Police using Green Laser to temporary blind people :)

[LaserCo]

At Harbor Freight they have special tailcaps for flashlights.
Has anyone tried one of them on their laser?
They have several strobe and power selections as you click them

 

[CaptDeathRay]

So what happens when police start to possibly use this more than anything they have, and the 'bad guys' get smart and start wearing orange glasses...You can get them for a few dollars, and they will do enough to block the green, and have no effect.

So what does the cop do then? Hope it has a red mode?

The real problem is what happens when the bad guys start pointing 1/4-1/2 watt lasers at pursuing cop cars after random heists? Ill tell you NEW more restrictive laws for the law abiding, and who's the reckless fools that are starting it?? the cops WOW

 

[rathat]

They are just going to play around with the laser, the male cops anyway.

 

[inuboi8]

LASER RADIATION--AVOID DIRECT EXPOSURE TO BEAM :tsk: and police opposite is not allowed :gun::thinking::crackup:
what's happen if the police blind someone?
is that the FDA accepts it?

well police are allowed to point loaded guns at people soooooooo

 

[00Giorge]

250mw of 532nm is safe and won't blind you? I guess I will just have to start wearing red sun glasses! I want to know what happens when they hit unsuspecting bystanders.

Anyone see problems with this one?

 

[StridAst]

it actually depends how wide of an area that 250mw is spread out across. 250mw in a tight beam hitting your eye is going to fry it. but if it's spread out over 100 square cm, then I would guess your eye isn't taking in much more then 2.5mw. (guessing 1 square cm to be somewhere in the ballpark of the maximum size of the pupil of a human eye, but totally guessing here)

If it's spread out enough then you won't perma-blind someone. There''s still a catch. If your beam is eye safe at 10 feet away or more, but the target is 5 feet away........ Or if someone was running right at you, then you would have little way to accurately determine how far away they will be when you finally tag them in the eyes......

 

[X FLY]

I think this is an good idea. Ofcourse there is always a risk of permanent eye damage when using lasers but also theres the risk of an heart attack when using tazers

So what happens when police start to possibly use this more than anything they have, and the 'bad guys' get smart and start wearing orange glasses...You can get them for a few dollars, and they will do enough to block the green, and have no effect.

So what does the cop do then? Hope it has a red mode?

Thats a nice idea also. They could make it flashing red/green instead of just green/green that would make any safety goggles pretty useless Also it would make the dazzler more effective because green and red are complementary colors.

 

[Benm]

Well, you do have eyewear that protects from both red and green, but it only has a narrow passband or two so you will not be able to see much.

Police should not be allowed to use lasers to temporarely blind anyone, such weapons are banned even in warfare. If they would, in could even result in a laser arms race - police fires 250 mW of green, and gets shot straight in the face with 10 watts of 445.

No sensible country would equip its police force with such weaponry though, attempting to blind someone with a laser is, in terms of engagement, at least as wrong as releasing nerve gas. The latter could be seen as an attempt to kill, while a laser would be a weapon intended to maim. Using those is not even permitted against enemy combattants, let alone your own civilians.

 

[enomosiki]

Well, you do have eyewear that protects from both red and green, but it only has a narrow passband or two so you will not be able to see much.

Police should not be allowed to use lasers to temporarely blind anyone, such weapons are banned even in warfare. If they would, in could even result in a laser arms race - police fires 250 mW of green, and gets shot straight in the face with 10 watts of 445.

No sensible country would equip its police force with such weaponry though, attempting to blind someone with a laser is, in terms of engagement, at least as wrong as releasing nerve gas. The latter could be seen as an attempt to kill, while a laser would be a weapon intended to maim. Using those is not even permitted against enemy combattants, let alone your own civilians.

Huh? The US military's used greenies in Iraq for years, especially at checkpoints. A cop I know who went for two (it could be three--I'm not sure) tours in Iraq as an Army reservist told me that if a suspicious vehicle was spotted approaching their checkpoint or convoy, they'd fire up a greenie, stopping the vehicle dead in its track because the driver can't see anything. I'd imagine that they could be using these in Afghanistan, but I doubt that it gets much of a use as it did in Iraq due to lack of proper road systems.

Honestly, I'd rather see tools like this being employed more often. Your logic is invalid, as any number of pacification tools--batons, tasers, stun guns, tac-lights, mace, etc.--that a cop can carry can be categorized as "intended to maim" under your statement. When people see concentrated spot of bright green light being shined at their faces, the first instinctive (and logical) response will be to look away, impairing their vision and incapacitating them from doing anything but to cover their faces. If they are dumb enough to simply continue staring at it until their eyes burn out, then there is something obviously wrong with them.

 

[AUTO XX]

I get pissed when someone is screwing around with a <5mW red pointer and gets near my eyes, I'd be heading off to prison if a cops shone that crap in my eyes. Can you say 1.6W 445 revenge?
Cops have to get hit with a taser to be able to use them on others, would the same be true for the "dazzlers"?
Lasers are not toys, tasers are not toys. You give them to idiot cops and bad things will happen.

