L@ser attacks on Aircraft
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: new york
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shining a light or l@ser at an aircraft cockpit in the U.K could land you in jail.
Hi All,
Found this article and thought that it was interesting.
Shining light or laser at aircraft cockpit in U.K. is now a criminal law.
CUBE
Found this article and thought that it was interesting.
Shining light or laser at aircraft cockpit in U.K. is now a criminal law.
CUBE
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea behind redifining the offence was to avoid having to prove 'reckless endangerment' and make the offence a simple one of shining the laser at the aircraft in the first pace.
man convicted in Germany
A man was convicted on 13 Jan 2010 for shining a laser onto a police helicopter and thereby blinding the pilot - who luckly was flying with the autopilot engaged. Sentence was 10 month prison - on probation - and 1000 € (wich ~ one month pay)
Polizeipresse: Landesamt für Zentrale Polizeiliche Dienste NRW - POL-LZPD: Polizeihubschrauber mit Laser geblendet - 10 Monate Haft auf Bewährung und 1.000,- Euro Geldstrafe
Greetings Flying Bull
Polizeipresse: Landesamt für Zentrale Polizeiliche Dienste NRW - POL-LZPD: Polizeihubschrauber mit Laser geblendet - 10 Monate Haft auf Bewährung und 1.000,- Euro Geldstrafe
Greetings Flying Bull
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not aware of an unsuccesful prosecution where reckless endangerment was charged for shining a light/l@ser. The new offence may increase the number of charges/convictions but not the conviction rate.
Further, Article 222 provides:
222. A person must not in the United Kingdom direct or shine any light at any aircraft in flight so as to dazzle or distract the pilot of the aircraft.
If the requirement for the offence is "..so as to dazzle or distract the pilot..." would this not in all probability amount to reckless or negligent endangerment in any event?
Is there anyone on Pprune who would disagree with the proposition that targeting a laser at a helicopter or fixed wing cockpit is inherently dangerous and therefore likely to endanger the safety of that aircraft? Thus we seek to discourage it.
The first principle is that a person who is tempted to blind a pilot with a high powered light or l@ser is a moron to begin with. Previously some (although I accept not all) of the morons who were tempted to do it might just have been deterred by the likelihood that, if caught, they would go to prison. Now the greatest risk is a fine. The point I was making was simply that in terms of deterrence (and in the light of Court of Appeal judgements as to the appropriate level of sentence) the introduction of this offence does virtually nothing to enhance avaiation safety.
As an example
Most people reading this will have exceeded the speed limit at some point. Why? It is against the law but the penalty, a fine and points on the licence. (Obviously the more points a motorist has the less they may be inclined to break the speed limit).
Significantly fewer will drink and drive. Why? Fine plus automatic disqualification.
Fewer still will, with a previous drink drive conviction, drink and drive again. Why? Fine plus real risk of prison and much longer disqualification.
The greater the known penalty the less the temptation. Simples
Further, Article 222 provides:
222. A person must not in the United Kingdom direct or shine any light at any aircraft in flight so as to dazzle or distract the pilot of the aircraft.
If the requirement for the offence is "..so as to dazzle or distract the pilot..." would this not in all probability amount to reckless or negligent endangerment in any event?
Is there anyone on Pprune who would disagree with the proposition that targeting a laser at a helicopter or fixed wing cockpit is inherently dangerous and therefore likely to endanger the safety of that aircraft? Thus we seek to discourage it.
The first principle is that a person who is tempted to blind a pilot with a high powered light or l@ser is a moron to begin with. Previously some (although I accept not all) of the morons who were tempted to do it might just have been deterred by the likelihood that, if caught, they would go to prison. Now the greatest risk is a fine. The point I was making was simply that in terms of deterrence (and in the light of Court of Appeal judgements as to the appropriate level of sentence) the introduction of this offence does virtually nothing to enhance avaiation safety.
As an example
Most people reading this will have exceeded the speed limit at some point. Why? It is against the law but the penalty, a fine and points on the licence. (Obviously the more points a motorist has the less they may be inclined to break the speed limit).
Significantly fewer will drink and drive. Why? Fine plus automatic disqualification.
Fewer still will, with a previous drink drive conviction, drink and drive again. Why? Fine plus real risk of prison and much longer disqualification.
