam on his brakes and cause a pileup.”

Commentary from LaserPointerSafety.com:

As of April 2015, this is the only documented case we have been able to find where laser light aimed at a vehicle driver or aircraft pilot has caused an accident. “Accident” is defined here as “an incident that results in actual damage to a vehicle or aircraft, or that results in an bodily injury (e.g., anything beyond a claimed laser light injury to the eyes).”
 
And another point that no one responded to: If properly-labeled red lasers that meet federal requirements are unlikely to damage eyesight, then they shouldn't be covered by the law. Only the improperly-labeled Chinese-made super-strong lasers (typically green, not red) are dangerous, so they should be the only types of lasers outlawed for use outdoors when airplanes are flying around.
 
If he was walking in the park away from an airport and happened to catch a plane that would be an accident. Shining a laser into the sky around airport where it hits a plane and the control tower while it might be an accident it might also not be. I think 5 years would be way to long but 30 days would not be.

I don't know why you replied to my post to not actually utilize it at all.

I thought I made it quite easy, but I guess I can ask you specifically: Can this guy learn not to do this again from anything other than jail?
 
You should probably read your own link more closely
You specifically asked if there had ever been any eye injuries associated with lasers being pointed at vehicles. My link includes several cases in which drivers suffered blurred vision or other eye injuries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mstp1992
You specifically asked if there had ever been any eye injuries associated with lasers being pointed at vehicles. My link includes several cases in which drivers suffered blurred vision or other eye injuries.

Hard to tell from this compilation if any of these lasers were the "safe" variety as discussed by the laser safety expert from Texas A&M, or the more-dangerous kind that are improperly-labeled Chinese-made products that should probably be outlawed outright, whether you're shooting them at planes or not.
 
Last edited:
Romeo and Juliet, for one thing, were fictional characters. Additionally, they each committed suicide because of a misunderstanding - but not before Romeo killed a guy. So they probably are not shining examples of teenagers being ready to live on their own.

Crikes, apart from misunderstanding the entire story, the point was that marriageable age, back then, when lives were much shorter, was at a much younger age. A quick google search tells me age of consent laws pegged 12 years old some 800 years ago. Times have changed, people grow older.
 
Why don't we hear about such injuries in non-aviation settings? There are laser pointers used in all sort of settings. If they were really this great threat to eye health, why are they allowed at all?

And what about cats? Are there thousands of blind cats out there, victims of people getting them to chase the laser all over the room?

giphy.gif
 
Yes it can blind them and make it difficult if not impossible for them to fly. It is a federal crime to do this.

So not true. Here's an excerpt from a airline pilot blog (who also flies for American) about the subject.

"The only way possible to get the light square into my eyes would be to somehow determine my exact landing aimpoint on the runway (not possible) and stand precisely there, aiming the light perfectly into my face, but that’s even less likely: from the front, we’re a tiny target that’s changing position constantly. And the laser “aimer” would have to be standing on the exact spot where seventy tons of metal was about to plop down doing about a hundred and fifty miles per hour. That’s a Wile E. Coyote, Darwin-esque scenario and NOT a “scare in the air.”

https://jethead.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/airline-scare-in-the-air-laser-mythology/
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Tradition
I don't know why you replied to my post to not actually utilize it at all.

I thought I made it quite easy, but I guess I can ask you specifically: Can this guy learn not to do this again from anything other than jail?
Don't know do you? It would make it easier if we knew what penalty would work for every crime committed.
 
Are those "star shower" laser shows designed to replace Christmas lights dangerous? Will Federal agents come drag me away if my house is too close to the airport?

star-shower%E2%84%A2-laser-light-4.jpg


Christ, anyone who walks out that front door will be blinded!

https://www.getstarshower.com/?uid=...F2&gclid=CKKY-uS6vMoCFYfMDQodOz0DGw&gclsrc=ds

Actually, I do recall seeing segments on the news about this.

a quick google search lists a number of articles regarding this.
http://www.laserpointersafety.com/news/news/other-news_files/tag-star-shower.php

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/09/holiday-decorations-pose-safety-risk-for-aircraft-pilots.html
 
I appreciate the honest response mstp, and Tradition blew the response out of proportion, but I essentially agree with his first one: saying it only takes once is such a weak cop-out. You could say that about, quite literally, every action ever.

Don't pick your nose while driving, you could hit a bump and poke your brain. It only takes once for that to be catastrophic.

I personally think it is likely way overblown, but I'm not in aviation. If pilots say it is dangerous, I'm fine banning it. But let's make the response appropriate. Calling him bro is simply uncalled for.
What's concerning is the potential risk of said action. If you do something to yourself, and only yourself, what is the totality of the 'catastrophe?' One individual vying for a listing on the Darwin awards.

What's the potential risk of an airliner crashing?

I grew up in the aviation industry so maybe I'm a bit more sensitive to this issue, but as both my dad and grandfather used to say they want their aircraft to be completely safe because otherwise they're the first ones on the scene of the crash.
 
What's concerning is the potential risk of said action.

We get that, we are questioning whether there actually is a potential risk, or how substantial of a risk it may actually be.

I'll just the aviation industry, as long as our response, legally, is proportionate to the actual risk.
 
Actually, I do recall seeing segments on the news about this.

a quick google search lists a number of articles regarding this.
http://www.laserpointersafety.com/news/news/other-news_files/tag-star-shower.php

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/09/holiday-decorations-pose-safety-risk-for-aircraft-pilots.html

I have stared right into one of these things and they do not cause any issues with eyesight at all, temporary or otherwise. And I was standing right in front of the thing, not a mile away.
 
I have stared right into one of these things and they do not cause any issues with eyesight at all, temporary or otherwise. And I was standing right in front of the thing, not a mile away.
I was not arguing the safety or the damage these may or may not cause. Just pointing out that the whole starshower/airplane thing has been out there
 
I have stared right into one of these things and they do not cause any issues with eyesight at all, temporary or otherwise. And I was standing right in front of the thing, not a mile away.

Seriously, does this surprise ANYONE on here?
 
Well, he's certainly not the 'brightest' bulb in the chandelier.

While the risks of ocular damage from the average conference room type laser pointer (class 3A) is pretty small, there are reports in the literature of long lasting dysfunction from improper use of them.

Any of those reports indicate injury from someone improperly using them a mile away from the eyeball?
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT