Belarus deploys photon blinding weapons on poland

In the first large scale deployment of laser blinders since the 1980s, we can see why they are a warcrime lolololol https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5xAH4kZjiw I win lol Also, they can be invisible and still blind people for life.

>I win congrats man. Also how is this supposed to be a warcrime ? what is this doing ? blinding people ? breaking cameras ? you know what else can do that ? Lets take one example, it starts with an "B" and ends with an "ullets". You can easily see why they are a warcrime. They can be basically invisible and still kill people for life. Be careful with that keyboard lain, you could put your eye out.

>>56154 >Also how is this supposed to be a warcrime ? what is this doing ? blinding people ? Well, you gotta have some rules and principles even for warfare. We aren't savages, you know.

>>56148 While horrible this isn't a warcrime. There are actually fairly specific definitions for what a warcrime is and a directed energy weapon that is actively targeted, specific and isn't even meant to be lethal doesn't meet the mark

>>56156 >We aren't savages, you know. One of the greatest lies we continue to tell ourselves. Proof you don't need lasers to be blind.

>>56156 >We aren't savages, you know. enjoy some history: >iraq >sir these guys are raping boys >let them be its their culture and we dont want to harm our mission >then those guys who actually said well why not participate in their local culture? fuarrrked 8year old girls while parents had to watch and we only know cause they got before military court as they were retards and got it public war basically never changed, your foot soldiers include the dumbest specimen of the population, you train them to kill, so why wouldn't they act like rabid dogs once unleashed? They couldn't even contain rape&murder on the okinawa base where they see zero battle so there is no chance they can on the battlefield.

>>56166 Although I was being facetious, the example you gave for your counter-argument is actual news to me. Sure, I knew the US soldiers weren't acting lije goody two shoes in Iraq, but this for me brings it all to a new low. Thank you.

>>56166 >your foot soldiers include the dumbest specimen of the population Oh come now, the US tried that back in vietnam and it didn't go well, thats why we try to have a cutoff about 80 iq nowadays.

>>56154 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Blinding_Laser_Weapons Your not understanding. Lasers have almost infinite ammo in a combat setting, can be given to literally children, can supress just as well as a machine gun, have no recoil and can actually outrange firearms. It's a warcrime because it really fuarrrks over enemy soldiers for life instantly. Not only that, but you don't even have to hit people with stronger ones, merely landing the beam near them will blind them Pic related can sweep a crowd and blind nearly everyone in it, and even looking at the user will also blind for life.

>>56162 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Blinding_Laser_Weapons Actually... specifically laser guns meant to blind are a warcrime

>>56198 And they can also be made undodgeable in photon Cascader form to even strike targets hiding behind cover. >Eyeprotection Then dig out the full spectrum laser arrays to strike at the weaknesses of any particular analog eyeprotection using a rainbow beam

>>56181 >80 cutoff sub 90 means already too stupid for conditional reasoning. Its easier perhaps to take a look at your personal experience: Academic average is ~120+ for graduates. 100 gets often taken for mentally sound but you most likely are surrounded by people who are above 100 and still fuarrrkups so from that you should be able to extrapolate how bad 80 really is. offtopic dont remember who it was again but a song i truly enjoyed went something like "we dont have to be smart, we got smart weapons to do our part"

>>56204 Except that has proven to be not particularly true as the abject debacle in Afghanistan has proven.

>>56197 Compared to spears, rifles have almost infinite ammo in a combat setting, can be given to literally children, can supress just as well as spear volleys, require very little strength, and can even outrange archers. It should be a warcrime because it really fuarrks over enemy soldiers for life instantly. Not only that, but you dont even have to hit people with stronger ones. Large rifles can penetrate armor, and even light bullets can ricochett off of hard surfaces. Still striking and in some cases killing or maiming their marks. Sure, ok, they're a warcrime. So what. What really makes it different than artillery, than rifles, than litterally anything ? Weapons are meant to kill people and injur them. Thats like, litterally the point. There are a few arbitrary lines drawn here and there that say this or that is a warcrime, they could just as well be drawn further back to say guns are a warcrime, or bladed weapons, or made weaker and say chemical weapons and landmines and lasers and everything are peachy. Its arbitrary, unenforced, and no one really gives a soykaf except once in a while when they can use it as an excuse to start or escalate a conflict. >>56208 was that the 80iq soldiers ruining things or the hrpdrp bureaucrats and brass ruining things ? and yeah I know even 100iq is kinda dumb.

Oh the psychopathic autist that's obsessed with blinding people with lasers is back again.

>>56197 > Not only that, but you don't even have to hit people with stronger ones, merely landing the beam near them will blind them That's also the case with explosive ammunition though, except maiming in addition to perhaps blinding if they survive and happen to be looking that way. >>56199 > Then dig out the full spectrum laser arrays to strike at the weaknesses of any particular analog eyeprotection using a rainbow beam This sounds like the sort of thing that would precipitate the use of automated weaponized drones, if suddenly the use of humans is guaranteed failure. Is that even remotely desirable?

>>56213 You mistake,these are anti soft target and anti vip weapons. They are effective vs soldiers but their primary purpose is as terror weapons. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rElAW56ezvA For example, they can be used on the children of the enemies of mankind to destroy their future potential forever.

>>56217 Not only only that but drones that can seek human eyes autonomously already exist lololol Also Russia has learned how to equip blinders in anti sniper roles by blasting large areas with near ir light to detect the reflection from scopes then attacks them with a 532nm pulse. Ukraine has often complained about these systems trying people using binoculars lololol

>>56217 In these cases, the problem is not lasers, it is what they're being used against. It is the same thing as running into a village and slaughtering or maiming all the villagers with machete. But we do not call use of the machete a war crime, only the targeted attack against civilians. And what even are civilians, anyway.

>>56219 Well the reason the protocol exists is because in the Iran Iraq war there was extensive use of early nd;yag killowatt class lasers and literally thousands of soldiers where struck blind. It almost changed warfare, so they derezzed it.

>>56221 https://www.laserpointersafety.com/news/news/nonaviation-incidents_files/2163d29244587e945da69132e6eacdbf-388.php#on Link related

>>56223 Whereas machineguns actually changed warfare. maybe laser's time just hasn't really come yet, maybe the age of the laser gun is only just beginning, somewhere on the border between boland and pelerus.

>>56224 >Fingers crossed

>>56223 t.y. for link thats actually pretty interesting. Sounds like these were all repurposed vehicle mounted targeting lasers just being directed into faces. Kinda impressive for the late 80s, lasers (and batteries) have come a long way since then, as those rioters in portland can attest. Wonder whether they'll see wider use, strong lasers at least as a anti tracking system countermeasure seem likely to be very useful, in addition to the anti-human eye abilities.

>>56227 What I expect to see if Ukraine and Russia fight is large scale deployment of Russian anti-sniper systems. They have been used a few time in the last decade and have actually proven to be surprisingly effective (even if they end up blinding random people using binoculars alot)

>>56148 should be a attachment for rifles perma blind them then spray

>>56230 https://youtu.be/3LbH7U6o9s8 Like this?

>>56156 >We aren't savages, you know. Does not apply to Russians

>>56234 We are all Russian, anon.

>>56217 They should be considered the same as assault with any other maiming weapon, and responded to in kind. > For example, they can be used on the children of the enemies of mankind to destroy their future potential forever. That assumes sufficient damage to prevent visual prosthetics, which suggests sufficient damage to motivate exactly the kind of response I'm talking about. Assistive technologies have also made a lot of progress so it's debatable how futureless one really is. Lastly, wouldn't this promote the adoption of digital goggles with visual composite of anything between visual, lidar, sonar and passive radar inputs as important protective equipment?

>>56262 Actually nothing seems to happen. Laser weapons as response to restrictive gun laws doesn't fit the narrative. The people in power are insane and also don't care about their foot soldiers. Their initial response to laser weapon deployment wasn't even to issue eyepro, they where told to look down and away from the beams >Attack does damage at literally light speed >Lol just look away And as a bonus the eyeprotection the government adopted lets red through because it's less common and cheap to get a powerful red laser. A sane government would respond as you said, our current governments respond by pretending that lasers can't blind people and that they are toys. This is because to acknowledge them would be to acknowledge that gun bans don't work and in fact spur innovation.

>>56262 Also: True uv and true ir lasers do damage in a way that prosthetics can be used Near uv/near ir/color beams kills both the retina and optic nerve, blowing both apart to pieces. Get hit by a color beam or a near ir/near uv and you will never see again, and even steno cells can't help you.

>>56263 >Lol just look away While I have to admit that seems like a dumb suggestion, its not as dumb as it sounds. In portland and such where these were used, they were generally handheld devices relatively poorly aimed, an attacker usually doesn't hit right in the face in the beginning, but has to track toward the face and eyes. Some of the stuff OP posts also looks like its pretty undirected. I can imagine a sinister, well aimed and perhaps even invisible laser that would be pointed right at unwitting victims, and hit them before they notice whats going on, but thats not whats happening here. Maybe we'll see that again, it sounds like what the iraqis had. >prosthetics Even if we had perfect prosthetic eyes destroying someones eyes is a violent attack. We can make pretty good prosthetic ear lobes but I dont think anyone would consider chopping someone's ear off a trifiling or insignificant attack. Also, short term blinding can easily be a prelude to something else.

>>56269 1: police officers struck by 90-300mw prome laser 301s and prome laser 303s where only flash blinded, the effects wore off quickly. The officers hit by 1.6 and 3.5 watt thor lasers where not only flash blinded, but seriously damaged, never fully recovering. Only 3 7.5 watt sanwu strikers where used, and the officers hit by those have had 90% loss of vision + permanent vertigo nerve pain and migraines. Temp blinders where what was mostly deployed in Portland, and permablinding lasers where what was deployed in Ukraine and Belarus. And again, currently just because it could and should justify gunfire in response, it just doesn't. People suddenly lose their ability to react properly when confronted by light speed laser fire. It's alot different on the receiving end, and that's if you even know your under attack During bright daytime color beams are not very visible but lose no danger, and invisible beams are well, invisible. You might not even know you are under laser attack until your entire squad has been blinded. Every once in a while militaries actually accidentally blind their own people with tank/aircraft/seacraft mounted laser designators. And that's by mere accident.

>>56269 Also; Here's that exact invisible and silent beam weapon you speak of. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OUZ_p0WrqUE

>>56271 https://youtu.be/p5MtpkkFL8g You can also always throw a scope on visible beams and quickly splash your targets face as you only need 1/10th of a second to blind them.

>>56272 And then there are laser "sniper rifles" that thanks to their very pure, very tight wave beam they can "hide" their power output by not drawing a very visible beam, but still deliver enough power to outright pop an eyeball at 1000 yards https://youtu.be/khMEjtSpVxk

>>56263 >This is because to acknowledge them would be to acknowledge that gun bans don't work and in fact spur innovation. That stance is even more ridiculous considering what Defense Distributed, JStark and Ivan have been doing in parallel. Even in countries where some chemicals are hard to obtain, some analogues using other projection methods have been made.

>>56275 It's absolutely hilarious. It I had been fighting competent government masterminds or even just a sane government I would be in jail at the moment. But I'm not fighting masterminds, or even sane people. I'm fighting an insane, mid-wit tier tyrannical regime that engages in half measures constantly. Again, this is a wierd clown world tier timeline, so what should happen, doesn't.

>>56265 >Near uv/near ir/color beams kills both the retina and optic nerve, blowing both apart to pieces. That reinforces the "the same as assault with any other maiming weapon" line I'm going with, as there is in fact classical maiming on top of blinding with this.

>>56277 Yes normally. But that's not the effect. It tends to paralyze a trained soldier when they first encounter it, as their training doesn't tell them what to do. In irl, it's a terrifying weapon on the receiving end, and your higher ups will often literally ignore you being attacked by it. This is reality.

>>56277 I guess it's just that your trying to force irl consequences onto something that at least so far, doesn't result in consequences at least for me to use. I don't get in trouble for using it (your results may vary, but you can always sneak a laser into the courtroom and blind the overzealous prosecutor for life as they can be ridiculously small)

>>56288 You can also bombard servants of ZOG with other energy weapons, not only will they not know what to do to counter them, but again their higher ups will literally tell them they are retards even if you give them brain damage. Pic semi related, here's a congressman desperately trying to convince other congressmen that lasers are a threat. He was laughed at, and is still mocked by his peers. Talking about directed energy weapons is a fast way to get labeled a schizo, something directed energy weapons users can take advantage of easily.

