Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress

[jamesrage]

I am opposed to the use of drones for civilian law-enforcement. This paves the way for more abuse on 4th amendment rights,the government spying on the people and these things being everywhere.



Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress - Washington Times
Look! Up in the sky! Is it a bird? Is it a plane? It’s … a drone, and it’s watching you. That’s what privacy advocates fear from a bill Congress passed this week to make it easier for the government to fly unmanned spy planes in U.S. airspace.
The FAA Reauthorization Act, which President Obama is expected to sign, also orders the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the testing and licensing of commercial drones by 2015.
Privacy advocates say the measure will lead to widespread use of drones for electronic surveillance by police agencies across the country and eventually by private companies as well.
“There are serious policy questions on the horizon about privacy and surveillance, by both government agencies and commercial entities,” said Steven Aftergood, who heads the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation also is “concerned about the implications for surveillance by government agencies,” said attorney Jennifer Lynch.

 

[Karl]

I would tend to agree. Hopefully the E.F.F. will be successful in shedding some light on who is doing what: Are Drones Watching You? -- Electronic Frontier Foundation

 

[Temporal]

Why is 1984 becoming more and more of a reality?

 

[MaggieD]

I am opposed to the use of drones for civilian law-enforcement. This paves the way for more abuse on 4th amendment rights,the government spying on the people and these things being everywhere.

Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress - Washington Times
Look! Up in the sky! Is it a bird? Is it a plane? It’s … a drone, and it’s watching you. That’s what privacy advocates fear from a bill Congress passed this week to make it easier for the government to fly unmanned spy planes in U.S. airspace.
The FAA Reauthorization Act, which President Obama is expected to sign, also orders the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the testing and licensing of commercial drones by 2015.
Privacy advocates say the measure will lead to widespread use of drones for electronic surveillance by police agencies across the country and eventually by private companies as well.
“There are serious policy questions on the horizon about privacy and surveillance, by both government agencies and commercial entities,” said Steven Aftergood, who heads the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation also is “concerned about the implications for surveillance by government agencies,” said attorney Jennifer Lynch.

Police Officers and Firefighters. They sure love their toys.

Only place I could see these making sense would be on the borders. Otherwise? Just one more waste of taxpayers' money.

 

[Mr. Invisible]

Police Officers and Firefighters. They sure love their toys.

Only place I could see these making sense would be on the borders. Otherwise? Just one more waste of taxpayers' money.

This. In addition to this drones have been inside the US for quite some time (Drones Becoming Pervasive INSIDE America - Washington's Blog). This will only serve to erode our rights even further and lead us further down the path of becoming a full-on police state where any opposition against the government causes one to "disappear."

EDIT: Look here as well (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28616).

 

[a351]

30,000 drones by 2020 in our own sky? Yeah why not? The bureaucrats always seem to have our best interests at heart.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

My new home I am building is very remote and I guess the DEA thinks it is a prime pot growing spot. Every summer around harvest time a helicopter hovers over our garden so low I can see the guys faces. It completely pisses me off, as far as I am concerned this is a search without a warrant. I stand there and give them both middle fingers. At least a drone would be quiet I guess.

 

[KevinKohler]

So..if both the liberals and the conservatives pretty much hate this, why have our elected "reps" voted positive on it?

 

[MaggieD]

So..if both the liberals and the conservatives pretty much hate this, why have our elected "reps" voted positive on it?

The left voted for it to support the copper/firefighter unions. The right voted on it to support the corporations that stand to make billions.

 

[a351]

So..if both the liberals and the conservatives pretty much hate this, why have our elected "reps" voted positive on it?

I suppose representative is a relative term.

 

[Deuce]

Betting pool on when the first VFR Cessna collides with one of these.

 

[MoSurveyor]

My new home I am building is very remote and I guess the DEA thinks it is a prime pot growing spot. Every summer around harvest time a helicopter hovers over our garden so low I can see the guys faces. It completely pisses me off, as far as I am concerned this is a search without a warrant. I stand there and give them both middle fingers. At least a drone would be quiet I guess.

To me this is the whole argument. If someone wants to play Spy In The Sky they can do that now using a helicopter. The only difference is the drone makes less noise. I honestly don't see an issue with drones other than the added crash and collision risks.


Now, if you want to talk about surveillance equipment and it's uses that's a different story. The same IR cameras and whatnot used on drones can (and no doubt are in some cases) used on helicopters as well. How surveillance is carried out inside the US has it's own set of laws and should be addressed the same way other surveillance cases have been.

 

[EagleAye]

To me this is the whole argument. If someone wants to play Spy In The Sky they can do that now using a helicopter. The only difference is the drone makes less noise. I honestly don't see an issue with drones other than the added crash and collision risks.

Now, if you want to talk about surveillance equipment and it's uses that's a different story. The same IR cameras and whatnot used on drones can (and no doubt are in some cases) used on helicopters as well. How surveillance is carried out inside the US has it's own set of laws and should be addressed the same way other surveillance cases have been.

For me, I'm totally cool with drones for police use. In fact, I'd feel more secure with them in use. Imagine if you were the victim of a crime in progress or were witnessing one. You could dial something like 1011 on your cell phone. Location data could be sent directly to a drone. An overhead drone's camera could lock on to the cell phone location where police units could be directed to the perps (because it already has eyes on them) far faster than current means. Drones could significantly improve the effectiveness of law enforcement.

 

[Tigger]

Why is 1984 becoming more and more of a reality?

Because American citizens are too stupid and immoral to do what they should rather than what they want to without "Big Brother" watching.

Oh, and this isn't going to make a huge amount of difference. They already do it with satellites.

 

[EagleAye]

Oh, and this isn't going to make a huge amount of difference. They already do it with satellites.

