49 replies to this topic

[DEL RIO]

US skies to be full of drones
The American skies may soon be full of drones after it was disclosed that domestic law enforcement agencies – from the FBI to local police – have been granted permission to deploy the unmanned aircraft.




An MQ-9 Reaper on a training mission

Documents obtained under Freedom of Information laws show that show that more than 50 non-military organisations have asked to fly drone aircraft, many of which can carry cameras and surveillance equipment for spying within the US.

The figures from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group pledged to defending Americans from digital snooping by government, showed that major agencies like the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice had been cleared to launch drones.

But more alarmingly, the documents reveal that individual city police forces are also drawing up plans to use the reconnaissance aircraft more regularly associated with top secret missions against terror suspects in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen.

Police chiefs in Miami, Seattle and even North Little Rock – a city in Arkansas of less than 70,000 people – were all cleared by the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) to launch drones within their jurisdictions.

A spokesman for the North Little Rock Police Department told the Wall Street Journal that it was only using its unmanned helicopter for training over unpopulated areas but hoped to eventually fly it above crime-ridden neighbourhoods and use it to gather intelligence for major drug cases.



In one of the few examples of an application being rejected, the FAA refused to sign off on a request by campus police at the Georgia Institute of Technology, a force tasked with protecting and keeping order among the university's 20,000 students.

In response to the revelation both Democrats and Republicans in Congress last week wrote to the FAA demanding that it take into account privacy concerns before approving deployments.

"We must ensure that as drones take flight in domestic airspace, they don't take off without privacy protections for those along their flight path," said Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts who co-chairs the Congressional Privacy Caucus with a Republican from Texas.

American pilots have previously raised concern that large numbers of drone could pose a danger for manned aircraft.

[investorman]

I believe there are many more private aircraft already flying and they don't seem to present a problem.

[skrappyone]

Just a note...Little Rock is the Capital of Arkansas and has well over 70,000. If I'm not doing anything illegal, why should I care if they fly them. JMO

Little Rock is the capital and the largest city of the U.S. state of Arkansas. The Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) had a population of 709,901 people in the 2011 census. The MSA is in turn included in the Little Rock–North Little Rock–Pine Bluff, Arkansas Combined Statistical Area, which had a population of 886,992 in the 2011 census, making it the 47th largest combined statistical area in America. As of the 2010 US Census, Little Rock had a population of 193,524, making it the 118th largest city in America.^[1][2

Edited by scrappyone, 22 April 2012 - 09:25 PM.

[Roadrunner]

That statement "If I am not doing anything illegal, why should I care if they fly them" is like saying "If I am not doing anything illegal why should I care if they search my house or my car without a warrant" My privacy should be protected better than that. Without probable cause they have no business monitoring me. There is no difference between filming my house from a drone and tapping my phone. If they have reason to believe that I am involved in some illegal activity, they have every right to investigate me. However; if they have no such reason and I am not suspected of any illegal activity, they have no right to monitor my movements or place me under surveillance. This is just another case of our government doing what ever they want to do because they know most people will not say or do anything about it.

Roadrunner

Edited by Roadrunner, 22 April 2012 - 09:47 PM.

[HisPlan]

Wow... seems like a few of the above post forgot about the fourth amendment! Wake the hell up... The Gov't should fear the People/not the other way around. I'm an ex cop and even I
am shocked with the level of police state which we've entered into since the inside job of 9/11. Study "false flag terror" and go down that rabbit hole, then you will find why Americans are against
being spied upon!!! There is no boogieman! If you will give up freedom (particularly freedom of movement) for security- wuss out to another country!

[umbertino]

Quote
Just a note...Little Rock is the Capital of Arkansas and has well over 70,000.
End Quote
He said North Little Rock.

[puckster_guy]

welcome to the new american police state and dictatorship. where demanding freedom and proclaiming privacy makes you suspect. get used to it it's gonna get worse. all under the guise of protecting you. the police already have too much power and want more and more........power corrupts....stalin and hitler would be proud of what is happening and they did not have to fire a shot to bring it about. heads up folks look whats happening one rule and law at a time.