>>56277 In fact, ide go so far as to call you blind for not understand that from a practical perspective, the narrative is the god of the western world. If you go against the narrative in the right way, instead of being destroyed by it's inflexibility, you can use it to be completely invisible to half of all people.

>>56289 It's so completely insane. Lasers seem a lot less complicated to me than guns and a lot more intuitive to understand. On one hand you have something that can be compared to looking at the sun for an hour straight, and on the other you have a bunch of strange chemicals accelerating a pellet of metal faster than sound. What is wrong with these morons?

>>56156 All those "rules" only apply during peacetime, do you genuinely believe anyone follows rules during an actual war? Lmao.

>>56289 Its good to see those suit puppets are as clueless as ever, shizo stuff is great for anything. >>56263 Bless the heros who stick it to the man, may our glorious laser palandins slay the monster. Personally i think blinding with lasers is far to humane a method for facsists, if it were up to me id have each pig and their leader tied up and pry their eyes out with my pliers and lighter. I hope the feds and their families really suffer, i pray their lifes are living hell from now on. >>56305 Rules are made to benefit those who make them up, those who follow the rules only do so out of some sort incentive, it will be broken once there is a netto benefit.

Has anyone here tried attaching a laser to a camera and then fixing pigs from far range? I suppose the stability would be an issue, on the other hand if its invisible and long range you can take your time. I suppose a automated tacking laser turret could be an interesting experiment. Also does anyone know if being hit by a laser in the eye can be felt prior to permanent damage taking place(so you can look away)?

>>56309 depends on the laser. If your aim is true you wouldn't even need an invisible one, and if the power is great enough you can just blow up the retina in one shot. Victim wouldnt even have time to blink. >>56301 most people have experience with guns, have seen in person the sorts of things they can do and are generally satisfied they can be dangerous. Even to an ancient person you could probably explain it as a better version of the bow and arrow. Many people also have experience with lasers, as pointing devices, cat toys, and targetting aids. I imagine I'm not the only person who's spent some time looking straight into a laser just as a curiosity. These devices are basically inocuous toys, and anyone who uses them can see that. Also, staring into the sun for an hour. Do you know anyone who's done that ? I dont know anyone whos done that. I've stared for a few minutes and gotten temporarily blinded but its not that bad. This type of damage is an abstract sort thats sort of difficult to understand, people only hype it up when donald trump spends a few seconds glancing up at it during an eclipse. A peice of metal passing through your body at high speed is pretty obviously injurious, and everyone has direct personal experience usually with at least smaller and lighter peices of metal at lower speeds passing into their bodies and know it is unpleasant and physically damaging.

>>56310 >Also, staring into the sun for an hour. Do you know anyone who's done that ? I dont know anyone whos done that. I've stared for a few minutes and gotten temporarily blinded but its not that bad. This type of damage is an abstract sort thats sort of difficult to understand, people only hype it up when donald trump spends a few seconds glancing up at it during an eclipse. Theres some former meth addict comedian who said in an interview that one time when she was on meth, she started doubting the warnings anyone had ever given her. Then decided to go stare at the sun for a couple hours because everyone tells you not to. Now she has blindspots in her vision that have faded a bit over time, but will never fully heal. I think it's in this interview but I don't have time right now to search through it to confirm: https://youtu.be/avzQF5jczn8 This is the only person I'm aware of who's stared at it for a while in a single session. I think she says that staring at the sun for a long time is hard because it makes you sick, so if that's true, I doubt anyone not on drugs is staring at the sun for long periods of time. When I was a kid, me and my friends played a "game" where we'd try to stare at the sun longer than each other, but we'd only last for a few seconds. None of us are blind, but we do all need glasses. But both my parents have poor vision, so not sure how much that sun game affected my vision.

>>56311 45m20s is when the sun bit happens. She was fully blind for a few days and now has blind spots.

