Incorrect. Land-based lasers are effectively restricted by U.N. conventions to be used ONLY in an anti-material role where there is no risk of inducing permanent blindness on enemy combatants. That is to say, any use of a laser that might cause eye damage constitutes a war crime.As far as I'm aware there are no laws governing the use of laser based weapons in warfare as the weapons do not yet truely exist in a capacity where they can be used in open warfare.
Or we'll just get another neoconservative "I can has geneva conventions?" administration who doesn't give a damn about war crimes and goes and does it anyway.^ Really? I had no idea! You learn something new every day.
I'm pretty certain someone will find a loophole in the clause someday, weapons manufacturers are huge fans weaselling there way round international law. Just look at the devastation thermobaric weapons have on the human body (it basically turns you inside out).
Well, it would essentially have to be a type of directed energy weapon that doesn't emit visible light. Basically, a laser emitting radiation in the far infrared range or (alternately) something in the x-ray/gamma ray spectrum. That wouldn't have alot of the same effects as a laser, but it might have some other interesting effects. Something powerful enough to act like a phaser would create a visible flash in the air that might resemble a laser beam, but it wouldn't have variable settings, it would pretty much cook you where you stand.How different are lasers and phasers? If someone did invent phaser technology and it was far enough removed from laser technology, would it then be legal to use?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.