backtop


Print 233 comment(s) - last by fuckyoumyfrien.. on Jul 10 at 2:59 AM


WickedLasers Spyder III Pro Arctic Laser  (Source: WickedLasers)

The product comes with a warning that the weapons-grade laser can burn and/or blind people or animals.  (Source: WickedLasers)

The laser retails for a mere $200 an is perhaps a good self-defense tool in urban areas.  (Source: WickedLasers)
It goes without saying that this product is not safe for children

With recent advances in lasers, many have fantasized about creating "real life lightsabers".  Many military commanders have fantasized about creating portable blasters along the lines of those portrayed in fictional workers like Star Trek and Star Wars.  The Spyder III Pro Arctic laser from WickedLasers can be seen perhaps as the culmination of those efforts and perhaps the first consumer laser weapon.

The laser is built with a diode from Casio's new mercury-free Green Slim projectors which ironically have a somewhat blue tint.  The laser is rated at 1 watt of power and retails for a mere $200 USD.

And here's the best (or worst) part -- it can set people (or things) on fire.  Apparently the laser is so high powered that shining it on fleshy parts will cause them to burst into flames.  Of course it's equally capable of blinding people.  The retailer warns:

Warning: Extremely dangerous is an understatement to the power of 1W of laser power. It will blind permanently and instantly and set fire quickly to skin and other body parts, use with extreme caution and only when using the included eye protection. Customers will be required to completely read and agree to our Class IV Laser Hazard Acknowledgment Form.

If you're willing to "sign the form", WickedLasers warns you "With greater power comes the need for greater responsibility." (We can't make this stuff up, really!)

The laser comes in sleek packaging that looks, unsurprisingly like a lightsaber.  Hopefully its users follow the path of the light side.  The last thing we need is a bunch of Sith running around.

The price of $200 is quite commendable, considering it's 20 times as powerful as the company's previous best model, "Sonar", while a mere tenth of the cost ("Sonar" sells for $2,000 -- we imagine it will be discontinued as it seems most customers will flock to the Spyder III).  The product even comes with a free pair of safety glasses, so you don't accidentally blind yourself.

Obviously it goes without saying that this is not a product to leave around kids.  Don't say we didn't warn you.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Public Safety
By Jedi2155 on 6/10/2010 3:38:03 PM , Rating: 5
I'm worried that some random jerk will be playing around with this thing in public, and blind some random pedestrian who happens to be walking by.




RE: Public Safety
By Lord 666 on 6/10/2010 3:48:34 PM , Rating: 2
Or aim it at a plane while taxing


RE: Public Safety
By ekv on 6/10/2010 4:15:29 PM , Rating: 2
wasn't that a Michael Crichton book?


RE: Public Safety
By barjebus on 6/10/2010 5:15:28 PM , Rating: 2
Its a Tom Clancy book. John Clark and Domingo Chavez use a green laser light to blind the pilots of two AWACS planes that are landing during an American vs. Japan war.


RE: Public Safety
By Rebel44 on 6/10/2010 5:34:37 PM , Rating: 2
That wasnt laser, but concentrated light from portable search-light.

:)


RE: Public Safety
By Cypherdude1 on 6/11/2010 2:09:06 AM , Rating: 2
This is a totally idiotic idea. I agree that what's going to happen is either a random pedestrian or some other victim is going to be permanently blinded and then the government will finally step in a ban the device. Of course, by then there will be thousands of these devices loose in the public domain.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/12/2010 11:41:02 AM , Rating: 3
Very classy of you, throwing around blanket statements and wishing harm on others without knowing anything about them. If you hope that I blind myself because I bought one of these lasers, then I hope that you run your car off a cliff.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By Sonikku13 on 6/13/2010 7:48:18 PM , Rating: 2
I think someone might use this device to get revenge on an ex if that someone knows where his/her ex lives.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By elpresidente2075 on 6/16/2010 1:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
I thought for sure that story would end up talking about moving in with your aunt and uncle in Bel-Air.


RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/14/2010 7:32:02 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
For what practical use do you have a need for such device?

Practicality is irrelevant. Apparently you aren't familiar with the 'because I can' philosophy. For what practical reason do I have a dirt bike, or an AK47, or video games, or a multitude of other things. I don't need a practical reason to buy it, but you do need a damn good reason to prevent me from buying it.

quote:
If for one I ever saw you or anyone else in public with such a device I would beat the living hell out of you. I would rather cripple you before you harm someone trying to impress your friends.

This perfectly illustrates your underlying problem. You're judging me without knowing anything about me. Because you disagree with my choice to buy the laser you're playing this down like I'm some immature and irresponsible little kid. FYI, I'm a college grad, an electrical engineer, a homeowner, a volunteer firefighter, and I've never been arrested or issued any kind of citation in my life. And yet you're assuming not only that I would carry this thing around in public, but that'd I'd use it in public to 'impress my friends.' I'm not 14 asswhipe. But apparently from your viewpoint anyone who disagrees with you must be a dumb little kid. Grow the fuck up.

And another FYI, if you ever attacked me in public for any reason, you'd catch a .357 in the face.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/14/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/14/2010 6:38:20 PM , Rating: 3
You're the one talking about attacking other people without provocation, yet you think I'm dangerous because I openly admit to practicing my second amendment rights. You, sir, make absolutely no sense. I'm not going around initiating violence or intimidating people. You, on the other hand, specifically did say that you would. I'm just saying that if some asshole such as yourself attacked me, it would be a dire mistake on your part.

However, none of this has anything at all to do with the laser in question. I'm not going to carry my laser around in public, nor did I ever say or imply that I would.


RE: Public Safety
By thekadar81 on 6/15/2010 5:38:36 AM , Rating: 2
Although, if you did carry around the laser in public for the same reason you carry around the .357, it might be covered by the same laws that cover the .357. I would say blinding or igniting someone that attacks you is as equally justified as shooting them.


RE: Public Safety
By talonvor on 6/19/2010 12:17:30 AM , Rating: 2
LOL, so the guy thats willing to defend himself againt a strangers attack is the danger?? Wow, your sense of right and wrong is totally screwed up.

Oh and by the way, this cool little toy works great on cutting through a ton of things from rubber to metal. It works really well at cutting sheet metal.


RE: Public Safety
By para606 on 6/18/2010 6:52:58 PM , Rating: 2
Mount it on your AK and use as a bayonet,,be cool!!JusT kiddin' BTW,,,;].
MOLON LABE!


RE: Public Safety
By fuckyoumyfriend on 7/10/2010 2:59:05 AM , Rating: 1
i could only hope you wud try to beat me for using MY laser safely. ill tell you if you come closer i will use this laser to defend myself this is not a toy and it will hurt you if you chose to still attack well your loosing sight and possibly your life as i do carry a .40 cal ccw all day long so being that your some fucking tard who thinks everyone is a fucking stupid fool well you should look a lil deeper that just judging us cause we think that this is super cool you fuck tard so fuck you. me and .357 will be in the mountains using our lasers and you can sit in your house like the hermit you prolly are good day kind bitch

p.s. damn right i want it cause i can have it wtf do you need a ring on your wifes hand you dont meaningless materials are everywhere just like he said i dont need a ps3 but you can damn sure bet i got one shit there is two in my house whatssss up lol we love these things so just because your an uptight prude thats amazingly cheap dont mean we have to be


RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/14/2010 8:20:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If for one I ever saw you or anyone else in public with such a device I would beat the living hell out of you. I would rather cripple you before you harm someone trying to impress your friends.

I just realized something else ironic and amusing about this. You are talking about preemptive action against an individual. You do realize that you would be charged with assault and battery for this, and then probably sued for all you are worth, right? Unless the person has actually committed a felony, you can't touch them. And unless possession of the laser is illegal, you have zero grounds to attack them and would receive no leeway from a judge.

So either you're just some pissant e-thug trying to talk tough, or maybe you really are dumb enough to attack someone in public. Either way, you fail.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/14/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By cryolithic on 6/14/2010 3:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
I believe I can carry my possessions where ever I want to. Though, not like I'd actually worry about some ITG trying to start anything.


RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/14/2010 6:46:48 PM , Rating: 2
Um, what?! Nowhere have I said anything about carrying my laser in public. You are making shit up in order to pretend like you have some shred of an argument.

And furthermore, you're wrong. I'm not sure where you live, but in my state I can walk through town with a loaded AK47 slung over my shoulder. As long as I don't point it at anyone and stay off of school and government grounds I haven't violated any laws and will not be arrested. I'm quite certain that I could carry the laser if I were so inclined.


RE: Public Safety
By robinthakur on 6/22/2010 6:55:51 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm not sure where you live, but in my state I can walk through town with a loaded AK47 slung over my shoulder. As long as I don't point it at anyone and stay off of school and government grounds I haven't violated any laws and will not be arrested.


And...you believe this to be a good thing? Do you live in tribal Afghanistan or the Wild West? Its absolutely crazy for private individuals to carry such hardware in the street in America and did you ever consider what effect you walking around with a loaded assault weapon on your shoulder has on other people in your vicinity? People get scared enough when police or counter terrorist officers carry them, and they are rigourously trained to be responsible for their weapons and how to use them. Why do you think its illegal to carry this gun on school property or government grounds exactly?

Human beings are inherently emotionally fragile creatures, prone to being under the influence of alcohol or drugs with often far from benign motives anyway, getting easily jealous, unbalanced and vengeful. To imagine that everybody who purchases this device is going to treat it with the necessary respect it deserves (like a car or a gun or a taser etc) or to be aware of the fact that it can so easily blind someone inadvertantly by not even pointing it at them directly is expecting a bit much from your average joe. Packaging it to look like a lightsaber type device which could actually quite easily get into the hands of kids is absolutely the worst idea ever considering its incredibly dangerous n omatter how you use it to both yourself and people around you.


RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/29/2010 8:03:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Human beings are inherently emotionally fragile creatures, prone to being under the influence of alcohol or drugs with often far from benign motives anyway, getting easily jealous, unbalanced and vengeful. To imagine that everybody who purchases this device is going to treat it with the necessary respect it deserves or to be aware of the fact that it can so easily blind someone inadvertantly by not even pointing it at them directly is expecting a bit much from your average joe.

