Drones Shot Down Over Texas [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Drones Shot Down Over Texas


4Rules
05-31-2012, 19:27
Published on May 29, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel (http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel)

Drones Shot Down Over Texas - YouTube Published on May 29, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel (http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel)
http://www.infowars.com/drones-shot-down-over-texas/
Following columnist Charles Krauthammer's observation that the first person to shoot down a surveillance drone on U.S. soil will be a "folk hero," gun enthusiasts in Texas have done precisely that as a protest against the use of spy drones on the American people.

Using consumer drones as target practice, Alex Jones and the Steiner brothers tested out the best way to bring down the drones on the 10,000 acre Steiner ranch as part of filming for Brothers in Arms, a new show which focuses on firearms and the second amendment.

With spy drones now commercially available for less than $1,000 dollars that are barely any different from the ones being used by police departments to spy on the public, Jones and the Steiners made short work of the devices during filming.

This was an exercise in pushing the message that the use of surveillance drones in U.S. skies must be politically shot down because it represents a complete violation of the 4th amendment right to privacy.

Congress recently passed legislation paving the way for what the FAA predicts will be somewhere in the region of 30,000 drones in operation in US skies by 2020.

Privacy advocates have warned that the FAA has not acted to establish any safeguards whatsoever, and that lawmakers are not holding the agency to account.

In addition, A recently uncovered Air Force document circumvents laws and clears the way for the Pentagon to use drones to monitor the activities of Americans.

Incidents involving the drones in recent months have hardly provided positive spin for the industry, which is why Americans are set to witness a massive PR campaign that will "bombard the American public with positive images and messages about drones in an effort to reverse the growing perception of the aircraft as a threat to privacy and safety."

Earlier this month, a mystery object, thought to be a military or law enforcement drone, flying in controlled airspace over Denver almost caused a catastrophic mid air crash with a commercial jet.

Last summer, police in North Dakota used a Predator drone to spy on a family who refused to give back back three cows and their calves that wandered onto their 3,000-acre farm.

Watch out for the next episode in which you'll see a full size drone blasted out of the sky. Watch the first installment of Brothers in Arms below.

[find out more about Sid Steiner at]
http://austinarcherycountry.com/index.html
http://www.steinersteakhouse.com/

[Gunsmith and weapons expert Matt Williams]
http://www.gunfightersclinic.com/

http://www.infowars.com/
http://www.prisonplanet.tv/
http://twitter.com/#!/RealAlexJones (http://twitter.com/#%21/RealAlexJones)
http://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerikJones

Category:

News & Politics (http://www.youtube.com/news)

RussP
05-31-2012, 21:42
So, what's your opinion on this whole drone thing?

thetoastmaster
05-31-2012, 22:01
"Pull!"

:ufo: :50cal:

The idea of domestic spy drones sickens me.

Sam Spade
06-03-2012, 20:07
The idea of domestic spy drones sickens me.

Why so?

janice6
06-03-2012, 20:13
I don't like the thought of being spied on, to prevent me from offending the Government.

SPIN2010
06-03-2012, 20:21
Why so?

Because, when the operators lose control of the drone (as they have many times in the past) and the drone crashes into a school or civil rights march (:tongueout:) the explanation will be self evident. But, until then I am sure it will be lauded by the law enforcement crowd as the greatest thing since sliced bread.

TKM
06-03-2012, 20:29
Sure, it's easy to shoot the ones that look like drones.

The ones that look like cats, not so much.:dunno:


http://technabob.com/blog/2012/06/03/taxidermy-cat-quadcopter/

Mister_Beefy
06-03-2012, 23:35
So, what's your opinion on this whole drone thing?


you never ask this question to TBO when he posts news articles.

countrygun
06-03-2012, 23:59
Sure, it's easy to shoot the ones that look like drones.

The ones that look like cats, not so much.:dunno:


http://technabob.com/blog/2012/06/03/taxidermy-cat-quadcopter/

What, they didn't use a ......wait for it......."Pig"


:rofl: oh I kill myself.:supergrin:

Atomic Punk
06-04-2012, 03:05
if i had the land and the money i would do the same thing. but more for the fun of shooting a moving target.

RussP
06-04-2012, 08:33
:animlol: you never ask this question to TBO when he posts news articles.:animlol:

After 9 years, I don't need to... :thumbsup:

Sam Spade
06-04-2012, 19:43
Because, when the operators lose control of the drone (as they have many times in the past) and the drone crashes into a school or civil rights march (:tongueout:) the explanation will be self evident. But, until then I am sure it will be lauded by the law enforcement crowd as the greatest thing since sliced bread.

So if your objection is to all drone aircraft, why specify "spy" drones?

That was kind of a rhetorical question; your explanation is pretty clear. Thanks.

OlliesRevenge
06-04-2012, 20:59
Why so?

You'd expect these things in the sky over North Korea, America... not so much.

How do you define the word 'Freedom'?

RussP
06-04-2012, 21:05
You'd expect these things in the sky over North Korea, America... not so much.

How do you define the word 'Freedom'?Do you consider any use of drones legitimate within the United States?

alexanderg23
06-04-2012, 21:18
From my RC days, I think all you need to do is broadcast the same signal as the controller, confuse it and it will crash. I'm sure they have some sort if increption, but won't long before those hacker types start figuring it out. Shooting one down with a gun would probably get you in TONS of trouble probably more than you would of been to begin with. Plus you never know where those bullets will land.
It would be fun though to mess with some protester or someones with them. Make em think the gov is watching them. I've got some friends right now that I'd like to mess with like that.

Sam Spade
06-04-2012, 21:56
You'd expect these things in the sky over North Korea, America... not so much.

How do you define the word 'Freedom'?

What does the drone see that LE helicopters and fixed wing aircraft don't? Where does it go that they can't?

crazyasian1
06-05-2012, 06:08
Bwahahaha!! Fast fwd to 5:07...

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/06/04/article-2154283-136ED7F3000005DC-412_634x412.jpg

JAS104
06-05-2012, 06:22
What, they didn't use a ......wait for it......."Pig"


:rofl: oh I kill myself.:supergrin:
Haaaaaaaaaaaaa :animlol:

RussP
06-05-2012, 07:02
You'd expect these things in the sky over North Korea, America... not so much.

How do you define the word 'Freedom'?Do you consider any use of drones legitimate within the United States?

What does the drone see that LE helicopters and fixed wing aircraft don't? Where does it go that they can't?That's where I was headed.

The same observation tools can be fitted onto manned aircraft.

The association with using drones against "enemies" in war zones, that connotation is what influences people's negative opinions about drones.

