# Laser Dazzler



## Jason2TheHilt (Sep 21, 2007)

I am not sure if I am in the right area for this.. 
But I am looking for a Laser Dazzler, Optic disruptor, neural scrambler.. Etc that the military and security firms are using as a non-lethal deterrent.. Have some friends transferring overseas and figured you guys were the people to ask.. Can be used.. even abused.. as long as it works.. (also hoping for a reasonable price) Thanks
Jason


----------



## Tempora (Sep 21, 2007)

The strobe function of Megaray will completely disorient a person.


----------



## Bushman5 (Sep 21, 2007)

http://www.laserdazzler.net/

click ont he picture to see a flashlight VS a Laser Dazzler:

http://www.laserdazzler.net/laser_flashlight.htm

Video of one in use:

http://www.laserdazzler.net/standard_laser_dazzler.htm


----------



## Ra (Sep 22, 2007)

Tempora said:


> The strobe function of Megaray will completely disorient a person.




The laser dazzler is much more effective than Megaray or Maxabeam on strobe: The strobe on these short-arc's is not completely on-off, short-arc is not allowed to lose the arc in the process, so Megaray and MB strobe is a quick switching between low and high settings.

The laser in the dazzler has a completely on-off cycle, and with the higher surface brightness, it's even more dazzling !!


Regards,

Ra.


----------



## Kiessling (Sep 22, 2007)

Moved to "Lasers Foum"
bernhard


----------



## DocArnie (Sep 23, 2007)

Interesting, but why does the device have to be so big? If it's really not doing damage to my eyes, I'd love to try it out - I want to see for myself how effective it is.


----------



## Ra (Sep 23, 2007)

DocArnie said:


> Interesting, but why does the device have to be so big? If it's really not doing damage to my eyes, I'd love to try it out - I want to see for myself how effective it is.



It's big because of the frontlens: The laser itself produces a beam diameter of approx 2mm, definitely causing eyedamage at close range! And much more difikult to aim at eyes.
The lens converts the beam to a much wider, lower surface-brightness beam: Better aiming possible and hamless to eyes.


And bernhard: What's a "Lasers:hahaha:Foum"


Regards,

Ra.


----------



## Kiessling (Sep 23, 2007)

Yeah yeah Ra ... :nana:


----------



## DocArnie (Sep 23, 2007)

I don't have experience with lasers. Do you think one could turn a Docter Aspherilux into a dazzler for SD? The requirements for a citizen are different than those of the police. I don't need to dazzle someone 100m away. The range for SD should be around 0-5m. The Aspherilux mini 100 for example has a switch like a trigger and the form is good for easy aiming.


----------



## lazerlover (Sep 24, 2007)

Have you checked out the Photonic Disruptor? Its on xadsgear.com. Wicked Lasers is the manufacturer, and sells it for around half the price here:

http://www.wickedlasers.com/lasers/Photonic_Disruptor_Series-65-3.html

XADS seems to be an official military contractor, but you need a lot of credentials before they sell it to you, Wicked seems to be able to sell to anyone because they are based outside the US.


----------



## Aseras (Sep 24, 2007)

The photonic disruptor is NOT a dazzler. it's a overpriced focusadjustable laser. 

a TRUE laser Dazzler has pulsed operation from 2-10hertz. the pulsed operation is the same as human brainwaves and that causes the distrotion and nausea. While the laser itself is good for producing flash blindness, a TRUE DAZZLER's power is in the incapicitation effect of the pulsed operation.


----------



## lazerlover (Sep 25, 2007)

Aseras,

I did not know that dazzlers are defined as pulsed mode only?

I agree about the overpriced bit, hell if you are good at DIY it shouldn't be too hard to rig one of those suckers up, but as you know, theres big money in the military industry.

These resources seem to indicate the XADS P-D / Wicked P-D is considered a dazzler:

http://www.xadsgear.com/105specsheet.pdf

http://www.gizmag.com/go/3453/

http://www.securitysolutionsmagazine.com/Articles/SSM38.pdf


----------



## Aseras (Sep 28, 2007)

Hi sorry i didn't see your reply.

