30 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
30.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 29, 2015, 15:44
30.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 29, 2015, 15:44
Jun 29, 2015, 15:44
 
Chicken and egg. They are doing it because they know its dangerous but they don't know it can cause a crash? That's really...weak. I would buy that argument for kids, not a 26 year old guy who repeated his efforts at a second target.

14 years is nothing for what he was doing. When the potential for death and destruction are that high so are the consequences.
Avatar 51617
29.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 26, 2015, 18:35
Quboid
 
29.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 26, 2015, 18:35
Jun 26, 2015, 18:35
 Quboid
 
Verno wrote on Jun 26, 2015, 09:03:
The little kid in this case was 26 years old and had a long criminal history. He did it intentionally to two different helicopter pilots. Not sure what other intent there can be when you shine a high powered laser at a cockpit, it's not like (most) people don't know its dangerous.

I think the intention is to annoy the pilot and make the aircraft serve. Like an idiot dropping bricks from an overpass, I don't think that they even think of the possible consequences, and should an aircraft crash they would be as shocked as anyone. I.e. they are utter, utter morons. I don't think that shining a laser pointer at an aircraft is a deliberate attempt to cause a crash, and as the judge points out, that the laser-shining law exists suggests that US law thinks the same.

I think 14 years is harsh and although the aircraft-destruction law does appear to be technically applicable (the "reckless disregard" clause), this goes against the spirit of that law. However, given that there were 2 targets hit several times, this guy's criminal record and his age, I see no reason why he shouldn't face the maximum sentence of the lesser crime. Five years in prison is a hell of a long time, or 10 years if he gets 2 consecutive maximum sentences.

He certainly deserves to go away for quite some time. The probation and community service given to the man in New Zealand seems crazy.
Avatar 10439
28.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 26, 2015, 09:03
28.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 26, 2015, 09:03
Jun 26, 2015, 09:03
 
The little kid in this case was 26 years old and had a long criminal history. He did it intentionally to two different helicopter pilots. Not sure what other intent there can be when you shine a high powered laser at a cockpit, it's not like (most) people don't know its dangerous.
Avatar 51617
27.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 26, 2015, 04:05
27.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 26, 2015, 04:05
Jun 26, 2015, 04:05
 
Im not saying that it shouldn't be dealt with, but let the punishment fit the crime. A person that points a high powered laser with the intent of bringing down a plane should definitely be punished accordingly, if the cops can prove it was attempted murder then sure lock em up and throw away the key, but sometimes its just stupid kids playing a really stupid prank. I don't think jail time would help much in that case.
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
26.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 20:49
26.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 20:49
Jun 25, 2015, 20:49
 
Blue wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 18:03:
I'm a little surprised at the reactions that think that this is not a problem since the plane didn't crash.

Again like no big whoop...

But isn't that normally the case? Uou might get lucky that nothing too bad happens or you may be extremely unlucky if it goes the worst possible way. A lot of times your are judged on how it all played out.

Yeah if the putz is a career criminal, yep that will tack on years, sure.
Avatar 17232
25.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 20:43
25.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 20:43
Jun 25, 2015, 20:43
 
InBlack wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 17:53:
There is the question of how the pilots managed to land the plane if they were both blinded. I mean if they were really blinded, there is no way they could have brought that plane down. So while I do agree that shining a bright light into someone in a flying plane is a horribly stupid and potentially very dangerous thing to do, and could cause a pilot to lose control of the plane, I don't think those pilots were seriously injured. We might as well be sentencing people for driving in traffic with their headlights turned on high. (That might actually be a pretty good idea, god that pisses me off).

It really depends on the strength of the laser in question. A 10 mw pointer laser isn't going to do anything other than disrupt a pilot's night vision, but a 5 watt laser could burn his retina. Here's a list of injuries that have occured during various incidents. Mostly minor and temporary, but some more serious:

He felt a "minor burning sensation" from the "very, very strong" laser beam. After landing at Livermore Airport, the pilot had his eyes checked by a doctor. The pilot’s eyes appeared unharmed, but the doctor recommended that the pilot see a specialist.

...

The pilot of a medical helicopter flying in the Denver area was illuminated with a laser beam at about 8:30 pm local time on March 30 2015. The pilot made a “precautionary landing … was checked out and is off work for the next few days due to having sore eyes.”

...

One crew member, who had been illuminated by lasers numerous times in the past, suffered temporary flashblindness, afterimages, a headache lasting several hours requiring pain medication, and dizziness.