The greater the known penalty the less the temptation. Simples
Last edited by Legalapproach; 14th Jan 2010 at 06:29.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anonythemouse
I thought proving either reckless or negligent was enough. There's been lots of convictions for endangering reported in this forum and in R&N. Has anyone got off? Even if there was a problem getting convictions, which Legalapproach says there isn't, what's the idea behind making the worst punishment for the new offense a fine? 
The number of laser attacks have rocketed in many countries, its a serious flight safety problem, judges have sent several people to jail, the British Court of Appeal said they should go to jail and the new offence has a worst punishment of, wait for it .................. a fine.
How stupid is that.
The idea behind redifining the offence was to avoid having to prove 'reckless endangerment' and make the offence a simple one of shining the l@ser at the aircraft in the first pace.
The number of laser attacks have rocketed in many countries, its a serious flight safety problem, judges have sent several people to jail, the British Court of Appeal said they should go to jail and the new offence has a worst punishment of, wait for it .................. a fine.
How stupid is that.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anyone considered that some people might shine a l'aser at an aircraft not with the intention of blinding the occupants, but simply to see how far the light travels? There will always be those that wish to cause harm, but I imagine a large number are simply down to curiosity.
There should be some proper publicity regarding the dangers and potential punishments. How can you expect people to stop doing this, if they don't know it's wrong?
There should be some proper publicity regarding the dangers and potential punishments. How can you expect people to stop doing this, if they don't know it's wrong?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bath, UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignorance of the law is no defence. Sure, some publicity might help to educate the public, but most small boys tire of pulling the legs off flies and playing with matches at an early age, as a result of boredom, sometimes painful realisation that their actions have consequences, or the acquisition of some semblance of intelligence and morality.
UK law has changed in two ways. First, the use of lasers is now a specific offence. Second, it's a strict liability offence.. In other words, you can't claim that you did it to test how well your laser pen worked or that you were communicating with UFOs, or that you had a very troubled childhood from which you've failed to grow up.
UK law has changed in two ways. First, the use of lasers is now a specific offence. Second, it's a strict liability offence.. In other words, you can't claim that you did it to test how well your laser pen worked or that you were communicating with UFOs, or that you had a very troubled childhood from which you've failed to grow up.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the YouTube clip, it appears to show the culprit's name - Alison Kruse? I would be surprised if the local Police haven't knocked on her door yet.
Listening to the "commentary" she does sound a bit "heid the baw" (I don't normally use Glasgow patter, hailing from another part of Scotland, but this expression is a pretty good description).
Listening to the "commentary" she does sound a bit "heid the baw" (I don't normally use Glasgow patter, hailing from another part of Scotland, but this expression is a pretty good description).
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: No. Cal, USA
Age: 72
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 years in the slammer for laser pointing
Sacto 9-1-1: Rocklin man sentenced to 4-year prison term for laser pointing
For all the criticism the US gets, I think we handled this quite well...
For all the criticism the US gets, I think we handled this quite well...
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SummerLightning
The new UK law Article 222 of the 2009 ANO states: “A person must not in the U.K. direct or shine any light at any aircraft in flight so as to dazzle or distract the pilot of the aircraft.”
What does "so as to" mean?
Does it mean the DA has to prove the guy pointing the laser 'intended to' dazzle or distract the pilot?
Or that the laser did dazzle or distract the pilot?
Or both?
grumpyoldgeek
Yep, although lasers are a global problem, for some reason the UK has gone out of step not only with America but most other countries. The new offense doesn't give UK courts power to send laser offenders to prison!
Max penalty of a fine is a great deterrent.
it's a strict liability offence
What does "so as to" mean?
Does it mean the DA has to prove the guy pointing the laser 'intended to' dazzle or distract the pilot?
Or that the laser did dazzle or distract the pilot?
Or both?
grumpyoldgeek
Yep, although lasers are a global problem, for some reason the UK has gone out of step not only with America but most other countries. The new offense doesn't give UK courts power to send laser offenders to prison!
Max penalty of a fine is a great deterrent.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canada is just like the UK
Yes. People who shine lasers at planes but don't yet crash them should still be jailed.
