Skip to comments.Combat Drones Soon To Fly Over U.S. Airspace [Police State Coming]
Posted on 02/15/2012 3:59:44 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
While combat drones are not allowed in the U.S. airspace without a special certificate from the FAA, the military is in a fix over the 7, 500 military drones deployed overseas, that need to be recalled home....
After returning home, the robotic aircraft would be stationed in military bases around the nation for use in emergencies...
Last week, Congress approved legislation requiring the FAA to create a plan for wide-scale integration of drones in the national airspace by 2015.
(Excerpt) Read more at jdjournal.com ...
Testing, testing.................Those who disagree.........
You WILL obey!
There is nothing more frustrating then when I read something like this.
Either the Lame Stream Media and "Journ-0-Lists" who write these stories are lazy, clueless or simply avoiding providing the facts.
WHO (SPECIFICALLY) in Congress introduced such legislation is what I want to know and who are the co-sponsors or others who support this potential infringement of our rights???
I’ll bet they never see the border either.
Obama will give control to NATO who are now
the world’s SHARIA POLICE.
There are still people like me running around virtually unobserved and they can’t have that.
Heck, I might be building a nuke behind my garage. Worse yet, I might be growing a garden back there.
Surprise people. The drones are already here and have been for some time. I see them quite often as I live near a base where the drone operating crews are being trained. Simple enough to load them with whatever payload deemed to be needed and you have the tools to do what ever you want.
Sounds easy enough to me.
yeah, so I 'bird hunt' with a .270, I'm a good shot ;-)
I knew they were using drones, but I didn’t for the life of me think they had 7500 of these things flying around.
Thwe first time one of these damn things has a mid-air with a family in their Bonanza, maybe then the thought will occur to these idiots that this is a bad idea.
Seriously, as far as a “threat” to American citizens, how is this any different than manned US military aircraft flying over US soil? The administration; ANY administration, could just as easily fill a pilot’s seat with someone willing to launch an ATG at someone as they could a remote operator console.
Basic fact, these combat drones need to come back to the US, eventually. Provisions need to be made for that eventuality; unless you are proposing never letting them come back to US bases.
Better not be distributing unprocessed milk, either.
Maybe they should tap my phone too. After all they have the capability, no reason they shouldn’t use it.
Guess I’m gonna have to dig a tunnel to the neighbor’s house so we can smuggle heirloom seeds back and forth. After all, the FDA has already testified that there is no constitutional right to eat what I want. LOL
I hereby establish as of this date a half-mile no-fly zone around my house.
Aerial Interlopers and Flying Peeping Toms will interdicted and summarily prosecuted and punished with anti-drone countermeasures.
Those neighboring estates suffering Collateral Damage from such aforesaid actions may bring legal action against the federal government for littering on their respective properties.
Use of Flying drones violates New York State Law:
New York State's "Peeping Tom" laws only cover the use of a camera or other device to "peer" through a window. Signed into law on 23 June 2003.
Turbo, thanks for at least one rational post on this thread. As you point out, the aircraft are flying now and could have been doing these missions all the time. No evidence of that. This fear of UAV’s is not unlike the black helicopter one.
This is simply a case of allowing UAV’s to operate in the National Airspace, which they can only do now after jumping through hoops to get a one time clearance to fly. It’s a severe restriction and hindrance.
They have to acclimate Americans to this crap before they start herding them into re-education camps
exactly, where in the news reports does it tell us the names of the critters who pushed this??
Paging the anti-Patriot Act crowd....
No mistaking it - the main target of the elites (ie, communists) are those that are self sufficient and not as dependent on the government as the majority of the population.
The "idiots" will just ban privately owned aircraft.
I saw some idiot on FOX yesterday saying this is no different than being on surveillance camera in a convenience store. In a convenience store I know that I have a somewhat limited right to privacy and I accept that.
The real problem is the fact that flyover country people like myself, sometimes go weeks at a time without turning up on a surveillance camera. Obviously we’re up to no good.