A true dazzler, at least as far as contract and DOD reqs etc, to be approved for use must be eye safe from the aperture to target. That means it needs a HUGE aperture, and the beam needs to be anywhere from 3-6 inches wide depending on the output in mw right from the aperture. This is the biggest fault against the disruptor. It has to be able to comply with ANSI z136 standards. The pulsing is there for two reasons, first to limit overall exposure and allow for the least risk of eye damage possible while still providing maximum effect. Our eyes are slow so anything that flashes faster than 5 times a second will be seen as a continuous output. The brightness apeears the same, however the light entering the eye can be reduced by orders of magnitude. Secondly it is targeted between beta and delta wave brain frequencies to disorient and cause rapid nausea. It's the same wavelength that has been known to cause seizures and other physiological effects, but that's an acceptable risk to prevent lethal force and provide for a deterrent and enforcement action.


----------



## Kiessling (Sep 28, 2007)

Sorry for splitting hairs, but:

1) The human optical system has a flicker threshhold of roughly 25Hz, not 5 Hz

2) Brain Wave activity:
Delta: 0,5-3,5 Hz
Theta: 4-7,5 Hz
Alpha: 8-13 Hz
Beta: 13,5+ Hz
There isn't one speific frequency that is known to cause seizures, this differs between individuals and it usually doesn't work at all, or else we would all be epileptic given our flashy environment.
Not to mock you, but your argument sounds a bit like a flashback of the "Alpha-Cult" in the middle of the last century 

bernhard


----------



## Aseras (Sep 28, 2007)

TV's are 60-100htz, so you only get epileptic activity with certain type of flashing pattern or animation. Any repetive flashing between 2 and 50htz can cause seizure activity in those suceptible to it. 

The big catch with dazzlers is they they are whole field of vision interruptors, not just a small portion on a tv or something. So when you flash in the 2-10 hertz range for brainwaves it really messes most people up. Not only are the lasers bright but everything around you is pulsating, so even if you aren't looking into the beam, but the diffuse reflection of of the ground walls or whatever, it really messes with your head. Most of these are so bright that even if you close your eyes it still messes with your perceptions. It's FAR FAR more effective and disorienting than just a constant illumination source.

I'm not saying these are intended to cause a seizure, I'm just using that as an example that there is a physiological mechanism to the flashing/pulsed operation.


----------



## Kiessling (Sep 28, 2007)

I would not connect the disruption caused by a dazzler to brainwave cerebral activity. Brainwaves (speaking of base activity) aren't even really understood and we are unable to mess with those anyway. So ... you don't flash for brainwaves, but you flash to disrupt the subject's senses and orientation.

There is indeed some physiological reaction to be seen in a certain number of subjects when flashed with certain frequencies. It is called "photic driving" and is an adaption of the brain wave base rhythm to the flashes. There is no other effect though.
You can trigger seizures, but that is pathological, and the resulting brain wave patterns are pathological, too, mostly spike/wave activity for most types of photosensitive epilepsy.

bernhard


----------



## jhosaki (Oct 4, 2007)

Regardless of the technical aspects, telling people that "this is a laser to shine in people's eyes" is incredibly irresponsible. This device is being sold explicitly for the purposes of shining in people's eyes and the sale is not restricted to military or law enforecement, they will sell to anyone. The line about selling only to governement unless you order under 10 units is rediculous and meaningless. Anybody can now buy a laser which is marketed as a device to shine in people's eyes, and it's only a matter of time before a person who buys one of these things damages somebody's eyes and goes to jail. This is bad for the whole laser industry, and it's irresponsible to even suggest purchasing this item for its stated purpose. DON'T SHINE LASERS IN PEOPLE'S EYES!


----------



## DM51 (Oct 4, 2007)

jhosaki said:


> they will sell to anyone.


And you won't? 
Do you restrict the sales of your >5mw lasers?


----------



## KrisP (Oct 4, 2007)

jhosaki said:


> Regardless of the technical aspects, telling people that "this is a laser to shine in people's eyes" is incredibly irresponsible. This device is being sold explicitly for the purposes of shining in people's eyes and the sale is not restricted to military or law enforecement, they will sell to anyone. The line about selling only to governement unless you order under 10 units is rediculous and meaningless. Anybody can now buy a laser which is marketed as a device to shine in people's eyes, and it's only a matter of time before a person who buys one of these things damages somebody's eyes and goes to jail. This is bad for the whole laser industry, and it's irresponsible to even suggest purchasing this item for its stated purpose. DON'T SHINE LASERS IN PEOPLE'S EYES!


