Time to emigrate....

[omnivorr]

Idiots misuse these or any other devise, ignoring any advice that such behaviour is unacceptable.. agreed?

so to deter them they must be held liable to punishment for such offensive behaviour.. hence laws.. but you see people, there's no magic law for him but not for you.. laws must apply equally to all.. that's called democracy.

for this law to be effective we must 'enforce' it.. now how do we do this children?

well, we have to pay the police to catch them, the courts people to apply the laws and penalties... and the politicians and bureaucrats to 'enact' the laws... so there might be some fees...

it's more likely the aircraft concern is about solo novice pilots in Cessna's than Jumbo-jockeys... and Peter's emigration idea is to me an unfounded folly.. considering that Australia is about the most happily law abiding affluent and opportunity-rich country in which he could have achieved all he has....

but then sometimes people aren't satisfied being treated 'like the rest'.

if you want civil society as opposed to 'law of the jungle', then you must realise that in all things human there is imperfection, and compromise...

however did people manage to live without these laser toys in days of yore?!?!

(my much more eloquent version was wiped using the 'preview' function... so this is the abrupt and abbreviated ...frustrated version

[astroron (Ron)]

Quote from a post by ARGO NAVIS, could also envisage the scenario of a number of terrorists using a battery of them to bring down an aircraft on final appraoch.

William,Terrorist are not going to ask for a licence.
Like criminals don't have a gun licence.
Ron

[rider]

mmmm, I haven’t totally made up my mind about all this,- however, the idiots need to be told to go back to something constructive like graffiti or carving up train seats.

I AM hugely amazed that someone has the ability to hold the beam of a hand held laser on the cockpit window of a moving plane. These people must have incredible hand eye coordination, - sign them up for the Ausi cricket team!
secondly, those windows are high, the angle seams wrong for hitting some one in the eye.

The only possible scenario seem to be directly ahead on approach to landing . This means the perps would need to be in a very specific position on the ground. That would mean that it wouldn’t take Einstein to catch them. - Problem solved, no laws needed.

Personally, I was thinking of getting a laser prior to the current B.S, but I can do without one if it is going to reduce the chances of people dieing in crashes.

By the way the latest police media announcement (should they call them “Police-Beat” ups)
said that most attacks were with GREEN lasers.. Err, they are reasonably rare - can anyone think of a particular group that uses green lasers???.

Rider

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by Ian Robinson

Bye .... where are you going to go ?

I can't think of a better country to live in .

At least we don't have Bush Jr and his gang of thugs in charge and we've finally off loaded Honest Johnny.

Of course Oz is a great country....but this obsession for PC and bubble wrapping everything needs to be stopped IMHO.

And we certainly do not have a monopoly on lifestyle....just spend a little time on the Amalfi Coast for some real perspective...

[edwardsdj (Doug)]

Originally Posted by Rodstar

...legislation of this sort does not get off the ground unless there is some science to it.

I thought "science based legislation" was an oxymoron in this country.

Much like "honest politician" or "competent government"

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by astroron

could also envisage the scenario of a number of terrorists using a battery of them to bring down an aircraft on final appraoch.

Ron

Pray tell, how? Even if twenty of these idiots got together with 100mw pointers the total flux would be around a milliwatt...ie harmless... Must be the Austin Powers "Laser" effect

Perhaps it's time for a bit of Laser 101.
Light from a laser is the same as light from any other source, except for two properties. It is in phase (ie coherent) and spectrally pure.

The former means the beam does not diverge as quickly as normal light, but *it does* diverge and after about a kilometre most laser pointers have diverged to around a half a metre or more in spot size.

This physical property seems to be lost on our legislators. It's just light. Possibly annoying but hardly a weapon.

[astroron (Ron)]

Peter , my quote was taken from ARGO NAVIS post I was queiring the same thing.
There was a quote from some Captain/ pilot on the ABC News Radio this morning who said that he knew of two pilots who had their eyes damaged by lasers,do you know if this is true?.
Ron

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by astroron

Peter , my quote was taken from ARGO NAVIS post I was queiring the same thing.
There was a quote from some Captain/ pilot on the ABC News Radio this morning who said that he knew of two pilots who had their eyes damaged by lasers,do you know if this is true?.
Ron

Apart from the fact eye damage is physically impossible over a kilometre or so, I am not aware of anyone in the QF group having sustained any eye injury as a result of laser mis-use. There are also some industrial issues going on at present...

