Court Upholds Domestic Drone Use in Arrest of American Citizen

reply to post by nunyadammm

reply to post by nunyadammm


Asked and answered ....

see page 1 and read.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by PsykoOps
One of you "my rights are dead" people do explain how this is any different from a helicopter? I'm bit buzzled that anyone would even think that.

Helicopters are easily seen and heard from a far distance. They are also driven by a human versus someone controlling a drone with an X Box controller. Therefore there is more accountability involved for the helicopter's actions.

Helicopter missions are expensive to fund due to fuel and manpower costs. While the drones themselves will eventually be less expensive to purchase and operate so it opens the door for a whole lot more surveillance than we're used to at a much lower cost for the agencies doing the spying.

reply to post by xuenchen


I totally agree.

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by nunyadammm

 

reply to post by nunyadammm

 

Asked and answered ....

see page 1 and read.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on Aug-03-2012 by xuenchen because:

The only thing that posts "answers" is that you are upset because a drone makes a better eyewitness. Other than that, helicopters do not use warrants either so pbbbbbbbbbbt.

I need a REAL answer. Not your usual empty talking point pablum.

So now it is asked yet again.

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed

Originally posted by PsykoOps
One of you "my rights are dead" people do explain how this is any different from a helicopter? I'm bit buzzled that anyone would even think that.

Helicopters are easily seen and heard from a far distance.

They knew the drone was there. Ask their lawyer.

They are also driven by a human versus someone controlling a drone with an X Box controller.

Aliens control the drones?
I thought those were driven by humans too?

Therefore there is more accountability involved for the helicopter's actions.

Not really since what you just said does not make any sense.

Helicopter missions are expensive to fund due to fuel and manpower costs. While the drones themselves will eventually be less expensive to purchase and operate so it opens the door for a whole lot more surveillance than we're used to at a much lower cost for the agencies doing the spying.

Hey...something not crazy!

Originally posted by nunyadammm

Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by nunyadammm

 

reply to post by nunyadammm

 

Asked and answered ....

see page 1 and read.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on Aug-03-2012 by xuenchen because:

The only thing that posts "answers" is that you are upset because a drone makes a better eyewitness. Other than that, helicopters do not use warrants either so pbbbbbbbbbbt.

I need a REAL answer. Not your usual empty talking point pablum.

So now it is asked yet again.

A wee bit touchy today are we ?

I'm not the one upset.

You misunderstood the entire court precedent.

Asked and answered.

What's Your point anyway ?

reply to post by xuenchen


Xuenchen, I see you have met nunyadammm

Don't worry you get used to him/her after a while.

I might have missed this, but does any one know what they charged him with?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

That should be updated then. Big difference between an airplane flying over your house, and an unmanned drone flying over your house with the sole intent of spying.

So your wife and daughter are being held hostage on someones property, law enforcement knows they are there, just not where and whether the perp is armed. They say let's send in a drone to find their location and situation. You would say NO, NO DRONE! If my wife and daughter die that's the risk I'll take, just go in guns a blazin'.

If so I'm disgusted.

Yes, I would, because i understand that such issues work on precedent, and once we allow the government to do it once, they can do it in any instance.

You may have total faith in your governments benevolence, but i do not.

It's just not right.
It's not supposed to be that way. Too much power, too much control. I wouldn't want to live in a place where I am watched constantly. I mean, we know they already tap our phone conversations, our emails, they watch what we do on internet, they record us with thousands of cameras at every street corner, they track our movements with GPS, they chipped the IDs, so the question is when it will be enough? Since when the human society became a wild herd who needs to be kept in place by a few mad dogs? Are all these methods really justified? Do we see an improvement in our society behavior?

Maybe some will think that the drone was justified in this case. Of course, that damn thief.... But where this road will take us? To even more power and control against us. To more automatization of "law" enforcement, which law is less and less made to protect us. And before we will realize it, we or someone close to us will be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that god damn machine will blow us away before having a chance to see what hit us.

Because the real question is this: will we really be safer with drones hovering all over our heads?
I guess not.
So why we accept them? Because this frog it's almost boiled

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
Helicopters are easily seen and heard from a far distance.

So? What has that to do with anything?

They are also driven by a human versus someone controlling a drone with an X Box controller. Therefore there is more accountability involved for the helicopter's actions.

Newsflash for you. Drones are flown by humans. How is drone actions not accountable? That makes no sense at all.

Helicopter missions are expensive to fund due to fuel and manpower costs. While the drones themselves will eventually be less expensive to purchase and operate so it opens the door for a whole lot more surveillance than we're used to at a much lower cost for the agencies doing the spying.