Doesn't it explain that with such a wide beam the intensity is so low it can't cause permanent damage?


----------



## lazerlover (Oct 5, 2007)

Guys,

Justin is part of Laserglow, and its understandable how laser companies these days will say anything about each other to get ahead. I wouldn't put much weight into anything said unless its from an unbiased expert opinion.

I do see something at Laserglow that seems to be contradicting what they are doing themselves, Novalasers is their new name for selling high powered illegal laser pointers, but on Laserglow, they still say that high powered laser pointers are all weak powered, and there is a picture of them in the garbage can. I think now that Wicked Lasers has moved on to their own manufactured product, and Nova Lasers has started selling what they used to, you could probably take this page down now, its only saying that your Nova branch is selling crap lasers.

http://www.laserglow.com/index.php?considering


----------



## DM51 (Oct 5, 2007)

It was hypocritical of jhosaki to berate another company for selling lasers which have the potential to damage people's eyes, when that is exactly what his own company is doing.

Furthermore, it has already been pointed out in post #7 (by Ra) that this particular Laser Dazzler is not harmful because of its wide beam. The light is not concentrated like a normal laser. 

jhosaki's indignation is misplaced and disingenuous.


----------



## jhosaki (Oct 5, 2007)

You guys are free to have your opinions of my intentions here, but my point is not that lasers can harm eyes. All lasers can potentially harm an eyeball, and all of our lasers come with instructions that state never to point it in a person's eye. THIS laser is being sold to the general public with the explicit purpose of shining it in people's eyes. The beam may be diffuse enough to be safe at a given distance, but at close range and with the focus set to produce a tight beam this laser can still cause enourmous eye damage.

A qualified military or law enforcement officer would be trained to understand this, which is why companies that deal in real laser dazzlers only sell to trained personnel, but this laser is available for sale to any 16 year old kid with a summer job. That's my problem with this device. If it was actually restricted to government sales I would have no argument, but Wicked is marketing them to everyone, saying that it is okay to go around shining lasers in people's eyes, which I feel is irresponsible.

Also, if you read our press release carefully you will notice that Novalasers is not "part" of Laserglow. Our companies are seperately owned and managed, and we at Laserglow still do not carry overpowered laser pointers. Our professional customers demand high performance and 100% duty cycle from their lasers, which is why Laserglow still does not carry overdriven laser pointers. Nova tends to deal more with the hobbyist market, where duty cycle and lifetime are not as significant considerations as cost and portability. Laserglow will continue to carry 100% duty-cycle handheld lasers, and Nova will continue to sell Class IIIb pointers for hobbyists and laser enthusiasts.


----------



## DM51 (Oct 5, 2007)

On your website under "products" > "handheld lasers & laser pointers" > "view all" are listed lasers from 0.6mw up to 500mw (green ones 3mw - 400mw). All on the same page.


----------



## jhosaki (Oct 5, 2007)

That is correct, and none of them should be aimed into a person's eyes for any reason, not even the low-powered models. My problem is not with the availability of high-powered lasers, it's the fact that this is a commercially available laser MEANT to shine in somebody's eyes.

A hammer can be used as a weapon, but as long as it is sold as a tool for hammering nails there is no problem. But it would be irresponsible for Home Depot to continue to carrying a hammer which was marketed as a self-defence item for hitting people with, do you see my point?


----------



## DM51 (Oct 5, 2007)

jhosaki said:


> we at Laserglow still do not carry overpowered laser pointers.


That quote is from your previous post. It does not really square with the content of the page of your website pictured above, does it?

To make my own position on this clear, I have no objection whatever to you selling these things. But I find your rather self-righteous objection to another company selling a less harmful laser product to be hypocritical. 

There appears to be a wide gulf of difference between what you say and what you actually do.


----------



## jhosaki (Oct 5, 2007)

I'm sorry, perhaps I was not clear when I typed that... What we call an "overpowered laser pointer" is a laser which is over 5mW but does not have any safety features or heatsinking. Laserglow's selection of >5mW lasers are considered "high-powered handheld lasers" because they all contain the 5-point safety system needed for FDA approval and safe operation, and they all have sufficient heatsinking to perform continuously without overheating concerns.

