1W Laser for Self Defense in an Active Shooter Situation

[BobMc]

Bob, if it's a large crowd you're shooting at, wouldn't those two options be "Basically" the same thing?

"That" my friend, is the question. Would they?

Will be interesting to see what people say?

:undecided: :thinking: :undecided: :thinking: :undecided:

 

[Rivem]

It's a coincidence you guys are talking about this now. high school shooting just happened locally. :cryyy:

I don't think there's a huge amount that can be done to protect people in these situations, but school staff should at least be allowed pepper spray or something. I'm not opposed to letting people carry in a school, but I do realize that's a hazard in itself.

Probably going to be another gun debate in NM.

 

[nakedlaseruser]

There is no "the answer" there are an infinite number of potential answers and partial answers and answers when combined with other answers might be an effective answer.
In some cases with some people, just like kicking on attacker in the nuts might end an attack and another it might piss him off enough to kill you anyway, One shooter, a laser pointer in the eyes may not mean much and another, it blind him hard enough to scare him enough to break off an attack. Being a welder I have known people that need very little filtering to see and others that need the darkest lense or will suffer.
We, You and I and everyone else can not possibly know how any defense will work on any specific attacker or shooter till we try.
The point in all of it is to "do something" don't just stand there saying nothing will work while innocent people are being murdered.

 

[BobMc]

There is no "the answer" there are an infinite number of potential answers and partial answers and answers when combined with other answers might be an effective answer.
In some cases with some people, just like kicking on attacker in the nuts might end an attack and another it might piss him off enough to kill you anyway, One shooter, a laser pointer in the eyes may not mean much and another, it blind him hard enough to scare him enough to break off an attack. Being a welder I have known people that need very little filtering to see and others that need the darkest lense or will suffer.
We, You and I and everyone else can not possibly know how any defense will work on any specific attacker or shooter till we try.
The point in all of it is to "do something" don't just stand there saying nothing will work while innocent people are being murdered.

Changing the perimeters of the question is one way to not answer the question. But that doesn't mean the question have no answer. :thinking:

 

[nakedlaseruser]

I said there is no "one answer" not, no answer. There are many viable potential answers.

 

[BobMc]

I said there is no "one answer" not, no answer. There are many viable potential answers.

There were only two choices given.

Choice (1) or choice (2)

If you were responding to my question?

 

[nakedlaseruser]

jesus this will get confusing. no i was responding to some one elses.

 

[BobMc]

jesus this will get confusing. no i was responding to some one elses.

Oooops, sorry. Hate it when that happens.

 

[nakedlaseruser]

I don't think in this scenario, what is "best" from the standpoint of a "Crazy Asshole Killer" is either imaginable for reasonable people or relevant to defending against them.
Of course I realize the next "Crazy Asshole Killer" maybe reading along in this blog with the rest of us "reasonable people", all the more reason not to discuss what might be best for them.

 

[waffailtrager101]

There is no "the answer" there are an infinite number of potential answers and partial answers and answers when combined with other answers might be an effective answer.
In some cases with some people, just like kicking on attacker in the nuts might end an attack and another it might piss him off enough to kill you anyway, One shooter, a laser pointer in the eyes may not mean much and another, it blind him hard enough to scare him enough to break off an attack. Being a welder I have known people that need very little filtering to see and others that need the darkest lense or will suffer.
We, You and I and everyone else can not possibly know how any defense will work on any specific attacker or shooter till we try.
The point in all of it is to "do something" don't just stand there saying nothing will work while innocent people are being murdered.

I don't trust the everyday person to carry around a high powered laser pointer and use it only in an active shooter/attacker situation.
Yes, there is a chance you could blind the shooter. But there is also the chance you accidentally blind a civilian in the process of trying to blind the shooter, causing an even bigger shitstorm.

Just like firearms, there's a higher chance you accidentally hurt someone than being in the perfect spot at the perfect moment to stop an attacker. The only difference firearms have the money and political power to stay even after two of the worst shooting in America occurred this year. Unfortunately, no one is lobbying for lasers like that, even though they are a lot less harmful than firearms....

But anywho, chance of anyone caught in the middle of an active shooter situation is still very low even though they are becoming more common

 

[nakedlaseruser]

Are you crazy? Don't allow laser pointers incase of accidental injury in the midst of someone firing on 100's of innocents? Really? "No, No don't use your laser pointer, you may hurt someone" while high powered automatic rounds are whizzing by?

 

[waffailtrager101]

Are you crazy? Don't allow laser pointers incase of accidental injury in the midst of someone firing on 100's of innocents? Really? "No, No don't use your laser pointer, you may hurt someone" while high powered automatic rounds are whizzing by?

There is a much higher chance you hit a bystander with the beam or a reflected beam than hitting the intended target. Lasers could be useful if you can hit the person directly in the eyes and keep the beam only on them. But to keep a beam that steady is highly unlikely. At a distance of 100m, moving your hand only 1/10th a degree would cause the beam to move about 17.5cm, which is more than enough divergence to miss the shooter.

And chances are the shooter will be moving and there will be mass panic, making it even harder to hit them.

There is just way to much collateral to justify using a laser pointer to defend people.

 

[nakedlaseruser]

I'm not talikin to you no more.

 

[paul1598419]

How did this thread turn into an idea that lasers could be used as weapons? They make lousy weapons, but have the ability to blind a person, which is cruel and inhumane, IMHO. This question shouldn't even be asked here as it brings unwanted publicity to the LPF. This question has come up before, but this is the first time I remember it taking on a life of its own. I'll be glad when this thread becomes old news and people forget about it entirely.

 

[RedCowboy]

A 1w multi mode laser at 450 yards ( Vegas shooting ) is going to look bright, but to a shooter 20 stories high in a building lit by bright accent lighting it's likely to be little more than an annoyance and a target point, not that anyone should ever point a laser at someone 450 yards away but in this situation lets look at the facts.

You say a 1W laser, I assume a 1W 520nm focused as tight as you could get it with a 3 element which is the best lens for distance, your spot at 450 yards would be aprox .... 10 inches by 35 inches for a total of 350 square inches, that's 3mw per square inch and with a human pupil being at best 1/4 inch round that's over 16 pupils plus per 3mw, so basically a 1w 520 MM with the best common lens focused at 450 yards would produce only a fraction of a mw, basically a bright shoot me target.

 

[Encap]

No offense man, but I can say with certainty you are incorrect. Killing civilians is a war crime. Standing up to an active shooter in a nightclub (for example) and blinding them to get them to stop shooting civilians will do many things...but land someone in prison isn't one of them.

War crimes apply to soldiers fighting soldiers in "legitimate" warfare. Pretty obvious no?

Geneva Conventin rules only apply to a Countries behavior in time of "war" right? For there to be a "war crime" there has to be a war, so....