[ShelledPants]

Originally Posted by m102404

I'm not really in the know with lasers/etc...

Even though the Class 1 definitions that are posted here say that they must be safe/etc to use...does that "normal use" really encompass shining it at person's eyes? I get that there's light splash/reflections/etc...and that red colours make you blink faster than green, etc...but we're basically going to be pointing them at each other. I really appreciate the amount of research and education that some of the guys have put into this.

I think that each and every player on the field, and the owner, and the insurer, etc.. has to assume that if lasers/etc...are in play, that they'll be pointed in someone's eyes. Directly, indirectly, accidentally and on purpose.

We wear goggles because that's the one spot that can get permanently injured with airsoft. You can get broken teeth, skin punctures, etc...but those can be fixed/healed. You can shoot/unload/blast at good goggles essentially indefinitely at any range and they'll take it. We mandate that eyepro be able to take wicked shots and shrug them off.

Can the same be said for these things? If so, and you want to test them, why not just have the owner submit to being zapped with their own laser/gizmo straight in the eyeball? If they're not "safe" enough to do that...then their use should be disallowed.

http://www.sciencebuddies.org/scienc...r_Safety.shtml

This is a good, simple read, not just for you: but in general.

There are two systems, old and new, and both classify Class 1 in the same light. That it cannot cause eye damage of any kind even after hours of prolonged direct exposure even under magnification. The new class system also distinguishes between Class 1 and Class 1M, where Class 1M is an eye safe laser UNLESS magnified.

LDI Class 1 laser's are safe for hours of direct exposure to the eye and are designed with force on force training in mind.

The Sun for example, has more potential for blindness from directly looking at it than any Class 1 Laser.

EDIT: To address some of the comments above, an attack on character of individuals who are informed on the tech they possess instead of the issue at hand (misuse of lasers, misinformation of laser output power, fear mongering), is exactly what the desperate do in an argument they can't win with documented scientific theory.

If you have a personal vendetta against NVG users, that's fine, but if your argument is constantly tuned to the pitch of "burn the witch" eventually the townsfolk will realize that you're the nutter and you might end up on the wrong end of the burning pier.