I wanted to quote this first since it embodies the emotional nature of your post. In essence what you are saying is that because there are bad apples in society and because there are people who are overly emotional and fearful, we need overbearing regulations to protect us from ourselves. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the summary of how I interpreted your argument. And on that point I strongly disagree.

quote:
And...you believe this to be a good thing? Do you live in tribal Afghanistan or the Wild West? Its absolutely crazy for private individuals to carry such hardware in the street in America

Yes, it absolutely is a good thing and it is not crazy. The right to defend oneself is a basic human right that no government should ever have the ability to curtail. Furthermore, having citizens be allowed to carry guns creates a balance of power; it limits the extent to which the government can infringe upon people's rights before there is a significant uprising. I see no reason why an individual with a clean mental and criminal record should not be allowed to carry a firearm in public. And FYI, many (probably most) states allow open carrying; it is concealed carrying that requires a permit. Feel free to look that up, but I know it to be true. The police are less concerned when they can see that you have a gun; it's the guns they can't see that they are worried about.

quote:
and did you ever consider what effect you walking around with a loaded assault weapon on your shoulder has on other people in your vicinity?

Unless the gun is being brandished in a threatening manner there is no rational reason for concern. And perhaps they too should be carrying guns. I've noticed that a lot of people who feel intimidated by the presence of guns are people who have no experience with guns. IMO every child should have supervised hands-on experience with firearms; teach them proper safety and handling early on and simultaneously make them more comfortable around guns. I've been shooting guns since I was about 3 btw.

quote:
People get scared enough when police or counter terrorist officers carry them, and they are rigourously trained to be responsible for their weapons and how to use them.

A generalized statement, not true of everyone. Honestly, I'm not scared of police carrying guns. The majority of police officers are good people doing their job, a very important job at that. Unless you've done something wrong then fearing their presence is paranoid and irrational.

quote:
Why do you think its illegal to carry this gun on school property or government grounds exactly?

Because they want to prevent people going on shooting rampages, and these (as well as workplaces) are the most common targets for crazy people. Furthermore, carrying a gun is for self defense, and you aren't likely to need it in a school or government building anyway, so there's no need to carry it in either of those places.


RE: Public Safety
By Wererat on 6/14/2010 10:53:36 AM , Rating: 5
So your intention is to commit assault and battery on anyone who possesses a legal weapon? Interesting. I can only imagine what you intend for wielders of dangerous cigarettes or Big Macs.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/14/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/14/2010 8:28:21 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I see the laser as wow thats cool but have enough common sense to know not to purchase one. I have no practical reason for owning one and know that randomly using such a device the beam will hit something I wouldn't intend it to.

And that's just it, you're the only one here talking about using it 'randomly.' You don't know how I or anyone else will use the laser, so stop acting like you do. And buying it vs not buying it has nothing to do with common sense. Just because you can't use it safely doesn't mean that nobody else can. It's good that you didn't buy one though; a man has got to know his limitations.


RE: Public Safety
By frobizzle on 6/21/2010 8:08:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is a high chance of hurting someone this is light you drop it and the beam is still running and it hits everything in its directional path which is much more than a gun which only hits its single line of site when fired.

And thus the X-Men's Cyclops was born!


RE: Public Safety
By lyeoh on 6/14/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By JediJeb on 6/14/2010 4:03:12 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
A handgun's effective range is about 100-200 metres ( 200m = desert eagle, 100 metres = "lesser handguns").


Seems you don't know much about handguns either. This may be their range of accuracy but even a small 22 pistol can be lethal at close to a mile.

Also if you read up on this laser further you will find that a Class 4 laser already has regulations limiting their use.


RE: Public Safety
By T2k on 6/21/2010 10:55:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Seems you don't know much about handguns either. This may be their range of accuracy but even a small 22 pistol can be lethal at close to a mile.


As someone served in combat zone I'd say apparently you don't know jacksh!t about handguns either - your 22 can be lethal from a mile only if you can throw it so far away, because it's a nonsense to aim with such a toy a mile away. Beyond 200 meters it is pretty much impossible to compensate for ballistics (ie it will deviate way too much and way too randomly.)

Your best chance for hurting someone is if you shoot up in the air in X degree and you hope it will arrive there. :D


RE: Public Safety
By InsaneGain on 6/15/2010 4:18:18 PM , Rating: 3
From Gizmodo:

"I dont think people understand exactly how dangerous this laser is, any living creature that can be anywhere near this beam needs safety glasses. Mirrors aren't even the main issue here. if you point this at your matte wall, and look at the dot, you can go blind from that. And it isn't temporary. its blind for life.. yes the reflection off a matte surface.

Anything above 5 mw can blind you, that means anything that reflects even .5% of the light back in to your eye could cause damage.

Pointing with this or waving it around is not an option.. the beam needs to be controlled at all times "


RE: Public Safety
By Chernobyl68 on 6/14/2010 4:49:35 PM , Rating: 2
IIRC, it was a little stronger than a portable searchlight... :)


RE: Public Safety
By ekv on 6/11/2010 3:50:37 AM , Rating: 2
no, no, no. It may've been Clancy, but the laser was mounted in a business jet, which typically took off 5 - 10 minutes before their victim passenger jet. They struck before the victim could set autopilot. Hence the passenger would crash for no apparent reason. Can't quite remember the motive ... maybe they were trying to start a war or something, but it was more like trying to sell protection. Interesting detective work.


RE: Public Safety
By Chernobyl68 on 6/14/2010 4:52:25 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't sound like you're describing one of the Jack Ryan books...maybe an OpCenter novel (which aren't written by him anyway) or a novel by another author.


RE: Public Safety
By Phoque on 6/10/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By Lord 666 on 6/10/2010 8:06:35 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-12-30...

Now that the price point is down to $200, there is a possibility this can be used for evil purposes. The two that quickly come to mind are the plane scenario and also aimed at cars on a highway from an overpass or building.

In all honesty, don't see what legitimate purpose this device can be used for.

PS - I am not a terrorist or criminal.


RE: Public Safety
By tspinning on 6/10/2010 8:08:33 PM , Rating: 1
Used for awesome freaking light shows!


RE: Public Safety
By Phoque on 6/10/2010 8:40:08 PM , Rating: 1
I totally agree this is not a device that should be available so easily, whatever freedom freaks are barking about.

By the way the article you refer to mentions:

quote:
He characterized it as a reasonably powerful visible light laser that can lock onto a fast-moving aircraft.


I maintain that the handheld 200$ laser couldn't do that job. But maybe to a well organized terrorist group it could represent a cheap key component.


RE: Public Safety
By PrinceGaz on 6/11/2010 10:35:27 AM , Rating: 2
There are plenty of cases in the UK of (usually) teenagers with cheap laser pointers aiming at police helicopters and causing temporary blindness. It doesn't have to "lock on" to anything to do this, just a brief time where it happens to be pointed directly at the pilot is sufficient, and this will happen if it being aimed generally at the helicopter.

This far more powerful laser could wreak havoc on roads if someone were to point it from a bridge at cars passing underneath as you could probably blind the majority of drivers (assuming it is aimed through the windscreen at the driver's side of the car). Yeah a gun could do the same job but you'd run out of bullets long before this laser runs out of electricity (I don't know what it is powered by, but a couple of NiMH AAs can provide upwards of 4Wh of energy).


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By camylarde on 6/13/2010 5:06:51 AM , Rating: 2
Except for the fact, that corrective laser surgery worrcts retina, not the nerves in your eye, th part of our eye that is actually slowly being adamaged by the excessive light. Good luck to your future experiments dude.


RE: Public Safety
By jadestar on 6/16/2010 12:14:51 PM , Rating: 2
No, corrective laser surgery corrects the *cornea*... stray lasers to the eye damage the *retina*.

http://health.howstuffworks.com/lasik1.htm
http://health.howstuffworks.com/lasik3.htm

The cornea is the part that focuses light onto the retina. The retina is where the photon-sensors (rods and cones) are. It connects to the optic nerve to transmit the sensation of light.

Laser surgery is a finely tuned process to burn away bits of the cornea and reshape it to focus light more precisely onto the retina. On the other hand, stray laser light passing *directly into the eye* is *focused onto the retina*, and overloads the rods and cones to the point that they are destroyed, if not physically burning them away.

The laser light has to pass directly into the eye for this, with enough intensity and coherence to still be considered laser light. I don't know exactly what the tolerance of the retinal material is, BUT... *diffracted* laser light is far less likely to have an effect than *reflected* laser light. In other words, if you have a complete reflection such as from a mirror or planar/spherically lensed window, you have the same beam. If you have a diffraction, such as from clouds or glass/plastic edges, you have probably less than a millionth of the beam, and besides that, it's not particularly coherent any more. It's possible to have some combination of diffraction/reflection as well, and obviously higher intensity lasers have more potential for damage since a much smaller percentage of the beam is required for overloading the retina (it still has to be coherent, though).

Viewing a laser beam at any angle other 100% incident is impossible. If you can see the beam and you aren't at 100% incident, you're seeing a trace of diffracted light, and it isn't particularly harmful.


RE: Public Safety
By dark matter on 6/13/2010 8:18:55 PM , Rating: 2
Looking forward to you getting this device and showing the world via youtube how you can stare into lasers.


RE: Public Safety
By dark matter on 6/13/2010 8:21:57 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't like to stare into this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXTLkZqDVDU


RE: Public Safety
By ClownPuncher on 6/11/2010 3:13:56 PM , Rating: 5
Freedom freaks? If you don't want freedom, feel free to give it up. If you want to tell me what I can and cannot do in a "free" country, give it a try.


RE: Public Safety
By Phoque on 6/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By Kurz on 6/11/2010 5:09:57 PM , Rating: 2
If you think by seriously giving up your freedom to a laser that has hardly any chance of killing anyone is worth more government involvement and more taxation and more nanny state policies.

I guess I don't have the ability to reason either by your definition.


RE: Public Safety
By ClownPuncher on 6/11/2010 5:34:13 PM , Rating: 5
If you think we need the government to protect us from ourselves, you're asking to be treated like a child by your elected officials.

I just don't need anyone telling me what I can and cannot have based on abritrary justifications for regulation.