[DinarDiva007]

[quote name='scrappyone' date='22 April 2012 - 09:22 PM' timestamp='1335151355' post='940798']
Just a note...Little Rock is the Capital of Arkansas and has well over 70,000. If I'm not doing anything illegal, why should I care if they fly them. JMO



Are you kidding??? People need to wake up! Go see Hunger Games movie and get a glimpse into what is coming if our freedoms and constitution continues to be slowly dismantled.

[kosman]

That statement "If I am not doing anything illegal, why should I care if they fly them" is like saying "If I am not doing anything illegal why should I care if they search my house or my car without a warrant" My privacy should be protected better than that. Without probable cause they have no business monitoring me. There is no difference between filming my house from a drone and tapping my phone. If they have reason to believe that I am involved in some illegal activity, they have every right to investigate me. However; if they have no such reason and I am not suspected of any illegal activity, they have no right to monitor my movements or place me under surveillance. This is just another case of our government doing what ever they want to do because they know most people will not say or do anything about it. Roadrunner

Excellent opinion and well written. Let me disagree with one point. Filming your house from a drone and tapping your phones are two different things. When they tap your phone they are intruding on an area where you have an expected right of privacy. When they film from the air, they are filming something that is in the public view although from an angle that is difficult to access. With the expected right of privacy there must be urgent needs and court approval to intrude without your permission, a warrant. This is the same as entering your house. However, in your yard, they can look into what you are doing with no warrant needed because it can be viewed without intrusion, plain view. They may be in a building that is higher and see what is going on if you have a fence around your yard but it is still outside the wall of your house and in plain view, no expectation of privacy. An interesting note is that there is no expected right to privacy for anything you throw away. As tested in court, the police can go through your trash without a warrant and any evidence they find will be admissible in court. The court found that once trash is placed for collection it is deemed abandonded property and therefore has no expected right of privacy. To me the question comes with the use of drones that are meant for surveilance. Which leads me to a question that I do not have the answer to or opinon of: Is there a difference between an unmanned drone and a manned Police Helicopter that is used for normal patrol activities? They can both see the same things. I value my rights as much as anyone and more than a lot of people. So, I wonder, Are the agencies that want to use the drones, looking for criminal activity or just snooping into private citizen's lives? Are they using drones because it is cheaper and safer than using manned aircraft? Is this just a high tech method of common law enforcement practices? Are these drones operated by the military? Does this violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents Federal military forces from enforcingn laws of the land if they are operated by military personnel? I look forward to discussion on this topic. I especially look forward to discussion post RV Be excellent to each other, have a great day and do something nice for someone who does not expect it.

Edited by kosman, 23 April 2012 - 07:47 AM.

[kosman]

Excellent opinion and well written. Let me disagree with one point. Filming your house from a drone and tapping your phones are two different things. When they tap your Be excellent to each other, have a great day and do something nice for someone who does not expect it.

I apologize for the one long paragraph, Everytime I save the computer took out the spacing. Then it stopped letting me edit altogether.

[Roadrunner]

Kosman,
I respect you opinion and there is some merit to it. However; my yard is not in plain view. There is not another house in sight of mine and I have an eight foot wall around my yard. I selected this location for that purpose and built the wall at great expense because I value my privacy. Should I then also be expected to incur the extra cost of putting a roof over my yard as well? A prime example is; there is nothing illegal about me skinny dipping or having sex at my pool, but I don't want it open for public viewing.

Roadrunner

[Bobster2001]

Kosman,
I respect you opinion and there is some merit to it. However; my yard is not in plain view. There is not another house in sight of mine and I have an eight foot wall around my yard. I selected this location for that purpose and built the wall at great expense because I value my privacy. Should I then also be expected to incur the extra cost of putting a roof over my yard as well? A prime example is; there is nothing illegal about me skinny dipping or having sex at my pool, but I don't want it open for public viewing.