The reason the military uses drones is to reduce air crew casualties. Replacing manned LE aircraft with UVAs would accomplish the same goal. Anyone object to that?

:cool:

JAS104
06-05-2012, 07:03
Do you consider any use of drones legitimate within the United States?

Sorry to butt into the conversation, but I figured I'd put my 2c in here. And yeah I know I'm probably gonna get a lot of backlash for this, but here it goes anyway.

While I do think that drones simply monitoring civilians/American Citizens is a gross violation of the 4th amendment and shouldn't be tolerated, I do however believe there are circumstances when drones can be used for surveillance domestically. For example, monitoring terrorists, or expanding the operational capabilities of our border patrol guys. I know it's a sensitive topic, but there it is.

cowboywannabe
06-05-2012, 07:28
im pretty sure they wont be used along our southern border to detect illegal aliens crossing over.....and if so nothing will be done about it.

Numismatist
06-05-2012, 07:48
Sorry to butt into the conversation, but I figured I'd put my 2c in here. And yeah I know I'm probably gonna get a lot of backlash for this, but here it goes anyway.

While I do think that drones simply monitoring civilians/American Citizens is a gross violation of the 4th amendment and shouldn't be tolerated, I do however believe there are circumstances when drones can be used for surveillance domestically. For example, monitoring terrorists, or expanding the operational capabilities of our border patrol guys. I know it's a sensitive topic, but there it is.

Therein lies the problem...how do you define a terrorist?

Am I a terrorist because I smuggle in 20 ounce sodas into New York City?

JAS104
06-05-2012, 07:53
Therein lies the problem...how do you define a terrorist?

Am I a terrorist because I smuggle in 20 ounce sodas into New York City?

Solid point, no 'big gulps' for you, sir.
We would need to define it as someone who meant do to harm to innocents or American citizens.
I'm not talking guys who do small time stuff like that, I'm talkin about, say, a foreign national who is suspected for bomb making, frequents Taliban chat rooms and living in Brooklyn. or areas along the border that frequents drug and weapons trafficking. Serious stuff

thetoastmaster
06-05-2012, 09:28
Why so?

Domestic spying sickens me because it erodes at our natural rights. It's a Fourth Amendment concern. Remote-controlled helicopters like in the video can go places that manned vehicles can't, and see things that a set of human eyes would need a warrant to see.

This is not done in a spirit of keeping the peace. This is to promote a totalitarian state. The evidence is in the backlash against these unmanned vehicles. When Talk of the Nation of all shows runs stories citing their concerns, you know the fix is in: the American people ("We the People", the ones supposed to be in charge of the country) don't want it; we're getting it anyway, precisely because we're not in charge.

Personally, I hope pocket-sized jammers or EMP devices become the norm, as these spy vehicles become more prevalent.

OlliesRevenge
06-05-2012, 09:58
What does the drone see that LE helicopters and fixed wing aircraft don't? Where does it go that they can't?

For starters I am not a fan of manned aircraft engaging in spying operations (Thermal scans, etc), and since drones accentuate that capability, I am an opponent. To be clear, LE helos being used as air support to track criminals who are evading capture is a totally separate issue from spying.

One point is that it's an issue of focus. LE helicopters and fixed wing aircraft are multi-use, where as drones are used for bombing or spying.

Another point is stealth, they can operated in close proximity without detection...
Remote-controlled helicopters like in the video can go places that manned vehicles can'tThere is also the economics of it, drones are cheaper, and can be deployed in greater numbers.

It all amounts to an expansion of the National Security Police State, & is a draconian assault on (what should be) a free people. To use the boiling frog example; the use of drones represents turning up the heat, and that is exactly the opposite of what I think should happen.

RussP
06-05-2012, 13:37
The association with using drones against "enemies" in war zones, that connotation is what influences people's negative opinions about drones.See, I told you so...LE helicopters and fixed wing aircraft are multi-use, where as drones are used for bombing or spying.:upeyes:

RussP
06-05-2012, 13:42
How about assigning an attorney with the ACLU to each UAV pilot, sitting and observing each second of flight for civil rights violations.

Would that work?

:faint:

OlliesRevenge
06-05-2012, 15:51
:upeyes:
I feel the same way about anyone defending the use of SPY drones in American airspace.



---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?5p4xl1

RussP
06-05-2012, 17:44
I feel the same way about anyone defending the use of SPY drones in American airspace.So do I.

Now, to broaden your knowledge base from......where as drones are used for bombing or spying.Drones can be and are used for:

Pipeline Monitoring & Oil and Gas Security


Wildfires Detection and Management


TV Broadcast relay by UAV technology


Pollution Monitoring


Meteorology, also Weather


Hurricane Monitoring


Cryospheric Research - Arctic and Antarctic


Civil Engineering


Bridge Inspection


Transmission Line Inspection


HAZMAT Inspection


Epidemic Emergency Medical Supply


Traffic Monitoring


Aerial Surveying


Damage Assessment


Insurance Claim Appraisal


Real Estate Marketing


Golf - Resort Marketing


Stadium Event Monitoring


Concert Security


Sports Video


Runway Inspection


Corridor Mapping


Virtual Tours


Landmark Inspection


Precision Agricultural


Wildlife and Land Management


Vigor Mapping and Frost Mitigation


Crop Disease Management


Herd Tracking and Management


Entomology


Forestry Inspection


Fisheries Management


Species Conservation


Wildlife Inventory


Mineral Exploration


Remote Aerial Survey


Forest Fire Surveillance


Forest Fire Mapping


Volcano Monitoring


Remote Aerial Mapping


Oil Spill Tracking


Snow Pack Avalanche Monitoring


Ice Pack Monitoring


Poaching Patrol
That's a few uses other than BOMBING and SPYING.

dpadams6
06-05-2012, 18:32
Being that they will help police catch the scum of the earth. I'm all for them. If your not doing anything wrong, I wouldn't worry about it.

KennyFSU
06-05-2012, 18:45
Being that they will help police catch the scum of the earth. I'm all for them. If your not doing anything wrong, I wouldn't worry about it.

My sentiments as well. I have nothing to hide, nothing to be paranoid of, etc.

If this helps fight terrorism and keeps me and my family safe, then so be it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

thetoastmaster
06-05-2012, 19:23
Being that they will help police catch the scum of the earth. I'm all for them. If your not doing anything wrong, I wouldn't worry about it.

That's not how an adversarial criminal justice system works. Without strong boundaries protecting the rights of the individual, what will happen when the law changes, and you suddenly find yourself doing something "wrong" (malum prohibitum)?

