Phillyburb hunters shoots down activist spy drone

page: 6
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Ok then. Sure sure.



Thank god you are in Finland and not here in the States.
Please, do yourself a favor adn stay there.




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Sounds like these SHARK people have waay too much money and time, and very little common sense.
The Yootoob videos of them getting themselves harrassed by various frustrated shooters and police,have gotten pretty lame.
Perhaps they fail to understand that freedom is everybody, in their drive to save the pidgeon populace from............
nah not extinction.....violent ignominous death at the hands of a larger predator...?
isnt that the way of nature? regardless of method....at least these predators husband the birds or the whole bird shooting sport would have dissapeared already.......
I think it would be a good idea for the drone flyers to engage in some activity of a more useful benefit to nature
Its sad when these over educated ignoramuses try to tell us all how we should think like they do......

And i find it somehow self demeaning when they pull that " pity us, for we are pure"" routine.......



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Does this mean you've not found a source and are actually giving up? Who am I going to discuss this with now?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Works for multiple people, using multiple rendering agents.

Sounds like your Finish stuff is broken.


Sorry, can't help broken Finish PCs or broken Finish thinking.

Have fun in life.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Discuss with yourself, as at the end of the day. that really is who your opinion of US laws matter to most.

Ta-ta.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Oh, so sad. I had hoped that you'd at least try linking one source to vague source of some kind. I mean it's only laws that are all pretty much right in the webs for anyone to link into. Laws being the word you too use quite often I see.
Anyone else care to source this claim?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Oh, so sad. I had hoped that you'd at least try linking one source to vague source of some kind. I mean it's only laws that are all pretty much right in the webs for anyone to link into. Laws being the word you too use quite often I see.
Anyone else care to source this claim?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Oh, so sad. I had hoped that you'd at least try linking one source to vague source of some kind. I mean it's only laws that are all pretty much right in the webs for anyone to link into. Laws being the word you too use quite often I see.
Anyone else care to source this claim?


still enjoying the litter.

here


Classification of privacy laws Privacy laws can be broadly classified into: General privacy laws have an overall bearing on the personal information of individuals and affect the policies that govern many different areas of information.


edit to add:
here is a wealth of information about us in the US.


Specific privacy laws These laws are designed to regulate specific types of information. Some examples include:
Health privacy laws
Financial privacy laws
Online privacy laws
Communication privacy laws
Information privacy laws
Privacy in one's home


Privacy in one's home extends to his private land as well.

wow, this clumps nicely.

edit on 20-11-2012 by network dude because: added snarky comment.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


There is no source for the claim as you are correct. It is just lame on the part of the shark folks but unfortunately NOT illegal. The supreme court ruled in Ciraolo vs. California that there is no Fourth Amendment protection from aerial recon...period.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Wow what a clumb... Doesn't say anything about the issue thought. Better try than the other guy thought



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by howmuch4another
 


It's kind of a moot point anyway, as the activity they were involved in is perfectly legal. They could probably make a case for harassment against SHARK and other organizations though.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


exactly...It is also moot because nothing will come of it. Like previously stated I am sure that nobody saw or heard anything



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Harrasment would only apply if they'd be somehow interfering with the shooters. So that wouldn't really work either.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   
why is this organization harassing pigeon shooters.

is it that offensive to eat pigeon.

why isn't this idiot organization flying over a chicken processing plant.

if you're going to fly a remote controlled drone in the middle of a pigeon hunt, chances are it's going to catch a "stray" bullet.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
When one group has guns and the other doesn't, harassment is whatever they say it is!



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


If they've been forced to move their activity to try to hide it from activists, then they've been harassed.


harassment (either harris-meant or huh-rass-meant) n. the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The purposes may vary, including racial prejudice, personal malice, an attempt to force someone to quit a job or grant sexual favors, apply illegal pressure to collect a bill, or merely gain sadistic pleasure from making someone fearful or anxious. Such activities may be the basis for a lawsuit if due to discrimination based on race or sex, a violation on the statutory limitations on collection agencies, involve revenge by an ex-spouse, or be shown to be a form of blackmail ("I'll stop bothering you, if you'll go to bed with me"). The victim may file a petition for a "stay away" (restraining) order, intended to prevent contact by the offensive party. A systematic pattern of harassment by an employee against another worker may subject the employer to a lawsuit for failure to protect the worker. (See: harass, sexual harassment)

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...


“The pigeon shooters are basically going into hiding,”

Source

If they're going into hiding to perform a legal activity, and can prove that they've had to do so because of activists, then they can win a harassment suit.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Nope, they have not been forced to do anything. They choose to go into hiding cause what they do is embarrasing and they don't want the public to see it. They could just be there standing out in the open and smile for the cameras while torturing pigeons for fun. They are afraid of public perception and choose to hide.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Arm the drones. Then if they are fired upon, have them fire back. Have RC tanks and artillery come in for backup. Repeat as necessary until those terrorist pigeon shooters recognize that RC toys have the right to exist.

Pretty sure those pigeon shooters are developing nuclear weapons to use against the pigeons.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
How far into the atmosphere do you own when you purchase property?
I would have loved to shoot one of things, good for them.
"I thought it was a pigeon!"



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
I think it's 50-100ft. in rural areas. Don't quote me on that thought. I got that from another ATS member.





new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join