Laser Weapon Operational

[Minimalist]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/laser...tt-weapon/

The US navy has demonstrated a ship-mounted laser weapon system in the Persian Gulf, off the coast of Iran, capable of destroying targets on speeding boats or even aircraft with pin-point accuracy, it told reporters Wednesday.

I suppose it had to happen eventually, still this:

Under Protocol IV of the Geneva Convention (added in 1995), laser weapons are currently banned for use against humans. This is perhaps why, in the demonstration, wooden human figures are propped up on the target boat, to show that the system is accurate enough to destroy mounted weaponry while avoiding human targets.

“We will not point lasers at people,” said Klunder. “We are going to honor the conventions.”

would be more convincing if we had not just admitted that we violated the UN Convention Against Torture

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nati...st_Torture

2 days ago.

How long before they start turning them over to the fucking cops to use on peaceful demonstrators?

[thesummerqueen]

As soon as they find a better weapon and it becomes more profitable to sell the tech to the cops to make more RnD space.

[vorlon13]

The Navy device would make quite a gory splattered mess of a human. Can't imagine much enthusiasm for using it on a rioting crowd, for instance.

Weirdly though, death would be instantaneous, and seemingly more humane than most firearms . . . .

[Tonus]

Under Protocol IV of the Geneva Convention (added in 1995), laser weapons are currently banned for use against humans. This is perhaps why, in the demonstration, wooden human figures are propped up on the target boat, to show that the system is accurate enough to destroy mounted weaponry while avoiding human targets.

“We will not point lasers at people,” said Klunder. “We are going to honor the conventions.”

"...at least until we complete the construction of a laser powerful enough to obliterate Geneva. We're designing the 'pro-to-type' now."

[Anomalocaris]

I wonder how soon it would be before people start to install angle reflectors on their missiles so any laser beam pointed at the missile will be reflected back to the laser projectors and damage or destroy it.

The difference between a laser weapon and a projectile weapon is a target can reflect the laser straight back at the laser gun. No one had invented anything that can bounce a bullet straight back at the gun that fired it.

[thesummerqueen]

Sounds like you just gave the military a reason to sell it to the LAPD, Chuck.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Could a reflector survive long enough to reflect a sufficient amount of light to damage the weapon? Or would it last long enough to deflect the beam?

[Mister Agenda]

What I want to know is when can we start mounting them on sharks?

[Heywood]

I wonder how soon it would be before people start to install angle reflectors on their missiles so any laser beam pointed at the missile will be reflected back to the laser projectors and damage or destroy it.

The difference between a laser weapon and a projectile weapon is a target can reflect the laser straight back at the laser gun. No one had invented anything that can bounce a bullet straight back at the gun that fired it.

Mirrors do not reflect 100% of the energy so even if hit with a laser they would begin to heat and distort/discolor. Further mirrors only reflect a narrow range of wavelengths. If you want to destroy a mirrored surface with a laser, then fire a laser whose frequency is not reflected by the mirrored surface. A variable frequency laser would easily defeat the mirrored surface defense.

[The Grand Nudger]

We're told that we aren't necessarily cleared to use Ma Deuce (50cal) against people either...so we "aim for their canteens". The notion that something isn't cleared for use against personnel is a restraining myth.

Lasers are cleared...there just hasn't been a case yet. Give it time.

(the key phrase is "direct military advantage")