- Joined
- Sep 22, 2012
- Messages
- 42,430
- Reaction score
- 12,599
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Easier to jam the drones than shoot them down.
More fun to shoot drones than jam them.
Look it as real world beta testing.
Easier to jam the drones than shoot them down.
Yes, like "Here are insane criminals, with their names and addresses. Come arrest them."
I sometimes fly very small planes and I don't want one of these morons taking shots at me thinking I'm the FBI coming to steal their land. People like that are too cowardly to shoot at a plane they think has feds on it, but they just might be dumb enough to shoot at what they think is a drone.
Deer Trail, CO. is considering an ordinance that would grant hunting licenses to shoot unmanned government drones. The FAA threatens criminal and civil liability for the hunters, as though they shot at a manned aircraft.
Deliberate destruction of government property, or righteous civil disobedience? Personally, I think the drones are unreasonable search because no warrant was issued, and unconstitutional laws should be disobeyed until repealed. But this has a public safety issue that sort-of muddys the water.
Article is here
You feel free to invite unfettered snooping into your life, even your bedroom.
Some of us are independent and do not need some agency to hold or hand, coddle us, or make us feel comfortable.
Are you saying that a drone can fly up to your second-story bedroom window and film what's going on inside?Walking through city centers and/or bars/disco's you can expect to be filmed. That is not the same as snooping in my bedroom. Filming inside a house should be only done with a warrant from a judge but if you are accidentally filmed while a drone is following or is on surveillance duty is not something that a warrant is necessary.
Now if you are the target of said drone then a warrant should be acquired (except if they follow you after you already committed a crime which you were accidentally observed to have committed).
I am also independent but the sad fact is that our society needs security and cops, fbi and even drones at times will be needed.
Are you saying that a drone can fly up to your second-story bedroom window and film what's going on inside?
Are you saying that a drone can fly up to your second-story bedroom window and film what's going on inside?
Apparently you can.
"This afternoon, a stranger set an aerial drone into flight over my yard and beside my house near Miller Playfield. I initially mistook its noisy buzzing for a weed-whacker on this warm spring day. After several minutes, I looked out my third-story window to see a drone hovering a few feet away. My husband went to talk to the man on the sidewalk outside our home who was operating the drone with a remote control, to ask him to not fly his drone near our home. The man insisted that it is legal for him to fly an aerial drone over our yard and adjacent to our windows. He noted that the drone has a camera, which transmits images he viewed through a set of glasses. He purported to be doing "research". We are extremely concerned, as he could very easily be a criminal who plans to break into our house or a peeping-tom."
So This Is How It Begins: Guy Refuses to Stop Drone-Spying on Seattle Woman - Rebecca J. Rosen - The Atlantic
There's no legal right to shoot at aircraft, manned or not, in the US. The airspace above your land is not your own. Any aircraft can fly as low as 500 feet above the ground. Plus, are you certain you can tell the difference between this passenger aircraft and this drone?
Doesn't matter to me that I'll never use it, I want one of those permits. :mrgreen:
Exactly. Besides, I wouldn't worry about it, these guys are all talk. If they see a drone, they'll just go about their day as usual. Big talk does not equal big walk.
I'd bet that 99.9% of people who say they'd shoot one down wouldn't do squat.
I'd bet that 99.9% of people who say they'd shoot one down wouldn't do squat.
Scenario (not totally unlikely): The FBI is using a drone to follow a known child rapist/killer who is suspected of having kidnapped another child and normally keeps the children alive to repeatedly rape before he kills them. The FBI is using a drone because a helicopter would be noticed much sooner by the suspect and the really want to follow him very closely to see if he leads them to the child.
Some idiot shoots the drone out of the air because he/she feels it violates their privacy rights and the child killer gets away, goes towards the child before the FBI can find him again and kills the child. Yeah, long live civil disobedience!!
Might be a bit far fetched, but with drones the police can much easier follow people and use observe properties suspected of crime to protect the public. Helicopters are useless because they are seen or heard much more easily and as you said they are expensive and not available in the numbers the police might need in a crisis situation.
Apparently you can.
"This afternoon, a stranger set an aerial drone into flight over my yard and beside my house near Miller Playfield. I initially mistook its noisy buzzing for a weed-whacker on this warm spring day. After several minutes, I looked out my third-story window to see a drone hovering a few feet away. My husband went to talk to the man on the sidewalk outside our home who was operating the drone with a remote control, to ask him to not fly his drone near our home. The man insisted that it is legal for him to fly an aerial drone over our yard and adjacent to our windows. He noted that the drone has a camera, which transmits images he viewed through a set of glasses. He purported to be doing "research". We are extremely concerned, as he could very easily be a criminal who plans to break into our house or a peeping-tom."
So This Is How It Begins: Guy Refuses to Stop Drone-Spying on Seattle Woman - Rebecca J. Rosen - The Atlantic
Yes.
Anyone who is well versed in identifying aircraft, at least, can absolutely easily tell the difference. I've never even studied those two types of aircraft and can spot a lot of noticeable differences.
Hell, even those not well versed in spotting aircraft - but able to recognize patterns - could do that fairly easily - they're similar, but not so similar it's impossible to distinguish the two.
Not if your talking police helicopter drones that can hover overhead for several minutes. If helicopters can get shot down by ground fire in battle why would this be any different?Most of them don't even have the firepower or the skill necessary to do so. Anyone who thinks they can hit something flying 135 mph at an altitude of up to 30,000 ft is tripping balls on cough syrup.
Not if your talking police helicopter drones that can hover overhead for several minutes. If helicopters can get shot down by ground fire in battle why would this be any different?
I'd have the asshole arrested as a peeping tom, AFTER shooting down his drone. Not only would he be without his drone, but he would end up on the sex offender's list for the whole world to see, and I would be sure to show the list that he's on to all the neighbors.
I have come very close to shooting at helicopters flying over my remote home looking for a pot farm so shooting at a drone is a no brainer for me.
And I'm sure those police are glad that you didn't murder them simply because they were doing their job.
Guards at Auschwitz were simply doing their jobs too, what's your point?
Because surveying the area for illegal drugs is totally like killing 6 million Jews.