>>56148 Stop trying to spread your repulsive, un-cyb soykaf and your garbage yt channel onto lain. I've seen your ass on 4chan and here flapping your gums about how so very smart you are, figuring out how to dump power into a laser and point it at people that your internet-addled, tiny brain think deserve it. Even if the people in power are retarded, they're not going to be toppled or their systems destroyed just because you can sweep your soykafty amateur lasers through a crowd of their children. No one is going to side with you. Terror will never change the course of history, it will never be cyber, and it will never belong among the rest of the good threads on this board.

>>56328 In fact, why don't you go back to po l so they can tell you how based you are for posting grainy images of your disgustingly misused equipment lasing random objects. Every single person who invented/designed/engineered all the pieces of tech on your soykaf would spit in your face if they knew what was being done with what they created. You will not change anything about the world, or warfare. Getthefucouttahere.

>>56199 >>56212 I was just wondering today how nice it is that the glitterboy who masturbates with lasers hasn't shown up in a while... Lasers don't work in all weather conditions like bullets... You can literally stop the danger of it by lighting things on fire because smoke obscures the light. >Rainbow beam Get that gay soykaf outta here >>56221 >doubt.jpeg There were proposals to use laser weapons way before then I would like to see that this was the definitive reason behind the rule. Also this probably happened because rangefinders have a big sign that says "do not point at eyes or blindness" so probably makes sense that they would use it for exactly that. These are the same people who electrified a swamp to kill Iranians like fish in a barrel. >>56263 >Attack does damage at literally light speed >Lol just look away Outside the ocular hazard distance, just looking away will prevent long term damage, and this is a guaranteed safeguard in the visible spectrum because the light hurts so you look away. >And as a bonus the eyeprotection the government adopted lets red through because it's less common and cheap to get a powerful red laser. >A sane government would respond as you said, our current governments respond by pretending that lasers can't blind people and that they are toys. These points are both factually incorrect. Not only is the laser user unsafe, he is also retarded. >>56270 >People suddenly lose their ability to react properly when confronted by light speed laser fire. You misunderstand, its just not very good to start spraying into a crowd with live rounds. It would be the same if someone fired a gun from a crowd. >>56289 >taking one politician seriously only when it backs up your argument as proof that you are somehow winning at what exactly?. they come up with all kinds of off the wall things that they get laughed at for (ar47 with gorillan round clips)

Glad to see that lain does not support people like OP who have nothing positive to contribute >>56313 The same goes for flash blindness in nuclear blasts because of the visible light and IR/UV radiation flashing at such high speed >Flash blindness is an either temporary or permanent visual impairment during and following exposure of a varying length of time to a light flash of extremely high intensity, such as a nuclear explosion, flash photograph, lightning strike, or extremely bright light, i.e. a searchlight or laser pointer or landing lights or ultraviolet light.[1] The bright light overwhelms the retinas of the eyes and generally gradually fades, lasting anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes. However, if the eyes are exposed to a high enough level of light, such as a nuclear explosion, the blindness can become permanent. >Flash blindness may also occur in everyday life. For example, the subject of a flash photograph can be temporarily flash blinded. This phenomenon is leveraged in non-lethal weapons such as flash grenades and laser dazzlers.

>>56328 >>56329 >>56330 >>56331 Oh boy lol I really love the butthurt. >Your just wrong! The reality is that at a high enough power threshold a laser will simply unmake your ability to see, and like any piece of equipment is situational. Also this is irl so you can use a gun at the same time as a permablinding laser, which is what Russia actually DOES But again, keep trying. Tell me how "Havana syndrome" worked out while I keep exposing random traffic to truly hazardous beams and continue threatening my local police that I will pulse blast them whenever they try to ask me to stop. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mAs0RqpFsL0

>>56330 Also yes, not only where almost everyone using laser let go within western countries, but Poland and Ukraine have both been memory holed on Russian and belereusian laser weapon use. Also yes the particular pair of eyeprotection adopted at the Portland riots was weak to 635nm lasers.

