Obama to US Military?: Must shoot US Citizens

[+joc]

Ive got a question:

Do you think its ok to fly helicopters over cities to observe them?

Hell (insert your favorite vulgarism) No! It is okay to fly helicopters to observe traffic, it is okay to fly helicopters to observe 'situations'...it is NOT okay to observe the goings on of the American People via any means. Camera are one thing...but just hovering around 'watching' people...NO! Hell No! Ditto with drones or planes or anything else including just cops eyeing me! If there is a situation...Prez is in town...big game...high crime area in parking lots...that's one thing..but no..the government shouldn't Watch the people...the people should however Watch the government!

[Stellar]

Helicopters are not drones. Fact

Thats not what I asked.

Hell (insert your favorite vulgarism) No! It is okay to fly helicopters to observe traffic, it is okay to fly helicopters to observe 'situations'...it is NOT okay to observe the goings on of the American People via any means. Camera are one thing...but just hovering around 'watching' people...NO! Hell No! Ditto with drones or planes or anything else including just cops eyeing me! If there is a situation...Prez is in town...big game...high crime area in parking lots...that's one thing..but no..the government shouldn't Watch the people...the people should however Watch the government!

So you want all the police sitting at the police station waiting for a call?

Police drive around observing for crimes being comitted. Helicopters fly in the air observing for crimes being comitted as well.

[AsteroidX]

Theres currently bounties available for the downing or capturing of a drone in US airspace. So noone here (America) cares about your opinion on there usefulness. We dont want them spying on our sex lives end of story.

In case you didnt read it the first time read it this time.

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2012_cr/drone-thud.html

[Stellar]

Theres currently bounties available for the downing or capturing of a drone in US airspace. So noone here (America) cares about your opinion on there usefulness. We dont want them spying on our sex lives end of story.

In case you didnt read it the first time read it this time.

http://www.fas.org/i...drone-thud.html

I'm simply asking some questions. Why do you consider drones flying overhead to be "spying", but helicopters flying overhead arent?

[Zaphod222]

One thing I haven't seen many people mention is that if there's an eventual economic collapse...the government might not be able to pay the police.

No. The government will always be "able to pay the police". That they are trashing the currency and the economy in the process is a different story, but a government is always, by definition, able to maintain the organs that the state itself functioning.

In fact, the LAST people who are going starve in even a total economic collapse would be the government employees.

Just study some history and learn how these things play out.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Zaphod222

[AsteroidX]

I'm simply asking some questions. Why do you consider drones flying overhead to be "spying", but helicopters flying overhead arent?

Helicopters dont typically have the option to carry a hellfire missile. Itleast not the ones flying over the USA.

[+joc]

Thats not what I asked.

So you want all the police sitting at the police station waiting for a call?

Police drive around observing for crimes being comitted. Helicopters fly in the air observing for crimes being comitted as well.

I guess there is a fine line between Patrolling and Trolling. I don't like our government...it's out of control and I don't trust it...so no...I want the police doing their job..but the idea of 'watching' the people is different from the idea of 'watching for crimes'.

But wait a minute...maybe I need to relook at all of that...because...we do live in America ...the most vile, violent, and immoral country on the globe...with the possible exceptions of The Congo.

[Mr.United_Nations]

Mexico tops the list, followed by Honduras I think.

[Stellar]

Helicopters dont typically have the option to carry a hellfire missile. Itleast not the ones flying over the USA.

So if the drones are unarmed it's ok?

[Stellar]

I guess there is a fine line between Patrolling and Trolling. I don't like our government...it's out of control and I don't trust it...so no...I want the police doing their job..but the idea of 'watching' the people is different from the idea of 'watching for crimes'.

But wait a minute...maybe I need to relook at all of that...because...we do live in America ...the most vile, violent, and immoral country on the globe...with the possible exceptions of The Congo.

So why do you think drones are watching specific people? And why do you think helicopters are incapable of doing that?

