Story

Laser Pointing at Aircraft Increasing

Preview

So many conflicts (Score: 3, Insightful)

by sleazyridr@pipedot.org on 2014-03-19 14:30 (#PA)

On the one hand, I'm excited about the fact that I can buy a very powerful laser quite cheaply. On the other hand, I'm terrified that everyone else can buy a powerful laser quite cheaply.

On the one hand, I'm glad that an offense that could lead to a plane crash and loss of many lives is being dealt with. On the other hand, I'm disappointed that it's being used as a cheap way to slap someone the cops didn't like but couldn't directly pin anything to.

On the one hand, pointing lasers at aircraft can be very serious and should be discouraged as actively as possible. On the other hand, 14 years seems like a very long sentence for someone who probably didn't understand that he was doing something so very dangerous.

Re: So many conflicts (Score: 2, Funny)

by insulatedkiwi@pipedot.org on 2014-03-19 16:51 (#PG)

Are you related to Kali?

BTW, what excuse does anyone over 12 have for pointing a laser at anything besides their own eyes, or a whiteboard.. or maybe the floor in front of their cat or dog? I am of course assuming that the guy wasn't developmentally disabled.

Re: So many conflicts (Score: 5, Interesting)

by kerrany@pipedot.org on 2014-03-19 17:31 (#PK)

FTA: In pleading guilty, Mahaffey admitted he knew it was a crime to point the laser at an aircraft but stated he "just can't help himself from doing stupid things."

That's not the current genius talking, but another brilliant fuckwad who decided to make the shiny on something far up in the sky. He only got 21 months. The guy this post is about, with the 14 year sentence, also sounds like he might have an impulse control problem, though - the article mentions multiple previous criminal convictions. The lawyer tried a "didn't know any better" defense, but it probably didn't play well due to the previous convictions.

I'd like to see some actual data: how many of those laser strikes do result in moments of blindness? Nearly 4000 known events last year, but I don't remember any headlines like "Plane brought down because idiot shined a laser at it". I wonder if the law is not because of potential danger to the pilots, but because of a danger to the plane due to false positives. I'd be willing to bet that it's not that hard to detect laser painting, and that some planes, military for sure and possibly civilian, are equipped to do so. In an area where people have rocket launchers, being aware of laser painting is going to make you jump a mile and raise altitude fast. Having an idiot whose pointer looks like the start of a missile attack would become a bigger deal. I have no info on this, though. Anybody?

Re: So many conflicts (Score: 2, Funny)

by nefariouswheel@pipedot.org on 2014-03-19 22:22 (#PM)

Can't these attacks be ah, foiled by a translucent protective coating on the cockpit window? I'm imaging something similar to the gold coloured reflective helmet visors used by the Apollo astronauts.

Re: So many conflicts (Score: 2, Insightful)

by hombre@pipedot.org on 2014-03-20 06:29 (#PS)

So I should go with the added expense of adding a new coating (when was this approved by the FAA btw? You do know that you can't just add anything to aircraft that you feel like. It's not a car.) to keep from being blinded by some assclown on the ground with a laser. Or, maybe, we can continue pointing out that it's dangerous and illegal to point lasers at aircraft and punish the nincompoops who do it?

Moderation

Time Reason Points Voter
2014-03-20 13:46 Insightful +1 kerrany@pipedot.org

Junk Status

Not marked as junk