Mister_Beefy
06-05-2012, 21:03
if drones are deployed, all they have to do is give it a name and a badge number like they do police dogs, so that if anybody damages it they can be charged with assault or attempted murder of a peace officer.

dpadams6
06-06-2012, 08:01
if drones are deployed, all they have to do is give it a name and a badge number like they do police dogs, so that if anybody damages it they can be charged with assault or attempted murder of a peace officer.

Why would you want to damage one? Would you purposely damage a police car? And during these hard financial times for cities, they are a lot cheaper than flying a helicopter. And do it better. Win /win

dpadams6
06-06-2012, 08:04
That's not how an adversarial criminal justice system works. Without strong boundaries protecting the rights of the individual, what will happen when the law changes, and you suddenly find yourself doing something "wrong" (malum prohibitum)?

Oh boy. Here we go.

thetoastmaster
06-06-2012, 11:22
Oh boy. Here we go.

Is there a better reply to the "If you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear" chestnut?

oldman11
06-06-2012, 11:44
Sorry to butt into the conversation, but I figured I'd put my 2c in here. And yeah I know I'm probably gonna get a lot of backlash for this, but here it goes anyway.

While I do think that drones simply monitoring civilians/American Citizens is a gross violation of the 4th amendment and shouldn't be tolerated, I do however believe there are circumstances when drones can be used for surveillance domestically. For example, monitoring terrorists, or expanding the operational capabilities of our border patrol guys. I know it's a sensitive topic, but there it is.
+1 Couldn't have said it better.

MadMonkey
06-06-2012, 12:15
So do I.

Now, to broaden your knowledge base from...Drones can be and are used for:

Pipeline Monitoring & Oil and Gas Security


Wildfires Detection and Management


TV Broadcast relay by UAV technology


Pollution Monitoring


Meteorology, also Weather


Hurricane Monitoring


Cryospheric Research - Arctic and Antarctic


Civil Engineering


Bridge Inspection


Transmission Line Inspection


HAZMAT Inspection


Epidemic Emergency Medical Supply


Traffic Monitoring


Aerial Surveying


Damage Assessment


Insurance Claim Appraisal


Real Estate Marketing


Golf - Resort Marketing


Stadium Event Monitoring


Concert Security


Sports Video


Runway Inspection


Corridor Mapping


Virtual Tours


Landmark Inspection


Precision Agricultural


Wildlife and Land Management


Vigor Mapping and Frost Mitigation


Crop Disease Management


Herd Tracking and Management


Entomology


Forestry Inspection


Fisheries Management


Species Conservation


Wildlife Inventory


Mineral Exploration


Remote Aerial Survey


Forest Fire Surveillance


Forest Fire Mapping


Volcano Monitoring


Remote Aerial Mapping


Oil Spill Tracking


Snow Pack Avalanche Monitoring


Ice Pack Monitoring


Poaching Patrol
That's a few uses other than BOMBING and SPYING.

Holy cow... for once I didn't have to post it! :rofl:

Law enforcement and "spying" are a very tiny percentage of what UAVs will be used for. They're going to revolutionize a LOT of industries.

RussP
06-06-2012, 12:20
Holy cow... for once I didn't have to post it! :rofl:

Law enforcement and "spying" are a very tiny percentage of what UAVs will be used for. They're going to revolutionize a LOT of industries.:supergrin:

Bren
06-06-2012, 12:51
Because, when the operators lose control of the drone (as they have many times in the past) and the drone crashes into a school or civil rights march (:tongueout:) the explanation will be self evident. But, until then I am sure it will be lauded by the law enforcement crowd as the greatest thing since sliced bread.

You realize those are just like common remote control model planes, only smaller, lighter and with camera, right? They could give somebody a nasty cut, I guess.

OlliesRevenge
06-06-2012, 12:59
So do I.

Now, to broaden your knowledge base from...Drones can be and are used for:

Pipeline Monitoring & Oil and Gas Security
Entomology
.......et al

That's a few uses other than BOMBING and SPYING.

Nice Google search Russ.

I know you're a fan of staying on topic. This is from the article posted by the OP...

the first person to shoot down a surveillance drone on U.S. soil will be a "folk hero", gun enthusiasts in Texas have done precisely that as a protest against the use of spy drones on the American people.I know someone up here in the NW who uses a small drone in his business as a roofing cost estimator, he flies his RC helo up and takes pics of a roof to determine total sq footage, etc.

The drones LE will be using are in a separate category though (size, cost, capability, etc), and they will be used primarily for SPYING on the public, not for Entomology (Good grief!) :upeyes:

This is an ancient debate. Those who seek to control others (and their apologists), vs. those who want to be free. There are two completely different, competing ideologies at work here...

St. Thomas Aquinas vs. St. Augustine
Aristotle vs. Plato
John Locke vs. Jean Jacques Rousseau
Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx
Thomas Jefferson vs. Vladimir Lenin
Ayn Rand vs. Immanuel Kant

This debate cannot be won on a chat forum, but rather, some future battlefield is where this argument will be fleshed out. If it comes within my lifetime, I know what side I'll be on!

Good day sir!

Texas357
06-06-2012, 13:35
Nice Google search Russ.

I know you're a fan of staying on topic. This is from the article posted by the OP...

I know someone up here in the NW who uses a small drone in his business as a roofing cost estimator, he flies his RC helo up and takes pics of a roof to determine total sq footage, etc.

The drones LE will be using are in a separate category though (size, cost, capability, etc), and they will be used primarily for SPYING on the public, not for Entomology (Good grief!) :upeyes:

This is an ancient debate. Those who seek to control others (and their apologists), vs. those who want to be free. There are two completely different, competing ideologies at work here...

St. Thomas Aquinas vs. St. Augustine
Aristotle vs. Plato
John Locke vs. Jean Jacques Rousseau
Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx
Thomas Jefferson vs. Vladimir Lenin
Ayn Rand vs. Immanuel Kant

This debate cannot be won on a chat forum, but rather, some future battlefield is where this argument will be fleshed out. If it comes within my lifetime, I know what side I'll be on!

Good day sir!

He uses it for a commercial purpose? I thought that was considered a no-no

OlliesRevenge
06-06-2012, 13:45
I only know what I've been told. I have not seen it in action (assuming you are referring to re-roof estimator drone).


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?fh1dxw

dpadams6
06-06-2012, 13:46
Nice Google search Russ.

I know you're a fan of staying on topic. This is from the article posted by the OP...

I know someone up here in the NW who uses a small drone in his business as a roofing cost estimator, he flies his RC helo up and takes pics of a roof to determine total sq footage, etc.

The drones LE will be using are in a separate category though (size, cost, capability, etc), and they will be used primarily for SPYING on the public, not for Entomology (Good grief!) :upeyes:

This is an ancient debate. Those who seek to control others (and their apologists), vs. those who want to be free. There are two completely different, competing ideologies at work here...

