State/local governments pushing for unmanned drones more

and yall phaggots hated on me around 3 months ago when i posted my prophecies

good night reasonable privacy


say hello to another few hundred years of being fucked in the ass by ridiculous tax rates if you're a US citizen.

brb aiding every nation forever
brb international drug war
brb anti terror industrial complex
brb domestic security industrial complex

imagine our tax rate if we didnt spend on stupid shit
 


flysarescary said:
good night reasonable privacy
Click to expand...

If you're in public, you have no privacy. Unless this thing is using x-ray vision to see through your walls, it's not invading "privacy". Let's ban helicopters and planes, since someone on those with a lens of sorts can see the same thing as a drone.
 
papajohn56 said:
How is buying a million dollar drone, hiring an operator, and paying for fuel a better option than putting a cop out?
Click to expand...

Cops aren't cheap, there is a serious outlay between recruitment fees, training fees, equipment fees, health insurance, pension allocations, salary and management overhead. Then there's the ancillary costs, they gotta have equipment outside of their service weapon and uniform like the cruiser, the radar gun, etc...

papajohn56 said:
Not only that, but that 5% you say, which I think is closer to 30%, will abuse this technology and fuck with us. Give an inch and they take a mile. No thanks.
Click to expand...

If I think the corruption rate is <5% and you think it's ~30% we'll most likely never come to a consensus on the place of law enforcement in our society, so be it. But fwiw, if we had 30% corruption I think we would have a society that functions more on the level like that of mexico.

But also, I'm curious to what you define "fuck with us" as. Do you mean the operators would just hover around looking for people skinny dipping in pools, or if they found a pot field they would shake the grower down instead of busting it, cops with petty vendettas following ex wives? I just can't see precluding technology from law enforcement over some ambiguous sense of dread.

Cops don't sit around waiting for that one piece of tech that makes them think "finally, with this (drones, wire taps, heat scanners, etc...), I can start being evil, which is why I joined law enforcement so long ago to begin with." The cops who were going to do crooked shit did it before drones, and the ones that were clean will stay clean despite drones.
 
I don't mean corruption rate, I mean "asshole cop" rate. Corruption will be lower, but some cop on a power trip wanting to search my shit without a warrant is much higher than 5%. And yes, I mean cops looking for skinny dippers (like they've been found to do in helicopters), look in windows, illegally observe (like with heat sensing equipment to find alleged pot growers, when they've been caught without a warrant for it and no pot was found), etc. It's not the technology that makes them evil or whatever, it's the power trip of the officer thinking he IS the law, not enforces the law, and he'll use that technology just as an arm of that.
 
johu said:
If you're in public, you have no privacy. Unless this thing is using x-ray vision to see through your walls, it's not invading "privacy". Let's ban helicopters and planes, since someone on those with a lens of sorts can see the same thing as a drone.
Click to expand...

Except people have been prosecuted for observing others in their own homes from a helicopter.
 
papajohn56 said:
Except people have been prosecuted for observing others in their own homes from a helicopter.
Click to expand...
But the cops can do that legally, already.
papajohn56 said:
It's not the technology that makes them evil or whatever, it's the power trip of the officer thinking he IS the law, not enforces the law, and he'll use that technology just as an arm of that.
Click to expand...
So your solution is to hire a shit ton more cops, rather than deal with fewer corrupt cops? What's more effective - Having a few operators use droves to keep an eye on border areas, and alert fewer border patrol agents to exactly where the illegals are, or hire a ton of cops (which apparently are heavily corrupt and on power trips), and send them out randomly? We shouldn't hire enforcement personnel, because there's a chance that they're corrupt and could use their power against innocent citizens to invade their rights/privacy, then.

You seriously sound like an ACLU liberal in this argument. Are you in favor of the Arizona law allowing cops to demand immigration papers from people thought to be here illegally, or are you going to start arguing about how it's invading your privacy or rights? The ACLU liberal types are the ones concerned about the potential misuse of every government action in the war on drugs/terror/illegal immigrants, not the conservatives.

But I guess I'm the one accused of being liberal here, with my pro-border-security, pro states rights argument...
 
I'm not talking about borders, I'm talking about in non-border areas getting these things for "traffic violations". And no, cops cannot observe or attempt to observe in your house without a warrant. If some pervert cop is using binoculars in the helicopter to try and watch you beat off to porn or fuck your brother's wife, it's illegal.

I'm talking using these in communities where it really is unnecessary, it will become a threat to your privacy.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3Fu4YVH8nA"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHmP_KtmcB4"]YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.[/ame]
 
papajohn56 said:
Privacy concerns. Why do you need an unmanned drone to catch people speeding?
Click to expand...

The drones are just a tool to enforce the laws, what that law happens to be is largely irrelevant because society (and law enforcement) can't just pick and choose which laws are going to be enforced. Considering it costs a city about $600,000 per year to have 10 officers per day on speeder patrol, in the long run a drone could actually save money so my concern isn't the waste of money but more the waste of technology.

In regards to privacy, unless these drones are able to look through your roof and into your home I don't view it as an invasion of privacy since you would need to be outside for them to even see you. When you're outside, you have to assume that anybody who drives or walks by can see you or peep their head over your fence so you never really had any privacy to begin with.
 
papajohn56 said:
I'm not talking about borders, I'm talking about in non-border areas getting these things for "traffic violations". And no, cops cannot observe or attempt to observe in your house without a warrant. If some pervert cop is using binoculars in the helicopter to try and watch you beat off to porn or fuck your brother's wife, it's illegal.
Click to expand...
As ayzo said, these things aren't peering through your blinds. If they were, I'm sure it would be handled the same way as if a cop was sitting in his squad car across the street with binoculars looking in your house. This doesn't seem to be a setup with one pervert cop in a small locked room, fapping to your wife from a drone's camera.

Border protection aside (since apparently it's a slippery slope for you), you keep bringing up that traffic violations seem to be something you don't want enforced from the air. It's a fucking law violation! I don't care what your view on the law is, but if you're speeding, you're technically breaking the law. A drone for catching/tagging speeders is probably less expensive than speeding cameras that already do this in many places around the country. I've seen signs around the country saying "speed monitored by aircraft" while driving out west - just a different type of aircraft, technically.

God forbid law enforcement enforces laws. I think this is what it comes down to - You don't like or agree with a law, so you'll ignore the law and dismiss it as "pointless".
 
I think this convo is veering away from the political corruption issue.

I'm more worried about the feds using this against me in advancing their nanny-state regime's policies than some local cop writing a ticket for a law that was obviously broken.

A drone won't question authority when asked to spy on citizens but it's hard to hide the action when it becomes a mandate for law enforcement personnel.
 
LotsOfZeros said:
I think this convo is veering away from the political corruption issue.

I'm more worried about the feds using this against me in advancing their nanny-state regime's policies than some local cop writing a ticket for a law that was obviously broken.

A drone won't question authority when asked to spy on citizens but it's hard to hide the action when it becomes a mandate for law enforcement personnel.
Click to expand...
You seem to be missing the point of the article that it's the states that are trying to get drones, yet current federal aviation policy is what needs to be worked out to give the states permission for the drones.
 
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin, February 1775
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom