+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18
May 17th, 2012, 09:40 AM #1
Judge Napolitano: First Patriot To Shoot Down A Government Spy Drone Will Be A Hero
» Judge Napolitano: First Patriot To Shoot Down A Government Spy Drone Will Be A Hero Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
As we reported in February, over 30 prominent watchdog groups have banded together to petition the FAA on the proposed increase in the use of drones in US airspace.
The groups, including The American Civil Liberties Union, The Electronic Privacy Information Center, and The Bill of Rights Defense Committee, submitted a petition demanding that the FAA hold a rulemaking session to consider the privacy and safety threats.
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.
The ACLU noted that the FAA’s legislation “would push the nation willy-nilly toward an era of aerial surveillance without any steps to protect the traditional privacy that Americans have always enjoyed and expected.”
In addition to privacy concerns, the groups warned that the ability to link facial recognition technology to surveillance drones and patch the information through to active government databases would “increase the First Amendment risks for would be political dissidents.”The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The unprotected are backing Trump.
May 17th, 2012, 10:07 AM #2
I wonder how much of the confusion and hard feelings would have changed IF a spy plane/drone had footage of the Martin/Zimmerman incident.
It would certainly help the Govt find those pesky first rights instigators who think they can say whatever they want.They say technology slows down for no one. I know it outruns my wallet. I figure its because my wallet isn't light enough yet.
TechIMO Folding@home Team #111 - Crunching for the cure!
dulce bellum inexpertis
May 17th, 2012, 12:26 PM #3
While Alex "Troll-Master" Jones would have you believe this is some huge affront on your rights, the truth is far less dramatic. The issue is we currently don't any any good rules in place for who can operate drones and they are proliferating rapidly. We need rules in place so that amateurs can continue to operate their R/C planes and we can come to a conclusion about whether realtors should be able to operate drones to take pictures of real estate they are marketing. We need rules so that the Interior Department and the National Parks Service can operate drones to look for forest fires, so the Coast Guard can do enhanced search and rescue, so border patrol agents can better look for illegal border crossings, and so the National Guard can do more effective disaster relief after event like Katrina or the Joplin tornado.
May 17th, 2012, 12:32 PM #4
There are good uses for drones.
But to allow the nations police agencies to do surveillance at will, on everyone in the USA is not what citizens of America signed up for.
Today's optics will allow a drone driver to see what is in your pockets in the dark of night.The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The unprotected are backing Trump.
May 17th, 2012, 12:45 PM #5
It's part of the information surveillance net that already encompasses everything you do. If you want that fixed, you'll need to repeal the Patriot Act and get Americans to give-up their security-at-all-costs post 9/11 mentality that is based on fear and ignorance.
Got a link to the drone optics, BTW?
May 17th, 2012, 01:29 PM #6
But for starters, you can "process in" body jewelry though clothing using Photoshop by tweaking the settings.The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The unprotected are backing Trump.
May 17th, 2012, 02:32 PM #7
Yeah. Still images. Taken in daylight. Using cameras that take images from several feet away. I have no doubt someone is working on it, but I don't think we are there yet. You'd have better luck pulsing them with x-rays or some other sort of active-return scan. There just isn't enough information present in low-light or no-light/infrared situations to return pictures of what is in someone's pocket. IMO.
May 17th, 2012, 02:56 PM #8
May 17th, 2012, 03:49 PM #9
Is it the act of tailing that bothers you or the ease of which you can be tailed with a spy drone. Are you all for it as long as it costs lots of money and manpower?
Somehow I doubt there will be a spy drone assigned to you in your mundane life.
You do know that that little airplane up there way high in the sky with a pilot could be filming you as you travel down the highway. If the police can patrol the skies right now with a two seater plane why cant they use a drone?
May 17th, 2012, 10:47 PM #10
Well, EPI, it's like boiling a frog. It won't be long and you won't see anything wrong with wearing a RFID tag "just in case you need help"...The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The unprotected are backing Trump.
May 18th, 2012, 09:25 AM #11
RFID? Try again, Chuck. People already carry a way more advanced device with them every day that tracks their every movement and relays everything they say.
RFID chips are mostly useless except for short range scanning on the range of inches to several feet.
Last edited by tony_j15; May 18th, 2012 at 09:27 AM.
May 18th, 2012, 10:52 AM #12
May 18th, 2012, 11:02 AM #13
On the subject of the drones, I was originally thinking that drones could possibly increase the amout of bird-strikes because drone operators wouldn't be able to see what a real pilot in a plane would see. But now I realize that, bird strikes already happen and cause regular planes to crash, and maybe it would be better for a drone to crash than a plane with a two person crew or such to crash.
May 18th, 2012, 12:20 PM #14
On the subject of actual threats from drones: they do occasionally lose communication with the controllers, at which point they are supposed to go into safe mode and either fly a hold pattern until the signal is re-established or return to base. The problem is software occasionally bugs up and they continue flying. As more and more of these things get into the sky, chances increase that they could fly over airports or no-fly zones like DC, causing all sorts of problems.
May 18th, 2012, 01:52 PM #15
if communication's are lost and GPS is lost then I guess flying into airspace of an airport is possible. but sometimes personal aircraft and commercial aircraft lose signal to the brain. Heart attacks, strokes... Is it really any worse a threat than a pilot breaking down.
A triple failure of GPS, loss of communications, proximity and default course that endangers airports might be a fairly unlikely event.
May 18th, 2012, 02:23 PM #16
sometimes the water is not going to boil and the frog just gets a comfortable bath it really all depends on the ultimate heat applied to the water.
By your logic, we should not have police because at some point they might abuse their power, We should not have a military because time and time again through out history militaries are used against the people, you should not demand drivers licenses.
Sometimes things are abused and others they are not. Tell me essentially what this drone is going to do to you. In your rogue government situation, what is uncle sam going to use this drone for? How is it essentially different from other methods that exist and are employed today?
May 18th, 2012, 03:21 PM #17
May 18th, 2012, 04:31 PM #18
that sounds like it only met one of the criteria. Lost communications. Possibly 2 in that apparently it did not have a gps mode to travel to a designated safe area and fly in circles waiting for more commands. i guess they don't have that algorythim in the thing.
But it did not fly into airport airspace.
I would recommend that they have designated safety areas for any stateside drones. For them to travel to in the event of loss of signal. A system like that would be even better than what private airplanes have Currently in the air
Last edited by Epidemic; May 18th, 2012 at 04:49 PM.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By mad1 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 3Last Post: July 20th, 2010, 10:08 AM
By SiliconJon in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 12Last Post: July 19th, 2010, 11:28 AM
By Chuckiechan in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 7Last Post: July 10th, 2010, 12:13 PM
By no1_vern in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 1Last Post: December 17th, 2009, 01:29 PM
By Theophylact in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 4Last Post: September 21st, 2006, 12:11 AM