I now understand why some fields ban green lasers...

[hotelkilo]

yes its clearly all my fault for which i apologise profusely 

 

now back to the actual discussion..

[P.S.I.]

I use lasers from time to time in low light or night events.  I do not use it as an aiming device, only as a designator. 
For example during one night game I was the only person with NVGs and I used my laser to point out targets for the rest of my team. I had high ground, out of range of enemy fire and lased the cover the enemy was behind, or the ground at their feet.  Never directly on a person above the knee.

On the flip side, I've been on the receiving end of *albatrosses* with lasers who were deliberately directing them at people's faces (during daylight no less).  They were warned that if it happened again they would be banned for life from the field & all future events put on by that organizer...That was enough to stop the behavior at that event.

[ollie_ty]

At the Arnies UCAP visit, I'm going to do more 'Willy waving' than you've ever seen before.

[DWZippy]

as long as you steer clear of Mcdonalds  

[Inari]

You see my problem is that there is no reason to use lasers in airsoft, just the same as there is no reason to use pistols, grenades or even AEG's. Airsoft is a superfluous hobby, that has no real purpose except enjoyment. It prides itself on realism (hence why the vast majority of airsoft guns are based on real guns), and people buy what they like the look of and want to use. Lasers fall into that category, the same as torches do.

 

Strobe lights can cause epileptic attacks, should they be outright banned, or should their usage (rules etc) be enforced by the site you play at? Thunder B grenades can cause damage to your ears, especially in confined spaces...just as pyro grenades can. Should they too be outright banned, or simply have their usage determined by site operators? For example, do not use Thunder B or Pyro grenades in confined spaces (such as small rooms etc), and do not use strobe lights if anyone is suffering from photosensitive epilepsy.

 

I am an advocate of people using whatever they want, and its usage being limited by the sites' rules, and also the individual's responsibility. The site have a duty of care to its patrons, and it is their responsibility to deal with people playing dangerously. I do not use high powered lasers - I do however have lasers (all red; green are illegal for use on any type of gun in Ireland) mounted on some of my guns. I have used it in game on a P90-TR when my Aimpoint Military sight went down, and couldn't see the iron sights. It was effective, and made it worth keeping as a back up aiming device. 99.9999% of the time it will not be used, but I would fight tooth and nail for peoples right to use them if they wished, provided they use them responsibly. A laser passing over your eyes by accident is completely forgiveable, and something you risk from walking down the street (I have had more lasers shone in my eyes by teenagers at street corners than on the skirmish field).

 

Airsoft is an inherently dangerous activity, that has no real reason for existing outside of "because we want to" which is exactly the same argument for using lasers. Hypocrisy annoys me.

 

I still stand by that you personally choose how safe you want to play, and what PPE to use. If you choose to wear inadequate PPE in areas you deem important, I fail to see how that is my problem? Lasers are superfluous, I completely agree. But so too is airsoft, and hence why I put absolutely no stock in that argument. It is the same for saying that because someone uses one type of attachment, then you can't use another (magnified optics & lasers respectively) - do we resort to who got there first? Or do you simply have it set up that everyone is aware of the risks involved, and that all players use their equipment responsibly. Any irresponsible behaviour is dealt with by the site operators.

 

I honestly can't believe that such a big deal is being made out of this...

[hotelkilo]

cool well you wont mind if i attach this real bayonet then for a spot of 'realism'

 

im responsible honest and i pwomise i wont hurt anybody wif it at all

[amateurstuntman]

If a laser is legal - fine. I have no problem with legal lasers.

 

At <5mW red or green lasers can't damage your eye before you can blink.

Everyone thinks green lasers are more powerful but that's not true.

For a given wattage a green laser looks brighter but it is the energy that does the damage and the energy is the same.

 

 

>5mW or infra-red lasers can damage your eyes before you can blink - but they are illegal.

 

So as for if they should be banned in airsoft:

The dangerous ones already are so no sweat.

[hotelkilo]

what about magnifying optics? whats the effect? and if there is an effect how do we avoid it?

[Inari]

cool well you wont mind if i attach this real bayonet then for a spot of 'realism'

 

im responsible honest and i pwomise i wont hurt anybody wif it at all

I'm sorry, what?

 

You are drawing a parallel between a live blade and a laser? I think you've watched to much Star Wars mate.

 

You have raised some valid points, but that one is just plain ridiculous. You obviously do not like the idea of lasers because you have deemed them to be pointless; that's fair enough. Airsoft is in itself pointless as well though, and as such it makes that argument pretty much invalid. Lasers having no purpose in airsoft - anything they offer can be achieved through other means. Pistols have no purpose in airsoft - everything they do can be replicated using other devices. It is at best semantics.

