US opens homeland airspace to use Drones

[Justice For All]

Read all about it -

U.S. opening up airspace to use of drones - Technology & science - Science - DiscoveryNews.com - msnbc.com

Well looks like another violation of our rights has come to pass. Between this and the Patriot Act I might as well just have the government set up video cameras in my house and backyard. This country continues to circle the drain each passing day. Are we people just going to keep taking the punishment?

 

[jamesrage]

I hope that every politician who voted for this loses their job and loses their privacy because of these things.

 

[What if...?]

Read all about it -

U.S. opening up airspace to use of drones - Technology & science - Science - DiscoveryNews.com - msnbc.com

Well looks like another violation of our rights has come to pass. Between this and the Patriot Act I might as well just have the government set up video cameras in my house and backyard. This country continues to circle the drain each passing day. Are we people just going to keep taking the punishment?

Drone hunting anyone?

When I was a kid a guy down the street had cb radio gear hooked up to a linear amplifier on a channel near the one my r/c car operated on.

Everytime he keyed the mike my car took off in a straight line at top speed. Finally got to the point i'd knock on his door to let him know I was gonna be playing with the car because I couldn't afford repairs.

I bet Silly String would take one down too. Lasers for the cameras.

**** a buncha drones!

 

[Chiefgator]

I work in the airborne electronic surveillance field. All this is doing is changing from a manned platform to an unmanned platform. The surveillance is already there, this doesn't really change anything except to allow for unmanned vehicles to be in the airspace.

None of the laws changed that have an effect on right to privacy, search and seizure, search warrants, etc.
The restrictions placed on surveillance over US soil are very strict, as well they should be.

 

[Grendel]

I work in the airborne electronic surveillance field. All this is doing is changing from a manned platform to an unmanned platform. The surveillance is already there, this doesn't really change anything except to allow for unmanned vehicles to be in the airspace.

None of the laws changed that have an effect on right to privacy, search and seizure, search warrants, etc.
The restrictions placed on surveillance over US soil are very strict, as well they should be.

Something I don't understand. I bought a GWS Slow Stick radio controlled airplane, and got a controller for it with one extra channel, that I connected to a digital camera, so I could operate the camera from the radio, and flew it around and took pictures. That wasn't illegal. Working in the industry, can you tell me what the difference is, here?

I mean, aside from the fact that my plane was junk and the camera I used was crap. But I could have easily bought better equipment, and people do all the time, including live action cameras that broadcast to a ground station.

 

[Chiefgator]

Because you are a private citizen. It also has to do with what you do with the video.
Using it in any official capacity is when the legalities come into play.

The cameras used on these small UAVs do not have that good of resolution compared to the bigger systems on manned aircraft. It is all a question of the weight of the lens, etc. They work great to watch a Gross picture, but are not very good where a fine resolution is needed. Granted, they can get closer to the subject without detection than an aircraft, but that distance is normally overcome fairly easily by the better equipment.

 

[Temporal]

I work in the airborne electronic surveillance field. All this is doing is changing from a manned platform to an unmanned platform. The surveillance is already there, this doesn't really change anything except to allow for unmanned vehicles to be in the airspace.

None of the laws changed that have an effect on right to privacy, search and seizure, search warrants, etc.
The restrictions placed on surveillance over US soil are very strict, as well they should be.

Automation makes the process easier and more generalized, that's the problem. Where before we had individuals flying helicopters and having to dedicate man hours to it in the specific cases where monitoring was needed, we now have drones doing the work for people and they can fly around looking for crime.

It's this looking that creates a spy state. Before they would send surveillance if there was a call for such help, now they can do it regardless if crime is happening or not. I don't think this level of control is needed - and if you look at the specifics surrounding the law that passed, the public was not consulted on this issue.

 

[Grendel]

Because you are a private citizen. It also has to do with what you do with the video.
Using it in any official capacity is when the legalities come into play. .

Makes sense. I suppose, also, I was only flying it around in public areas. I guess if I flew it into someone's back yard and snapped pictures through their upstairs bedroom window, it would have been a whole 'nother ballgame.

Does this law increase the government's ability to break privacy laws without a warrant? I mean, they can't currently use aircraft to peek into your house with court authorization, right?