So it's evil cause it's cheaper? Wth? This is all you have? So you have nothing (worthy) to distinguish from helicopters.

reply to post by PsykoOps

So? What has that to do with anything?

Put your thinking cap on please.

It has a whole lot to do with it, part of the drone's advantage for spying on us is it's ability to remain unseen and unheard. Sure I'm all for catching real criminals, but most of us already know they will be using these to spy on regular law abiding citizens but you sound like you are okay with that.

Put your thinking cap on please.

Newsflash for you. Drones are flown by humans. How is drone actions not accountable? That makes no sense at all.

Yes, drones are flown by humans, by a human who is cooped up in some office at drone headquarters working for some government agencies that are not held accountable for their actions. It makes perfect sense, it just takes a little brain power...passes you some ginkgo biloba

So it's evil cause it's cheaper? Wth? This is all you have? So you have nothing (worthy) to distinguish from helicopters.

I never once said it was evil, please stop slandering me and making up lies. I only pointed out the fact that it will be much easier and less expensive for them to implement a higher degree of surveillance. I made it quite clear actually so I don't understand your inability to comprehend the obvious points I have made.

What does it's ability to be unseen have to do with anything? So only law enforcement that is clearly visible is ok? LEO's have been using covert surveillance for ages. So that's not a valid point.
Also your "knowledge" of them spying on law abiding citizens is moot also. That's what law enforcement does by default if they are not engaging criminals. They look for criminals. That's what you pay them to do.
Also now that you make a claim of drones being flown by people who are not accountable I shall ask you to source that. I have never heard of such.
"obvious points"

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Also now that you make a claim of drones being flown by people who are not accountable I shall ask you to source that. I have never heard of such.

The Pentagon is considering awarding a Distinguished Warfare Medal to drone pilots who work on military bases often far removed from the battlefield.

Pentagon officials have been briefed on the medal’s “unique concept,” Charles V. Mugno, head of the Army Institute of Heraldry, told a recent meeting of the Commission of Fine Arts, according to a report in Coin World by our former colleague Bill McAllister.

Mugno said most combat decorations require “boots on the ground” in a combat zone, but he noted that “emerging technologies” such as drones and cyber combat missions are now handled by troops far removed from combat.

The Pentagon has not formally endorsed the medal, but Mugno’s institute has completed six alternate designs for commission approval.

www.washingtonpost.com...

If they're planning on giving the killers of innocent children medals to commemorate their duty, it's not so far fetched to believe that their accountability will be limited domestically as well.

So you're just making assumptions? What happens over seas in a war zone is somehow related to domestic law enforcement? Does not compute.

The only point of contention is in the apparent 'warrant-less search' part....

I don't know the exact law, but I'm sure a person has some rights to the airspace above their
property in regard to law enforcement searches.

There are similar laws regarding line of sight searches of property. If those laws were broken then
there is a case for a tainted evidence dismissal.

The use of the drone really has no bearing...only whether it was used lawfully to perform the search.

Found this about military drones.
How long it will take until they will be proved "useful" for the police too?

Military robots come in an astonishing range of shapes and sizes. DelFly, a dragonfly-shaped surveillance drone built at the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, weighs less than a gold wedding ring, camera included.

By jabbing the ground with a gas-powered piston, the Sand Flea can leap through a window, or onto a roof nine metres up. Gyro-stabilisers provide smooth in-air filming and landings. The 5kg robot then rolls along on wheels until another hop is needed—to jump up some stairs, perhaps, or to a rooftop across the street. Another robot, RiSE, resembles a giant cockroach and uses six legs, tipped with short, Velcro-like spikes, to climb coarse walls.

Robots' capabilities have steadily improved. Upload a mugshot into an SUGV, a briefcase-sized robot than runs on caterpillar tracks, and it can identify a man walking in a crowd and follow him.

It's scary, to say the least.

Robots go to war: March of the robots

reply to post by xuenchen


At every step of every day someone is going to trample on the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights
in order to PUSH the Governement into getting bigger and deeper into everyone's lives.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
So you're just making assumptions? What happens over seas in a war zone is somehow related to domestic law enforcement? Does not compute.

Keep in mind that these drones like the one in question may not have been under the direct control of a law enforcement officer !!!

If the one in question was "operated" by military personnel, that person may not have had local jurisdiction.

And we really don't know if any drones "owned" by municipalities or States are or will be under the direct control of a sworn police officer.

Police helicopters ARE under direct control of Police.

Big difference in laws.

Originally posted by xuenchen
Keep in mind that these drones like the one in question may not have been under the direct control of a law enforcement officer !!!

May not... That's weak. Also what's to stop the police from asking help from outside the department?