Should we ban kitchen knives from homes that don't cook? Should we ban guns from people who don't hunt? Should we ban pepper spray from people who don't get raped? Should we ban swimming pools from people who don't swim? All of these things I list are dangerous when improperly used. Oh, but it has no practical use? Neither does my Boba Fett statue, which has sharp edges.

Adults must be treated as adults. The government is there to protect our freedoms, not take them away..


RE: Public Safety
By Phoque on 6/11/2010 7:29:46 PM , Rating: 1
That's already a stronger argument than just stupidly saying I want to give my freedom away.

---

quote:
you're asking to be treated like a child


You have great faith in adulhood. A lot of those who ought to be considered adult based on age are just that: immature and not so responsible kids. That could be a first step: forbid the selling of this device to people under the age of X, if it's not already the case.


RE: Public Safety
By Phoque on 6/11/2010 7:43:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The government is there to protect our freedoms, not take them away..


I personally think the advent of society has brought its share of advantages and disadvantages. Rights and obligations. There are already laws restraining our freedom, your freedom: like killing your neighbour. Of course, buying this laser doesn't even come close to killing or harming anybody by itself. Then, it's just a matter of deciding where to draw the line.

In this case, unless a reasonable prejudice can be demonstrated about the interdiction of selling such a device to the general public, the hazards involved in its distribution makes me go toward an interdiction except for scientific/research/industrial/? applications.

Can you explain me, except feeling miffed at a government trying to protect you, what prejudice would that cause you, how it would prevent you from reaching the top of Maslow's pyramid?


RE: Public Safety
By thekadar81 on 6/15/2010 4:55:22 AM , Rating: 4
“The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either.”
-Benjamin Franklin


RE: Public Safety
By laserboy on 6/16/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By Reclaimer77 on 6/10/2010 9:01:56 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Now that the price point is down to $200, there is a possibility this can be used for evil purposes.


What CAN'T be used for an evil purpose??


RE: Public Safety
By Phoque on 6/10/2010 9:56:43 PM , Rating: 2
I think he somewhat refer to the potential for evilness of the device. You know, not all objects have the same potential for wreaking havoc around you.

No?

If I were to put your logic to extremes, there wouldn't be any reason to control nuclear material since anyway a chair could be used for evil purposes.


RE: Public Safety
By twhittet on 6/10/2010 10:28:58 PM , Rating: 2
Chairs can be arguably more dangerous than this. I could beat someone to death with a chair pretty easy. This laser I could give them a nasty sunburn.
The only problem with the laser is that it has a longer range. If it were a REAL light saber, that wouldn't be an issue!


RE: Public Safety
By saulgoode on 6/14/2010 10:18:02 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
What CAN'T be used for an evil purpose??


A cheese sandwich can't be used for evil, rubber ducks, can't be used for evil. Bubble bath etc.


RE: Public Safety
By TechZeal on 6/14/2010 12:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
ANYTHING can be used for evil purposes...All you need is a little creativity and a desire to cause harm.

A cheese sandwich or rubber duck forcibly shoved down a throat or the duck forcibly up the rear could cause a few problems. Your bubble bath is a problem if you are held under the water for a few minutes...

(Not directed specifically at you) I don't get what everyone is so freaked out about this device. Your own hands can cause the greatest harm to another individual. In fact, your own hands could kill another before this laser could... Should we cut off your hands?

You can choose to be afraid of everything if you wish. I'll just pay attention to whats going on around me as best I can and handle those situations as they come... if ever.


RE: Public Safety
By AssBall on 6/11/2010 12:44:11 AM , Rating: 3
This could be handy as hell in a survival situation. With different lenses you could signal or start a fire.


RE: Public Safety
By CurseTheSky on 6/11/2010 1:26:08 PM , Rating: 3
Signal, perhaps, but a much lower-powered laser would take care of that (or powerful flash light, or flares, or mirror, etc.)

Start a fire? Wouldn't a lighter be much more convenient and MUCH more compact? For the size of this thing (since you'll be carrying it, along with the rest of your equipment, around on your back) you could take numerous lighters and strikers with you.

Google videos of 50-75+ mW lasers on YouTube. They can set things on fire if you keep the beam on it long enough. With a 1W laser, you could cause the trees above you to burst into flames when you try to send out a "signal."


RE: Public Safety
By mattclary on 6/11/2010 10:43:57 AM , Rating: 2
You forgot the third, sharks with freaking lasers on their head!


RE: Public Safety
By ARoyalF on 6/11/2010 10:44:53 PM , Rating: 2
How about Sea Bass instead?


RE: Public Safety
By sublifer on 6/11/2010 4:39:53 PM , Rating: 2
This would be a great campfire starter. No more kneeling and piling kindling and blowing on sparks... throw a log in your pit, go sit in your car (if its cold or raining), aim it at the log and prepare your marshmellow sticks :)


RE: Public Safety
By MedLR on 6/10/2010 10:49:12 PM , Rating: 5
Or attach to the head of a frickin' shark! *Holds pinky finger to edge of mouth*


RE: Public Safety
By Golgatha on 6/11/2010 10:02:50 AM , Rating: 2
6!


RE: Public Safety
By rburnham on 6/11/2010 10:33:21 AM , Rating: 2
I love you.


RE: Public Safety
By mattclary on 6/11/2010 10:44:38 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, didn't see yours!


RE: Public Safety
By Shatbot on 6/11/2010 3:25:09 PM , Rating: 2
Check out the info they give on Beam Divergence, got to love this quote...

quote:
It all comes down to how small the end "spot"(the diameter size of your leaser beam) is at certain distances. This is important because you want to point far, far away and because you want to burn stuff, lots of stuff.


RE: Public Safety
By Proxes on 6/10/2010 3:49:44 PM , Rating: 1
I agree. Seriously what is the practical application for this thing? The risk involved isn't worth the novelty of the item.


RE: Public Safety
By 91TTZ on 6/10/2010 4:27:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The risk involved isn't worth the novelty of the item.


Who gets to decide this- you, or the person whose rights you're trying to take away? Because currently, a person has the right to buy this.


RE: Public Safety
By morphologia on 6/10/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By Obujuwami on 6/10/2010 4:42:44 PM , Rating: 2
I gotta agree with the safety bit, but then you lost all credibility with:

quote:
Don't come crying to me when America is invaded by Taliban Jedi.


Honestly, we should just offer them some smoking drugs and they could use the laser as a lighter.

Most people that will buy this are techies and college jerks who want to mess with people. Seeing as most of the people on this forums fit in one of those categories loosely, we can see that lots of people will buy them. What will they use it for? WHO CARES!

The point of this whole post is to let people know that a new toy is on the market. Leave people alone and play with your new toy in the safety of a mirror free environment.

/endrant


RE: Public Safety
By Nutzo on 6/10/2010 4:53:03 PM , Rating: 2
That would be Taliban SITH

The Jedi are the good guys and don't chop the heads of civilians and little kids.


RE: Public Safety
By AEvangel on 6/10/2010 5:36:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The Jedi are the good guys and don't chop the heads of civilians and little kids.


It's a shame we can't call America the Jedi, since are involvement in the middle east has been anything but good.

I guess we are more like Boba Fett killing for the highest bidder.


RE: Public Safety
By rcc on 6/10/2010 5:41:52 PM , Rating: 5
Speak for yourself bunky.


RE: Public Safety
By Sazabi19 on 6/11/2010 1:14:04 PM , Rating: 2
That's when we shoot them ded with our guns that we can have in this glorious (formerly glorious?) country ^.^


RE: Public Safety
By Helbore on 6/10/2010 5:47:24 PM , Rating: 4
What is it with the knee-jerk "rights of the people" attitude some people have? There are LOTS of things you aren't allowed to buy. Try buying a few kilos of cocaine and then cry about rights to the judge when he locks you up. nowhere are you free to buy whatever you want.

Some things really shouldn't be allowed to be sold to Joe Public. A laser with no appreciable use than blinding people and setting them on fire should be one of those things.

It's got many uses in industrial circles. It really doesn't have any in domestic circles and poses many risks.


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/10/2010 5:56:51 PM , Rating: 1
Yes, rights can be taken away by majority vote, but that's it. This thing isn't even as dangerous as a gun so no one is really going to give a crap.


RE: Public Safety
By cscpianoman on 6/10/2010 8:12:30 PM , Rating: 4
Really?! Not as dangerous as a gun? I'm sorry, anything given to the right person can be more dangerous than a gun. This belongs in a research lab or industry, not the consumer's hands.

For example, maybe some kid just breaks up with his girlfriend and starts blinding people by shooting the laser from the overpass. What a about a domestic violence case where someone gets ticked off enough and decides to "fry" someone? How about someone just opening the box, plugging in the 3 "D" batteries and burning down the house just from "testing" it? The list of warning labels on this thing will quickly outnumber the actual uses.

Come on, seriously? We have enough creative psychos in the world today to not give them something potentially dangerous and only by signing a document saying they won't do something stupid with it.


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/10/2010 11:02:14 PM , Rating: 1
Paranoid much? If you're worried that they aren't regulated enough... then I'd say you're probably right. Should be more like guns and you have to be a legal age and such. I'm not saying they aren't dangerous, but you act like it'd be able to do ANY of what you said instantaneously. It's not that strong. If you get yet on fire you'd probably have the same problem if you sat on a stove.


RE: Public Safety
By Reclaimer77 on 6/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By Helbore on 6/11/2010 12:37:40 PM , Rating: 2
A car can be more dangerous than this laser. You could mow down a whole streetful of people quicker then you could shoot them with a handgun.

But a car has a use to the average member of the public. It provides many benefits. Banning their use would have far more detrimental effects.

What use does this laser actually have? It's an open-air "pointer" than can blind a person the instant it hits their eyes. Why would the public need this thing? What use does it actually bring? Why would anyone need this?

Unlike the ability to drive a car, there is no use in being able to shine a 4w laser wherever the hell you want to.


RE: Public Safety
By abel2 on 6/11/2010 2:08:46 PM , Rating: 2
Not important, but it's only 1w.

And secondly, who really cares? Yes, it's a dangerous toy that is being sold without any certification, etc necessary. But then again can't I go online and buy a ton of tannerite without any certification either? And what purpose does it serve except clearing out beaver dams, blowing up dumptrucks and trees and possibly killing alot of innocent people. None.

