Feeds

Feds crack down harder on 'lasing'. Yep, aircraft laser zapping... Really

FBI extends $10,000 bounty scheme against aircraft laser attackers

The essential guide to IT transformation

Vid The FBI has announced it is extending a trial campaign that offers a reward of up to $10,000 for information leading to the arrest of anyone indulging in "lasing" – the increasingly popular sport of zapping aircraft with lasers.

Back in February, the Bureau decided it had had enough of this "dangerous crime", which in 2013 resulted in 3,960 reported laser strikes against aircraft.

It explains: "When aimed at an aircraft, the powerful beam of light from a handheld laser can travel more than a mile and illuminate a cockpit, disorienting and temporarily blinding pilots.

"Those who have experienced such attacks have described them as the equivalent of a camera flash going off in a pitch black car at night. As of December 2013, the FAA had documented at least 35 incidents where pilots required medical attention after a laser strike."

The anti-anti-aircraft laser scheme launched in a dozen FBI field offices in areas of high lasing activity. "Since then, there has been a 19 per cent decrease in the number of reported incidents in the major metropolitan areas of those offices," the Feds report.

Accordingly, the campaign will now extend across the US. Federal air marshal George Johnson said: "We want to encourage people to come forward when they see someone committing this crime, which could have terrible consequences for pilots and their passengers."

To emphasise just how much hot water lasing can get you in, the FBI cites the case of the 26-year-old California man who back in March earned himself "14 years in prison for aiming a laser pointer at a police helicopter and a hospital emergency transport helicopter".

Sergio Rodriguez was convicted of targeting the choppers with "a high-powered green laser pointer". His girlfriend, 23-year-old Jennifer Coleman, was later sentenced to two years for her part in the crime. ®

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup

More from The Register

next story
Munich considers dumping Linux for ... GULP ... Windows!
Give a penguinista a hug, the Outlook's not good for open source's poster child
UK fuzz want PINCODES on ALL mobile phones
Met Police calls for mandatory passwords on all new mobes
e-Borders fiasco: Brits stung for £224m after US IT giant sues UK govt
Defeat to Raytheon branded 'catastrophic result'
EU justice chief blasts Google on 'right to be forgotten'
Don't pretend it's a freedom of speech issue – interim commish
Yes, but what are your plans if a DRAGON attacks?
Local UK gov outs most ridiculous FoI requests...
Detroit losing MILLIONS because it buys CHEAP BATTERIES – report
Man at hardware store was right: name brands DO last longer
Snowden on NSA's MonsterMind TERROR: It may trigger cyberwar
Plus: Syria's internet going down? That was a US cock-up
UK government accused of hiding TRUTH about Universal Credit fiasco
'Reset rating keeps secrets on one-dole-to-rule-them-all plan', say MPs
Caught red-handed: UK cops, PCSOs, specials behaving badly… on social media
No Mr Fuzz, don't ask a crime victim to be your pal on Facebook
prev story

Whitepapers

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup
IT departments are embracing cloud backup, but there’s a lot you need to know before choosing a service provider. Learn all the critical things you need to know.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.