>>56330 Show us on the doll where the laser touched you

Today, the United States is among a number of nations working to develop and field advanced directed energy weapons, or lasers, for a number of military applications. Near the end of the Cold War, the Soviet Union began experimenting with the idea of fielding a laser-equipped tank that could blind the targeting systems of inbound ballistic missiles or vehicles. Ultimately, two prototypes of the laser-armed 1К17 Сжатие, translated to “Compression,” were built, though they weren’t complete until the Soviet Union fell and was replaced by the new government of the Russian Federation. Today, the United States is among a number of nations working to develop and field advanced directed energy weapons, or lasers, for a number of military applications. The U.S. Air Force recently announced its intentions to begin fielding lasers on their fighter platforms as soon as 2025, and the U.S. Navy began testing its latest laser, the MK 2 MOD 0, aboard the USS Portland in May of this year. But decades before these programs came to light, the Soviet Union was already exploring the idea of using lasers as a means of missile defense. The Soviet strategy wasn’t to use these lasers to destroy incoming missiles like the applications in development today intend to. Instead, the Soviet laser tank aimed to blind or burn out the electro-optical sensors missiles used to find their targets. Once blinded or damaged, a missile would miss its intended target, whether that was the 1K17 or other nearby assets. Other planned applications included using the laser apparatus to blind heavy vehicles like tanks, making it impossible for them to aim and fire accurately. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/cold-war-era-laser-tanks-are-set-make-comeback-199830 >Laughs as militaries around the world take another look at laser blinders I will win, the world will change.

>>56336 “When there was contact with enemy armored vehicles, Soviet laser tanks simply would blind them, making aimed fire impossible.”

Come now people, OP may be a crazy guy in some respects but he seems to have some interesting information and laser weapons are clearly a piece of 'tech'. Can't we engage in good faith ? I dont think lasers are the huge world shattering change OP might be suggesting, but its pretty easy to see how they can be useful. There's been alot of talk of significantly destructive lasers, say replacing the cannons of fighter planes, which has been constantly shuffled back and talked about as 'a few years away'. Lasers aren't very effective against targets with any armour or heat capacity to speak of, but optical sensors must be somewhat exposed as a matter of course, and it is against these that lasers seem to be holding promise. As >>56330 points out, you can just throw smoke out or some other thing to block the laser, but the problem with all of these things is that you need to be able to see, whether for your camera system, rocket or artillery guidance system, or your plain old mark i eyeballs. Forcing an enemy to blind himself in this fashion can be almost as good, short term, as blinding him outright. If you blast a ship with lasers right as your missile is comming into its visually guided defenses range, it might have a better chance of getting through, and likewise if the ship frys the incomming missile's laser tracking, well then that missile is probably not going to hit its target. We do similar disrupting with radio. >these points are both incorrect I don't know why the feds chose the glasses they chose, but from what I can tell the glasses they're reported as obtaining, stingerhawk FT-2, are not well shielded on the red end of the spectrum. Of course most of the lasers used there were greens, so thats not too ridiculous. Need to have some light left over to see with, afterall. As to the swiftness of the damage, its not clear to me the exact circumstances that caused the reported blindness, I've been trying to find follow up information as to whether the victims have recovered partially or at all. At any rate, its very difficult to do your job as a policeman or soldier while averting your eyes all the time. >>56221 >almost changed warfare, so they derezzed it. There's a popular claim that things like chemical weapons are permitted to be warcrimes because they're impractical. The big boys get to pat eachother on the back for renouncing barbarity, but they only do it because it was clumsy and ineffective anyway. Meanwhile they embrace depleted uranium penetrators and other more effective but similarly venemous weapons with open arms. Its possible lasers like this just aren't that great and this is why they've been 'illegal'. As has already been pointed out in this thread lasers have advanced some since the 80s, its possible that we are seeing a change in their usefulness. If not as a weapon of armies at least as an easily concealed weapon of harassment. I think Portland attested to the latter, we're seeing how things go in East Europe still.