...

A pilot on an Air Canada commercial airliner, and two New York police officers on a helicopter, sustained eye injuries from a laser beam pointed at aircraft flying into and out of LaGuardia Airport on March 9 2015. According to police, the helicopter officers were treated and released in stable condition. The Air Canada pilot was taken to a hospital in Toronto for treatment.
RIP RedEye9. We miss you.
Avatar 22024
24.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 18:03
24.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 18:03
Jun 25, 2015, 18:03
 
InBlack wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 17:53:
There is the question of how the pilots managed to land the plane if they were both blinded. I mean if they were really blinded, there is no way they could have brought that plane down. So while I do agree that shining a bright light into someone in a flying plane is a horribly stupid and potentially very dangerous thing to do, and could cause a pilot to lose control of the plane, I don't think those pilots were seriously injured. We might as well be sentencing people for driving in traffic with their headlights turned on high. (That might actually be a pretty good idea, god that pisses me off).

AFAIK most places do have laws that require switching off your high-beams for oncoming traffic.

I'm a little surprised at the reactions that think that this is not a problem since the plane didn't crash.
Stephen "Blue" Heaslip
Blue's News Publisher, Editor-in-Chief, El Presidente for Life
Avatar 2
23.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 17:53
23.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 17:53
Jun 25, 2015, 17:53
 
There is the question of how the pilots managed to land the plane if they were both blinded. I mean if they were really blinded, there is no way they could have brought that plane down. So while I do agree that shining a bright light into someone in a flying plane is a horribly stupid and potentially very dangerous thing to do, and could cause a pilot to lose control of the plane, I don't think those pilots were seriously injured. We might as well be sentencing people for driving in traffic with their headlights turned on high. (That might actually be a pretty good idea, god that pisses me off).
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
22.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 16:27
22.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 16:27
Jun 25, 2015, 16:27
 
Part of me thinks the guy deserves 14 years.

Yet at the same time, USA (in certain states) has a horrible prison system entirely based off profit. There's been cases of judges handing out maximum sentences because they were getting pay outs from the private institute jails.

Jails are filled because of crazy hand out punishments which costs everyone money.

Avatar 57660
21.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 15:39
21.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 15:39
Jun 25, 2015, 15:39
 
JD you and your facts... :p

I agree that they basically charged him with the wrong thing initially. At least that part has been cleared up (this is where the 14 year charge came from for those that only read headlines).

This guy already had a string of priors, known gang ties, and was on probation. He was basically going to get the maximum allowed sentence no matter which charge stuck.
Avatar 56185
20.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 15:25
20.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 15:25
Jun 25, 2015, 15:25
 
jdreyer wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 14:25:
As I understand it, there are two laws. One is for idiots that point lasers and aircraft to see what happens. Even people that do it multiple times. That's the lesser crime, and the max sentence is 5 years. Then there is a law for people who point lasers at aircraft with the intention of crashing them. That's the greater crime. The judge applied the wrong law to the case, and gave him an inappropriate sentence. Is the guy an asshole? Sure. Did the punishment fit the crime? I argued back when this story broke that it did not, and it still does not. It's the right call.

I'm not a judge nor play one on TV, seems somewhat inline to me. But also whatevah's dude done stupid shit, now your at the mercy of others.
Avatar 17232
19.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 15:24
19.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 15:24
Jun 25, 2015, 15:24
 
harlock wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 13:06:
Blue wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 11:14:
harlock wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 10:34:
when has a laser ever "blinded" a pilot enough to cause them to lose control of the vehicle?

Three hours ago.

btw, lynchmob mentality is the hallmark of sheeple thinking - so you're in good company

Awesome comment.


haha.. "treated for injuries" of having a bright shiny light in their faces? lol the cops can use some of their own medicine

did you even read that story? of course not, that would explain everything

Do you realize that there are lasers that can permanently damage your eyes? Ever worked with fiber-optics? Also, who said anything about cops?
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” William Casey, CIA Director 1981-1987
Avatar 57016
18.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 14:49
18.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 14:49
Jun 25, 2015, 14:49
 
Capital punishment is only supported in 31 states and in many of those it has a very high bar for successful prosecution, I don't think that would work out but cookie for the idea.