Roadrunner

Roadrunner, I knew I liked you! You replied the above while I was writing the following so you beat me to the punch. Mine is just a bit longer but since I put so much time in it I'm going to post it anyway.

Quote from Kosman
"However, in your yard, they can look into what you are doing with no warrant needed because it can be viewed without intrusion, plain view. They may be in a building that is higher and see what is going on if you have a fence around your yard but it is still outside the wall of your house and in plain view, no expectation of privacy." This is your argument, that what is in my yard behind a fence should have no expectation of privacy because if, from a different angle, it can be plainly seen then it is free for all on watching.


Question: why is it called a privacy fence? Is it not because those of us who choose to use it expect to have “privacy.”


Using your logic we should not complain if the government installs cameras in the sidewalks to look for possible drug deals going on. I know that my wife wears dresses in order to shield others from looking at her “private parts” but since, “from another angle” one can view the underside of her dress, we should not expect any privacy here either. Is that what you are saying? Just trying to be clear.


Then the next natural step in this erosion is OK by you too I guess. Public bathroom stalls. I mean, if someone can see you relieving your bowls by simply looking over the top of the adjacent stall thereby “viewing from a different angle,” then this is open for anyone including our government to install cameras as everyone knows that all sorts of criminal activities occur there from drug deals to illegal sexual encounters of all kinds.


Perhaps your solution is that we now go to the expense of placing large canvas shields over our yards if we expect any real privacy. I'm sure that would not cost much, although it will probably have a deleterious result to my grass and garden with the reduced light.

I know my wife would lose her place of sunbathing with this new found shade. She has already stated that she will have to stop sunbathing in the nude if she finds local law enforcement is flying around town specifically monitoring our backyard.


What are you saying we should give up:

Our late night rendezvous in the hot tube are definitely now out.

No skinny dipping in the pool.

Gee, I don't know, just the feeling that there is someplace on this entire planet that I can go outside and feel is really mine to relax, unwind, and not feel like I am being watched.


Are you saying that this is not to be included in what our founding fathers had in mind when they fought for our freedom?


I think it is becoming clearer and clearer that the temperature of the pot of water we “frogs” here in America are in is nearing the boiling point but since it has slowly been rising for so many years now, most are so comfortable with the warm feeling of our big brother “protecting” us for our own good that we will not stand up and do anything about it.


In conclusion, one of the member here at Dinarvets.com ends all his posts with this great quote:

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke, Philosopher, Politician (1729-1797)


To me, that says it all. If we continue to allow the encroachment of an ever more invasive government, and say or do nothing about it, than we deserve the lack of freedom we will one day have which is to say, no freedom at all.


Oh wait, that member who always ends with that quote is you Kosman!

Edited by Bobster2001, 23 April 2012 - 09:12 AM.

[DinarMillionaire]

Excellent opinion and well written. Let me disagree with one point. Filming your house from a drone and tapping your phones are two different things. When they tap your phone they are intruding on an area where you have an expected right of privacy. When they film from the air, they are filming something that is in the public view although from an angle that is difficult to access. With the expected right of privacy there must be urgent needs and court approval to intrude without your permission, a warrant. This is the same as entering your house. However, in your yard, they can look into what you are doing with no warrant needed because it can be viewed without intrusion, plain view. They may be in a building that is higher and see what is going on if you have a fence around your yard but it is still outside the wall of your house and in plain view, no expectation of privacy. An interesting note is that there is no expected right to privacy for anything you throw away. As tested in court, the police can go through your trash without a warrant and any evidence they find will be admissible in court. The court found that once trash is placed for collection it is deemed abandonded property and therefore has no expected right of privacy. To me the question comes with the use of drones that are meant for surveilance. Which leads me to a question that I do not have the answer to or opinon of: Is there a difference between an unmanned drone and a manned Police Helicopter that is used for normal patrol activities? They can both see the same things. I value my rights as much as anyone and more than a lot of people. So, I wonder, Are the agencies that want to use the drones, looking for criminal activity or just snooping into private citizen's lives? Are they using drones because it is cheaper and safer than using manned aircraft? Is this just a high tech method of common law enforcement practices? Are these drones operated by the military? Does this violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents Federal military forces from enforcingn laws of the land if they are operated by military personnel? I look forward to discussion on this topic. I especially look forward to discussion post RV Be excellent to each other, have a great day and do something nice for someone who does not expect it.

