Posted on 02/15/2012 3:59:44 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
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’ ;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.