 

The health risk point is valid, and I accept that. The fact is they have the potential to cause damage, but so do airsoft guns. Airsoft guns have (as documented on here) broken teeth, broken skin etc. The argument is the same as stopping airsoft altogether. It is a tired point, and one that doesn't have much weight. Obviously I believe that rules should be put in place and enforced by the site operators, which would handle the safety side of things, but I do not believe that they should be forbidden from use because of potential. Hell, I have the potential to cause physical harm, I would not like to be forbidden from an airsoft site because of that potential

[Inari]

You can avoid it by using your own argument; by not using magnified optics.

what about magnifying optics? whats the effect? and if there is an effect how do we avoid it?

[hotelkilo]

Kidding. Actual protective film below:

http://www.edmundoptics.com/optics/laser-optics/laser-windows/laser-gard-pvc-film/1336

 

 

yeah thanks for that link, nice to see that your solution is so cost effective although not quite so cost effective as my solution where u dont spend $$ on a laser for airsoft and i dont have to spend $524 for a piece of material 15x15 inches to modify my already perfectly useable eyepro just so u can use your expensive toy safely

 

was this a serious suggestion? am i missing the point?

[Yuri]

Look at the ANSI and IEC classifications for lasers. I've copied some from the website below.

 

 

http://www.rp-photonics.com/laser_safety.html:

 

Class 2: The accessible laser radiation is limited to the visible spectral range (400–700 nm) and to 1 mW accessible power. Due to the blink reflex, it is not dangerous for the eye in the case of limited exposure (up to 0.25 s). Example: some (but not all) laser pointers

 

Class 2M: Same as class 2, but with the additional restriction that no optical instruments may be used. The power may be higher than 1 mW, but the beam diameter in accessible areas is large enough to limit the intensity to levels which are safe for short-time exposure.

 

So a class 2 laser should be pretty safe for airsoft. Like I said before, use red ones to stay on the safe side. Lasers of other colors are at their core IR lasers. A poorly made green laser might appear to be around 1mW, but then be also sending IR light at similar power. Notice that IR lasers are never class 2, since they are invisible and an IR photon carries more energy. Maybe a class 1 IR laser then? There's not a lot of info online, if I google that, most of top hits are about civilian DBAL modules. I would personally like some more details before a device meant for civilian RS shooting is pointed at people.

 

EDIT: My quote crapped out but I fixed it mostly. Amateurstuntman, where'd you get those numbers?

 

EDIT2: Sorry, an IR photon obviously carries less energy, E = hbar*omega and all that.

[cazboab]

Exactly how dangerous are the common AND uncommon types of laser that people could possibly field? [1]

As magnified optics are common, would a laser shone through one make that laser more dangerous? [2]

Should we, as a community, push for more clarity on laser use during site safety briefings?[3]

All three following answers have a couple of caveats First blue/violet lasers, which I've not looked into much, but basically what I have looked into on them would suggest they're far more a risk than their red or green cousins, and second shining lights of any kind in peoples face deliberatly is

 

1 Everything I've ever seen suggests that a red or green laser less than 1mW is only capable of causing very minor permanent damage in extremely rare circumstances with prolonged continuous exposure, much like looking into a bright light, you'll blink and look away long before any real damage can occur, those purple spots aren't permanent damage 999 times out of a thousand, just annoying. The problem is a lot of airsoft lasers, are whatever the hell power diode the manufacturer felt like putting in, or sometimes more powerful because more power is "better", but still not really powerful enough to cause permanent damage without a few seconds of continuous exposure.

 

2 With the coatings on optics, and how the prisms refract the light inside the scope, the laser emitter would need to be practically in the crosshairs for the beam to pass through the optic without splashing on a surface inside the scope and only annoying the user, even then it still would only do as much damage as looking into a bright light with a scope, IE you'd have long enough to look away you'd pretty much have to want to blind yourself. Still bloody annoying...

 

3. it should really be covered under the "don't be a *rickroll*" rule or common sense, but ultimately it probably should be said one way or the other much like pyro or rubber knifes etc if the site allows them or if they're not to be used at a certain part of the game area etc.

cool well you wont mind if i attach this real bayonet then for a spot of 'realism'

 

im responsible honest and i pwomise i wont hurt anybody wif it at all

Well no, that would be an offensive weapon, as well as being a bad idea, even for a rubber one since you've still got the metal barrel of the gun behind it.

[ollie_ty]

cool well you wont mind if i attach this real bayonet then for a spot of 'realism'

 

im responsible honest and i pwomise i wont hurt anybody wif it at all

A Real Batyonet? Jeeez, what a willy waver....

[Shardik]

cool well you wont mind if i attach this real bayonet then for a spot of 'realism'

 

im responsible honest and i pwomise i wont hurt anybody wif it at all

Pwomise

[hotelkilo]

Well no, that would be an offensive weapon, as well as being a bad idea, even for a rubber one since you've still got the metal barrel of the gun behind it.