 

[rathi]

There are obvious privacy implications when dealing with unmanned drones, but those should be handled with laws not trying to ban technology. Aerial surveillance should be allowed only in response to a specific need, regardless of platform. Manned or unmanned, we shouldn't have aircraft flying around recording the populace just because they can.

 

[Thunder]

...Well looks like another violation of our rights has come to pass....

police take video and pictures from helicopters.

now remote-controlled drones will do it instead.

what's the ****ing difference? its still a human piloting the thing and choosing what to monitor.

 

[Chiefgator]

I think a couple of you guys have a misconception of what a drone is.

Drones are more accurately called an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). They are not automatons that fly around independent of human input. There are many types, and many sizes. The ones that you see on the news most often are the very large predator type vehicles that are actually the size of a civilian aircraft. Those are flown via satellite uplink and can be flown from the other side of the world.

The vehicles in question here, are more about the size of a remote-controlled aircraft that a teenager would fly. There is also the restriction that the pilot must maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft at all times.

This change in the regulation also has no effect whatsoever on the law regarding surveillance. This basically allows your local radio station to do a remote camera instead of a helicopter traffic report during rush hour. It allows the police to follow a vehicle with a remote instead of a helicopter or aircraft. To do that they still have to have the same search warrants or causal factor that they had with the helicopter.

I am a dedicated opponent of the patriot act. This however, has no effect whatsoever on your personal liberties.

 

[EagleAye]

I think a couple of you guys have a misconception of what a drone is.

Drones are more accurately called an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). They are not automatons that fly around independent of human input. There are many types, and many sizes. The ones that you see on the news most often are the very large predator type vehicles that are actually the size of a civilian aircraft. Those are flown via satellite uplink and can be flown from the other side of the world.

The vehicles in question here, are more about the size of a remote-controlled aircraft that a teenager would fly. There is also the restriction that the pilot must maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft at all times.

This change in the regulation also has no effect whatsoever on the law regarding surveillance. This basically allows your local radio station to do a remote camera instead of a helicopter traffic report during rush hour. It allows the police to follow a vehicle with a remote instead of a helicopter or aircraft. To do that they still have to have the same search warrants or causal factor that they had with the helicopter.

I am a dedicated opponent of the patriot act. This however, has no effect whatsoever on your personal liberties.

There we go. I don't imagine a small police force could afford to operate a predator. Operating costs would be too high. Maybe L.A. or New York could manage one, but that would be limited even so.

 

[AdamT]

I think a couple of you guys have a misconception of what a drone is.

Drones are more accurately called an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). They are not automatons that fly around independent of human input. There are many types, and many sizes. The ones that you see on the news most often are the very large predator type vehicles that are actually the size of a civilian aircraft. Those are flown via satellite uplink and can be flown from the other side of the world.

The vehicles in question here, are more about the size of a remote-controlled aircraft that a teenager would fly. There is also the restriction that the pilot must maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft at all times.

This change in the regulation also has no effect whatsoever on the law regarding surveillance. This basically allows your local radio station to do a remote camera instead of a helicopter traffic report during rush hour. It allows the police to follow a vehicle with a remote instead of a helicopter or aircraft. To do that they still have to have the same search warrants or causal factor that they had with the helicopter.

I am a dedicated opponent of the patriot act. This however, has no effect whatsoever on your personal liberties.

I've noticed that the FAA is set to clamp down on for-profit, private use of RC aircraft, which kind of sucks. Or rather, I can understand some regulation, but they seem poised to implement some crazy regs requiring RC operators to have full pilot's licenses, and if you operate a heli RC, a helicopter permit. All to operate the same sort of aircraft that hobbyists can operate with no permit or license at all? That'a nutz.

 

[Chiefgator]

There we go. I don't imagine a small police force could afford to operate a predator. Operating costs would be too high. Maybe L.A. or New York could manage one, but that would be limited even so.

That's very true. Besides predators and the like are proprietary. The military is just not going to give up that technology to just anybody. I see this request for the relaxation of the regulations to be mainly a cost-cutting measure. The money saved on fuel alone would be substantial over the course of only one year.