For anyone to gripe about this laser and it's potential to do damage, or that raving lunatics are going to go off on the deep end and.. not kill, blind people enmasse is retarded. If someone wanted to kill people, they are going to get it done. If somebody started blinding everyone in sight and setting them on fire, it would be just the same as if someone started shooting people at random. Someone would stop him.

This is America. The Capitalist Nation. We have more useless potentially deadly crap that is sold here than I'd care to know about. So add one more thing to the pile.

But I'm not saying I wouldn't buy one. 'cause it's kinda interesting.


RE: Public Safety
By Reclaimer77 on 6/11/2010 4:00:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why would the public need this thing? What use does it actually bring? Why would anyone need this?


If you have ever been mugged or attacked or physically abused, you wouldn't have to ask that. This is a self defense laser, remember?

Oh but there are tasers and pepper spray for that, you say? Well guess what. Tazers and pepper spray have killed too! But you don't seem to have a problem with the general public carrying those around.

Sorry but none of you has made an argument against this yet that isn't contradictory to itself. Things are bought and sold on a daily basis that CAN do massive harm to others. There is a reason that harm isn't executed to it's fullest on a daily basis.


RE: Public Safety
By intelpatriot on 6/11/2010 4:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
1) Permanent blinding is second only to killing so you can't really bracket this device with tasers and pepper sprays.

Yes, you can use this device to 'burn', but only in the same way you can use a gunshot to cripple instead of kill. The presumption will be that when you use this device you were intending to blind.

2) This device can blind far more easily and with less prejudgement than a gun can kill on account of the physics of laser light.
i) it is silent
ii)the light can be reflected and refracted while still carrying the potential to blind
iii) the range of this device is more akin to a sniper weapon than a hand gun, while being smaller and more easily concealed than either

So, we can see that this device would be considered a "blinding weapon". And a weapon that blinds far more easily than a gun can kill.

Do you think that carrying such a weapon can be justified under the constitution? Given that blinding has always been considered a cruel and unusual punishment (in fact the definitive case of it).
I don't think any supreme court, no matter how libertarian, would take your side.


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/2010 11:40:44 PM , Rating: 1
Most of your #2 is crap. Just like a gun, range matters. In fact, even more so. That's why with the cheap laser pointers after like 20 feet they are completely useless for everything. You shine one down a long hall way and it'll cover the entire back wall.


RE: Public Safety
By jRaskell on 6/11/2010 11:42:37 AM , Rating: 1
People can, and have, dropped large rocks from overpasses and caused damage, injuries, etc (I have not read of any actual deaths, but that has probably happened as well).

There are dozens of household chemicals that are capable of blinding (in some cases permanently) and burning.

There are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of actual cases of home fires every year being caused by none other than the common candle.

I really don't see how this product is going to make our world any more dangerous than it already is. That just isn't going to happen. Take a step back and look at how many common household items there are that can be used in very dangerous ways. 5 minutes of googling will get you half a dozen recipes for explosives that can be made from the products under your kitchen sink.


RE: Public Safety
By piroroadkill on 6/14/2010 3:57:37 AM , Rating: 1
This is easily more dangerous than a gun.

You don't need to make noise when using it, but can permanantly blind someone from whereever you're hidden.


RE: Public Safety
By Reclaimer77 on 6/10/10, Rating: 0
RE: Public Safety
By HotFoot on 6/10/2010 9:32:04 PM , Rating: 2
And cocaine is illegal... why? It's like you think these laws were handed down straight from God or something. Blindly follow one law but don't apply logic to something else.

But back on the topic at hand, there has got to be a damn good reason to take something out of the public's hands. And I agree with the whole "who gets to decide, you?" question.

But then, at least look at the arguments and have some form of rational debate.

I live in a high-rise apartment. A weapon such as this laser is very inconspicuous, and pretty much impossible to trace. If I were a total jackass, I could cause a lot of harm to people with little to no chance of being caught. And Lord knows we have a lot of inconsiderate jackasses in this world. This article reminds me of the rash of drive-by paint-ball gun assaults that were happening a few years ago. I think someone actually died from taking a paint-ball point-blank to the face.

Back to the drugs argument. Your country spends over $50B per year on the war against drugs. I have yet to see why this is taken sitting down by the taxpayer. Where in "it's my right America" does one person get to determine what another person does to their own body? If it's damage causing, it's self-inflicted, and someone could just do that with a pocket knife. Is the U.S. going to declare war on pocket knives?


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/2010 12:17:12 AM , Rating: 2
I really doubt this laser is powerful enough to even blind someone from your high rise apartment. If they do get powerful enough to do that then they probably just need to regulate who gets them, just like guns.


RE: Public Safety
By todda7 on 6/11/2010 6:51:12 AM , Rating: 5
A 100 mw LASER can easily blind people across the street.

This son-of-a-bitch is 10 times more powerful, and even though you may not blind people if you live in a high rise apartment, you could easily damage their eyes and drasticly reduce their ability to see for the rest of their lives. Furthermore, the higher up you live the smaller is the chance of getting caught.

I own quite a lot of LASERs myself ranging from 10 to 200 mW, and while I would easily pay 200 USD to get my hand on this cracker I believe that the fun would'nt make up for the risk of having this baby laying around.


RE: Public Safety
By Starcub on 6/11/2010 10:00:37 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know why you were rated down for this. It's quite true that mW class diode lasers can blind a person (thus the warning lables on pointing devices). I do however, doubt that a 1W laser could start a person on fire.

I worked with a pulsed gas laser while doing opto-acoustic work in college and it was pumped with a kV rated source. I could (and did) stick my hand in it's path and could actually feel the pulsing on my hand, but it certainly didn't cause any pain.

Later I found out from my professor that I shouldn't have done that because supposedly it was a cancer risk, and even reflections from such a high power laser could have damaged my vision. Oddly enough, we never took a laser safety course in my EE curriculum :p


RE: Public Safety
By Reclaimer77 on 6/11/2010 4:42:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I own quite a lot of LASERs myself ranging from 10 to 200 mW


Just curious, but do you go around trying to blind people and/or set them on fire??


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/2010 11:46:12 PM , Rating: 2
Define easily? People think a quick swipe across a football field would blind half the people in the stadium with this 1w laser. It's not that simple or easy. Yes, looking into any laser, or a lot of other things for that matter, has the potential to cause harm but I don't see how the fact that product is a laser makes it more dangerous than a lot of other items mentioned in these posts.


RE: Public Safety
By Reclaimer77 on 6/11/2010 12:55:47 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
I live in a high-rise apartment. A weapon such as this laser is very inconspicuous, and pretty much impossible to trace. If I were a total jackass, I could cause a lot of harm to people with little to no chance of being caught.


Here we go again. You know, I really think our whole society has become the 'society of the minority'. Where because a minority of people do something, the entire majority has to suffer or be responsible for it. Because YOU could cause major harm, we need everyone to be limited?

Furthermore, some of you act like we're barely evolved past monkeys. We apparently have to always safeguard against us all reverting into primates with barely any self control. Are you forgetting that guns are legal? What about crossbows? Those are readily available, and I don't hear about people getting crossbowed. We have a civilized society, we have laws, and we have consequences for breaking them.

Because something has the potential to do harm, and some jackasses probably will be irresponsible with it, just isn't compelling enough for me to agree that EVERYONE needs to be deprived of it. That's just draconian.


RE: Public Safety
By HotFoot on 6/11/2010 1:25:06 AM , Rating: 4
Look at what's happened due to the actions of a small minority of radical Muslims from the far side of the world. The point isn't punishing the offenders so much as protecting the majority of innocent victims or potential victims.

I definitely agree that just become a few will be irresponsible, that shouldn't mean prohibition for all. Consider alcohol...

But it's not black and white. To illustrate this point, should anyone that can afford one be allowed to buy nuclear warheads. Yes, that's completely extreme compared to a laser that could cause serious harm should it happen to be shone in the eyes. However, I think we've come to the conclusion that there is a limit on how much weaponisation we want individuals to have. Myself, I consider the risk to the populations' eyesight to be of greater concern than the right to own some novelty item with little to no practical use. At the same time, how much more dangerous is this thing - again going to my high-rise balcony situation - than someone tossing beer bottles at cars from a 30-story building? Those would be similarly untraceable if you're not leaving fingerprints all over them.


RE: Public Safety
By FITCamaro on 6/11/2010 7:06:09 AM , Rating: 1
A drug like cocaine effects far more than just you. It affects your family, the people around you, the violence caused by those vying for the turf to sell you the cocaine.

You'd have an argument if you said pot. Because personally while I will never smoke it legal or illegal, at this point my attitude is legalize it and tax the crap out of it. Might as well make all the hippies out there pay taxes on it. Can still make it illegal to grow in your basement.


RE: Public Safety
By Kurz on 6/11/2010 4:40:13 PM , Rating: 2
Violence caused by gangs would end since there would be no money to fund their activity if Cocaine was legal.

Cocaine for a long time was legal I dont remember hearing about anying Gangs or street violence coming from it.

Make drugs legal will end drug related violence within a few short years. The only grief will come to families of drug addicts instead of it effecting entire communities. Since there will be a transition to shops that sell the stuff.

Hell its great source of Tax Revenue.


RE: Public Safety
By Sazabi19 on 6/11/2010 1:16:49 PM , Rating: 2
Bet this would shrink heat-shrink wraps that were just soldered in a tight space where conventional heat would be bad:)


RE: Public Safety
By thekadar81 on 6/15/2010 5:11:22 AM , Rating: 2
I can think of one clear use in domestic circles. This would make an excellent non-lethal self defense weapon. I would feel much safer about my girlfriend walking home at night if she had one of these. If it is as dangerous of a weapon as some people seem to think then it might be covered by the second amendment (no I am not an NRA gun nut).


RE: Public Safety
By Mysidia on 6/27/2010 3:56:32 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is since it can only be used to cause severe permanent bodily harm (blindness), use of it is not likely to be considered reasonable self defense.

Meaning, you use it as a weapon, it injures them, then you go to jail, and get to be liable financially.

Better to get an actual gun to use for self defense. It can ward off an attacker, is capable of causing minimal non-permanent damage, and it is a common self-defense weapon.

Failing that, perhaps a less-permanent laser that does not do permanent damage to the eye, or more commonly used non-lethal devices, such as sirens, mace, etc.


