Comment by 01100011
4 years ago
Why not laser control of people? You could setup a dazzler which blinds, say, someone pulling out a gun in a public place. You could couple it with an alarm system to have a limited 'area denial' system?
4 years ago
Why not laser control of people? You could setup a dazzler which blinds, say, someone pulling out a gun in a public place. You could couple it with an alarm system to have a limited 'area denial' system?
I'm sure by "dazzler" you mean something causing temporary blindness rather than intentionally afflicting a permanent life-altering injury, but sadly that's not how lasers work.
Are you saying there is no safe exposure limit to a laser? That doesn't sound right. There are already dazzlers available for non lethal defense. You could use a poorly collimated laser to temporarily degrade vision just like any bright light causes temporary pupil constriction. I'm not suggesting causing actual eye damage.
What if I told you law enforcement requirements for less-than-lethal weapons don't actually require the inability to cause permanent disabilities? A lot of people have literally had their eyes shot out with less-than-lethal ammunition last year and tear gas and pepper spray are both known to cause health problems if used "incorrectly".
That something is considered somewhat safe under very specific usage restrictions doesn't mean that's how it will be used. Rubber bullets are rated only for indirect fire by bouncing off the ground from a safe distance, yet no law enforcement officer faced any consequence over almost exclusively firing them directly at protestors, often at too short a range even for indirect use.
The damage in lasers is not caused by brightness but by literally heating up and burning parts of the eye because you're shooting an already dense beam at a lens. A flashlight is much safer and doesn't require fancy AI to aim.
That said, I hope you're not seriously proposing putting literal sentry guns in public places to deal with shootings. I thought I wouldn't have to explain why you can't fix the result of socioeconomic problems with technology.
Hey, great idea! We could also expand this to, say, blind anyone trying to say something bad about the president - NLU gets better every day!
sound dangerous
In many jurisdictions in the US, interfering with criminals in any way is itself a crime, even if it’s with cool LTL tech. If you’re fortune enough not to live in one of those places, firearms are a solution that have worked for the last few centuries.
>In many jurisdictions in the US, interfering with criminals in any way is itself a crime
What do you mean by this? In what jurisdictions is it a crime to “interfere” with someone that pulls a gun?