[+joc]

So why do you think drones are watching specific people? And why do you think helicopters are incapable of doing that?

I would think that drones are watching specific people because 'specific' in law enforcement means...perpetrator...that's what I think. Helicopters are way too expensive to operate and there presence is widely known. If you want to profile someone specifically...and be stealthy about it...drones are the way to go...and ....the word drone...really is just a way to describe a remotely operated vehicle...probable the most popular 'drones' about are the quad-copters...check 'em out...I'm sure you already have but I lost a lot of people just now...

Quads

just google quadcopters..there is tons of videos about it.

[+DieChecker]

just google quadcopters..there is tons of videos about it.

I think the one guy with the flying cat was hilarious.

[+DieChecker]

So if the drones are unarmed it's ok?

So why do you think drones are watching specific people? And why do you think helicopters are incapable of doing that?

To all:

I commented on this in another thread, or earlier in this thread. That I'd like to see one example of a drone inside the US borders being used to spy on Innocent US Civilians, or killing anyone. Once I see that, I'll be much more likely in favor of limiting them more then any other aircraft are limited. Till then drones are just tools used to fight crime and secure the border and for training our guys to fight wars "Over There".

Where is the proof of damages to Privacy? The proof of crime prevention and cost savings are available and obvious to everyone, so where/what is the damages side of the equation?

Edited February 11, 2013 by DieChecker

[F3SS]

To all:

I commented on this in another thread, or earlier in this thread. That I'd like to see one example of a drone inside the US borders being used to spy on Innocent US Civilians, or killing anyone. Once I see that, I'll be much more likely in favor of limiting them more then any other aircraft are limited. Till then drones are just tools used to fight crime and secure the border and for training our guys to fight wars "Over There".

Where is the proof of damages to Privacy? The proof of crime prevention and cost savings are available and obvious to everyone, so where/what is the damages side of the equation?

I think it's just more about the potential. Drones are made to spy and unless the sun is gleaming off one they're nearly impossible to see since they're up so high. I don't know that they're around us but they easily could be and known only to who knows who? Since they're hard to spot, their existence could also be easily denied.

[+DieChecker]

I agree that they could be hard to notice, and that they Could be used to invade privacy. But, I just want to see an example of such happening.

There are tons of things that the government could stop doing, or could regulate, to make our Privacy better, but that does not mean that getting rid of those things WILL make everything better.

I just don't think that Sgt Fester of the 100020202034343th drone Squadron in Muncie Indiana is actually going to take his million dollar toy and circle it around some lady's house for 72 hours trying to get a shot of her nakid through the skylight. You see this kind of thing on Movies like Enemy of the State (Will Smith), and so people will believe that such things are actually going on and are Common. But, I just don't see it happening to the degree that everyone will have their privacy lost all the time. Or even a little privacy lost for a little time. If there are 4 million people (like there is in Oregon) and say 40 drones, that is 1 drone for 100,000 people. That is not enough drones to even keep taps on 1% of the known Criminals/Felons. Much less have time to go spy on unsuspecting housewives in suburban neighborhoods. Statistically it is just not going to happen. Not on purpose.

Now if drones end up Public, and get into the hands of Poparazi/Photographers, then we'll see quite a lot of Privacy issues. But the government just does not have the resources or the motivation to just casually fly around and spy on Joe Shmoe for no reason.

[Stellar]

What Id like to know is why people who worry about drones infringing on privacy are not worried about helicopters infringing on privacy.

[+DieChecker]

I live in the approach path of the Hillsboro airport and helicopters and private small planes fly over constantly. I take it for granted that none of them are using high powered optics to spy on me, sitting on my deck eating burgers every summer.

[F3SS]

What Id like to know is why people who worry about drones infringing on privacy are not worried about helicopters infringing on privacy.