Too much of a slippery slope. You say, "When they film from the air, they are filming something that is in the public view..." If I build a fence for privacy around my backyard, from the "public view", what makes it okay to allow police to comb the neighborhood with a "drone", filming what's going on in my backyard? A flyover is one thing, but filming is another.

You say, "They may be in a building that is higher and see what is going on if you have a fence around your yard but it is still outside the wall of your house and in plain view, no expectation of privacy. I say, if you live in such a place, you can't expect privacy and will conduct your private affairs in house. But, where I live it's not that way. The only way to disrupt my privacy is in the air. Therefore, I EXPECT my privacy and do not expect to have it infringed upon by the government.

Do you realize these "drones" could be equipped with infrared cameras, that look into your house? Do you realize they could be fitted with listening devices, that, when pointed at your glass, can pick up private conversation? And do you realize that the definition of these "drones" are not confined to what most people might think a "drone" is? Some of these "drones" could fit in the palm of your hand.

The problem I see with these drones is, they can fly over your neighborhood much longer than a manned aircraft, picking up information, without a warrant and I have a right to privacy, I have Liberty. I don't have anything to hide, but that doesn't mean I want to be looked at nor listened to, anytime the government wishes. I have a RIGHT TO PRIVACY, given to me by The Bill of Rights. The government is getting too invasive into our PRIVATE lives as it is.

Most people that go to the airport and get felt up by the TSA, only think it's for their own safety. There is a much bigger problem people don't realize and that is, what they are willing to give up for a little bit of security. I'll leave it to Benjamin Franklin who said it best. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Another of my favorite quotes from Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death."

Bobster we were typing at the same time. haha good post though.

Edited by DinarMillionaire, 23 April 2012 - 09:21 AM.

[jerry125]

I agree roadrunner. But did you know the law is now reasonable suspission rather than reasonable cause? Just another example of the erosion of citisens wrights. My sons were in there home town getting a snack at the local bp when the police questioned them as to why they went into the store two times, for another snack, and that was enough reasonable suspission to question them? NOT COOL at all in my book, how bout you?

[desimo]

Personally I do not see the news. I have been saying all along that our government has been turning America into old Russia. The main difference is that it is just being done more covertly. People are not whisked away into concentration camps here, but you are quietly talked to by Secret Service for making comments against the president, your lines are tapped more freely, chat rooms are monitored, and conservative groups are infiltrated. See somthing/say something has been taken from where it is simply encouraging good people to be pro-active to where the IRS is actually paying people for informing on others. Drones are now being used on regular people instead of tracking down and getting rid of the human and drug traffiking foreign invaders who are occupying part of the wildlife area in AZ. American people are being lied to on a regular basis: Fast and Furious, Black Panther and voting harassment, UN and global agreements, excessive executive orders. We have been losing our freedoms slowly over the past few years and have been more rapid loss in this administration. Government now sees fit to force people to buy a product. This is not the country in which I was born. It carries the same name but is not the same country.

[Roadrunner]

Jerry,
That's what happens when we aren't paying attention. Just by changing the wording from "Probable Cause" to "Reasonable Suspicion" they changed the whole intent of the law. By interpretation, a law that once said you can't search someone unless you can prove just cause now allows it based solely on an officers opinion that you might be concealing something.

Roadrunner

Edited by Roadrunner, 23 April 2012 - 09:50 AM.