>>56336 >Laughs as militaries around the world take another look at laser blinders >I will win, the world will change. Actually no, while there were experimental systems built, they actually never saw full use in combat outside of experiments. The russians also experimented with WIG boats and produced a bunch of them that never got used for combat either. One of the reasons is because lasers do not have the same effectiveness as projectiles when it comes to simplicity of taking out targets. Remember the 747 with a laser gun on it? If lasers are the greatest weapon ever, then why would that not be in use? The truth is that directed energy weapons are not good for any target that can be hardened against radiation with either glass coating or shielding. >>56340 The biggest problem with laser weapons is that they need sufficient power to actually cause damage. While OP in this thread and his other threads seems to suggest a small scale handheld devices are as dangerous as a rocket launcher, he is actually not very close to the truth. Lasers can be dangerous because of flashblinding effects which cause other side effects like crashing cars or aircraft. Because of this, aircraft pilots have worn laser eye protection for years. The power output of the laser is not itself the biggest danger, the wavelength is. In this respect, OP is actually not wrong; However, with certain wavelengths, the power output needed to cause damage is so high that it becomes a matter of having a good cooling system and enough power generation to burn a target object. You can burn out a laser source very quickly with poor cooling, which means it is less valuable than carrying a firearm that costs a a few hundred dollars to manufacture and can cause lethal harm at typical line of sight ranges with 100% guarantee with every successful hit and has a service life of tens of thousands of cycles, unlike a laser which may burn out after a few sustained cycles which may not even work properly. Power generation for military laser defense systems requires multiple generators or laser devices to even get the power needed to take out a missile. IIRC Rheinmetal created a mortar defense system that used lasers like the C-RAM uses bullets, to lase incoming objects to explode. The problem is that it requires multiple large laser emplacements over an area along with power generation and fire control radars that coordinate beams. The C-RAM just needs a truck to do the same thing. On the subject of missile defense, different manufacturers use different definitions of "success," the russians deflecting a missile from its intended target may count as a success, even if that missile goes off course and hits a school full of children. Other countries consider "success" to be a total destruction or making the missile fall apart so it presents no harm. These are examples of how moving the goal posts may obscure reports of success. Also regarding the intentional use of lasers, generally the FBI categorizes crimes into those done by children as a prank, or old criminals who are trying to be edgy and/or hurt other people >In 2009, there were 1,489 laser events logged with the FAA—that is, pilots reporting that their cockpits were illuminated by the devices. The following year, that figure had nearly doubled to 2,836, an average of more than seven incidents every day of the year. And the overwhelming number of the incidents involved green lasers—especially dangerous because the human eye is most susceptible to damage from the yellow-green light spectrum. A lot of states also don't have laws about lasing unless it is used against a law enforcement officer or unless it causes bodily harm, then it falls under a separate category of assault. I have a feeling that if guns were treated the same way as lasers, OP would probably shoot at cars driving down the road just because it wasn't illegal.

I guarantee this guy has tested his soykaf on animals. You know, just for fun.

>>56344 >The biggest problem with laser weapons is that they need sufficient power to actually cause damage. I know this and tried to acknowledge it clearly in my post. The most practical use of lasers as weapons seems to be, as OP suggests, blinders, used against optical sensors and human eyes, not as a replacement for bullets. If they are used in this capacity alone, the power requirements are much more limited, the heat problem is much more limited. Issues like linger time required to burn through even thin sheets of metal are much reduced. Furthermore, a laser that simply forces the sensor to be hidden to avoid damage, or makes its use difficult while doing little or no damage, is useful. >>56344 >aircraft pilots have worn laser eye protection for years maybe this is true for military pilots, from what I have seen of GA and Commercial aviation this is not the case. For instance in some GA forums I'm finding reports of users subject to laser attacks, where the suggestions usually are 'notify the FAA' and 'turn off your lights so they loose track of you'. >lol reddit but whatever https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/3qdjxl/a_little_night_currency_practice_and_a_green_laser/ >two weeks ago article discussing making laser eyepro for aviation as if its a new thing https://www.revisionmilitary.com/en/revision-announces-new-laser-eye-protection-designed-for-aviators >On the subject of missile defense, schools and successes I'd point out systems like CIWS have their troubles in populated areas as well. The US navy hardly uses its CIWS and still has managed to kill its own sailors with it in tests. If it was used in a city it very likely would do a good bit of damage in the course of 'safely' destroying missiles in the air. Still, differing definitions of success is something to look out for. In the example of a ship trying to misdirect an incomming missile, a successful misdirection means the missile hits the empty water, unlikely to do injury to any school children. It might do indirect damage to the ship if its a near miss, but this is still prefferable to it blowing up in the middle of the ship. Most definitions of assault that I have read do not have an exclusive list of permissible weapons, it is more along the lines of attack with intent (or plausibly interpreted as having intent) to do injury. Be it with a laser or a knife or merely ones fists it shouldn't matter.