Really? There's satellites under police control? Like a Sheriff in Waco, TX could get that kind of data instantly?

 

[Tigger]

Really? There's satellites under police control? Like a Sheriff in Waco, TX could get that kind of data instantly?

Not the local PD's, but definitely the Feds. About 10 years ago a local gun club got an interesting package from the Mass. Department of Environmental Protection..... A recent law had been passed that required all shooting facilities in the state to be pointed away from any body of water on the property. Clubs were given 18 months to relocate their facilities. About 9 months after the law was passed, this club received the package, which contained satelite imagery showing their Skeet/Trap range still facing a small pond on their property, with a not so nice hand-written note reminding them about the law. The club already had plans in place to turn the range, but it hadn't been completed yet. So, if you don't think that State and potentially Local Law Enforcement agencies can get that imagery, I would suggest you're mistaken.

 

[EagleAye]

Not the local PD's, but definitely the Feds. About 10 years ago a local gun club got an interesting package from the Mass. Department of Environmental Protection..... A recent law had been passed that required all shooting facilities in the state to be pointed away from any body of water on the property. Clubs were given 18 months to relocate their facilities. About 9 months after the law was passed, this club received the package, which contained satelite imagery showing their Skeet/Trap range still facing a small pond on their property, with a not so nice hand-written note reminding them about the law. The club already had plans in place to turn the range, but it hadn't been completed yet. So, if you don't think that State and potentially Local Law Enforcement agencies can get that imagery, I would suggest you're mistaken.

Nine month-old data is old data. And did the followup also come from the feds or from the local police?

What would really help police is if they can get recon of an area within 30 mins. Even better within 5 mins. The feds aren't going to retask a satellite to get info for a small county sheriff at all, and of course not before a crime in progress has provided time for perps to get away. Eyes in the Sky in the form of UCAVs can be far more available to small PDs. Even the operation cost could be shared out amongst many so it's within their budget. They could have the benefit of aerial recon without having to jump through the many hoops of getting data from government satellites.

 

[Tigger]

Nine month-old data is old data. And did the followup also come from the feds or from the local police?

What would really help police is if they can get recon of an area within 30 mins. Even better within 5 mins. The feds aren't going to retask a satellite to get info for a small county sheriff at all, and of course not before a crime in progress has provided time for perps to get away. Eyes in the Sky in the form of UCAVs can be far more available to small PDs. Even the operation cost could be shared out amongst many so it's within their budget. They could have the benefit of aerial recon without having to jump through the many hoops of getting data from government satellites.

The followup came from the STATE DEP. The aerial images came from the FEDS, at the request of the STATE and the photos were less than two months old (by the date on the photo).

I'm all for Local PD's being given access to this sort of UAV for their work. I always have been and probably always will be.

 

[Paschendale]

I'm a citizen. I'm tired of being treated like a potential criminal or a threat waiting to happen instead of one of the people that this government is supposed to be by, for, and of.

 

[EagleAye]

I'm a citizen. I'm tired of being treated like a potential criminal or a threat waiting to happen instead of one of the people that this government is supposed to be by, for, and of.

That makes a lot of sense, and I understand your feelings. But the other side of it, is the people who might try to do something TO YOU. For me, I would prefer that police forces do something halts or even prevents people from doing something TO ME, rather than punishing then after the fact, after they've already done the damage. I prefer prevention rather than retribution. About all I can count on now is retribution, and honestly that is cold comfort.

 

[AdamT]

Because American citizens are too stupid and immoral to do what they should rather than what they want to without "Big Brother" watching.

Oh, and this isn't going to make a huge amount of difference. They already do it with satellites.

I'd think you'd be in favor of this, given that you won't leave the house without being strapped or conducting extensive pre-reconnaissance to make sure you have multiple escape routes. Obviously you must think that crime is insanely out control, right?

 

[Tigger]

I'd think you'd be in favor of this, given that you won't leave the house without being strapped or conducting extensive pre-reconnaissance to make sure you have multiple escape routes. Obviously you must think that crime is insanely out control, right?

I'm totally in favor of this. No question about it.

Crime is out of control in our society today. Though most of it is still legal.

 

[Blue_State]

Not the local PD's, but definitely the Feds. About 10 years ago a local gun club got an interesting package from the Mass. Department of Environmental Protection..... A recent law had been passed that required all shooting facilities in the state to be pointed away from any body of water on the property. Clubs were given 18 months to relocate their facilities. About 9 months after the law was passed, this club received the package, which contained satelite imagery showing their Skeet/Trap range still facing a small pond on their property, with a not so nice hand-written note reminding them about the law. The club already had plans in place to turn the range, but it hadn't been completed yet. So, if you don't think that State and potentially Local Law Enforcement agencies can get that imagery, I would suggest you're mistaken.

I am curious about this one. Is there an article or anything? Do we know it wasn't a google maps image?

 

[Blue_State]

I'm totally in favor of this. No question about it.

Crime is out of control in our society today. Though most of it is still legal.

What is a legal crime? Contriception?

 

[Tigger]

I am curious about this one. Is there an article or anything? Do we know it wasn't a google maps image?

No there is not. I happen to be friends and a fellow competitor to a number of members/officers of a fish and game club in Central Massachusetts that this happened to. They were already in the process of obtaining the necessary permits to do the construction to turn the range at the time they received the "warning". I have heard unsubstantiated rumors that several other clubs in the Communistwealth received similar notices with attached aerial/satellite photos attached to them but I can't say specifically beyond the one club I am personally familiar with.

What is a legal crime? Contriception?

Pretty much all Moral Crimes are currently legal in the United States. Pretty sad that the highest form of crime in the world goes not only unprosecuted but remains legal in the nation that SHOULD have been the last great hope for humanity.