Laser Non-Lethal Weapon?

Hopefully, as the military already does this to slow down vehicles that refuse to stop, I won't be completely crucified for this...

When I used the collimator optic on my Nova X125, the beam quickly spread out into a large circle once it was past its focal point(about an inch from the aperture). It reminded me of a video from Wicked Lasers about one of their discontinued products, which was meant to temporarily blind the target without permanent damage.

And so I'm interested to know if there are any equivalent lasers available that can achieve the same effect.


A customer got slightly violent at my workplace today. and I've once again been reminded that any quickly available means of self-defense I have(my Nova X125, and my razor sharp quick opening knife that is more than likely sharp enough to cut a hand off without slowing down a lick) would more than likely land me in jail regardless of the circumstances.

[Disclaimer] I didn't get my Nova for the purpose of self-defense, but it can be made quickly available for that purpose.

While my Nova with the optic somewhat fills the criteria, even with the power diminished due to the beam being widened out, 150-ish mW seems far too powerful for someone to walk away without permanent damage. But then again, the 5mW "legal" output seems far too weak to blind anyone for longer than 10 seconds with the beam spread out.

So I'm basically looking for a dazzler with:
-5 to 15 feet effective range.
-No permanent damage.
-Small enough to carry in a pocket.
-Beam spread.
-Enough power to blind for about 30+ seconds.

I realize that a blinded suspect wandering into traffic might cause a lot of harm, but the chances of a blind person making their way out of a large supermarket and the large parking lot onto the roads is infinitesimal at best.

This is probably something you wouldn't want to mess around with.

The concept behind that video on the WL site had military backing.
They have some rather educated individuals available to measure beam diameter, power per cm2 and the values necessary to cause debilitating disorientation and NOT permanent blindness.

For this concept, perhaps its FAR FAR safer and a lot easier to use high lumen LED flashlights?

Remember SF and other high tempo combat units used to use the Surefire G6 and P6 flashlights attached to their weapons, and these 120 lumen devices used to cause disorientation of the target when used in building clearance roles. Those military flashlights were essentially the first in that role, they now have many many competitors for the same task.

LED flashlights now are in the same realm as HID torches. If you deliver 1300 lumen to your target, they wont see SHIT!! Such flashlights available at DX.
Much safer, you are unlikely to get your hide prosecuted for blinding a violent perpetrator.

^^^^ there's good logic in that...^^^^

Without proper test equipment it will be next to impossible to build
a safe and effective "Laser Dazzler"...IMO


Jerry

All I know is that Dieselmarine used his violet laser defocused to disorientate and scare away someone with a bat, I personally would attempt it unless it was a definite choice between getting punched/stabbed/shot or using the laser too scare them/disorientate.

Noctis said:

Hopefully, as the military already does this to slow down vehicles that refuse to stop, I won't be completely crucified for this...

When I used the collimator optic on my Nova X125, the beam quickly spread out into a large circle once it was past its focal point(about an inch from the aperture). It reminded me of a video from Wicked Lasers about one of their discontinued products, which was meant to temporarily blind the target without permanent damage.

And so I'm interested to know if there are any equivalent lasers available that can achieve the same effect.


A customer got slightly violent at my workplace today. and I've once again been reminded that any quickly available means of self-defense I have(my Nova X125, and my razor sharp quick opening knife that is more than likely sharp enough to cut a hand off without slowing down a lick) would more than likely land me in jail regardless of the circumstances.

[Disclaimer] I didn't get my Nova for the purpose of self-defense, but it can be made quickly available for that purpose.

While my Nova with the optic somewhat fills the criteria, even with the power diminished due to the beam being widened out, 150-ish mW seems far too powerful for someone to walk away without permanent damage. But then again, the 5mW "legal" output seems far too weak to blind anyone for longer than 10 seconds with the beam spread out.

So I'm basically looking for a dazzler with:
-5 to 15 feet effective range.
-No permanent damage.
-Small enough to carry in a pocket.
-Beam spread.
-Enough power to blind for about 30+ seconds.

I realize that a blinded suspect wandering into traffic might cause a lot of harm, but the chances of a blind person making their way out of a large supermarket and the large parking lot onto the roads is infinitesimal at best.

Click to expand...

I think that you refer to WL photonic disruptor but this laser is NOT a dazzler. It was an overpriced laser pointer with adjustable focus!