St. Thomas Aquinas vs. St. Augustine
Aristotle vs. Plato
John Locke vs. Jean Jacques Rousseau
Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx
Thomas Jefferson vs. Vladimir Lenin
Ayn Rand vs. Immanuel Kant

This debate cannot be won on a chat forum, but rather, some future battlefield is where this argument will be fleshed out. If it comes within my lifetime, I know what side I'll be on!

Good day sir!

Not sure where you live, but law enforcement by me are very busy these days. Do you really think they are going to waste their time spying on you JUST BECAUSE, unless your doing something wrong? Just like stopping a motorist for doing nothing wrong when numerous motorist are. Would accomplish nothing. Law enforcement could care less what olliesrevenge is doing if he is doing nothing wrong and obeying the law.

Brucev
06-07-2012, 05:29
Re: OP. If police want to use a drone to spy on someone, let the be required to get a search warrant. Otherwise, they should not be permitted to conduct such operations on citizens. If that cramps the style of some, so what? The rights of the citizen trump convenience, etc. of police or anyone else. Commercial use of drones, etc. should not be permitted unless that usage can be proven not to infringe on the rights of citizens. Again, if that cramps the style of some private companies, that's just their little problem. In summary, the rights of citizens are more important and more necessary to protect that the convenience of either police or business.

JAS104
06-07-2012, 05:59
So do I.


Now, to broaden your knowledge base from...Drones can be and are used for:

Pipeline Monitoring & Oil and Gas Security


Wildfires Detection and Management


TV Broadcast relay by UAV technology


Pollution Monitoring


Meteorology, also Weather


Hurricane Monitoring


Cryospheric Research - Arctic and Antarctic


Civil Engineering


Bridge Inspection


Transmission Line Inspection


HAZMAT Inspection


Epidemic Emergency Medical Supply


Traffic Monitoring


Aerial Surveying


Damage Assessment


Insurance Claim Appraisal


Real Estate Marketing


Golf - Resort Marketing


Stadium Event Monitoring


Concert Security


Sports Video


Runway Inspection


Corridor Mapping


Virtual Tours


Landmark Inspection


Precision Agricultural


Wildlife and Land Management


Vigor Mapping and Frost Mitigation


Crop Disease Management


Herd Tracking and Management


Entomology


Forestry Inspection


Fisheries Management


Species Conservation


Wildlife Inventory


Mineral Exploration


Remote Aerial Survey


Forest Fire Surveillance


Forest Fire Mapping


Volcano Monitoring


Remote Aerial Mapping


Oil Spill Tracking


Snow Pack Avalanche Monitoring


Ice Pack Monitoring


Poaching Patrol
That's a few uses other than BOMBING and SPYING.

+1 with Russ. That's some rational thinking there.
I think a little too often on here its like the movie 1984, too many guys convinced that Big Brother is forever watching them, or that the sky's falling.

Texas357
06-07-2012, 07:17
Not sure where you live, but law enforcement by me are very busy these days. Do you really think they are going to waste their time spying on you JUST BECAUSE, unless your doing something wrong? Just like stopping a motorist for doing nothing wrong when numerous motorist are. Would accomplish nothing. Law enforcement could care less what olliesrevenge is doing if he is doing nothing wrong and obeying the law.

Why would we expect it, other than past experience?

Or has there been no history of frivolous investigations?

cowboywannabe
06-07-2012, 07:26
.............

Texas357
06-07-2012, 07:28
you guys just dont see the inevitable payday.

sit out in the privacy of your back yard and whack your pud. when the drone videos this some wizenheimer at the controls will put the video out in the public domain and blamo, youre rich with an easy law suit.

worst case is you got your rocks off so is it really that bad?

You ever get a sunburn on your ****?

JAS104
06-07-2012, 07:48
You ever get a sunburn on your ****?

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

cowboywannabe
06-07-2012, 07:50
You ever get a sunburn on your ****?

cant, hand is always in the way.:rofl:

RussP
06-07-2012, 08:50
Come on guys, are you trying to get this thread locked?

Blast
06-07-2012, 23:44
It always amazes me how the paranoids always think an imagined government conspiracy is directed toward the general public or them in particular.:upeyes:

Anyway here is some info concerning airspace rights.

http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part91-119-FAR.shtml

http://aviation.uslegal.com/ownership-of-airspace-over-property/rights-in-airspace-and-relative-rights-of-surface-proprietors/

OlliesRevenge
06-08-2012, 09:35
It always amazes me how the paranoids always think an imagined government conspiracy is directed toward the general public or them in particular.:upeyes:

Anyway here is some info concerning airspace rights...

Thanks for the link, interesting read.

You don't have to be a paranoid conspiracy theorist to be opposed to an expansion of government surveillance capability. In fact, the word "conspiracy" is seeing a lot of use these days as rhetoric used to discredit legitimate concerns about government & politics.

I know a helo pilot who has a cold attitude toward UAV's cause he sees it as a job threat issue.

I'm a city government employee who simply thinks we have gone too far with police state security measures since 9-11, & there are are other things I'd like to see my tax dollars spent on.

RussP
06-08-2012, 09:44
I know a helo pilot who has a cold attitude toward UAV's cause he sees it as a job threat issue.I can empathize with his position. :cool:

JAS104
06-08-2012, 11:03
It always amazes me how the paranoids always think an imagined government conspiracy is directed toward the general public or them in particular.:upeyes:

Anyway here is some info concerning airspace rights.

http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part91-119-FAR.shtml

http://aviation.uslegal.com/ownership-of-airspace-over-property/rights-in-airspace-and-relative-rights-of-surface-proprietors/

Big brother's watching you, man.
The President is concerned with your brand of cereal, etc.
TO GITMO!

KennyFSU
06-08-2012, 11:18
The President is concerned with your brand of cereal, etc.

Lol, well they're already concerned about soft drinks in NY; cereal is the next logical step...

JAS104
06-08-2012, 13:07
Lol, well they're already concerned about soft drinks in NY; cereal is the next logical step...


Hey Kenny!
Yeah it's gonna be anything over 16 oz (I think?) if the mayor has anything to do with it. Therefore... we'll lose the Big Gulp. :shocked: lol

thetoastmaster
06-08-2012, 20:32
Big brother's watching you, man.
The President is concerned with your brand of cereal, etc.
TO GITMO!

You can have whatever cereal you want. You just can't put raw milk on it...

SPIN2010
06-11-2012, 16:00
You realize those are just like common remote control model planes, only smaller, lighter and with camera, right? They could give somebody a nasty cut, I guess.

