FBI Fesses Up: We’ve Used Domestic Drones 10 Times

Slate ^ | July 26, 2013 | Ryan Gallagher

[Jet Jaguar]

I think it was Murraymom.

[RedMDer]

Phony Scandals?

WE ARE FREE REPUBLIC!
You are Free Republic.
There are no outside influences.
No advertisers.
Just us, all of us.
Please Contribute Today!

[jy8z]

Additionally, the recording of what was observed is evidence.

I wonder what the double finger will earn me. I'm having a hard time pissing them off. Any advice?

[Standing Wolf]

In none of these cases, the bureau says, did it apply for a warrant to conduct the drone surveillance.

On the famous "bright side" that sometimes does and sometimes doesn't shed actual light, the F, the B, and the I never bothered with warrants when its main business was blackmailing politicians. See? It's not a problem, but a policy, so it's okay, so we're not a police state, after all.

[ClaytonP]

You think shooting at drones doesn't constitute that?

I guarantee it won't be interpreted that way by LE.

[bert]

I would argue you are not even known to them and they probably would never even know you were pissed

[Diogenesis]

[RedMDer]

LOL! The Wiener distraction!

[dinodino]

Jawohl. Are you former Stasi? I wonder, since you are defending this crap.

[bert]

what crap?

Police have been using air craft for years. Helicopters were and perhaps still are used extensively to locate pot fields. They are in use daily in local law enforcement.

In Virginia there are still lines on the interstate at quarter mile intervals for police in the air to catch speeders

Drones are merely a different type of aircraft

[jy8z]

More and more I am running across people from many walks of life that are finally starting to get what is happening to the US. And since I have been trying to warn them for several years, my phone is ringing off the hook. I'm certainly no authority but my antennae have been positioned for a while. I still give my take.

And they're even pissed.

[bert]

I don’t necessarily believe you are wrong. But, that doesn’t mean drones are evil as a law enforcement tool

There can be no doubt America is in peril. The root of the peril is well known. That root must be destroyed

[VerySadAmerican]

We have to accept that it’s not just obama. Most of these FBI agents were there long before obama came in. Bush was just as guilty of this trashing of the fourth amendment.

[bmwcyle]

What is the body count?

[dinodino]

Again, with no operator on station! Look at the problems we are having in Pakistan due to time delays on the links.

You want to surveil someone, go there with a badge and do it—don’t do it by playing a video game hundreds or thousands of miles away.

[Black Agnes]

Can you guarantee me that there are no pedophiles or stalkers in law enforcement?

That drones would NEVER EVER be used by such people for their own uses? Under the ‘color of law’? Good friend of mine had his WIFE stalked by the chief of police in their little NJ town. They moved. Sold their house at a loss. No lawyer would take the case so they just moved. The chief would park his cruiser at the end of their driveway after the husband went to work, he had to be out of the house an hour earlier than the wife because his commute was about 20m further. The wife would have to walk down the driveway and ask the cop to move. And every morning he’d ask her if she wanted a little ‘breakfast special’ now that her husband was gone...While he was in uniform, in an official car.

Especially when the average drone is quickly moving towards the size of a pigeon or even smaller.

[bunkerhill7]

No problem- all you need is a RC sugar rocket & 5-12 mile xmitter/rec with a microcamera a la Bullpup.

[jy8z]

I believe we're basically on the same page, but I have one question.

There can be no doubt America is in peril. The root of the peril is well known. That root must be destroyed.

Destroying that root should destroy drone surveillance, shouldn't it?

[bert]

Well no.

We must have a government, but not a government of tyrants. There can and must be surveillance of criminal and security risks. A good government will not conduct surveillance to oppress. Prior to the current tyrannical treachery, the IRS was not politically oppressive.

The drones are merely a tool that can be misused. I have a greater concern for the wireless cameras that are everywhere now. They are now located at intervals along the interstates.

I will not argue that drones may have a potential to be misused. That is a matter to be hashed out in the courts. A drone tasked to keep an eye on the movements of a criminal that inadvertently records a naked lady sunbathing in her fenced back yard will not use those images for prosecuting her for indecent exposure.

[bert]

There is surveillance and there is surveillance.

It is possible that the result, even the desirable result, is to eliminate possible suspects. Being able to make an immediate arrest is not always or even often necessary.

Immediate presence is not a valid reason for totally eliminating the use of drones. If you belong to a pplice union, you can make the argument but it is no different than various productivity increasing tools.