[puckster_guy]

it's 2012 and george orwell was late but right

[wavggg]

Hey - we got Seals and SS black-ops choppers doing unannounced troop drops in the middle of various Chicago neighborhoods and even on Lake Shore Drive in the middle of traffic - fully armed - just to get reay to kill us when the NATO club comes to town...
Betcha that all the Chicago native troops are doing duty in some other place on earth - couldn't have a boy shoot his mom - could we...
SICK OF THIS!
gg

[George Hayduke]

That statement "If I am not doing anything illegal, why should I care if they fly them" is like saying "If I am not doing anything illegal why should I care if they search my house or my car without a warrant" My privacy should be protected better than that. Without probable cause they have no business monitoring me. There is no difference between filming my house from a drone and tapping my phone. If they have reason to believe that I am involved in some illegal activity, they have every right to investigate me. However; if they have no such reason and I am not suspected of any illegal activity, they have no right to monitor my movements or place me under surveillance. This is just another case of our government doing what ever they want to do because they know most people will not say or do anything about it.

Roadrunner

Years ago when cameras were put up in intersections, then on freeways I thought; what the hell is going on here? When local government began purchasing satellite photos of the community for zoning purposes I thought; the bastards are spying on the citizens. When I read that London had set up concentric rings of CCTV’s around their city monitored 24/7, I thought, this is it; Big Brother is finally here and the Anti-Christ is right around the corner with a tattoo kit.

These changes in our world caused me to examine my faith as well as the Constitution. I come to realize that certain tenants of faith and the Articles of the Constitution overlap and support each other’s basic premise. Both address human behavior; one addresses personal behavior and conduct while the other addresses government behavior and conduct.

As a person of faith who believes I am accountable to my creator for my actions toward other persons, I find my conduct in public is monitored from within; a conscience. And, because my faith accepts the teaching that we live in a fallen world and that the Prince of Darkness rules over this world with an agenda of death, destruction, bondage and lies, I must then accept that my behavior is not only governed from within but influenced from without while at the same time constantly being observed by powers and principalities not of this earthly realm.

What in the heck has this got to do with drones?

Three things:
1.No person on this planet can see into my soul or into my thoughts, not even the Prince of Darkness. That right belongs only to the Creator.

2.The Founding Fathers recognized that not only was there a creator of men but that those same created men have a proclivity to dominate other men through various schemes, plans, societies and religions. To counter that likely intrusion the Founding Fathers recognized and proclaimed that men created by God were individually unique and sovereign in spirit and character. Therefor the 4th Amendment was written in support of that understanding to keep meddlesome men at bay regardless of what authority they claim to possess in order to enter one’s home, seize property and perform an arrest; that is why we also have ‘peeping tom and trespassing laws’. The Founding Fathers also knew that sometimes the conduct of a person is so egregious and potentially dangerous to other persons that the 4th amendment protection of individual sovereignty must be put aside by means of an sworn affidavit pursuant to, and in support of, a search warrant. Even then, the 4th amendment and subsequent court decisions demand the government be restricted within the search to only that which supports the original affidavit claim of unlawful behavior. In other words, the government can’t search for a stolen Brinks armored truck in the hall bathroom.

3.Law Enforcement officers drive down our streets and fly overhead in aircraft and look at our houses; Satellites fly overhead and take pictures of the earth and the dwellings upon it; Drones are going to fly overhead and take pictures and provide live feed to law enforcement and other government agencies. Why are they observing our behavior and conduct if we are not doing anything wrong? What does it matter who is watching our behavior and conduct? We are always being observed no matter where we are; either by other persons or by principalities not of this earth. What does matter though, is if other persons use means with the intent to cross the threshold of individual sovereignty protected by the 4th amendment without due process. Therein lies the simple crux of the modern battlefield in America; each individual is Sovereign and their home is their castle and the 4th Amendment is the moat around it. There are powers within and without government that work tirelessly to abridge that protection for they know that true power rest within the free and sovereign individual and they will not rest until it is destroyed with all men becoming enslaved to their will.

Choose your government representatives wisely; maintaining liberty and freedom is not for the faint of heart.

GH

[R2D2]

I believe there are many more private aircraft already flying and they don't seem to present a problem.

You have missed the whole point otherleftcoast. It is a Constitutionsl issue. Not a crowd issue. Please see a professional to help nudge your self past stupidity.