For $300 I got a drone. It has live to phone video and photo capabilities with two separate cameras. A front facing and one on the bottom. It's less than 2' across, is pretty quiet and can go supposedly 150 Meters high. I've had it probably 100'+/- and you wouldn't notice it if you weren't looking. It's pretty awesome but it was only 3 bills and does the job well. Imagine spending a grand. Here's a screen grab from a video. In it you can see the Geek Squad car, a woman walking, a school bus. Don't know the height but it was way above telephone poles and trees. Oh and it couldn't be easier to control.

Also, this is a picture of a big loud obvious helicopter flying above my house. Not very discrete. BTW, Can anyone identify it?

Now if drones end up Public, and get into the hands of Poparazi/Photographers, then we'll see quite a lot of Privacy issues. But the government just does not have the resources or the motivation to just casually fly around and spy on Joe Shmoe for no reason.

Ha, we will see. Just very recently a movie has been filming across the street from me. The thought of my drone crossed my mind but I didn't. Took regular pictures instead. A lesser greedier man may have attempted some antics but I didn't. I could've easily filmed them from above while remaining out of sight myself.

[The Silver Thong]

What Id like to know is why people who worry about drones infringing on privacy are not worried about helicopters infringing on privacy.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=94b_1360369071

[Stellar]

For $300 I got a drone. It has live to phone video and photo capabilities with two separate cameras. A front facing and one on the bottom. It's less than 2' across, is pretty quiet and can go supposedly 150 Meters high. I've had it probably 100'+/- and you wouldn't notice it if you weren't looking. It's pretty awesome but it was only 3 bills and does the job well. Imagine spending a grand. Here's a screen grab from a video. In it you can see the Geek Squad car, a woman walking, a school bus. Don't know the height but it was way above telephone poles and trees. Oh and it couldn't be easier to control.

Also, this is a picture of a big loud obvious helicopter flying above my house. Not very discrete. BTW, Can anyone identify it?

Ha, we will see. Just very recently a movie has been filming across the street from me. The thought of my drone crossed my mind but I didn't. Took regular pictures instead. A lesser greedier man may have attempted some antics but I didn't. I could've easily filmed them from above while remaining out of sight myself.

Yeah, but helicopters can have the same cameras... And why does it matter how easy it is to spot a helicopter vs a drone? A helicopter spying on you is ok because you can see it?

[The Silver Thong]

The Op is off. Drones probably have been used on Americans long before Obama took office. The best way to test a new product aka drones is on friendly ground where they won`t be shot down. Hence your own backyard.

[F3SS]

Yeah, but helicopters can have the same cameras... And why does it matter how easy it is to spot a helicopter vs a drone? A helicopter spying on you is ok because you can see it?

No but it's unlikely and even more unlikely to not cause a stir if it were widespread. Drone technology enables discreetness. I'm just saying that if spying were all the rage drones seem to be the way to go. Look at all I can do for a couple hundred bucks. If it were an ongoing spying event on certain individuals you wouldn't want them or half the town to see a helicopter hovering around the same spot for extended periods of time. It would definitely bug people out. You want to keep spying on the down low.

[Stellar]

No but it's unlikely and even more unlikely to not cause a stir if it were widespread. Drone technology enables discreetness. I'm just saying that if spying were all the rage drones seem to be the way to go. Look at all I can do for a couple hundred bucks. If it were an ongoing spying event on certain individuals you wouldn't want them or half the town to see a helicopter hovering around the same spot for extended periods of time. It would definitely bug people out. You want to keep spying on the down low.

Ok. Fair enough.

[F3SS]

Plus even remote control helicopters are much more difficult to fly. My drone couldn't be simpler to use.

[MstrMsn]

At the very least I believe automatic weapons could be illigalised in the US.

Not sure if these have been addressed yet, really not in the mood for skimming through 15 pages right now, so...

Civilians can't just own automatic weapons because they want them. They have to go through a really annoying process. This is covered under the National Firearms Act and Title 2 of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

So, the majority of civilians that have automatics have them illegally (you know, the criminal types like gang members...)