RE: Public Safety
By Trickydicky on 6/10/2010 7:00:13 PM , Rating: 2
Possibly the coolest way ever to fire up your BBQ or light a smoke!


RE: Public Safety
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/10/2010 7:40:50 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it is every bit worth it.


RE: Public Safety
By FaceMaster on 6/10/2010 7:45:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I agree. Seriously what is the practical application for this thing? The risk involved isn't worth the novelty of the item.


YOU GET TO OWN A LIGHTSABRE!


RE: Public Safety
By Smartless on 6/10/2010 3:54:29 PM , Rating: 5
Oh the irony. Like my login and yours. Just make sure you don't give it to some kid just because he has a high amount of mitochlorians. He just might try to kill you.


RE: Public Safety
By Yames on 6/10/2010 4:01:21 PM , Rating: 3
If it is a dangerous as it sounds then it will have to be treated like a gun. A kid getting their hands on one is seriously troubling.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/10/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By zmatt on 6/10/2010 4:45:01 PM , Rating: 3
And since when does practicality have any bearing? Ferrari's don't have a practical purpose, and I bet you I can kill more people at one time with one of those than that laser. They said it can burn, not kill. And the ability for a 1 watt laser to make something burst into flames is overstated. 1 watt of energy is not a lot. I imagine it would take several seconds for something to start burning and even then you wont be a pile of ashes. Dangerous? well yeah, looks like part of the appeal is as a self defense weapon, it doesn't run out of juice like pepper spray or need to be reloaded like a taser gun, and is ranged unlike a classic taser. But worse than a gun? You have to be kidding me. And yes there are practical sues for this, it can be use as an effective lighter where you don't want or cant have a flame. I have seen people make lasers like this out of dvd burner diodes and do just that. pretty nifty tool. Lighting matches, cigarettes and using shrink wrap. it's mainly a hobbyists device.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/10/2010 4:55:55 PM , Rating: 1
Instant eye damage and Im sure its capable of doing so at a good distance.

At what point do you suggest something like this be banned?


RE: Public Safety
By AEvangel on 6/10/2010 5:39:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
At what point do you suggest something like this be banned?


I would propose never, just put an age limit on it and then hold the person responsible who blinds someone. I guess the first person that does this maliciously ends up in jail for assault then others will think twice.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/11/2010 7:22:12 AM , Rating: 1
Yea because China mail order respects age limits.

Your also assuming you can catch the person who did it.

Its going to be like the original poster implied some idiot is going to be in some place other than their home town on a bridge randomly aiming it at cars/trucks on the underpass and just run away.

We would all like the think everyone is a responsible person but people do moronic things. Even more if they feel they can get away with it.

Man arrested after pointing laser at Fontana police helicopter
http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/sun-the-sa...

Teenager in CA arrested for aiming his laser pointer at a jetliner, commuter bus, and a police helicopter
http://boingboing.net/2007/12/27/teenager-in-ca-ar...

Hey lets give them stronger lasers.


RE: Public Safety
By laserboy on 6/16/2010 11:08:27 PM , Rating: 1
Its funny you should mention a teenager pointing a laser at a chopper, did you miss out on the Active Denial System the governments workin on? I think you should be more worried about the governments move towards totalitarian control of your asshole than a kid pointing a laser pointer at a chopper. In a world where the government has more and more ways of making it harder if not impossible to protest or fight for your rights, things like this appear. Don't wanna get blinded while flying? Don't be a fuckhead flying around town in a police chopper. Maybe if the police knew how to do their fuckin job they wouldn't have these problems. After you get pushed around and taxed for thousands if not hundreds of thousands when your young and naive by macho wannabe a-holes you kinda tend to lose all respect for these people and go out of your way to fuck their day up. Its incredible how things change when lil johnny grows up and hits the books and the weightbench(and learns about laser pointers).


RE: Public Safety
By inferno375 on 6/18/2010 3:20:05 AM , Rating: 2
point of order china means you should calm down there is no need to worry about the power of this laser worry if you ordered this is a simple identity theft scam look at the information they want none of which is required any who jumped at this just had their identity stolen. Anyone who ordered and actually have one of these care to post video and prove me wrong


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/10/2010 6:31:43 PM , Rating: 3
Guns can cause death, at what point do you suggest something like that be banned?

I hope by that you can see how ridiculous your statement sounds. Death is worse than blindness and guns are protected by the Bill of Rights.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/11/2010 7:11:03 AM , Rating: 1
Again guns leave behind something that can be traced back to an owner even if the gun is not registered it has the potential to find the shooter. This leaves nothing behind but the damage.

Now you can set someones house on fire without ever getting near their home.


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/2010 3:15:24 PM , Rating: 2
You can just as easily make a gun untraceable. The fact that morons don't doesn't mean much.

Every time I get on the internet I feel a little bit sadder for living in the United States. The land of the dumb.


RE: Public Safety
By JKflipflop98 on 6/11/2010 3:39:27 PM , Rating: 2
A 30.06 rifle will do extreme eye damage from up to and including 1 mile away. Yet I could legally own one.

Fire has killed many millions of people, and huge swaths of the Earth itself. Should we ban fire now?


RE: Public Safety
By ninus3d on 6/10/2010 5:03:16 PM , Rating: 2
A ferrari is a sportscar of a high luxurious standard, the prize of the car is NOT what determines wether or not it have a practical purpose.
Its a car, cars are quite practical :)

There has been quite the number of incidents here (Norway) where kids are having fun with standard $5 novelty lasers, several reports of flashed pilots and what not, I hope no one tries to escalate the "fun".


RE: Public Safety
By RivuxGamma on 6/10/2010 5:42:47 PM , Rating: 2
Price is always a factor when determining practicality.

e.g. - There's loads of shale oil available, but it's not practical to harvest it and make it into the same stuff as regular oil because it costs too much to do so right now. That makes it impractical. Once prices go up to the point where it is profitable, then it's practical.

Let's say that the Ferrari Enzo still gets you from point A to point B in the same manner as a Honda Civic. (I know it won't be exactly the same, but let's say that it does in this case.) The Ferrari is way less practical (especially for your average person) than the Civic because everything about it costs more.

On the flip side, if your goal is to set a good time on a track, then the Ferrari becomes then less impractical because it will (probably; Italian cars, while pretty in many cases, break a lot) set a better time. It still costs a lost to operate a Ferrari.

If something costs $10 to make and you can't sell it for more than $5, then it's impractical.


RE: Public Safety
By zmatt on 6/10/2010 7:42:08 PM , Rating: 2
Both of you are missing one of my points with the analogy. You can kill a lot more people with a Ferrari Enzo barreling down the wrong side of the road than you could with a non-lethal laser. Nobody considers cars a weapon. I dont hear anyone saying, "yeah that Camry is nice, but what if someone kills a person with it? we may have to ban them." The logic is ludicrous. If someone wants to kill me they will try with or with out a weapon. I wouldn't mind a restriction for children though. I don't think it would do much to deter a kid with unresponsible parents though.


RE: Public Safety
By Mitch101 on 6/11/2010 7:25:00 AM , Rating: 1
Driving the car the opposite side of the highway has the potential to kill yourself in the process.

Laser has the potential to hurt someone from a distance while you drink your beer.


RE: Public Safety
By Kenenniah on 6/10/2010 5:27:12 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
And yes there are practical sues for this, it can be use as an effective lighter where you don't want or cant have a flame.

You don't want a flame, yet you are trying to light something? Irony?


RE: Public Safety
By soloman02 on 6/10/2010 4:46:15 PM , Rating: 5
In most states, there is no such thing as "gun registration." And there shouldn't be. Criminals don't register their guns in the states that require registration (HI, NY, CA, and a few others). What makes you think someone who is going to use one of these for nefarious purposes is going to buy it and register it? Even if you made it so that you could not buy it without a background check (like firearms), the criminal would just steal it instead.


RE: Public Safety
By phantom505 on 6/10/10, Rating: -1
RE: Public Safety
By rcc on 6/10/2010 5:53:59 PM , Rating: 2
Soooo, someone who's firearm is registered is automagically a better person that someone who's firearm isn't registered? Even if it's not required. Or perhaps it's people that don't mind having their rights infringed on, or limited, that are better people??

Curiously enough, I don't have a conceptual problem with registering guns. I live in CA, and mine are registered. However, what concerns me is some day a politician trying to make brownie points with some special interest group or another, will try to use that registration list to collect them all.

Speaking of interesting tie ins. Since the federal government thinks it is capable of mandating that we buy health insurance..... how about we require everyone to buy and learn to use a firearm? We could use road tax or something to buy everyone a gun safe to keep them in.


RE: Public Safety
By rcc on 6/10/2010 6:28:13 PM , Rating: 1
Oh, please.. don't just rate the post down. Tell me where I am in error.


RE: Public Safety
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/2010 12:40:53 AM , Rating: 2
I think his point was that if a cop happened to come across a gun in a state that required registration it makes it easier to pinpoint criminals. Gives them the right to search your car, yada yada.


RE: Public Safety
By MozeeToby on 6/10/2010 4:38:04 PM , Rating: 2
A 1 watt laser will permanently damage your retina literally before you have a chance to blink. This thing will damage your vision just from reflections off random objects if you don't take the necessary precautions. It will be powerful enough to light a match from across the room, maybe from across a football field if it's mounted on something stable. So yes, it is as dangerous as it sounds.


RE: Public Safety
By JediJeb on 6/10/2010 5:33:16 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Class 4 LASER RADIATION AVOID EYE OR SKIN EXPOSURE TO DIRECT OR SCATTERED RADIATION CLASS 4 LASER PRODUCT
Class 4 lasers include all lasers with beam power greater than class 3B. By definition, a class-4 laser can burn the skin, in addition to potentially devastating and permanent eye damage as a result of direct or diffuse beam viewing. These lasers may ignite combustible materials, and thus may represent a fire risk. Class 4 lasers must be equipped with a key switch and a safety interlock. Most entertainment, industrial, scientific, military, and medical lasers are in this category.


