# Dumbbutt shined greenie on a State Trooper



## ConfederateScott (Oct 21, 2006)

A state trooper showed me a green laser pointer yesterday that he has confiscated from a fellow. The trooper was travelling south on I-55 and the guy with the green laser was going north. He was shining it across the median at oncoming cars. Just his bad luck that one of them was my trooper buddy. It was almost midnight and kind of foggy. You can imagine how it must have looked. When the beam hit the patrol car and all of the reflective markings illuminated green he stopped shining it but it was too late. Trooper crossed median and stopped the guy. I'm not sure what the bloke was charged with but he had his laser confiscated and will have to appear before a judge next week. He told the trooper that he shined it by accident and didn't mean to be aiming it towards cars. Anyone else know of somebody getting in trouble with the law because of playing with a laser? I bet it's probably pretty common.


----------



## Macaw (Oct 22, 2006)

Sounds like a case of reckless endangerment. NOT SMART!!


----------



## JonSidneyB (Oct 22, 2006)

I know this will sound harsh to some but I do hope he gets more than a slap on the wrist. There is just too much bad behavior today.


----------



## allthatwhichis (Oct 22, 2006)

Macaw said:


> Sounds like a case of reckless endangerment. NOT SMART!!


Sounds like a case of the DumbAss...  I hope it was a small 5Mw... for his sake or for who ever else got shined by it...


----------



## EvilLithiumMan (Oct 22, 2006)

He should have used the "It's not my car. It's not my laser. It belongs to my roommate whose name I don't know (after living together 3 months)." defense I always see on "COPS". I love that show. It's so entertaining to watch thier eyes dart around as the camera zooms in on them as they frantically attempt to construct a story for the trooper that has fewer holes than Swiss cheese.

(Variation on a theme): 20 years ago a coworker purchased the then sexy Toyota MR2 low riding two-seater sports car. I was at his home one day. He was sick "of all the idiots in large trucks who tailgate" and was in the process of installing a high powered red xenon strobe just above the rear window brakelight. Void of any formal (or positive) legal experience, I still offered my opinion that probably was not a wise move. His response was: "It's red. It's where the brakelight is. And until a judge tells me otherwise, I'm using it."

Weeks later as he pulled into the parking lot at work, I noticed only a dangling pair of wires where the strobe had once been. I never mentioned my observation to him - it was just too obvious to me.


----------



## James S (Oct 22, 2006)

question though. While I can't disagree with the pulling over of someone who was basically risking dangerously distracting drivers in the other lane, would he have done the same if the guy just had a regular spotlight and was shining it in the other lane? If I took my thor in the car and shined it out the window at oncoming traffic that would be just as dangerous as far as blinding them for a moment wouldn't it?

I'm just curious if it's just the endangerment or if we're being extra paranoid about lasers again.


----------



## The_LED_Museum (Oct 22, 2006)

I think it's a combination of the two: paranoia about lasers and the legal aspects (temporary blinding of a driver in the oncoming lane).
If the guy shined a Thor spotlight instead of the laser in the same manner, there's a very high probability the Thor would have been confiscated.


----------



## sniper (Oct 22, 2006)

> I'm just curious if it's just the endangerment or if we're being extra paranoid about lasers again.



We had big thread going a while back, about what to do if somone was tailgating/ driving erratically/ doing something displeasing to a driver. In this case, the driver was a young woman who was not old enough to have had a driver's license very long, who was being harassed by another driver. It appeared that the young woman had no viable options but to continue for some distance, when she could get out of the other's way. 

IIRC, the responses to the question "What should she do? " Were divided into two general groups. The first, and smaller group suggested some sort of aggressive action, involving bright lights shone at the other driver, suddenly applying brakes, and other actions, which almost certainly would guarantee some sort of escalating response by the "guilty" driver, given the current social mindset, and which were also dangerous, opening up the young woman and her family to criminal and civil prosecution. 

The rest of the answers seemed to be center around making herself safe, getting off the road, letting the aggressive drivers pass, getting a license number and making a police report, or, in worst case scenarios, calling the police from a cell phone (actually, somewhat dangerous in itself. )

In our current society, perception becomes accepted reality. "Urban legends" concerning lasers and their nefarious uses are growing: 

Tom Clancy, and his hitmen Clark and Chavez, and a fairly recent CSI episode, where lasers are used to cause aircraft crashes. EVERYBODY remembers STAR TREK right? Look what they did with lasers! The growing perception is: Lasers are BAD! Like most people, media types don't care to educate themselves in depth about anything: just so the Editor/Publisher's bias is represented. 

It doesn't matter what we know, If you repeat misinformation long and loud enough, it will be accepted as FACT!. Remember DDT, or the present foofaraw concerning Greenhouse Gases? Same thing.

Stupid will always be with us, and thoughtless use of lasers by irresponsible people will continue to give useful devices a bad reputation and probably will lead to the future restriction of laser pointers, and other implements.


----------



## abeepak1 (Oct 22, 2006)

You know what I think? I think that these arseholes derserve more than a confiscated laser. This is just a matter of common sense and these kind of ppl happen to lack of them. These arseholes should be put under arrest and they keep on creating a bad image of the laser pointers/modules.:scowl:


----------



## Glass (Oct 22, 2006)

Here in Oregon, there is a specific statute regarding this type of thing: Unlawful Directing of Light from a Laser Pointer ORS 163.709. It is an A Misdemeanor.

The moron would go to jail.

Patrick


----------



## LarryC (Oct 22, 2006)

TN LAW TCA 39-16-515. Pointing a laser at a law enforcement officer.

(a) It is an offense to knowingly activate and point a laser pointer or other device utilizing a laser beam at a person known to be a law enforcement officer while the officer is in the performance of such officer's official duties with the intent to place such officer in fear of serious bodily injury or death. 
(b) In order for subsection (a) to apply: 

(1) The law enforcement officer must actually be placed in fear of serious bodily injury or death; 
(2) The fear must be real or honestly believed to be real at the time; and 
(3) Based upon the facts and circumstances surrounding the defendant's conduct, the fear must be founded upon reasonable grounds. 
(c) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.


----------



## cloud (Oct 22, 2006)

He was a Dumbbutt!!!.. not a very smart thing to do.. I hope he is made an example.


----------



## Alin10123 (Oct 23, 2006)

Can't say i know for sure about cars, but to shine lasers at aircraft is a federal offense. The lasers could essentially ruin any sort of night vision that have been developed and disorient both pilots and drivers of cars. I would say it's a stupid move either way. The pointer of the laser could've been killed too. What if the driver got disoriented and drove through the median? They too could've been killed.


----------



## James S (Oct 23, 2006)

I think we're all agreed that it was a remarkably stupid thing to do for the exact reasons that Alin10123 notes. The question I was asking was is it worse cause it's a laser? Or would any really bright focused light have caused as much fracas.

I really like the law that LarryC quotes. It's well written because it gives the officer a real and legal out to ignore it if some kids are playing with one and illuminate him by accident, while still giving him a real reason to arrest someone if he's patrolling and gets tagged by gang members in the dark. It is always better to give the people inside the situation a little wiggle room with making their own decisions about the situation.

In this case it was obviously correct for the fellow to get pulled over and have his laser taken away. But the officer stopped him before he caused a problem and it could very well have been true that he was not actually trying to kill people or cause accidents. So mischief stopped before badness occurred needs to be punished differently than clear intent or success to cause harm or get in the way of an officer doing his duty. In most things in life we're able to make these distinctions, but lasers currently seem to be on the hot list of stupidity on both sides of the equation. Glad to hear thats not the case everywhere


----------



## Canuke (Oct 24, 2006)

The_LED_Museum said:


> I think it's a combination of the two: paranoia about lasers and the legal aspects (temporary blinding of a driver in the oncoming lane).
> If the guy shined a Thor spotlight instead of the laser in the same manner, there's a very high probability the Thor would have been confiscated.



It's bee a long time, but I'm pretty sure that the law in the province of Ontario (Canada) has long contained specific prohibitions against shining lights around in traffic. Even if there weren't a specific clause about lasers, I'd expect that there already exists a sound legal basis for officers to pull over someone -- vehicular lighting is strictly regulated vis-a-vis color, beam shape etc.... those wouldn't need to stretch too far to cover someone with a lit Thor.