However, in Canada, people who do _really_ nasty things that cause big injuries rarely get jail time.
In this situation, America has the right answer.
Yes. People who shine lasers at planes but don't yet crash them should still be jailed.
However, in Canada, people who do _really_ nasty things that cause big injuries rarely get jail time.
In this situation, America has the right answer.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Teesside
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gazette Live - News - Local News - Two teens arrested under Air Navigation Order. Location North East of England, nearest airport MME about 5 miles. The system works , at least it does here.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Pacific Northwest, USA
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Youtube video flight identified?
Regarding the video posted above, I have engaged the youtube poster in what might loosely be called "discussion". She has disclosed the location from where it was taped, the time and the direction in which they were looking. The "light" in the video happens to almost _exactly_ correspond with flight SWA1840 from KMCO to KPIT on Saturday, 23 Jan 2010. If the pilots of that flight were in any way affected by the laser I'm sure they may wish to take up the issue with the above youtube poster. Hope this helps. -- T.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bath, UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bronx, you've highlighted what seems to be poor drafting in the UK law. I hadn't read the Act in detail. The intention as I understand it was to create a strict liability offence, but 'so as to' can be construed in either/both of the ways you mention, and it will be, resulting in failed prosecutions.
I'm not sure why many of our politicians don't have English as their first language, but sadly that seems to be the case.
Those Pennsylvanian ufo thingies were 'hovering', by the way, or so I've been informed by a keen observer of extraterrestrial matters in that area in response to my YouTube comments.
Fair game, then. Obviously 'grey' pilots with their legendarily large eyes won't be bothered by lasers at all. Bless 'em, they're even blinking their lights back at us...
I'm not sure why many of our politicians don't have English as their first language, but sadly that seems to be the case.
Those Pennsylvanian ufo thingies were 'hovering', by the way, or so I've been informed by a keen observer of extraterrestrial matters in that area in response to my YouTube comments.
Fair game, then. Obviously 'grey' pilots with their legendarily large eyes won't be bothered by lasers at all. Bless 'em, they're even blinking their lights back at us...
“A person must not in the U.K. direct or shine any light at any aircraft in flight so as to dazzle or distract the pilot of the aircraft.”
Idiot in Adelaide
Irfan Bozan risks visa loss of Qantas laser incident | Adelaide Now
got a 14 month suspended sentence for shining a green laser at a Qantas cockpit.
Michael
got a 14 month suspended sentence for shining a green laser at a Qantas cockpit.
Michael
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: North West England
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The phrase 'so as to' should mean that the offence will be complete whether the offender has intentionally or recklessly managed to get the light pointer on the aircraft.
I would imagine the basic points to prove would be that the offender was the person in possession of the pen, that they had shone it towards the aircraft and that the pilot had been 'distracted' in any way.
I will try to check on this later and post an update. Given the fact that for obvious reasons pilots struggle to pinpoint the location of where the light was shone from, it is difficult to catch offenders in the act.
What would be useful is for it to be an offence to be found in possession of a laser pen or similar implement in a public place. That way (in uk) if police have information of when and where (roughly) l@ser pens are being used, they will have good grounds to stop/search individuals in those areas, pro-actively looking for said items!
This would be similar to current going equipped to steal and offensive weapon legislation. In fact, possession of an offensive weapon legislation could be used to arrest someone found in possession of a pen now, (article adapted for use to cause injury) although im pretty sure thats not been tested in the Uk so far.
TBL
I would imagine the basic points to prove would be that the offender was the person in possession of the pen, that they had shone it towards the aircraft and that the pilot had been 'distracted' in any way.
I will try to check on this later and post an update. Given the fact that for obvious reasons pilots struggle to pinpoint the location of where the light was shone from, it is difficult to catch offenders in the act.
What would be useful is for it to be an offence to be found in possession of a laser pen or similar implement in a public place. That way (in uk) if police have information of when and where (roughly) l@ser pens are being used, they will have good grounds to stop/search individuals in those areas, pro-actively looking for said items!
This would be similar to current going equipped to steal and offensive weapon legislation. In fact, possession of an offensive weapon legislation could be used to arrest someone found in possession of a pen now, (article adapted for use to cause injury) although im pretty sure thats not been tested in the Uk so far.
TBL