Without the interlock this can not be sold to the public. I'm not sure how they will get around this part of the regulations.

quote:
Interlocks and automatic shutdown Interlocks are circuits that shut down a laser if some condition is not met, such as if the laser casing or a room door is open. Class 3B and 4 lasers typically provide a connection for an external interlock circuit. Lasers that are class 1 only because the light is contained within an enclosure nearly always have an interlock that disables the laser if that enclosure is opened. Some systems have electronics that automatically shut down the laser under other conditions. For example, some fiber optic communication systems have circuits that automatically shut down transmission if a fiber is disconnected or broken, to ensure safety of technicians during system maintenance.[16][17]


Since the regulations say it MUST be equipped with this, then as shown I would question the legality of it being sold if it really is considered a Class IV laser. I also wonder if they still require you to register such a laser. I remember when I bought my first CD player back in the late 80s you received a form with it to register it with the FCC, though not many people actually did it.


RE: Public Safety
By cyclosarin on 6/11/2010 1:21:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without the interlock this can not be sold to the public. I'm not sure how they will get around this part of the regulations.


All of the higher powered Wicked Lasers have a safety key that is installed on the end of the laser. Remove it and the laser doesn't operate.


RE: Public Safety
By zaaf on 6/10/2010 5:08:52 PM , Rating: 3
All i can think of is how cool this would be and you go and start talking like my mom used to... "It's all fun and games until someone goes blind." Way to take the fun out of this.


RE: Public Safety
By jvillaro on 6/11/2010 12:50:15 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah like it wasn't easy enough for that random jerk to buy a gun and go blowing of peoples head just as or even easier


RE: Public Safety
By P4iN on 6/11/2010 6:00:35 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah im worried about that too...
whats the max range for the kind of damage mentioned in the article(skin damage, etc...)?


RE: Public Safety
By JediJeb on 6/11/2010 2:01:55 PM , Rating: 1
Depends on how well focused the beam is. If a beam doubles in diameter then it is 4x less powerful. If it keeps nearly the same diameter at 100m as it does at 1m then it will have the same power at 100m as 1m, but if the beam doubles in diameter at 100m then it will have 1/4 the power.

Think of the difference in a computer processor and a space heater. The processor will burn your finger if you directly touch it even when it only puts out 45w, but a space heater running at 600w may not even be as hot.

People here are instantly calling for a ban on this and yet most don't even know what regulations are currently in place. Dihydrogenmonoxide will kill more people this year than this thing ever will, yet it is a totally unregulated chemical, anyone can buy it in the store, children spray it on themselves all the time, and yet this dangerous chemical is not banned. Why not ban something that is already killing people instead of calling for a ban on something that might kill someone.


RE: Public Safety
By mrgoodbytes87 on 7/1/2010 3:59:14 PM , Rating: 2
Not to mention it's a key component of acid rain and is in every water system in the world. :P


RE: Public Safety
By callmeroy on 6/11/2010 11:05:03 AM , Rating: 1
Couldn't agree more. I'm reading the article and all the while waiting for the line about how its difficult to get one of these things, but apparently its just a matter of signing a paper and dropping a very affordable amount of just $200.

Burn flesh? PERMANENTLY blind people instantly? WTF....why should this NOT be considered as dangerous to public safety as a gun?

This should be out right banned in the whole country *OR* have strict processes and licensing requirements in order to legal own one.

It goes with out saying a safety course (an actual course not just -- hey read this paper) and a minimal age limit should be the least of the requirements to get a license to have one of these things. (Probably a criminal background check as well)


RE: Public Safety
By Moishe on 6/11/2010 1:14:38 PM , Rating: 3
I'm not worried.
We can't keep removing our freedoms by coddling people because "something bad might happen."

Eventually, we won't have any freedom left. The government is already treating us like children, and we're allowing it.

I'd rather have more freedom with more risk than less freedom with less risk.


RE: Public Safety
By muhahaaha on 6/15/2010 12:04:15 PM , Rating: 2
yep, that will be me. muhahahah


RE: Public Safety
By inferno375 on 6/18/2010 3:15:07 AM , Rating: 2
calm down there is no need to worry about the power of this laser worry if you ordered this is a simple identity theft scam look at the information they want none of which is required any who jumped at this just had their identity stolen. Anyone who ordered and actually have one of these care to post video and prove me wrong


Sweet
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/10/2010 3:41:45 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like I need to hurry up and buy one before it becomes illegal.




RE: Sweet
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/10/2010 3:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The price of $200 is quite commendable, considering it's 20 times as powerful as the company's previous best model, "Sonar", while a mere tenth of the cost

Wait a minute. This part of the article just registered in my mind. This has to be a hoax. Also, their website is down currently.


RE: Sweet
By mcnabney on 6/10/2010 4:05:28 PM , Rating: 4
You might be correct. A 1W laser for $200, especially of this size, is unprecedented. It would be like Tesla announcing that they will be selling their sports car for a grand. This diode is either extremely cheap to make or this is a mistake/hoax.

Also a little suspicious of it being blue. Must really be a special diode.


RE: Sweet
By omnicronx on 6/10/2010 4:07:40 PM , Rating: 2
I'm guessing they missed a 0... the previous 300mW version was around 1200..


RE: Sweet
By elFarto on 6/10/2010 4:43:15 PM , Rating: 2
They're site does actually say 1W (Google has a cached copy). However, that laser warning sticker says 2500mW, which is...odd.

Regards
elFarto


RE: Sweet
By zmatt on 6/10/2010 4:49:16 PM , Rating: 3
I don't see why it can't be done. Blu-ray lasers for the non recordable drives range form 250-350mw. The recordable drives use 500mw more or less. 1 watt = 1000mw. You can over volt a blu ray laser diode and get close to that and they weren't intended for that usage. I don't see any engineering reason why it cant be 1 watt.


RE: Sweet
By rs1 on 6/11/2010 2:20:39 AM , Rating: 4
I finally managed to get to the page that talks about how they build these. Basically, they dismantle an $800 LED projector for its blue laser diodes. Judging by the images they provide, each projector appears to have 8 laser diodes inside it (or rather, there appear to be 24 diodes, of which I assume 8 are blue), putting the cost of each diode at roughly $100 (arguably less if they use the other diodes to produce red and green lasers to sell). Assuming the rest of the parts in the device are reasonably affordable, their production cost might be around $125 per unit, plus labor.

So I think it's conceivable that they would sell them at $200. I also think they could get away with charging quite a bit more for them, as well.


RE: Sweet
By Moishe on 6/11/2010 1:16:11 PM , Rating: 2
Awesome info. Thanks.


RE: Sweet
By Sazabi19 on 6/12/2010 3:10:32 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it is correct, i just ordered one, i figure it should at least be a great convo piece, or a novelty one day, but it was $257 after i added the 2 yr warranty (standard 3 months) and $20 shipping. It should be fun:)


RE: Sweet
By omnicronx on 6/10/2010 4:06:33 PM , Rating: 2
The site is legit, I've seen the previous Spyder model before.. Whether or they are actually selling a class 4 laser for 200 dollars is yet to be seen.. IMO they made a mistake on the price (or its a hoax).. I don't see how a blue laser alone could cost that little, let a lone a full fledge portable device.


RE: Sweet
By MozeeToby on 6/10/2010 4:49:06 PM , Rating: 2
Any Blu-ray player already has a blue laser diode that peaks at 250mA. It's not impossible, but I can't imagine who their supplier would be, maybe a long range communication manufacturer?


RE: Sweet
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/11/2010 9:56:18 PM , Rating: 2
It was right in the article:

quote:
The laser is built with a diode from Casio's new mercury-free Green Slim projectors which ironically have a somewhat blue tint.


RE: Sweet
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/11/2010 8:08:52 AM , Rating: 2
Aaaaaand...purchased!


Pull It
By btc909 on 6/10/2010 4:03:56 PM , Rating: 1
I don't see this being on the market for very long.




RE: Pull It
By redbone75 on 6/10/2010 4:18:10 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see how this was even allowed to be sold in the first place.


RE: Pull It
By 91TTZ on 6/10/2010 4:29:50 PM , Rating: 2
Why not? You can buy a shotgun at a Wal-Mart and you can cause a lot more damage with that than you can with this.


RE: Pull It
By soloman02 on 6/10/2010 4:38:03 PM , Rating: 2
You used to be able to buy a shotgun at walmart. Here in New Hampshire walmart no longer sells any firearms. They now only sell Airsoft, paintball, and BB guns. They also sell a few Muzzle loader rifles.

The only department store in NH that sells rifles or shotguns now is Dicks Sporting Goods.

If only we had a Cabelas here...


RE: Pull It
By HostileEffect on 6/10/2010 7:26:30 PM , Rating: 2
Check out the Wal-marts in Texas, they got rifles, ammo, camouflage, camping gear, car batteries, all the stuff your ever going to need.


RE: Pull It
By irsmurf on 6/10/2010 7:51:28 PM , Rating: 2
Are you Jack Bauer?


RE: Pull It
By Lord 666 on 6/10/10, Rating: -1
Harmless
By Matthiasa on 6/10/2010 10:26:18 PM , Rating: 2
At 1 watt it wont melt your face it wont damage most objects it will barely heat them up even. A single light bulb puts out more energy then this thing does. It will blind you but so will looking at the sun to much. Non story, except maybe the price 1w laser diodes are really really expensive.




RE: Harmless
By ghost101 on 6/10/2010 10:53:14 PM , Rating: 1
You'd have thought, someone would at least do a google search before trying to claim so many people are wrong.

I suggest you use the search terms "1w laser" on youtube.


RE: Harmless
By Matthiasa on 6/11/2010 12:05:40 AM , Rating: 2
Yes one would, so how come you didn't?
60W lasers can burn <spots in thin> things but even that can take a while.
1W can pop a balloon if it has the right lenses to focus it.

1 watt is almost nothing when uses against skin (not including the eyes).

In case you were wondering this thing would take ~4s to raise just 1g of water 1C in other words to seriously burn someone you're going to be waiting a while.

Oh and for actual use in war the military is looking at ~100KW for use.


RE: Harmless
By PolygonUK on 6/11/2010 6:01:02 PM , Rating: 2
Regarding skin burning I think Matthiasa has a point in that people hit by this laser would not be instantly going Raiders of the Lost Ark, but I'm not sure you can compare lasers with the power of lightbulbs and heating water. The key is power density. The Spyder III has an output power of 1 W and a continuous beam of diameter 1.5 mm. Assuming no beam divergence:

Power density = 1 W / p(0.75)^2 = 566 mW/mm^2.