There has been a formal request by management to put in paperwork if it you get flashed...but having been flashed myself, I can honestly say it was a trivial event.

As I said before, people that don't dip their high beam, while I'm driving back from the airport give me more grief.

Search, seizure of your car and gaol for 14 years for not dipping your headlights....pretty much sums up the Iemma's lunacy.

[omnivorr]

....has anybody got any valid rebuttals to these points... or is a nebulous vehemence couched in spurious vigilante rhetoric merely the veil of a seven dances.. nine current affairs.

are you adult enuff to comply with the regimen required to provide the grounds on which the idiots can be dealt with, legally and democratically?

...nevermind "lasers 101" ... what about "Citizenship 101" ??

Cheers
Russ

Originally Posted by omnivorr

Idiots misuse these or any other devise, ignoring any advice that such behaviour is unacceptable.. agreed?

so to deter them they must be held liable to punishment for such offensive behaviour.. hence laws.. but you see people, there's no magic law for him but not for you.. laws must apply equally to all.. that's called democracy.

for this law to be effective we must 'enforce' it.. now how do we do this children?

well, we have to pay the police to catch them, the courts people to apply the laws and penalties... and the politicians and bureaucrats to 'enact' the laws... so there might be some fees...

it's more likely the aircraft concern is about solo novice pilots in Cessna's than Jumbo-jockeys... and Peter's emigration idea is to me an unfounded folly.. considering that Australia is about the most happily law abiding affluent and opportunity-rich country in which he could have achieved all he has....

but then sometimes people aren't satisfied being treated 'like the rest'.

if you want civil society as opposed to 'law of the jungle', then you must realise that in all things human there is imperfection, and compromise...

however did people manage to live without these laser toys in days of yore?!?!

(my much more eloquent version was wiped using the 'preview' function... so this is the abrupt and abbreviated ...frustrated version

[leon]

I reckon it is about time this thread was put to bed.

Leon

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by omnivorr

so to deter them they must be held liable to punishment for such offensive behaviour.. hence laws.. but you see people, there's no magic law for him but not for you.. laws must apply equally to all.. that's called democracy.

Yes, Democratic rule is a nice warm and fuzzy concept....

I'd put certain tasks are best left to expert or trained artisan hands and simply not be subject to a populist opinion/reaction.

I for one would not want any of the following being performed on the basis if it being a popular way to proceed by the local bingo club eg: surgery of any kind, civil-mechanical-electrical or electronic engineering, x-ray crystallography, operation of very heavy machinery on the ground or in the air, etc. etc.

The hysterical drivel we are fed by our media is simply populist spin with little to no factual basis.

I know the stay safe committee back in Oz says death is 50,000x more likely for me when I give the hired S-Class a boot full on the autobahn to Stuttgart.....and most certainly would see me gaoled trying the same just outside Goulburn...... So guess I can only do these heinous outside of kindergarten-Oz.....where the laws of Physics just operate differently.

[omnivorr]

sorry Leon, I disagree.. my point is that the law must operate within the bounds of the democratic ethos of our society... there is no animos t'ward Peter.. just a lil' jibe at the "emigrate", ..it's not SUCH a vitally important issue in our lives, surely???? ...fill out a form, pay a fee...

without a statute under which to prosecute a charge there is nothing to stop the idiots.

[Starless (Brian)]

Originally Posted by leon

I reckon it is about time this thread was put to bed.

Leon

Alas probably true unless someone can suggest how to get
idiocy and sociopathic personallity disorder declared illegall

These are there real problem, not possession of a laser pointer.

[Starless (Brian)]

Originally Posted by omnivorr

sorry Leon, I disagree.. my point is that the law must operate within the bounds of the democratic ethos of our society... there is no animos t'ward Peter.. just a lil' jibe at the "emigrate", ..it's not SUCH a vitally important issue in our lives, surely???? ...fill out a form, pay a fee...

without a statute under which to prosecute a charge there is nothing to stop the idiots.