A nasty cut? The drones that will be deployed here can and will carry armament. Plus:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/11/12169157-navy-drone-crashes-off-maryland-no-injuries?lite

It didn't take long at all.

MadMonkey
06-11-2012, 16:49
A nasty cut? The drones that will be deployed here can and will carry armament. Plus:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/11/12169157-navy-drone-crashes-off-maryland-no-injuries?lite

It didn't take long at all.

Take long for what? UAVs still crash quite often.

RussP
06-12-2012, 13:15
Take long for what? UAVs still crash quite often.Drone Crash Database (http://dronewarsuk.wordpress.com/drone-crash-database/)


And then there is the 2010 incident where a Mexican government drone crashed in El Paso...Mexico keeps drone incident under wraps (http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_16925337?source=most_viewed)

Mister_Beefy
06-13-2012, 00:09
You realize those are just like common remote control model planes, only smaller, lighter and with camera, right? They could give somebody a nasty cut, I guess.



the one that just crashed in MD was 44 feet long and has a unit cost of 104 million dollars.

RussP
06-13-2012, 09:24
Rand Paul Launches a Preemptive Strike Against Domestic Drone Use (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/rand-paul-launches-a-preemptive-strike-against-domestic-drone-use/258422/)

Bravo 1
06-13-2012, 14:20
What does the drone see that LE helicopters and fixed wing aircraft don't? Where does it go that they can't?

There is a significant difference as I am sure you know.

I do hope you are playing the devil's advocate here.

MadMonkey
06-13-2012, 15:09
Rand Paul Launches a Preemptive Strike Against Domestic Drone Use (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/06/rand-paul-launches-a-preemptive-strike-against-domestic-drone-use/258422/)

I have zero problem with that, and think that's the way it should be.


I do see a lot of parallels between many people's irrational fear of all UAVs and other people's irrational fear of guns.

Both are tools.

Both can easily be misused.

Both WILL be misused.

Both have legitimate, legal, and positive applications.

Both have fans and haters who want their use expanded/retracted and who want tighter/looser regulations.

I'm not a fan of restricting the rights of companies and individuals to use UAVs for legitimate purposes. As I (and RussP) have already stated, there are literally thousands of uses for UAVs that have ZERO to do with "spying" or "surveillance". I'm not a fan of law enforcement or government agencies using UAVs over the USA. I'm not a fan of law enforcement eagerly asking for tear gas and rubber bullet launchers on their UAVs.

Just as their are plenty of ways to legitimately use UAVs, there plenty of ways to misuse them as well. Focus on the misuse but don't lump the whole industry into your 1984-style tinfoil hat theory that all of them will be watching everyone every hour of every day waiting to catch you in the act of doing something wrong, or spying on your teenage daughter sunbathing in the backyard.

The UAV industry is going to create tens of thousands of jobs and revolutionize many businesses through legitimate means. As we've said already, spying/surveillance is a tiny, TINY part of what UAVs will actually be used for.

Don't let media fearmongering twist your opinion. You're being used, just like they use scary "assault weapons" and dangerous concealed carriers to sway public opinion against legitimate gun owners. I cringe every time they talk about "drones" in domestic use while showing pictures of a Hellfire-laden Reaper or Predator :upeyes:

Please people, do your research before demonizing and entire industry.

Mister_Beefy
06-13-2012, 17:07
gee, I wonder what madmonkey does for a living? :supergrin:

MadMonkey
06-13-2012, 17:30
gee, I wonder what madmonkey does for a living? :supergrin:

:whistling:

JAS104
06-13-2012, 18:25
You guys see a drone crashed in Maryland?


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Bravo 1
06-14-2012, 14:29
Being that they will help police catch the scum of the earth. I'm all for them. If your not doing anything wrong, I wouldn't worry about it.



Typical LEO attitude.

It has helped us as citizens get where we are today.

dpadams6
06-14-2012, 15:30
Typical LEO attitude.

It has helped us as citizens get where we are today.

Do you think the police could really care less what bravo1 is doing if he is doing nothing wrong? NO. sorry. Facts are the facts.

Mister_Beefy
06-14-2012, 16:51
police: "but they're soooo much cheaper than helicopters!"

truth: over 100 million unit cost


police: "they'll only be used to catch the scum of the earth!"

truth:
https://encrypted-tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQc5Kx-Wv09kwpxRvmUzVnLUmxjqOBOwwsgRNl2wvNjqx33L51r

Bravo 1
06-14-2012, 17:42
Do you think the police could really care less what bravo1 is doing if he is doing nothing wrong? NO. sorry. Facts are the facts.


No sir,, your facts are not facts.

What they are is this. The excuse and reasoning for a the minimizing of the citizenrys' rights.

The Bill of rights is clearly written.

And every part of it is important.

Power corrupts absolute,,absolute power corrupts absolutely.

dpadams6
06-15-2012, 08:03
No sir,, your facts are not facts.

What they are is this. The excuse and reasoning for a the minimizing of the citizenrys' rights.

The Bill of rights is clearly written.

And every part of it is important.

Power corrupts absolute,,absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Please explain how the police are specifically going to violate BRAVO1's civil rights, assuming that you are a law abiding citizen? Seriously, the police have way more important stuff to worry about and deal with then what you are doing. And just curious. Say, god forbid, some wacko does something serious to one of your loved ones and flee's the scene. I guarantee you would feel so much better knowing that your local police dept. had a drone in the sky looking for that wacko, with a much better chance of catching him. And they would be a tremendous tool in helping catch that wacko. More so than a helicopter. And i know exactly what helicopters have done to assist the police.

Bravo 1
06-15-2012, 11:15
Please explain how the police are specifically going to violate BRAVO1's civil rights, assuming that you are a law abiding citizen? Seriously, the police have way more important stuff to worry about and deal with then what you are doing. And just curious. Say, god forbid, some wacko does something serious to one of your loved ones and flee's the scene. I guarantee you would feel so much better knowing that your local police dept. had a drone in the sky looking for that wacko, with a much better chance of catching him. And they would be a tremendous tool in helping catch that wacko. More so than a helicopter. And i know exactly what helicopters have done to assist the police.



If I still have to explain myself,

then you are one of three things.

1: blind

2: in denial

3: part of the problem

I have stated all that is necessary to comprehend my concerns.

If you still cannot, then so be it.

Have a nice day.

Mister_Beefy
06-15-2012, 16:27
EPA using drones to spy on ranchers.

I don't think that ranchers are the worst of the worst when it comes to crime, a common claim of LEOs trying to defend their toys.

Judge Napolitano on Domestic Drones: "I Condemn Them They Are Not Constitutional" - YouTube

MadMonkey
06-15-2012, 16:39
EPA using drones to spy on ranchers.