Solar power density at ground level is well known to be about 1 mW/mm^2 on a clear day, and that power contains a whole range of wavelengths, not a highly collimated, coherent laser beam at 445 nm.

I may be wrong but the figures indicate the laser might feel a tad uncomfortable under a continuous stationary beam at close quarters - depending on how the skin absorbed 445 nm.

I completely agree that this could fry your retinas very quickly.


RE: Harmless
By Veoni on 6/12/2010 1:13:19 PM , Rating: 2
I have a nice hole in one of the walls of the lab - done by a 2 W laser. A 1 W laser is far from harmless...


It''ll be a weapon soon enough!
By Orac4prez on 6/10/2010 8:04:53 PM , Rating: 2
Why won't the military love it? If a combatant is about to kill you, and you have a choice to kill him or disable him (or her) what would you do?. If the there are casualties (but few deaths), the military look more humane as they have minimised death. Furthermore, it takes a lot more resources to look after a wounded (or blind) soldier than a dead person. If someone is dead, the Taliban may leave him behind to recover him latter. If the person is injured, they are less likely to do so and may need 2 people to guide him (2 people less to shoot at you) and then more poeple back home to try to heal/repatriate. If you shoot someone they may be injured, but can often fire back. If they are blinded, they may be able to fire but their aim is going to be "pot luck". If it isn't specifically forbidden in the articles of war, then it will almost certainly be used. If it is forbidden it will still be used but it may be more covertly used. I would like to know the frequnecy of this beast. Maybe it is a forerunner of a sea based laser to blast holes in subs and boats (eneregy of most lasers is dissipated in water)




RE: It''ll be a weapon soon enough!
By Rookierookie on 6/10/2010 9:50:02 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it IS forbidden.

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/0/49de65e1b0a201a7c125...

And before you ask, the US HAS ratified this section.


RE: It''ll be a weapon soon enough!
By Firebat5 on 6/10/2010 10:50:54 PM , Rating: 2
Well the link does forbid transferance of such weapons by "High Contracting Parties" but it does NOT forbid the use of such weapons. The only stipulation is that all feasible measures be taken to avoid "permanent blindness" from the use of these types of weapons.

In fact, "Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment" of the weapon is "not covered" by this document/treaty.

IMO the link doesn't support your statement.


By Rookierookie on 6/11/2010 2:23:40 PM , Rating: 2
"It is prohibited to employ laser weapons specifically designed, as their sole combat function or as one of their combat functions, to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision, that is to the naked eye or to the eye with corrective eyesight devices. "

Sentence 1 of the article. Looks like you've been hit by one of these lightsabers.

The incidental/collateral effect would refer to, for example, a laser designator for aiming accidentally causing blindness.


I could be wrong...
By morphologia on 6/10/2010 4:26:01 PM , Rating: 5
...but that price makes me think the sources for this story may be full of Sith. Either that or I'm totally in the Darth.

Ouch, I think I just gave myself indigestion with those bad puns. But seriously...will this thing require a permit or something? Maybe a lifetime commitment to defending the universe? And how long will it be before some idjit jury-rigs one of these with industrial-grade spare parts, to write his initials on the moon?




RE: I could be wrong...
By Trickydicky on 6/11/2010 1:42:00 AM , Rating: 2
I think you're right. No idea where the info for this article came from (probably a long time ago in a galaxy far far away...) but according to the webiste the $200 lazer is only 50mW and the most powerful is 500mW (not 1W) and costs $3k


Lightsaber License
By Hogger1 on 6/11/2010 1:30:26 PM , Rating: 2
That be funny if the gov required you obtain a license to buy and carry one of these.

"Hi. I'm here to apply for my dual weilding lightsaber license."
"Take a number and have a seat, sir."




RE: Lightsaber License
By MegaHustler on 6/14/2010 3:49:46 PM , Rating: 3
Fill out this questionnaire please:

1) Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Sith?
2) Are you affiliated with any current members of the Sith? If so, please elaborate.
3) Are you a clone soldier?
4) Do you believe dead Jedi are communicating with you?
5) Assume your young wife is dying in childbirth. Do you feel: a) Sad, b) enraged, c) ready to join the Sith as their Dark Lord?


RE: Lightsaber License
By Hogger1 on 6/15/2010 9:38:16 AM , Rating: 2
Lol.

6)In the last 6 months have you felt: fear->anger->hate->suffering?


What is this for?
By vadimur on 6/12/2010 12:09:00 AM , Rating: 2
What is the purpose of this product other than to hurt people?




RE: What is this for?
By thekadar81 on 6/15/2010 5:32:07 AM , Rating: 2
Hurting people is a good enough purpose. How about hurting the burglar that breaks into your house, the mugger stealing your wallet, or the rapist attacking you/your wife/your daughter?


RE: What is this for?
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/29/2010 8:05:12 AM , Rating: 2
It's primary purpose is just to be awesome. Does it really need any other purpose besides that?


This is the future.
By DixyCrat on 6/10/2010 4:31:34 PM , Rating: 2
...

Terrorism that can be stopped by a security check point will be passe in comparison to the destruction some kids screwing around with $50 worth of crap off the internet will be capable of in 20 years.

Imagine a carbon nanotube setup like a garrote wire across the golden gate-bridge:
cut in half and not know it until you hit the breaks.

Imagine this technology taken another 20 years out:
forget blinding people, this could cut planes in flight in half.

Imagine the your home bacteria-targeting buckeyball station with the payload replaced with the cartridge from your home botox machine and then pushed out of a spray bottle.

crazy? maybe... but they said i was crazy when I wanted a light-saber to murder bums and prostitutes with and now I have that.




RE: This is the future.
By Mojo the Monkey on 6/10/2010 5:20:06 PM , Rating: 3
all of your concerns are alleviated by my patented carbon nanotube-based carbon nanotube-blocking underwear with laser detection and return fire systems.


In a related story....
By chagrinnin on 6/10/2010 7:40:41 PM , Rating: 5
...the victim of a mugging used the Spyder III laser to ward off his attacker and was somewhat successful in doing so. While the mugger is recovering from third degree burns at the county hospital seven witnesses including the victim were blinded during the incident and may be unable to corroborate the victims story. Charges are pending.




Oh please
By Motoman on 6/10/2010 3:37:23 PM , Rating: 2
...really, lifting your tagline from Spider-Man? Oy.




RE: Oh please
By rburnham on 6/11/2010 10:54:20 AM , Rating: 2
It really makes the rest of us nerds look bad.


Grrr....
By irsmurf on 6/10/2010 7:23:34 PM , Rating: 2
I'm trying to buy one. The website is getting HAMMERED. It just went down, completely.




RE: Grrr....
By irsmurf on 6/10/2010 7:55:43 PM , Rating: 2
What the... the price went up to $257.97.

I'll wait for a sale or a 20% off code.

http://www.irsmurf.com/forums/dt/up.png


Laser Power
By joe4324 on 6/11/2010 6:38:06 AM , Rating: 2
I've worked with industrial lasers before. 1W "isn't" the death star laser by any stretch. Yes it can hurt you but I think to say it will 'set you on fire' is a big stretch. The 13-19Watt Co2 lasers I've used in the past on the other hand had been actually quite dangerous. But even then its not going to cut you in half. But it could cut you pretty good and you might not even know it since its likely the nerves would be cut and seared as fast as they can send a signal.

Yes this is dangerous, But probably not substantially more than a pellet rifle.




RE: Laser Power
By Grape Flavor on 6/12/2010 2:07:52 AM , Rating: 2
Really? A pellet rifle? A pellet rifle can cause you a superficial tissue wound which will heal quickly, if someone shoots you with it.

This thing WILL BLIND YOU FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE if you happen to glance in its direction for even a fraction of a second, (or see the reflection off of a window, car, building or absolutely anything halfway shiny.

You really think this is equivalent?

And yes, while you could blind someone with a pellet rifle I don't imagine its easy to shoot someones eye with pinpoint accuracy, with a pellet rifle, as they are fleeing from you.

This thing? Just aim it at a car down the street and you've just ruined that person's life.


Do not underestimate how dangerous this is.
By Dubb on 6/11/2010 1:06:22 PM , Rating: 2
1W of 445 nm at these specs can blind someone almost instantly from 200 meters away.

it IS a weapon, but one that can easily accidentally reflect off of glass and light colored surfaces in unpredictable directions

If you think you can operate this safely, avoiding mammals, aircraft, cars, light colored surfaces and glass, well, good on you. I know I can't claim that with any degree of certainty.




By Grape Flavor on 6/12/2010 2:23:59 AM , Rating: 1
Imagine this.

Picture some asshole, crouching behind a bush, at the edge of a crowded city plaza. He's wearing the safety glasses so he'll be fine.

Next time you're downtown take a look at how many reflective surfaces there are. Buildings are shiny, cars are shiny, purses are shiny, metal signs are shiny, the list is infinite.

Asshole takes out the laser and turns it on, waves it around indiscriminately for a few seconds. Puts it back in his bag and strolls casually away. No one notices.

Dozens of people, if not more, are permanently blinded. And all for just $200.

Can you imagine a cheaper, easier, more effective, and risk free terrorist act?

No. This thing is worse than owning a gun on so many levels and the legal penalties should reflect that. Your right to play around with a stupid little lazer toy is not greater than the public's right to wall down the street without fear of being blinded. Only the most selfish, irresponsible, sociopathic person would ever question that.


By LRonaldHubbs on 6/12/2010 11:32:36 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
No. This thing is worse than owning a gun on so many levels and the legal penalties should reflect that. Your right to play around with a stupid little lazer toy is not greater than the public's right to wall down the street without fear of being blinded. Only the most selfish, irresponsible, sociopathic person would ever question that.

Stupid? A laser toy is stupid??? Did you all hear that? Er, I mean...this isn't about the laser toy. This is about freedom, and my rights, and I have the right to buy anything I want!

Okay, but seriously, you're being ridiculous. You came close to a valid point but then followed it up with a bunch of crap. You should have stopped here:
quote:
This thing is worse than owning a gun on so many levels and the legal penalties should reflect that.

Yes, the scenario that you described in which someone blinds a whole crowd of people should be punished very harshly, equally harshly as someone who murders someone else with any type of weapon.