A true laser Dazzler has pulsed operation from 2-10hertz. The pulsed operation is the same as human brainwaves and that causes the distrotion and nausea. While the laser itself is good for producing flash blindness, a TRUE DAZZLER's power is in the incapicitation effect of the pulsed operation.
It is very difficult to replicate this and I should leave it to military

What would be the problem with replicating such a dazzler?

The only tricky thing is finding out the flash pattern required. This could be derived from an existing dazzler, or perhaps even public knowledge as a patent. Rigging electronics to make a powerful led flashlight emit the same pattern would probably be trivial using a microcontroller.

As far as safety is concerned: High power flashlights are a hazard, and pose similar risks to lasers. The beam is usually wider, but with power ever increasing, they have entered unsafe realms.

A 3000 lumen flashlight will put out a full watt of light (and consume 10-20 watt electrical power to do that). If you consider something like 1 mw/cm2 as safe (class 1 for lasers), the beam would have to be 1000 cm2 in area (40 cm diameter or so) to be eye safe. Clearly the head of the flashlight is not that big, and at close range there is an eye hazard.

That was my concern as well, as I can't very well shine that Wicked Lasers Torch at someone's eyes(if it burns paper at close range, it'll burn the eyes for sure). Not to mention it won't fit in your pocket, and certain price issues.

I'm also not sure about the power output needed to blind someone for a long enough duration, but without eye damage.

Yes. I agree and disagree.

I agree that rigging a timer circuit to a high lumen LED flashlight would be trivial.

Heck, plenty of 555 IC timer circuits online with variable frequency control via variable resistor. Just Google it.
But I dont think that high lumen flashlights would be hazardous.
It has been measured the average energy displaced on the surface of the earth from the sun is between 1.3kW/m2 and 1.4 kW/m2. (I also remember this data from my photovoltaic days)

This means without getting into too finer details, these high lumen flashlights are still much less bright than the sun, and the perpertrator would likely shield their eyes before permanent damage is done, as one would do should they try to stare at the sun. It would take minutes of exposure to cause damage, similar to when persons stare at a solar eclipse, even though the flashlights still lack the power output that the sun delivers.

Interesting but....

After looking at the flashlights on DealExtreme, I can tell you that there seems to be a LOT of trashlights in there. A lot of the cheapies seem to rely heavily on battery power to bring out the beam power. Unless I missed something, they don't seem to sort their flashlights by power output. The ones reaching 1000+ lumens don't look like they can fit in my pocket.

I found a nice candidate at 180 lumens for $60, and it seems very compact, though I wonder if 180 lumens is really enough to blind anyone for longer than 15 seconds. My old Maglite running on 4 C batteries sure as hell can't blind me for any length of time, though I'm not sure what the output is.

MickyP said:

Yes. I agree and disagree.
It has been measured the average energy displaced on the surface of the earth from the sun is between 1.3kW/m2 and 1.4 kW/m2.
...
This means without getting into too finer details, these high lumen flashlights are still much less bright than the sun, and the perpertrator would likely shield their eyes before permanent damage is done, as one would do should they try to stare at the sun.

Click to expand...

Two issues with this: For some reason people think that looking into the sun is always eye safe. Having evolved on this planet this would make sense, but if you look at it from a safety perspective, sunlight can be too bright to be acceptable.

1.3 kW/m2 equals 130 mW/cm2 - clearly an unsafe value for eye exposure, given a pupil size of 0.05-0.1 cm2* or so, its comparable to shining a 5 ~ 10 mW laser into your eye - not a very good idea!

As far as the very bright flashlights go: They could rain down about the same amount of optical power then the sun when focussed. If you have 1 watt of light output and a 2 inch diameter reflector, you'd be pretty close in some areas of the output (its not a linear distribution over the entire area).

In conclusion: both the bright flashlights and the sun create exposure levels that are considered unsafe. Neither, currently, create exposure levels that are likely to do actual damage in common scenarios.

The flashlight that sets paper on fire doesn't "count" as an example - its the IR doing all the work, with a little contribution from the visible light. If it were the visible light, it would be very difficult to set white paper on fire.

* i assume contracted pupils here. Looking at the sun immediately after coming from a dark area makes this -much- worse.

Found a Streamlight on eBay at 120 lumens. Hopefully that will do the job nicely.

Benm said:

Two issues with this: For some reason people think that looking into the sun is always eye safe. Having evolved on this planet this would make sense, but if you look at it from a safety perspective, sunlight can be too bright to be acceptable.