 

[AdamT]

That's very true. Besides predators and the like are proprietary. The military is just not going to give up that technology to just anybody. I see this request for the relaxation of the regulations to be mainly a cost-cutting measure. The money saved on fuel alone would be substantial over the course of only one year.

Hell, it doesn't have to be any predator drone. You can put together a hellacious radio controlled helicopter/camera rig for $50k. You can put together a pretty decent one for under $5k.

 

[Connery]

This is not a bad idea. Drones can fly where it is too dangerous to send a manned aircraft. They are cheaper than manned aircraft and do not suffer from fatigue. This is just another means to watch in an already surveillance heavy society.

 

[theangryamerican]

I'm honestly on the fence about this. I don't like the idea of making it any easier to put eyes in the sky, but if a warrant is required for anyone to be specifically monitored by drone and there is full disclosure to the public about the specifics of any drone surveillance, I don't think I can be too up in arms about this. I do see the potential for abuse here though, so while advancing techonology is not bad in and of itself, care must be taken to still protect the privacy of the People. Feel free to try sway my opinion one way or the other.

 

[Ikari]

Read all about it -

U.S. opening up airspace to use of drones - Technology & science - Science - DiscoveryNews.com - msnbc.com

Well looks like another violation of our rights has come to pass. Between this and the Patriot Act I might as well just have the government set up video cameras in my house and backyard. This country continues to circle the drain each passing day. Are we people just going to keep taking the punishment?

What are you talking about? The Patriot Act is an upstanding piece of legislation. I mean, it's not called The Fascist Act, now is it? The government wouldn't lie to us to try to expand their powers against our rights and liberties. Nope, not our government!

 

[What if...?]

police take video and pictures from helicopters.

now remote-controlled drones will do it instead.

what's the ****ing difference? its still a human piloting the thing and choosing what to monitor.

Helicopter can't hover outside your second story window and peak through the crack in the curtains.

My friends AR Drone certainly could.

 

[EagleAye]

Helicopter can't hover outside your second story window and peak through the crack in the curtains.

My friends AR Drone certainly could.

Well that's no trouble. Just don't smoke your bong in front of the crack in the curtains. :lol:

 

[Chiefgator]

That heli UAV can only do that with a warrant....

 

[Temporal]

...and warrants mean so much these days.

 

[Chiefgator]

...and warrants mean so much these days.

Sadly, there is much truth in this ....

 

[jamesrage]

I think a couple of you guys have a misconception of what a drone is.

Drones are more accurately called an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). They are not automatons that fly around independent of human input. There are many types, and many sizes. The ones that you see on the news most often are the very large predator type vehicles that are actually the size of a civilian aircraft. Those are flown via satellite uplink and can be flown from the other side of the world.

The vehicles in question here, are more about the size of a remote-controlled aircraft that a teenager would fly. There is also the restriction that the pilot must maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft at all times.

This change in the regulation also has no effect whatsoever on the law regarding surveillance. This basically allows your local radio station to do a remote camera instead of a helicopter traffic report during rush hour. It allows the police to follow a vehicle with a remote instead of a helicopter or aircraft. To do that they still have to have the same search warrants or causal factor that they had with the helicopter.

I am a dedicated opponent of the patriot act. This however, has no effect whatsoever on your personal liberties.

No one is picturing a Ginormous multimillion dollar predator drone flying around the city.I am sure that most people are imagining are small thousand dollar drones flying around cities unnoticed being used to spy on people seeing how obtaining warrants seem to be of little value to the government,one day being automated and the possibility of the US government allowing a foreign government to fly its own drones into the US to spy on citizens and to possibly terminate citizens.

 

[Chiefgator]

No one is picturing a Ginormous multimillion dollar predator drone flying around the city.I am sure that most people are imagining are small thousand dollar drones flying around cities unnoticed being used to spy on people seeing how obtaining warrants seem to be of little value to the government,one day being automated and the possibility of the US government allowing a foreign government to fly its own drones into the US to spy on citizens and to possibly terminate citizens.

So, you extrapolating out that a radio station using a UAV to report rush hour traffic will turn into a foreign government assassinating citizens...