And the laser which they sell may be potentially less harmful at range, but the difference is that we instruct our customers to NEVER point a laser into someone's eye, whereas Wicked is telling people to do just that.


----------



## DM51 (Oct 5, 2007)

Well, I don't want to get drawn into taking sides in any dispute you may have with a rival company. I very much doubt such a dispute would be welcome in any of the forums here on CPF, either, so I would suggest we leave it at that and allow people to make up their own minds about what you have said. 

If you wish to engage in a dispute with a rival, I suggest you conduct it elsewhere - not here.


----------



## marianne (Oct 5, 2007)

as a laser hobbyist who isn't part of any company, and hasn't even ever bought a laserglow product, i gotta say i agree with jhosaki, marketing a laser (especially a bloody 100mW one) to shine in people's eyes is moronic, stupid, and highly irresponsible, and especially given that a lot of wicked lasers's market is youngish kids (13+), they should be utterly *ashamed* of themselves. i can't even *begin* to imagine the havoc that would have been caused if some of the kids i went to school with had had one of these - they were bad enough with the low power red keychain things :/


----------



## KrisP (Oct 6, 2007)

I wish I had $600 spare when I was in school.


----------



## Kiessling (Oct 6, 2007)

> ... and its understandable how laser companies these days will say anything about each other to get ahead. I wouldn't put much weight into anything said unless its from an unbiased expert opinion.



How true. Unfortunately I have yet to see an "unbiased" opinion here in this forum that I can identify as such. The laser business is a whirlpool of agenda, and a lot of users are involved, too, not only the manufacturers. Just look at this forum, you get it all served.
No tcounting the shills etc., of course :sick2:

That said ... following DM51`s wise post I'd suggest concentrating on the topic at hand and leaving the hostilities outside the forum.

Thank you 

bernhard


----------



## itspecialist (Oct 11, 2007)

i dislike this thread i think it should be closed. for a forum that locks a thread about putting lasers in animals eyes this one should especially be closed because it involves giving LEO's/security/etc a weapon that can harm eyeballs when they already have enough tools(tazers, batons, pepper spray, firearms, etc) that can disarm you already & give them enough power already. please close this thread mods, thank you


----------



## Aseras (Oct 11, 2007)

It's worth mentioning that lasers intended for blinding soldiers or whomever or whatever are banned under protocol IV of the geneva conventions. it's the only forward looking protocol, the others such as landmines, unexploded ordinance and Incendiary devices are all reactionary from previous wars.

for the sake of the argument, there are always members of our diverse society who will use devices in ways they weren't intended. A couple people snuck some boxcutters on some planes and crashes them into building and look at what we have to deal with at airports now. ( NSFW, there's some nudity.. http://www.ryanair.com/site/EN/notices.php?notice=060822-ASP-EN glad the brits have sense of humor)

Once the high power lasers start becoming affordable and available everywhere i think there will be a large crackdown on them, and much more regulation. Laser tech is moving so fast now, and becoming such a large part of our technology it's inevitable. Even with the regulation there's always going to be some twit who will hack the next gen media player and take the 10 watt laser diode out( I can't wait  ) and try to shoot a plane or a car or people with it, even when they are heavily regulated and the handhelds of today are gone or basically unavailable in our quickly developing nanny states of the world.


----------



## jhosaki (Oct 12, 2007)

Well, in the interest of keeping the peace in this community and with the mods here I will leave this thread alone from this post on. But, just for the record, my dislike of this device is not because it is competitive with anything we sell (it is not), but because I feel it is an irresponsible move which, if it leads to an accident, could result in a major crackdown on lasers of all kinds. It's bad for the whole industry if some kid blinds his friend with a so-called "dazzler", and I'm afraid that that's what it will take for some people to realize that "laser dazzlers" should not be owned by untrained civilians.


----------



## RDZombie (Oct 14, 2007)

I've been wanting to build one of these for a while and happen to have a 30mw DPSS TTL module laying around. Are we agreed that the pulse rate is variable at 2-10 hertz? Now before you guys jump on me about eye safety please keep in mind this will NEVER be used on people unless they break into my home. It will be mounted to my AR15 along with the standard sight laser. I'm sure the potential intruder would rather have possible mild eye damage than a hole in their skull.


----------



## jhosaki (Oct 17, 2007)

`


----------