 

[Spartan X]

If they are dumb enough to simply continue staring at it until their eyes burn out, then there is something obviously wrong with them.

And at that point they are "maiming'' themselves with the choice to continue.

Just like in a fight. If they stop after the cop beats them to the ground the first time, it's all good. But if they keep resisting, they are going to have more then a shiner. It's either the person realizes they are not cooperating and stop in their tracks, and apologize profusely. Or they keep up, proving their guilt on some matter and get themselves into more trouble.

Cops have to get hit with a taser to be able to use them on others, would the same be true for the "dazzlers"?
Lasers are not toys, tasers are not toys.

In the article, a reporter is subjected to the Dazzler...so I'm sure the officers do the same at least as part of their training.

On another note. Taser's can actually kill depending on the persons medical history, that's one reason why alternatives are being looked for. Officers are typically in very good shape with no cardiac history, so the training they endure causing no dangerous side effects.

 

[Benm]

But why would you assume the average civilian or even soldier would be aware that looking into the light despite the pain causes blindness?

Using a laser or searchlight to distract/blind someone could be acceptable, as long as it is class 2. Class 3A could be considered reasonable force in some circumstances, but as soon as the exposure is equal to class 3B, you -must- assume that permanent eye damage will be inflincted instantly and unavoidably.

Obviously this will not always be the case in practise, but people get shot and step on landmines and survive all the time too.

These less-lethal weapons might seem appealing, but they just provide a sliding slope. As we see how tasers are used because they are just faster and easier than talking someone down, i'm affraid that dazzlers/lasers and other eye-hazardous devices will follow the same path.

Using any weapon that exceeds MPE must be viewed as a directed intent to permanently blind the target, just as shooting someone is usually considered to be an attempt to kill, even if the person doesnt actually die. Class 3B and up Lasers should be treated with the same respect as firearms: do never aim one at someone unless it is your intent to permanently blind that person.

 

[AUTO XX]

Well said Benm,
This is the same sort of nonsense as the tasers spartan X was talking about.
Your brain is basically a generator with an incredibly complicated switching system, what happens when you backfeed thousands of volts through a 2000W home backup generator?
Permanent damage.
Shine a "light" brilliant enough to stun you into a "photoreceptor" sensitive enough to easily see by starlight?
Permanent damage.
It will take hauling these cops and/or the manufacturer of this product into court and destroying them financially before they back off on these stupid "non-lethal" ideas.
Guns are a serious deterrent because they can kill you in an instant, most people respect that and don't mess with the one with the gun.
Non-lethal is only useful to provoke someone that is dead serious.

 

[00Giorge]

I agree with AUTO XX and Benm, it seems like some of the police use a taser for anything, some people have died due to hart conditions. It scares me to think if they have these laser they might over use them. I might be wrong but it seems that if someone was on drugs that dialate the pupils (like mushrooms or LSD) that getting hit in the eyes by a laser that it could do serious damage. Just my 2 cents.

Jeff

 

[Benm]

It is a very serious concern indeed. Here in europe those things aren't treated as lightly, and tasers remain very controversial.

I'm not sure about the US, but i think that anyone being 'dazzled' with some weapon operating beyond MPE shoud be able to push charges for excessive force being used.

The way i see it, dazzling someone with any device exceeding MPE limits should be considered an action that blinds the victim - even if the victim is lucky enough not to be blinded permantently.

The analogy should be set there and then - shooting someone is as much an attempt to kill as lasering someone above MPE is an attempt to permanently blind. Using a laser as a non lethal weapon is the same as shooting someone in the knee - not lilely to be fatal on the spot, but very likely to result in disability and possibly premature death due to the lack of income in the longer run.

Personally, i'd never use a class four laser as a weapon unless it is a self defense situation and no better weapon is available. These things are not toys anymore, with the latest laser diodes you can blind someone in both eyes in a single shot. Blasting someone in the face with such lasers is equal to stabbing someone in the eye with a shar fork - not guaranteed to blind permanently, but very likely to do so.

 

[00Giorge]

I agree, we have had people die from a taser due to unknown medical problems and I think that they are over used and I know a lot of other people that feel the same way. Now with seeing this about the dazer laser, if some one already has eye problems how do you know that hitting them in the eyes with a laser isn't going to totally blind them for life. I think it is just stupid to give them a device like this. Given some of them will probably be just fine with it, but there are some that will abuse it. I personally know some police officers that have a tough time walking and chewing gum at the same time, the criminals will really be disappointed when these guys are gone.

I figure as soon as they blind a few people and get some major lawsuits against them and the company that makes the laser they will quit using it.

I have a concealed weapons permit and carry a gun just about everywhere I go, I would rather kill someone in self defense then blind them and have them sue for everything you've got and ever will have! I can see how a laser might deter someone and sometimes that is all that is needed!:beer:

Jeff