- Jan 2, 2009
We were actually both typing the at the same time. Great minds think a like.Valid point, however what if it were possible to decrease those incidents even further and at no harm to any of the other (non-asshole) groups of laser users? Would that warrant your acceptance?
You pointed out the same thing I did in my response (although you detailed it a bit nicer ) about how it's not a serious issue yet. The thing is, and I believe this to be the concern of the OP, that as technology advances so will the aspect of danger associated with it. It's difficult to say whether or not it will even become a problem of any significance (I certainly don't know the future ), however operating on the assumption that it does...
I'll also take this time to re-iterate that I don't really believe any additional legislation needs to be passed at this time just because the problems it would most likely cause for the technicians, scientists, and even hobbyists outweigh the benefit it would provide.
I think the first part of your argument is a fantasy. You will never keep the wold without laser incidence. Not at this point anyway.
I used to work at a kids camp in the mountains. Being a very small population, they only had 2 volunteer police men. I asked one of them one day how can 2 people cover the vast area where the town was located. He told me that the world has roughly 8% a$$holes no matter where you go. They had such a small population, if something happened, they already knew who the a$$holes were.
Same situation applies here. There will always be that 8% no matter where you go, and there is nothing you can do about that. Unfortunately there are so many people, they are hard to keep track of.