This doesn't mean we need to ban these lasers across the board. Only the most paranoid, self-important, and authoritarian person would ever question that. Maybe you don't have anywhere to safely operate a laser like this, so fine, don't buy one. But don't tell me that I also can't safely operate it in spite of the fact that you know absolutely nothing about me. I happen to live in the middle of nowhere with 10 acres of land and dense woods on all boundaries. I have my own shooting range FFS. I can easily use this laser without harming anyone.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be regulated. I recognize that this is a dangerous item and that felons or mentally unstable individuals probably shouldn't possess them, same as with guns. But you're pushing for a blanket ban. I already bought one, so you sir can kindly suck my balls.


Innate goodness of man
By Thud on 6/13/2010 1:45:09 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure no one is going to use a silent, perfectly accurate, infinite range, blinding sniper rifle for nefarious purposes.




RE: Innate goodness of man
By thekadar81 on 6/15/2010 5:25:23 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sure no one will use a 2,000 pound guided missile with a liquid explosive payload for nefarious purposes. Oh wait, that's a car.
Guns are dangerous, knives are dangerous, bleach is dangerous, fireworks are dangerous, a baseball bat is dangerous.
There are plenty of dangerous things in this world. You can't eliminate them all. You can only punish the people who do not use them responsibly.


Off the market
By soundcore4 on 6/13/2010 5:53:55 PM , Rating: 2
This thing will be.
Dangerous it is.




RE: Off the market
By chloeelvis on 6/28/2010 11:59:41 PM , Rating: 2
really i am quite agree with you. this powerful laser is really a very dangerous to use. a terrible experience. you can see the IR filter laser pointer from http://www.perfectlasers.net/, a safe one to use.


where do you guys get your info from?
By reredrum on 6/13/2010 6:01:56 PM , Rating: 2
im on their website and the most powerful spyder III pro is 500mW and it's $3000!!!

http://www.wickedlasers.com/lasers/Spyder_III_Pro-...




By reredrum on 6/13/2010 6:51:54 PM , Rating: 2
nevermind... lol their website is retarded i found the 1w $200 one. http://www.wickedlasers.com/lasers/Spyder_III_Pro_...


Bugs Killer?
By NewBro on 6/18/2010 8:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
What I really want to know is.. Can this thing kill a cockroach?




RE: Bugs Killer?
By mrgoodbytes87 on 7/1/2010 3:55:36 PM , Rating: 2
Yes. It absolutely can. Just be very careful about what's around the cockroach, if the beam hits a shiny surface it could easily blind or otherwise injure anyone else in the vicinity.


In before archived
By HostileEffect on 6/22/2010 9:11:35 PM , Rating: 2
So... why not mount and level a rifle scope to this sweet piece of hardware?




RE: In before archived
By mrgoodbytes87 on 7/1/2010 3:57:32 PM , Rating: 2
Because a cheaper, less dangerous, far more visible laser would do the job.


By TennesseeTony on 6/10/2010 6:51:31 PM , Rating: 3
Thinking it's too 'good' to be true, but I want one anyway. But NOOOOO. Those of you not posting how dangerous this item is (and I agree) are trying to buy one.

So now the site's down and I can't get one of the first ten-thousand to be sold. Boo!




Where can it buy
By optimuscream on 6/10/2010 9:53:26 PM , Rating: 1
Is it sell in the toy shop ?




RE: Where can it buy
By mrgoodbytes87 on 7/1/2010 3:53:15 PM , Rating: 2
You have to buy it online. And it is absolutely NOT a toy. Don't buy it unless you know what you're doing.


SCAM
By Biodude on 6/11/2010 10:01:38 AM , Rating: 1
I call scam. Or the price is a mistake. We buy high powered lasers all the time, and the last 405nm one at ~100mW was in the 5-6k price range. And there are design issues too, it would seem to me (although I don't make them, I just use them). Getting that kind of power out of a stick that doesn't have air cooling fins all over it looks fishy to me.

And I don't see a battery life of 2 hours. Not at a Watt. A Watt at a single wavelength, in a coherent beam, is serious output. Don't compare this to a 1W LED, it's not the same stuff.




RE: SCAM
By Alexstarfire on 6/11/2010 3:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
Well, to be fair a 1W LED would last days, if not weeks, on the type of batteries used for this thing.


Nice product...
By millerm277 on 6/12/2010 12:35:16 AM , Rating: 3
Upon seeing this, I thought two things:
1. Holy s***, this is incredibly dangerous to let people have for $200.
2. I need to get one before they get banned for #1.




When coupled with the skill
By indignation on 6/17/2010 1:16:00 AM , Rating: 3
Traceurs buying this = win




Marine investment?
By icanhascpu on 6/10/2010 3:48:51 PM , Rating: 2
Into frikkin sharks populations next?




blindness
By trnddwn33 on 6/10/2010 4:16:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The product even comes with a free pair of safety glasses, so you don't accidentally blind yourself.


So you wont go blind, but you'll melt your face. Haha. If this is real I'm picking one up.




Hobos Beware
By bubbastrangelove on 6/10/2010 4:24:04 PM , Rating: 2
I doubt this will be the last time we'll see these in the news.




next youll see
By meepstone on 6/10/2010 5:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
People complaining about lasers killing people and how terrible they are like guns. While we're at it lets ban knifes, pitchforks, saws, and spoons cus we all know those make you fat.




By Camikazi on 6/10/2010 7:33:04 PM , Rating: 2
Yea cause registration and wait times stop guns from getting on the streets :P


New Lighter
By Slayeristight on 6/10/2010 10:58:19 PM , Rating: 2
No more burnt fingers for me on the 4th, I am going to get this bad boy for my new fireworks lighter! Wonder if you can light a bbq with it? Hmm... all these possibilities!




Can't wait
By Breathless on 6/11/2010 9:51:14 AM , Rating: 2
I got mine coming! I can picture it now:

Mugger: Give me all your money!

Me: (Vwing) Do you know what this is sucka?

Mugger: I said give me your money! Now!

Me: (Vwing, Vwing, Vwing)

Mugger: Ahhhh, I'm blind!




Discount
By electros on 6/13/2010 5:36:49 AM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately they deactivated coupon codes and free shipping on this, but you can still get a 5% discount by going through this portal: http://www.wickedlasers.com/index.php?refer=61031




laser
By tractah on 6/13/2010 5:40:49 PM , Rating: 2
I have a laser on my rifle that is supposedly good for a mile but with this laser you won't need a rifle.




laser fun
By tractah on 6/13/2010 5:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
Mine is a 2.5-4 mW output (do not know why there is a power variance) laser, which is good for a mile and is chock full of warnings about eyes, aircraft etc. It is a combat laser which can be obtained by the general public and would be awesome for jacking deer.




laser fun
By tractah on 6/13/2010 8:07:37 PM , Rating: 2
A one watt laser is powerful. My 4mW laser is only 4/1000th of a watt, which is considered a class III, cold laser and yet is green visible for a mile.




Wickedlasers Discount
By ipay on 6/14/2010 9:12:52 PM , Rating: 2
If you want a 5% discount on this laser and all items at wickedlasers, use this link: http://www.wickedlasers.com/index.php?refer=23037




This needs to be illegal
By AntDX316 on 6/15/2010 6:17:11 AM , Rating: 2
You know the types of mischiefs people can pull with a device like this? From ingraving burn marks on cars, to lighting people's roofs on fire, to their trees, to peoples skin and eyes from a distance where they will be hard to detect, I highly advice this to be illegal, this is worse than a gun because it's silence, stealthy, and as deadly as a gun if shined into someones eyes




the mind reels
By niveknivek on 6/15/2010 5:46:30 PM , Rating: 2
If this is what 200 dollars buys at retail, the mind reels at what 10 or 20 thousand might buy. How long before we see a backpack model? (The "Road Rager", the "Bum Toaster II",?!)

I would bet we should get our now before the inevitable regulations come about.




A weapon of terror
By Icehearted on 6/16/2010 9:38:19 PM , Rating: 2
Someone decides it'd be lolz to blind a bunch of people, walks into a busy grocery store, shines this thing around all about the ceiling while wearing glasses, people are now blind for life, for this one guy's lolz. Or they could just flash it at drivers on a freeway from a roadside, at a chopper overhead, this thing has a lot of potential for havoc.

I'm pretty surprised this isn't illegal without a license already.




artic laser III
By scott700 on 6/17/2010 5:12:33 PM , Rating: 2
This is a scam. I was scammed. If you dont believe me try calling their customer service, instant chat, or send an e-mail. I finally got ahold of someone but they wouldn't help me because they were in sales. You cant even post a comment because you have to sign up 1st. When you do sign up they say they will send a confirmation via e-mail, but it never arrives. So I cant warn anyone directly from the site! They will take all the money they can until it is widley known that they turned scammers. please let others know. Please post your own findings to help others not be scammed.




scamm for sure
By inferno375 on 6/18/2010 3:11:39 AM , Rating: 2
calm down there is no need to worry about the power of this laser worry if you ordered one this is a simple identity theft scam look at the information they want none of which is required any who jumped at this just had their identity stolen. Anyone who ordered and actually have one of these care to post video and prove me wrong




BS
By picrthis on 6/18/2010 11:31:47 AM , Rating: 2
Quote:
"Apparently the laser is so high powered that shining it on fleshy parts will cause them to burst into flames"
End quote:

That is TOTAL BS & WL HYPE, it can NOT and does NOT do that.

Chinese Marketing at it's worst, and what is even worst than that is the media that print such stupid scare stories to alarm the public. Go ahead and show us skin BURSTING into flames, dam idiots!




visibility
By pawnking on 6/28/2010 3:25:24 AM , Rating: 2
Safety issues aside, visibility of a 445nm laser, even with 1 watt of power, is very bad.

I'd rather have a much lower power highly visible green laser such as the Hulk 200mW from Dragonlasers at http://www.dragonlasers.com




powerful laser
By chloeelvis on 6/28/2010 11:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
wow, i nearly cannot believe my eyes, a laser might be powerful enough to make a man on fire. this <a href="http://www.perfectlasers.net">laser pointer</a> might be very dangerous to use.




The safety of the Spyder
By mrgoodbytes87 on 7/1/2010 3:47:20 PM , Rating: 2