 

 

whilst i was being somewhat facetious im not sure that it would either be an 'offensive weapon' or indeed be a problem if it was. yes it is a bad idea

 

im not a lawyer, it may well be an 'offensive weapon' however reenactment groups like sealed knot etc regularly attach real bayonets to real firearms and use real pikes etc to charge at each other across a smokey field for fun and no one thinks that is a problem, sheet if they get lasers we could all be fkd

[Shardik]

That's like saying playing a game of five a side football, with a real bayonet attached to your ankle is fine. As re-enactors use them too.

 

They are completely different sports. Besides, a real M9 bayonet has no use on the skirmish field, whereas a laser does.

[Rogue845]

UCAP explained their green laser ban to me thusly:

 

Ok, the way a green laser is formed has a power wave, cheaper units quote bottom of the wave not the peak. Green lasers produce light in the IR spectrum as well as the 'green'. Your eyes can't use blink reflex to protect themselves from light they can't see (IR) so much higher chance of damaging someone's sight.

[CatgutViolin]

As someone with permanent retinal damage in one eye, if I see people messing around with high-power lasers on the field, I'm out. Relying on people not to shine a laser in your face is like relying on them not to shoot a BB in your face. You may not be likely to get hit, but it's still a risk, and I value what vision I have too much to take my chances.

[hotelkilo]

A Real Batyonet? Jeeez, what a willy waver....

yeah you should see the shear size of it, and my batyonet (?) is fairly impressive also 

[hotelkilo]

airsoft is a game of consensual assault, held on private land, with rules in place. by taking part in an event u are consenting to a certain potential level of assault upon your person. paintball is the same. 

 

 

with regard to lasers im not happy playing on sites where ir lasers are allowed or indeed the sites safety policy does not address the use of lasers sufficiently enough and as such i will choose game sites and events based on *suitcase* like this, YMMV

 

ps, if anyone wants to know about more 'games of consensual assault' then i'd suggest that you dont go and ask your mum, in fact come and see me after..

[cazboab]

whilst i was being somewhat facetious im not sure that it would either be an 'offensive weapon' or indeed be a problem if it was. yes it is a bad idea

 

im not a lawyer, it may well be an 'offensive weapon' however reenactment groups like sealed knot etc regularly attach real bayonets to real firearms and use real pikes etc to charge at each other across a smokey field for fun and no one thinks that is a problem, sheet if they get lasers we could all be fkd

Reenactors are choreographed when using anything close to a "real" weapon- which generally wont carry a live edge- they're not likely to accidentally meet up in a bush or through a doorway etc.

 

The chance that any red or even green laser would cause damage to anyone's eyes is far lower than the chance of someone with a bayonet, real or not, on a rifle *fruitcage* up and plunging the rifle into a squishy hurty bit* of themselves or someone else.

 

 

*its a proper term, honest

 

Also, just type your swear words out, the censor will take care of it.

[AceOfSkulls]

Lasers in my eyes are very far down my list of safety/health concerns when I Airsoft.

 

I'm not ignoring the health risks but common sense. For them to damage your eye, even the powerfull ones people are talking about exposer has to be prolonged. Some one sweeping a laser across your eyes won't do anything. Adversely if you are letting someone shine one in your eyes for 5+ secounds at a time, then you are stupid. Again common sense, if someone is purposely shining one in someone's eyes, they are quite clearly a idiot and told so. I wouldst trust someone with that attitude with my safety regarding any safety aspect of Airsoft.

 

However in general I trust people not to be idiots. So lasers shouldn't be banned, if a site you attend has a problem with lasers, I would therefore suggest they don't. They have a idiot problem.

[Swerve]

airsoft is a game of consensual assault, held on private land, with rules in place. by taking part in an event u are consenting to a certain potential level of assault upon your person. paintball is the same. 

 

 

with regard to lasers im not happy playing on sites where ir lasers are allowed or indeed the sites safety policy does not address the use of lasers sufficiently enough and as such i will choose game sites and events based on *suitcase* like this, YMMV

 

ps, if anyone wants to know about more 'games of consensual assault' then i'd suggest that you dont go and ask your mum, in fact come and see me after..

 

Not quite

 

In law you cannot give consent to assault.

 

The law regards any consent, prior to an act, not to be a valid legal defence if an assault then occurs.

 

Injuries that occur following a foreseeable incident of a lawful activity in which the person injured was participating are not commonly regarded as resulting from assault. This could be football, surgury or airsoft.

[hotelkilo]

Reenactors are choreographed when using anything close to a "real" weapon- which generally wont carry a live edge- they're not likely to accidentally meet up in a bush or through a doorway etc.

 

 

 yes having a live bayonet is a bad idea, but if the site owner allowed it would it be legal or not?

 

 

also the sealed knot use live firearms but obviously only load them with a charge and no projectile same with all the cannons etc

 

so they are essentially firing live firearms and cannons at each other, albiet choreographed, insured etc but still clearly legal.