Nope.

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/06/08/is-epa-using-drones-over-missouri/

Mister_Beefy
06-15-2012, 16:55
Nope.

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/06/08/is-epa-using-drones-over-missouri/


reporter asks EPA if they're using drones.. "nope! no way, it's just business as usual with manned aircraft here!"

congressman asks EPA if they're using drones.. ... .... no answer.

yeah, I'm sure they're telling the whole truth. after all, it's the government, they wouldn't lie, right? :rofl:

MadMonkey
06-15-2012, 16:59
reporter asks EPA if they're using drones.. "nope! no way, it's just business as usual with manned aircraft here!"

congressman asks EPA if they're using drones.. ... .... no answer.

yeah, I'm sure they're telling the whole truth. after all, it's the government, they wouldn't lie, right? :rofl:

Would you rather trust rumors from a person who thinks he/she can identify an aircraft that usually cruises at around 13-16k? :rofl:

dpadams6
06-16-2012, 05:46
If I still have to explain myself,

then you are one of three things.

1: blind

2: in denial

3: part of the problem

I have stated all that is necessary to comprehend my concerns.

If you still cannot, then so be it.

Have a nice day.

If that scenario happened, would you be in favor of a drone?

And none of your 3 listed apply.

Misty02
06-16-2012, 07:24
I have no issue with their use for the purposes listed by RussP in post #29, as well as for rescue missions, home or abroad.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Iím concerned with their misuse by any government that elects to silence opposition or otherwise control those perceived as a threat to their power. There are governments (other countries) with prisonerís whose only crime was to write a letter disparaging their government/rulerÖÖÖ.. but that could never happen in the US, right?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
As for privacy, there isnít much of that now days anyway. The ability to track a personís every move, if so desired, is already in place. Emails, phone texts, home cameras, cell phones with GPS, on-star and equivalents in vehicles, etc. So long as our government doesnít go rogue on us, it is all technology that benefits the population. If it does, drone or no drone, weíre doomed.<o:p></o:p>

I have zero problem with that, and think that's the way it should be.


I do see a lot of parallels between many people's irrational fear of all UAVs and other people's irrational fear of guns.

Both are tools.

Both can easily be misused.

Both WILL be misused.

Both have legitimate, legal, and positive applications.

Both have fans and haters who want their use expanded/retracted and who want tighter/looser regulations.

I'm not a fan of restricting the rights of companies and individuals to use UAVs for legitimate purposes. As I (and RussP) have already stated, there are literally thousands of uses for UAVs that have ZERO to do with "spying" or "surveillance". I'm not a fan of law enforcement or government agencies using UAVs over the USA. I'm not a fan of law enforcement eagerly asking for tear gas and rubber bullet launchers on their UAVs.

Just as their are plenty of ways to legitimately use UAVs, there plenty of ways to misuse them as well. Focus on the misuse but don't lump the whole industry into your 1984-style tinfoil hat theory that all of them will be watching everyone every hour of every day waiting to catch you in the act of doing something wrong, or spying on your teenage daughter sunbathing in the backyard.

The UAV industry is going to create tens of thousands of jobs and revolutionize many businesses through legitimate means. As we've said already, spying/surveillance is a tiny, TINY part of what UAVs will actually be used for.

Don't let media fearmongering twist your opinion. You're being used, just like they use scary "assault weapons" and dangerous concealed carriers to sway public opinion against legitimate gun owners. I cringe every time they talk about "drones" in domestic use while showing pictures of a Hellfire-laden Reaper or Predator :upeyes:

Please people, do your research before demonizing and entire industry.

Misty02
06-16-2012, 07:25
Do you think the police could really care less what bravo1 is doing if he is doing nothing wrong? NO. sorry. Facts are the facts.

Definitions of right and wrong change, as do laws.

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Bravo 1
06-18-2012, 02:35
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/15/the-spy-society/


As the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down, the industries that back Americaís military muscle will see the need to market their products for domestic use. Machines that work wonders in a soldierís hands donít necessarily belong on Main Street. What works wonders on a foreign battlefield can, in some cases, diminish the freedoms that made this country great.

Take the issue of drone surveillance. Cities around the country have accepted Department of Homeland Security grants to purchase these eyes in the sky that once were reserved for use identifying and terminating insurgents overseas. The lure of ďfreeĒ money is irresistible to the local bureaucrat, and consequently little thought goes in to how new government goodies might be used.

Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, introduced legislation Tuesday that would introduce at least a little third-party forethought into the process. His measure states simply that before any drone could be used to spy on a citizen, law enforcement would have to convince a judge to issue a warrant. Itís a common-sense idea to put a minimal amount of restraint on a process that is currently without oversight.

The same problem applies to less exotic surplus hardware that trickles down from the military to the small-town sheriff. Capitol Police already greet tourists while toting M4-style fully automatic rifles. Two massive armored urban-assault vehicles are parked outside the FBIís Washington Field Office. If that seems excessive for the capital, consider the quiet, crime-free town of Keene, N.H., which spent $285,000 in U.S. taxpayer funds buying an 8-ton Bearcat armored vehicle.

Earlier this month, police in Aurora, Colo., were on the hunt for a bank robber. They had no idea what he looked like, so nearly two-dozen innocent motorists were detained at gunpoint and handcuffed for up to two hours. During the search, police didnít offer any explanation for what was going on, according to local news accounts. In some ways, the affected drivers were worse off than the customers in the bank, none of whom were harmed in the brief heist.

There is no doubt that police should act decisively in protecting society from the criminal element. That does not mean, however, that they should ever be allowed to lose sight of the fundamental principle of the presumption of innocence upon which our legal system rests.

Dr. Paulís legislative proposal is a good first step in restoring the proper balance between the need to protect society and respect freedom. Congress also should exercise more oversight regarding the transfer of military hardware to local police. The more these high-powered toys are seen as ordinary tools, the more they will be put to inappropriate use as regular citizens are seen as enemy combatants.

The Washington Times

Bravo 1
06-18-2012, 02:36
If that scenario happened, would you be in favor of a drone?

And none of your 3 listed apply.


:faint:


wow,,,,,,,,,

dpadams6
06-18-2012, 08:00
Wow is your answer? I'm curious what your answer really would be bravo.

RussP
06-18-2012, 19:59
Police UAVs: Nearly limitless potential (http://www.policeone.com/police-products/investigation/video-surveillance/articles/5558533-Police-UAVs-Nearly-limitless-potential/)

Kingarthurhk
06-18-2012, 21:33
Until the Supreme Court reverses the 4th Amendment opinion that anything you see from the air is not a violation, were all stuck like chuck. I do not like the concept of military drones being used on a civilian populus. If anything, perhaps it can be challenged under Posse Comitatus.