The statute should address the use of the device, not the possession!!

The dificulty of policing it is the government's problem.

Banning the devices is just putting the problem of catching idots in
the "too hard" basket.

[Peter Ward]

[quote=Starless;318403]The statute should address the use of the device, not the possession!!

The dificulty of policing it is the government's problem.

/quote]

Bravo! Couldn't agree more.

[omnivorr]

...don't all pilots fly by the same rules?

...not by populist choice, but by the proven practise that one set of rules reduces/eliminates the possibility of Murphy's Law causing havoc....

I have no problem with you driving an "S-class" on an autobahn at what speed you like... let's just watch you do it in an old Toyota between Emerald and Oodnadatta......

enuff diversions.... do you understand how civil society operates?

....it involves the operation of laws which protect both the "S-class" and "old Toyota" drivers ....from each other impinging on life, limb,property, or freedoms... but must make a reasonable and effective compromise to best serve ALL parties... and the maintenance of a cohesive social fabric.

the hysteria I observe in this issue is the bleating by those who have far better and more important things to do, about a trivial accessory being subjected to a rational control measure to reduce its likely abuse by a universally agreed "few who spoil it for the rest".

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Yes, Democratic rule is a nice warm and fuzzy concept....

I'd put certain tasks are best left to expert or trained artisan hands and simply not be subject to a populist opinion/reaction.

I for one would not want any of the following being performed on the basis if it being a popular way to proceed by the local bingo club eg: surgery of any kind, civil-mechanical-electrical or electronic engineering, x-ray crystallography, operation of very heavy machinery on the ground or in the air, etc. etc.

The hysterical drivel we are fed by our media is simply populist spin with little to no factual basis.

I know the stay safe committee back in Oz says death is 50,000x more likely for me when I give the hired S-Class a boot full on the autobahn to Stuttgart.....and most certainly would see me gaoled trying the same just outside Goulburn...... So guess I can only do these heinous outside of kindergarten-Oz.....where the laws of Physics just operate differently.

[omnivorr]

Starless... you're clueless... a law must be based on evidencially provable-in-court criteria... to wit: possession of the offensive object in or abouts the precinct near or abouts the time of the offence sufficient beyond reasonable doubt to be judged as evidence of guilt.... not just someone saying "he done it" because they don't like "him".

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by omnivorr

.... a trivial accessory being subjected to a rational control measure to reduce its likely abuse by a universally agreed "few who spoil it for the rest".

So what next? Say a spate of robberies break out with cricket bats used as the weapon of choice. So we ban the humble willow?

I use lasers constantly to align optics, test optics, align AO's and measure sky transparency. But I keep forgetting, that they are now the same class of WMD that were the basis for invading Iraq....I know this to be true as our politik told me so.

[Peter Ward]

I too grow weary of this thread...but as an epilogue it might have been nice if our comatose media had pointed out these green shafts of light work both ways...and also point directly to the perpetrators hand...with a good deal of accuracy......so if you are dumb enough to light up a Polair one...14 years sounds reasonable.

[Cerberus]

yes but i don't think 'reasonable doubt' can be the result of circumstantial evidence, there needs to be more to it, if it went to court it would be thrown out most likely
too hard basket=blanket ban=Iemma's lunacy!

laser beam divergence means the threat to airplanes is real but only on takeoff and landings from certain vantage points, if the government was really serious about these attacks they would concentrate on airport security instead of mass hysteria and anecdotal evidence, besides, has anyone here conclusive proof that, god forbid, a airplane has been taken down by a laser pointer whilst at altitude?

if the government is caught on the backfoot and starts covering it's back, they may start a different more liberal tact, like 'oh, it may not actually damage vision at that distance but it's a distraction none the less so I believe this complete ban is justified', but this is a slippery slope to say the least, I mean whilst we are driving the radio can be a distraction, let's ban all car radios! mobile phones can be a distraction, lets ban them altogether! provocative billboards can be a distraction- ban billboards and all other non essential roadside signage! pretty girls in short skirts can be a distraction to a motorist-lets ban that too!