Perhaps we could come up with a prison where things that should be obvious are just repeatedly explained, hmm....we could call it morning legal briefs!
Avatar 51617
17.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 14:31
17.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 14:31
Jun 25, 2015, 14:31
 
all the expected responses from the peanut gallery... yeh man, get pissed off, fuck the evildoers, all that shit

fuck prison time, lets just execute them - hang em in the public square, so you can really get your jollies
16.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 14:27
16.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 14:27
Jun 25, 2015, 14:27
 
Verno wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 14:17:
harlock wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 14:00:
you can assume whatever you want, theres still no evidence of it causing people to lose control of vehicles

Hahaha get the fuck out of here. Shine a laser at your own eyes while flying a helicopter, gather empirical data and let us know how much more evidence is required. Temporary blindness, spots in vision and other retina related symptoms from direct contact with a high power laser pointer have a large potential for distracting pilots which in turn can lead to a crash. At a high enough power it can also harm their long term vision. It's not a situation where we need to wait for someone to bring down a flight with a laser pointer to act. We already know what the consequences are and the act itself serves no legitimate purpose.

Recovery can take weeks, and the pilot cannot work during that time. Some pilots are affected with migraines for a year or longer. If the damage is great enough he or she may never be able to return to piloting. Although I've not heard of a case like that, it's possible in theory.
RIP RedEye9. We miss you.
Avatar 22024
15.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 14:25
15.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 14:25
Jun 25, 2015, 14:25
 
As I understand it, there are two laws. One is for idiots that point lasers and aircraft to see what happens. Even people that do it multiple times. That's the lesser crime, and the max sentence is 5 years. Then there is a law for people who point lasers at aircraft with the intention of crashing them. That's the greater crime. The judge applied the wrong law to the case, and gave him an inappropriate sentence. Is the guy an asshole? Sure. Did the punishment fit the crime? I argued back when this story broke that it did not, and it still does not. It's the right call.
RIP RedEye9. We miss you.
Avatar 22024
14.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 14:17
14.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 14:17
Jun 25, 2015, 14:17
 
harlock wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 14:00:
you can assume whatever you want, theres still no evidence of it causing people to lose control of vehicles

Hahaha get the fuck out of here. Shine a laser at your own eyes while flying a helicopter, gather empirical data and let us know how much more evidence is required. Temporary blindness, spots in vision and other retina related symptoms from direct contact with a high power laser pointer have a large potential for distracting pilots which in turn can lead to a crash. At a high enough power it can also harm their long term vision. It's not a situation where we need to wait for someone to bring down a flight with a laser pointer to act. We already know what the consequences are and the act itself serves no legitimate purpose.
Avatar 51617
13.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 14:00
13.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 14:00
Jun 25, 2015, 14:00
 
Blue wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 13:48:
harlock wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 13:06:
haha.. "treated for injuries" of having a bright shiny light in their faces? lol the cops can use some of their own medicine

did you even read that story? of course not, that would explain everything

The story was about UPS pilots, not cops. I'll assume you're trolling, that would explain everything.

you can assume whatever you want, theres still no evidence of it causing people to lose control of vehicles

sounds like youre the troll, posting completely irrelevant garbage to stir shit up
12.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 13:52
12.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 13:52
Jun 25, 2015, 13:52
 
It's hard to come up with any "intent" here other than attempting to bring the chopper down. You could technically call that "attempted murder", especially if it was a plane with a few hundred people on board.

Even then... Who's to say that 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years are enough though? How does one even quantify that? Just having the conviction on your record is enough to ruin most of the rest of your life... the amount of time you are actually jailed doesn't seem that important... especially for a technically "non-violent offense" if you don't believe that it is attempted murder.

Incarceration accomplishes nothing in the long run. Is this sort of "lesson" somehow worth the $200k+ a year in taxpayer money it will cost to jail him?

Pretty easy to play devils advocate on all sides of something like this... with no right answer readily available. The only thing that is clear-cut is that people need to stop doing shit like this. The result will end up being the ban of sale of all green-laser devices. Fun spoiled for everyone.

EDIT: Blue is feisty today! lol
Avatar 56185
11.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jun 25, 2015, 13:48
11.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jun 25, 2015, 13:48
Jun 25, 2015, 13:48
 
harlock wrote on Jun 25, 2015, 13:06:
haha.. "treated for injuries" of having a bright shiny light in their faces? lol the cops can use some of their own medicine

did you even read that story? of course not, that would explain everything

The story was about UPS pilots, not cops. I'll assume you're trolling, that would explain everything.
Stephen "Blue" Heaslip
Blue's News Publisher, Editor-in-Chief, El Presidente for Life
Avatar 2
30 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older