1.3 kW/m2 equals 130 mW/cm2 - clearly an unsafe value for eye exposure, given a pupil size of 0.05-0.1 cm2* or so, its comparable to shining a 5 ~ 10 mW laser into your eye - not a very good idea!

As far as the very bright flashlights go: They could rain down about the same amount of optical power then the sun when focussed. If you have 1 watt of light output and a 2 inch diameter reflector, you'd be pretty close in some areas of the output (its not a linear distribution over the entire area).

In conclusion: both the bright flashlights and the sun create exposure levels that are considered unsafe. Neither, currently, create exposure levels that are likely to do actual damage in common scenarios.

The flashlight that sets paper on fire doesn't "count" as an example - its the IR doing all the work, with a little contribution from the visible light. If it were the visible light, it would be very difficult to set white paper on fire.

* i assume contracted pupils here. Looking at the sun immediately after coming from a dark area makes this -much- worse.

Click to expand...

Read this: understand it and know it. Staring at the sun has been known to damage yes for as long as people have been around. You know when you come out of a movie theater and it's bright outside (assuming a matinee or something) it hurts quite bad from the indirect exposure until your pupils contract. Imagine how bad it would hurt if you looked straight at the sun when you first came out. Dazzlers aren't that effective in daylight. And any of them powerful enough to work well in daylight will blind completely at night. Ones safe at night won't be as effective in daylight. When someone's eye is dilated then less power can blind someone. When the pupil is contracted then more power then would be safe with a dilated pupil would be needed to disable them safely.

The power density needed isn't a constant. That's what makes it dangerous. You can't simply crunch some numbers, because you can't calculate a variable that's in constant change. Esp when it's an important one. I assume you could put some kind of meter on a dazzler to measure ambient light, and adjust power accordingly, but even this would fail at properly adjusting for all circumstances.
If you want to temp blind someone without permanently blinding them, you would need to know the diameter of their pupils first to adjust power density accordingly. This is what's needed to make it safe

From a legal aspect, ANY permanent damage will get you thrown in jail. Even if it was in self defense, building things that are untested and using them on someone will throw out the entire self defense case and you will face criminal charges. With firearms if you modify a bullet any to make it more lethal, and use it in self defense, you will face premeditated murder charges. The very fact that you make something ahead of time, can and will be used to prosecute you in america. There is quite a bit of legal precedent on this. Purchasing something is safe, making it yourself has a lot of risk.

Noctis said:

That was my concern as well, as I can't very well shine that Wicked Lasers Torch at someone's eyes(if it burns paper at close range, it'll burn the eyes for sure). Not to mention it won't fit in your pocket, and certain price issues.

I'm also not sure about the power output needed to blind someone for a long enough duration, but without eye damage.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry for the little OT but I would point out that the burn capacity of the Wicked Lasers Torch is principally due to the heat produced by the bulb, hence it's substantially different from the burning capacity of a laser beam.
Anyway the "dazzling capacity" of a device and the temporarily blindness of an intense light are two very different factors.

StridAst said:

You can't simply crunch some numbers, because you can't calculate a variable that's in constant change. Esp when it's an important one.

Click to expand...

Thats the thing - you can crunch numbers to demostrate that something is (potentially) hazardous... and in this case it seems logical that something that is effective cannot be safe, and vice versa.

The search for any kind of laser or other light emitting device that will reliably cause temporary blinding, yet never able to cause permanent damage, is futile.

Another hazard you run into with LED is that the light is generated firstly with a UV source and phosphor to give the visible colour. How much UV your eye may see also depends on the efficiency of the phosphor used.


Wiki> "The vast majority of devices containing LEDs are "safe under all conditions of normal use", and so are classified as "Class 1 LED product"/"LED Klasse 1". At present, only a few LEDs -- extremely bright LEDs that also have a tightly focused viewing angle of 8° or less -- could, in theory, cause temporary blindness, and so are classified as "Class 2".[65] In general, laser safety regulations -- and the "Class 1", "Class 2", etc. system -- also apply to LEDs

This article has some good info on it > Phosphor-converted LEDs take on industrial applications - Laser Focus World

Benm said:

Thats the thing - you can crunch numbers to demostrate that something is (potentially) hazardous... and in this case it seems logical that something that is effective cannot be safe, and vice versa.

The search for any kind of laser or other light emitting device that will reliably cause temporary blinding, yet never able to cause permanent damage, is futile.

Click to expand...

Flashbang?
An artificial flashbang?