I think even the dome light is regulated (as it interferes with driver vision at night).


----------



## chesterqw (Oct 24, 2006)

so.... a guy got a new toy, decided to play with it outside and accidently shine it at a state trooper...which promptly got confiscated and now is facing legal judgement...

1) was he shining it at other cars too?
2) what was the laser's power rating?
3) did the laser pose as a danger to the 'trooper'?
4) are you all being extra paranoid about lasers?
5) is it illegal to shine a laser into the emptiness?
6) who the hell knew some car will pass by in the middle of the night at 12?

now now, that is why i HATE, i HATE, i HATE, when someone get caught because of some silly *******'s actions.( the whole laser to the plane thing).


extra paranoid about lasers, the law is...
extra paranoid about lasers, the trooper is...
extra paranoid about lasers, are we...

if he gets into jail, the whole is going to end. you ever wonder why people over throw kings? because they are being really really unfair.


----------



## greenlight (Oct 24, 2006)

sniper said:


> Lasers are BAD!



M-kay?


----------



## SkinlessMonkey (Oct 25, 2006)

chesterqw said:


> so.... a guy got a new toy, decided to play with it outside and accidently shine it at a state trooper...which promptly got confiscated and now is facing legal judgement...
> 
> 1) was he shining it at other cars too?
> 2) what was the laser's power rating?
> ...



From what I read it seems as though he was driving one way while directing the laser at traffic going the other way. That would indeed be a dangerous thing to do.


----------



## senecaripple (Oct 25, 2006)

am i missing something? isnt this pointer evidence to be used against the perp? why is this trooper holding it?


----------



## Alin10123 (Oct 25, 2006)

senecaripple said:


> am i missing something? isnt this pointer evidence to be used against the perp? why is this trooper holding it?



It was a slap on the wrist.


----------



## Danbo (Oct 25, 2006)

This dumbbutt is probably lucky that the Trooper didn't make the lazer into a suppository!


----------



## Coop (Oct 25, 2006)

James S said:


> question though. While I can't disagree with the pulling over of someone who was basically risking dangerously distracting drivers in the other lane, would he have done the same if the guy just had a regular spotlight and was shining it in the other lane? If I took my thor in the car and shined it out the window at oncoming traffic that would be just as dangerous as far as blinding them for a moment wouldn't it?
> 
> I'm just curious if it's just the endangerment or if we're being extra paranoid about lasers again.




Here in the netherlands there is no specific mention in the law about the use of lasers on the public road. But there is a very strict definition of what sources of light are allowed, what color they should be, where they are located on the vehicle and for things like foglights there are regulations on when they can be used. 
Ofcourse, just like many other dutch laws this one leaves a lot of room for free thinking, so you have a lot of freedom in the choice for your bicycles headlight . But on the other hand, in almost any out of the ordinary situation the law can be interpreted in such a way that people doing dumb/stupid/reckless things can be prosecuted.


----------



## InfidelCastro (Oct 25, 2006)

Dumbasses like that will eventually shine it at the wrong guy and get capped. That's usually the only way they learn.


----------



## BIGIRON (Oct 25, 2006)

Don't overlook the fact that all LEO's, recent combat vets and some others think "Laser Sight/Aimer". Immediate return fire would be totally justified.

If you point a gun at someone, laser aimer or not, they are totally justified in protecting themselve, no matter whether you fire or not.


----------



## InfidelCastro (Oct 25, 2006)

BIGIRON said:


> Don't overlook the fact that all LEO's, recent combat vets and some others think "Laser Sight/Aimer". Immediate return fire would be totally justified.
> 
> If you point a gun at someone, laser aimer or not, they are totally justified in protecting themselve, no matter whether you fire or not.




This was a good 8 years ago or so, but I was driving down the street and noticed a red lazer dot shining on me and on the dash. This was daytime, maybe getting towards dusk though and the laser was pretty bright. So I was like what the hell? and was wondering where it came from, I was looking all around, I drove down the street and came back and noticed a little kid sitting on the fourth floor ledge of an apartment building shining this bright red laser pointer down at passing cars.


----------



## JonSidneyB (Oct 25, 2006)

I can see that. Last year I was walking my Girlfriends dog and I saw a red laser shining around the park I was walking the dog in and it did contact the dog at one point.

I did think it was just a pointer but I also thought there is the thinnest of chances that it was something else and I was armed. I turned to the source of the light and it was some kids in a second story window.


On flashlight, I did get pulled over and ticketed for shining a MrX while in a State Park while driving my car. I was holding the light above the window of my convertable. I would not have normally done this except it was 2am and in a forest in park land and I saw no cars anywhere.


----------



## tedjanxt (Oct 25, 2006)

chesterqw said:


> so.... a guy got a new toy, decided to play with it outside and accidently shine it at a state trooper...which promptly got confiscated and now is facing legal judgement...
> 
> 1) was he shining it at other cars too?
> 2) what was the laser's power rating?
> ...





I don't think it's the laser the troopers are paranoid about, it's the item the laser *could* be attached to.

They're not out there playing laser tag (pun intended) you know. To many officers, a little red/blue/green dot on your chest means you're tagged, and your wife/family will be receiving condolences...


----------



## chesterqw (Oct 25, 2006)

hey tedjanxt, i think you may be right...
i mean, at night, even a toy gun will look like a real gun...
and if it was a real gun...

so i think, the trooper had a reason but why confiscate and get him into play with law?


----------



## tedjanxt (Oct 25, 2006)

> why confiscate and get him into play with law?



Confiscate to keep him from doing it again, and as I read the story, no citation was issued (although it could have been)

The guy got off mostly scot-free, minus one green laser...


----------



## Madz (Oct 26, 2006)

James S said:


> question though. While I can't disagree with the pulling over of someone who was basically risking dangerously distracting drivers in the other lane, would he have done the same if the guy just had a regular spotlight and was shining it in the other lane? If I took my thor in the car and shined it out the window at oncoming traffic that would be just as dangerous as far as blinding them for a moment wouldn't it?
> 
> I'm just curious if it's just the endangerment or if we're being extra paranoid about lasers again.


You absolutely will get busted for using your Thor. My buddy bought a used Crown Vic (unmarked) cop car from the police station and as a disclaimer they told him he absolutely could never turn on the spotlights while driving... ever. As for "being afraid of a sniper" b/c of a laser pointer... that is probably the last thing on their mind. It is just another page in the book to throw at him... shouting terrorist. If a green pointer is capable of spot blinding a airplane pilot from thousands of feet away, that is more of a risk since the dude could blind a driver and cause large amounts of damage potentially. I mean if I was a rogue sniper without a cause sitting in a bush to murder somebody... having a BRIGHT green laser on the tip of my gun kinda seems like a bad idea especially since they leave a big streak of light going straight to your location. They dont use lasers for sniping (unless its IR) they are typically used in live action. situations where you dont have time to sit and aim accuratly, so the dot makes it easier to align a bullet with somebodies face.. any sniper with a fraction of skill could kill you using a standard hunting scope from across a football field.


----------



## nutz_about_lights (Oct 27, 2006)

Well well. Try shining a green laser pointer at a guard at the entrace of an airforce/navy/army base and see what happens....


----------



## cbfull (Oct 27, 2006)

What bugs me is, why is the state trooper allowed to confiscate something (he must have a good reason, like it's dangerous) and then carry it around and show it to people as if it were his own? It would seem to me that it is evidence and not the trooper's new toy that actually belongs to someone else.

I have heard similar stories about drug confiscation (E pills). I guess where there is power, there is corruption.


----------



## Lightmeup (Oct 28, 2006)

I was wondering, does anyone know for sure (first hand knowledge) what effect shining a handheld laser pointer at an airplane windshield would do? I know it's dumb, etc., but I always figured it was one of those laws they passed "just in case" it could cause a problem. Even if you hit your target, which seems like a longshot, it seems like it would just be a little colored light for a split second?