>>56351 He has, I'm not sure what it was, but on an old threat he was showcasing the results of his lasers on animals.

Lol op here, I got arrested last night because I blinded someone temporarily causing them to crash their car. I was released this morning on my on recognizance with no bail and they are already moving to reduce the charges from reckless endangerment to just creating a hazard. They didn't even ban me from having lasers.

>>56364 The officers where afraid to arrest me lol, when they told me the charges where basically nothing I laughed, put down my weapons and laughed again as I was out of jail in less than 5 hours. Didn't even confiscate the rifle shot at them :D

>>56364 haha, hope the car crash wasnt too bad. Are you actually firing these into cars or just alongside the road ? from the one video I found on your youtube it looked like the latter. If you're in New York I'd be more worried about them trying to take away your real guns than banning you from lasers, especially without a judge's involvement.

>>56354 Despite everything I didn't get anything but misdemeanors even though the guy can't see our of his right eye anymore. Nothing sticks to me, although the memetic barrier that protects me from consequences is slowly wearing out.

>>56366 I was firing along the road and must have accidentally hit someone lol I don't believe it, but oh well. I was worried they would ban me from lasers and all I would have are masers, sonic and heat based weapons + the cobalt 60 sterilizer. Instead I'm now more worried that some of my explosive materials are missing, and that one of the officers straight up pocketed a lb of binary explosive and catalyst, the officer tried to argue that it wasn't missing until I pointed out it's not really my problem, and it's his that one of his officers pocketed a lb of tannerite illicitly.

Remember folks, because of people like >>56364 you have whole families brutally dying in car crashes. Lmao

>>56369 And I didn't even really get in trouble lol

>>56340 We dislike OP because he's an asshole attempting to blind random people for soykaf and giggles. >>56344 > unless it causes bodily harm, then it falls under a separate category of assault. A burnt retina is bodily harm, any blinding should be considered maiming. > I have a feeling that if guns were treated the same way as lasers, OP would probably shoot at cars driving down the road just because it wasn't illegal. He would. >>56367 I really hope you end-up messing up at some point. > although the memetic barrier that protects me from consequences is slowly wearing out. Too little too late, of course. But progress in some sort. >>56369 Makes you wish he'd get horribly mauled doesn'it?

>>56374 Except you know, that I'll attack again for real long before the memetic gestalt breaks down.

>>56374 Also: what's wrong with harming random npcs? It's not like god cares. He literally rewards me for soykaf like this. I found 300$ in an envelope today literally the moment I was released.

>>56365 >>56367 >>56368 Wasn't this guy saying he was going to go out guns blazing with explosives and lasers if the cops ever came to arrest him?

>>56378 Good luck in civil court when he sues you for blinding him and then you get all your money and soykaf taken away. Just because you gave a dirty cop some explosives doesn't make you immune to the actions of your so called "NPC"s because you aren't the center of the universe despite your own beliefs

>>56380 I did the first time lol The second time I got surrounded. >>56381 Absolutely anal ravaged. I'll continue and never stop. If he sues me he dies lololol

>>56381 Also you absolutely love it >Nooooooooo you have to be subject to the same consequences as everyone else!!!!! But I'm not lol My entire life has been felony after felony and nothing has ever stuck. I have a massive criminal record and yet have never spent more than a day in jail at a time ever. I don't get in trouble the way you do.

>>56381 In general, people have tried to hold me accountable. Police, feds, even magistrates have all tried to bring me to heel. Nothing ever sticks, and if it ever does I is go on a rampage lololol I shot at the police and I still have the firearm that did it. Lolololol

>>56381 Also: im legit sketched out by the missing explosives. I didn't do that one lol >Inb4 terrorist event unrelated to me

>>56385 Bonus: I FOIA'd the cop cam footage so when I get it I'm gonna upload them coming under laser and conventional fire from me ;3

man this thread has sure gone off the rails today. OP is one mad lad. What a world

>>56387 Well I wouldn't be so crazy if do gooders, federal officers, and people who demand consequences for actions wouldn't try me and my reality warping memes. Pic related is why I will stand triumphant or dead at the end of this game.

>>56388 Lol lainchan is having troubles with image uploads