As it is, counties are already using satellite images to reassess taxes. A couple years ago a guy in a neighboring town was fined big bucks for damming an 18 inch wide creek on his property and creating a little frog pond under 50 square feet. He beat the criminal prosecution when the DEQ couldn’t explain how they knew about it but he still had to remove the dam.
7500 is a typo.
7500 total worldwide, counting all other countries and their versions of an RPV.
Logic is not to be tolerated when it comes to conspiracies. . . .
Manned police and military helicopters flying over the US all the time, as well as manned and ARMED fighters flying over the country all the time.
UAV integration is a subject that has been going on for years and years and years, with “sense and avoid” as primary, and the risk of air-to-air collision is foremost in the minds of all those that are working the issue.
The average dolt in is Bonanza has a greater risk of colliding with another aircraft than does a UAV, especially since the UAVs fly in space airspace, under positive control with radar providing constant feed to the operators. . .whereas the average dolt in a Bonanza doesn’t fly under positive control, doesn’t pay much attention to where he is looking and rarely ever speaks with radar control.
Predators in the DHS are used along the southern border mostly, with a few along the northern border.
They have a role to play in natural disasters and other, more extreme, incidents (nuke).
Surveilance cameras in convenience stores are not capable of being armed with missiles.
By the same logic, since Google Maps updates its pictures periodically, it would be no problem if they put webcams in front of everyone’s houses then.
I don’t suppose they’ll be coming into shotgun range...
Ten years ago that comment would have sounded kooky paranoid.
We are on the same side. Both your responses are comparing apples and oranges, though. You both cite instances where the government is being intrusive (CCTV on individual dwellings, and unwarranted, illegal phone taps of private citizens) which we can all agree can not be tolerated.
The only way your arguments hold water is if you are saying that simply flying UAVs over US soil, which is already happening, equates to the government snooping on US citizens without cause.
The government has over stepped its bounds on so many issues, including unwarranted surveillance. Picking this issue to get upset about strikes me a a little off base. You want to get upset about something, how about the arming of LEOs with military grade gear (like those jack asses at Red Jacket Firearms do on a regular basis and any number of state and local entities) and tactics? How about obama’s recent coup of getting Congress to authorize the detention of US citizens without due process. Or, how about DHS, and state agencies categorizing people like us as potential terrorists, simply because we hold conservative views on tax law and the 10th amendment.
Pick battles where your uniform won’t consist of a tin foil hat, lest we loose the war.
Now I have an excuse to buy a belt-fed .50 cal.
I read a story that threw out the number of drones being flown worldwide since 9-11 as between 10K and 20K. But who really knows?
Maybe my tinfoil hat has slipped, but I don’t see this in terms of a singular development, but rather as part of a chain of events. Technology is going to enable universal surveillance that will be impossible to resist unless there is a public outcry. At every stage, resistance will seem unwarranted by many because it’s just a little more, or it’s for the children.
I’ve worked more than 20 years as an electrical engineer, and I like to keep an eye on “what if”, out there, potential technologies. Consider this: someday in the not too distant future, wifi enabled cameras will cost a fraction of a penny to produce and be printed on a plastic sheet. “Here you go kids! put’em everywhere. It’s for your safety.”
Wonder if an RC with a little anhydrous surprise has the legs to go up there and say “hello”...just cogitatin’ ;^)
I was involved in the development of unmanned systems for 17 years. The UAV community has been working this with the FAA for at least 6-7 years to enable military UAVs to fly in the National Airspace like other military aircraft. There is nothing sinister or liberty threatening about it.
I notice you don’t seem to see any problems with stepping all over the constitution. Go back to your flock and all will be well.
This is a puerile response/rebuttal that tells me there is no sense in continuing a discussion that cannot result in anything meaningful.
You can’t explain why you or anyone else has any right or need to watch me go about my day.
Point taken; I just had that discussion with a co-worker and he the same exact sentiment. I can see where the chain of recent events can be strung together for a very scary what if scenario.
I still don't think it's worth getting upset over, when there are other, more glaring, in your face issues to fight about. I do appreciate your line of reasoning, though.
The difference is intent..