Either way, this is too much "big brother" for me. However, there has not not been a peep of complaint from the House on this issue. I guess no one really cares in the government how this football is used as long as it is their football. Much like the Patriot Act.

Misty02
06-19-2012, 05:04
Until the Supreme Court reverses the 4th Amendment opinion that anything you see from the air is not a violation, were all stuck like chuck. I do not like the concept of military drones being used on a civilian populus. If anything, perhaps it can be challenged under Posse Comitatus.

Either way, this is too much "big brother" for me. However, there has not not been a peep of complaint from the House on this issue. I guess no one really cares in the government how this football is used as long as it is their football. Much like the Patriot Act.

Could you direct me to the opinion you mention where anything that is seen from the air is not a violation? I would like to read it in context. Thank you, in advance. :)

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

RussP
06-19-2012, 17:23
Talk of U.S. Drones Sparks Anxiety (http://www.lawofficer.com/article/news/talk-us-drones-sparks-anxiety)

Kingarthurhk
06-19-2012, 18:29
Could you direct me to the opinion you mention where anything that is seen from the air is not a violation? I would like to read it in context. Thank you, in advance. :)

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

http://www.enotes.com/california-v-ciraolo-reference/california-v-ciraolo

Bravo 1
06-19-2012, 18:46
Wow is your answer? I'm curious what your answer really would be bravo.

This should express my disdain for your stance sufficiently.

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.
Thomas Jefferson

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
Thomas Jefferson

and one of my favorites,

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin

dpadams6
06-19-2012, 19:41
This should express my disdain for your stance sufficiently.

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.
Thomas Jefferson

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around yus by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
Thomas Jefferson

and one of my favorites,

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin

Can you not just give an answer instead of quoting someone all the time?
So you would not be in favor of using a drone to help apprehend a suspect who just did harm to your loved one?

Misty02
06-20-2012, 03:22
http://www.enotes.com/california-v-ciraolo-reference/california-v-ciraolo

Thank you, Kingarthurhk. Interesting reading. Iím torn on this one, while Iím glad that person was apprehended, I cannot justify the means to do so

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

Misty02
06-20-2012, 03:33
Can you not just give an answer instead of quoting someone all the time?
So you would not be in favor of using a drone to help apprehend a suspect who just did harm to your loved one?

Letís take a case like this one, for example: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/father-kills-molester-texas-no-charges_n_1610465.html?1340144123&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D171378 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/19/father-kills-molester-texas-no-charges_n_1610465.html?1340144123&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D171378)<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Had the criminal escaped I would have been in favor using a heat seeking drone to locate this piece of garbage in his home. I would have also been in favor of having the officer that found him execute him on the spot. However, that is not what the laws of this nation stand for. They require the laws to be followed, that search warrants be obtained when necessary and due process be afforded even the most vile of criminals. Iím not always in agreement with the end results (at times I'm totally disgusted by it) but I understand the overall reasons for it.<o:p></o:p>


.

RussP
06-20-2012, 07:52
I was on a ride-along with our local PD. We got a call to meet an officer from an adjoining PD to pick up a female juvenile from our County.

When we met the officer, she explained the 15-year old was found while they were using a thermal imaging device on their aircraft, searching for two males, gang members, who had robbed a convenience store . The 15-yr old admitted she had been with them and other gang members earlier in the evening. Somehow she wound up in a wooded area and hid when she heard sirens and saw the helicopter's spotlight.

The air unit directed officers to her position. She wouldn't talk on the way to her house, but her mother was very grateful when we returned her home.

Had she not been seen on the thermal display, she most likely would have spent the night in the woods, or gone back to where she'd been with the gang.

She was found incidental to the search for the robbers.

Just an example of electronic searching working...

Bravo 1
06-20-2012, 14:20
Can you not just give an answer instead of quoting someone all the time?
So you would not be in favor of using a drone to help apprehend a suspect who just did harm to your loved one?


Well,

that is an answer. And if you lack the comprehensive abilities to make the leap of logic, then that is on you.

Have a nice day comrade.

Bravo 1
06-20-2012, 15:15
I was on a ride-along with our local PD. We got a call to meet an officer from an adjoining PD to pick up a female juvenile from our County.

When we met the officer, she explained the 15-year old was found while they were using a thermal imaging device on their aircraft, searching for two males, gang members, who had robbed a convenience store . The 15-yr old admitted she had been with them and other gang members earlier in the evening. Somehow she wound up in a wooded area and hid when she heard sirens and saw the helicopter's spotlight.

The air unit directed officers to her position. She wouldn't talk on the way to her house, but her mother was very grateful when we returned her home.

Had she not been seen on the thermal display, she most likely would have spent the night in the woods, or gone back to where she'd been with the gang.

She was found incidental to the search for the robbers.

Just an example of electronic searching working...

Not quite an apples and apples comparison.

Drones,,,,,well they are a slippery slope.

But hey, if we are all safer then it is okay right?

happyguy
06-20-2012, 16:36
I don't have a problem with LE and other agencies having drones.

I do have a problem with politicians and bureaucrats who think they are above the law being able to use this technology for their own ends.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

RussP
06-20-2012, 17:44
Not quite an apples and apples comparison.

Drones,,,,,well they are a slippery slope.

But hey, if we are all safer then it is okay right?

Yes, it is an apple to apple example of one use for a drone in the future.

Technology generally has its challenges when applied.

Yes, if by using it we are safer, technology is good.

Kingarthurhk
06-21-2012, 21:23
Thank you, Kingarthurhk. Interesting reading. Iím torn on this one, while Iím glad that person was apprehended, I cannot justify the means to do so

.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

I am not fan of this practice, because I can see the potential for abuse. However, at the moment, because of court rulings, we are stuck with it.

Bravo 1
06-22-2012, 05:27
Yes, it is an apple to apple example of one use for a drone in the future.

Technology generally has its challenges when applied.

Yes, if by using it we are safer, technology is good.



Then I know which side you are on.

BORNGEARHEAD
06-22-2012, 05:31
Drones the size of a mosquito?!

http://www.rt.com/news/us-drones-swarms-274/

dpadams6
06-22-2012, 07:57
Well,

that is an answer. And if you lack the comprehensive abilities to make the leap of logic, then that is on you.

Have a nice day comrade.

You obviously don't have the "comprehensive ability" to speak without quoting a person with more "comprehensive abilities" then yourself. You can quote all you want, but I think I already know your answer to my question. But you obviously don't want to admit it.

RussP
06-22-2012, 08:09
Then I know which side you are on.I am on the side of those who work to use proven technologies effectively without infringing on Rights. If my safety is a result of that use, that is good.

How about you? Do you accept the use of proven technologies that do not infringe on Rights?

Bravo 1
06-23-2012, 04:52
To answer your question, yes I do.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/21/drones-threaten-privacy/

Bravo 1
06-23-2012, 05:03
You obviously don't have the "comprehensive ability" to speak without quoting a person with more "comprehensive abilities" then yourself. You can quote all you want, but I think I already know your answer to my question. But you obviously don't want to admit it.

You are 100% correct, as usual.

But I am sure you're used to being right all of the time and it isn't a surprise that you are right here.

Again,

RussP
06-23-2012, 05:56
To answer your question, yes I do.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/21/drones-threaten-privacy/Thank you...

Bravo 1
06-23-2012, 06:00
Thank you...


You are welcome.

But I still see a slippery slope,

RussP
06-23-2012, 08:10
You are welcome.

But I still see a slippery slope,As would/should any reasonable person.

Bravo 1
06-23-2012, 09:15
As would/should any reasonable person.

I would like to ask you something. Do you honestly believe that once various law enforcement agencies begin to use them"in the name of public safety, they will never encroach on the 4th along with other amendments?

And I do believe they will (encroach) with impunity fwiw.

RussP
06-23-2012, 09:39
I would like to ask you something. Do you honestly believe that once various law enforcement agencies begin to use them"in the name of public safety, they will never encroach on the 4th along with other amendments?

And I do believe they will (encroach) with impunity fwiw.Never? There will always be someone pushing the envelope.

thetoastmaster
06-23-2012, 09:39
With government, anything not expressly forbidden becomes mandatory. Yes, I fully expect State actors to milk this for all it's worth, while selling it to an unwitting and dumbed-down electorate. Spy drones and VIPR teams, coming soon to a neighborhood near you.

"'Merica: love it or leave it!" (whilst belching and hoisting a Budweiser).

Kingarthurhk
06-23-2012, 18:07
With government, anything not expressly forbidden becomes mandatory. Yes, I fully expect State actors to milk this for all it's worth, while selling it to an unwitting and dumbed-down electorate. Spy drones and VIPR teams, coming soon to a neighborhood near you.

"'Merica: love it or leave it!" (whilst belching and hoisting a Budweiser).

I don't trust government, and I never will. The Executive Legislation nonsense was the straw the broke the camel's back for me.

However, by judicial review of the 4th Amendment it has long been determined that aerial surveilance is not an infringment.

Why I don't like drones? Well, a government that uses them in combat overseas and is willing to ignore the Constitution of the United States could conceivably become a Syria using hellfire missles on its own citizenry.

When the government decides whether or not it will follow the Constitution when and if it feels like it, anything is possible.

Bravo 1
06-25-2012, 06:25
I don't trust government, and I never will. The Executive Legislation nonsense was the straw the broke the camel's back for me.

However, by judicial review of the 4th Amendment it has long been determined that aerial surveilance is not an infringment.

Why I don't like drones? Well, a government that uses them in combat overseas and is willing to ignore the Constitution of the United States could conceivably become a Syria using hellfire missles on its own citizenry.

When the government decides whether or not it will follow the Constitution when and if it feels like it, anything is possible.


I agree with that 100%

Posse comitatus is dead today anyway. So they can basically do anything they want today(or tonight) in the name of "terrorism" or "national security".

They can even detain you indefinately without a trial or lawyer.

This is NOT the United States it is supposed to be.

RussP
06-25-2012, 11:15
Drones: They could be turned into weapons. (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/06/25/drones-vulnerable-to-terrorist-hijacking-researchers-say/)

MadMonkey
06-25-2012, 12:35
Oh noez, the hackerz is coming! :rofl:

Kingarthurhk
06-25-2012, 17:30
Drones: They could be turned into weapons. (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/06/25/drones-vulnerable-to-terrorist-hijacking-researchers-say/)

That would make a good cover story when they are improperly employed, which with the things going on with the Executive, would not suprise me.

RussP
06-25-2012, 18:13
That would make a good cover story when they are improperly employed, which with the things going on with the Executive, would not suprise me.The part in bold, what do you mean?

Gunhaver
06-28-2012, 19:20
Just another step in the arms race like the radar/radar detector battle. The quad rotors are very fragile and only need something to take out one rotor to bring them down. Something lighter and faster like one of these inexpensive PCB board drones programmed to set a collision course with anything it's locked on to would bring them down at a cost of about $30. Probably cheaper and much less attention grabbing than all the shotgun rounds you'd have to fire to hit it.

http://www.instructables.com/image/FK2KLWQH2MYKEB7/PCB-Quadrotor-Brushless.jpg

Kingarthurhk
06-30-2012, 18:38
The part in bold, what do you mean?

How has the government handled freedom of speach lately? How has it handled the constitution lately? How has it handled individual liberty lately? I would give it a D- on all fronts. Why should we assume that a system that was originally designed as a weaponized unit would not be eventually misused and then labled as a "terrible, unfortunate, accident"? I see the potential for this type of abuse.

As we get more and more big brother, oposition will be less and less tolerated.

It would not be that hard to send out a weaponized drone, and say, well, we didn't mean to launch this one, it was an accident, and then something horrible happened either by a malicious hacker, or pilot error and a house, church, mosque, or whatever of people who might diagree with the current regime are tragically snuffed out.

As liberty has lately been abused, I see the potential for abuse in all areas.

You may have noticed that the Constitution was patently ingored by Executive Legislation of the dream act by doing an end run around Congress and there hasn't been as much as a wimper?

When the Constitution can just be set aside without any consequence or outcry, then absolutely anything is possible.

After this abuse of the Seperation of Powers, I trust nothing anymore.

RussP
07-01-2012, 06:35
How has the government handled freedom of speach lately? ...

After this abuse of the Seperation of Powers, I trust nothing anymore.Thank you, just wanted a bit more detail on what you meant. :thumbsup:

Kingarthurhk
07-01-2012, 10:57
Thank you, just wanted a bit more detail on what you meant. :thumbsup:

Yeah, I am just really depressed about the hit freedom has taken lately in our country. I am seeing a trend I don't like and don't trust anymore. I am usually a fan of the 4th of July. I just can't face it this year. It's meaning seems hollow.

RussP
08-12-2012, 14:14
‘THE REAL RISK IS NOT THE CAMERA’: DRONE USE IN NON-MILITARY SITUATIONS A FOCUS AT UAV CONFERENCE (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-real-risk-is-not-the-camera-drone-use-in-non-military-situations-a-focus-at-uav-conference/)