----------



## ConfederateScott (Oct 28, 2006)

Not to start an argument but.......The trooper brought the laser into the courthouse where I bailiff to show the county attorney the evidence and ask him questions in regards to the potential charges. He wasn't playing with it and carrying it around like it were his own. I never said that. Corruption? Man you need some counseling.


----------



## cbfull (Oct 30, 2006)

ConstableScott said:


> Not to start an argument but.......The trooper brought the laser into the courthouse where I bailiff to show the county attorney the evidence and ask him questions in regards to the potential charges. He wasn't playing with it and carrying it around like it were his own. I never said that. Corruption? Man you need some counseling.




Why bother starting off your post with, "Not to start and argument BUT..." and then proceed to address my post with argumentative sarcasm?

Only one sentence in your post is actually worth anything, and that is the explanation of the circumstances. Perhaps those circumstances should have been part of your story in the first place? I don't think it says anything about me that I attempted to fill in the facts of the story that were absent. 

Besides, since you stated that the trooper is your "buddy", and that he showed the laser "to you", I don't think it's a stretch to assume that this was a friendly encounter. Your more recent post states that he was not showing it to you at all, and in fact he was showing it to the attorney with you as the feet to deliver it, demonstrate it or whatever to the attorney.

I don't think it's necessary to waste time with negative sarcasm (not to mention, pretending to be qualified in determining my psychological status). It was a simple misunderstanding, nothing more. Let's try to stay productive in our posts so others won't become bored and annoyed.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 30, 2006)

And let's try to attack the post and not the poster ... AND ... keep it civil. Thanx.
bernhard


----------



## Handlobraesing (Oct 30, 2006)

so, why's the confiscated property from the night before in officer's PERSONAL possession? ??????


----------



## Blazer (Oct 30, 2006)

Canuke said:


> It's bee a long time, but I'm pretty sure that the law in the province of Ontario (Canada) has long contained specific prohibitions against shining lights around in traffic. Even if there weren't a specific clause about lasers, I'd expect that there already exists a sound legal basis for officers to pull over someone -- vehicular lighting is strictly regulated vis-a-vis color, beam shape etc.... those wouldn't need to stretch too far to cover someone with a lit Thor.
> 
> I think even the dome light is regulated (as it interferes with driver vision at night).



There's a couple of sections in the Ontario Highway Traffic Act that could apply:

Strength of front lamps

62. (9) No motor vehicle shall carry on the front thereof more than four lighted lamps that project a beam having an intensity of over 300 candela. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 62 (9)


Spotlamps

62. (22) No motor vehicle, other than a public utility emergency vehicle, shall be equipped with more than one spotlamp and every lighted spotlamp shall be so directed, upon approaching or upon the approach of another vehicle, that no part of the high intensity portion of the beam from the lamp will be directed to the left of the prolongation of the extreme left side, nor more than thirty metres ahead, of the vehicle to which it is attached. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 62 (22).


----------



## ConfederateScott (Oct 30, 2006)

Out of respect for CPF and the mods I'll refrain from posting any more responses to this post. The subject has gotten way off topic. Thanks for the funny and informative responses. goodbye (poof)


----------



## reptiles (Oct 31, 2006)

Well perhaps we can get the laser he used from PropertyRoom.com 

It is a funny little site that auctions stuff from police stations nationally.

Assuming the officer turned it in  

Regards, 

Mark


----------



## Lightmeup (Nov 3, 2006)

Lightmeup said:


> I was wondering, does anyone know for sure (first hand knowledge) what effect shining a handheld laser pointer at an airplane windshield would do? I know it's dumb, etc., but I always figured it was one of those laws they passed "just in case" it could cause a problem. Even if you hit your target, which seems like a longshot, it seems like it would just be a little colored light for a split second?


I guess no one here has ever experienced this first-hand?


----------



## allthatwhichis (Nov 3, 2006)

Lightmeup said:


> I guess no one here has ever experienced this first-hand?


 
Never first hand, but Pangolin has a page here that shows what a greeny will look like when it hits an airplane window at different heights... I would have posted it sooner but I figured someone else would have already gotten it here for ya...


----------



## Lightmeup (Nov 4, 2006)

Thanks, ATWI........


----------

