A droning sound across America

[5.56NATO]

A little more than a decade ago the border patrol started using surveillance drones. The technology and the mission were a perfect match, and few did any worrying—almost no one objects to closely monitoring America’s southern border.

The belief that the federal government was using drones to conduct domestic surveillance inside the United States, though, could get a person labeled a paranoid lunatic as recently as 2012. Yet by then, the border patrol had lent its drones to other agencies 700 times. And the Department of Homeland Security was actively developing a domestic drone fleet, egged on by at least 60 members of Congress. “This bipartisan caucus, together with its allies in the drone industry, has been promoting UAV use at home and abroad through drone fairs on Capitol Hill, new legislation and drone-favored budgets,” the Center for International Policy reported.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...merica/473136/




They're keeping us "safe"!

[imanaknut]

We need a particle beam weapon or laser or phaser or the like that we can use to shoot down these constitutional violations without worrying about a bullet falling back to earth.

Forget that the drone itself will fall to earth as a potential danger. I am sure the government would come up with a great excuse to explain it.

[Hatedbysheeple]

As long as they are not looking in through your windows, which with their airplane sized, turbo prop powered drones would be quite the feat of piloting, not sure how this violates the constitution. You have no protection or right to be free from surveillance in public. If that were the case street cameras as well as the entire private eye business would be illegal.

If they wanted to they could follow you around with a helicopter all day too, or in cars, because you are in public, where everyone can see you anyways.

It's like the guy that tried hooking a drone with his fishing pole on a public pier, he thought he had a right to privacy, on a public pier, surrounded by 50 other people, all taking pictures with their cameras, but he freaks out about the hobby drone.

[FunkyPertwee]

As long as they are not looking in through your windows, which with their airplane sized, turbo prop powered drones would be quite the feat of piloting, not sure how this violates the constitution. You have no protection or right to be free from surveillance in public. If that were the case street cameras as well as the entire private eye business would be illegal.

If they wanted to they could follow you around with a helicopter all day too, or in cars, because you are in public, where everyone can see you anyways.

It's like the guy that tried hooking a drone with his fishing pole on a public pier, he thought he had a right to privacy, on a public pier, surrounded by 50 other people, all taking pictures with their cameras, but he freaks out about the hobby drone.

I don't want the government doing those things whether they are constitutional or not.

People shooting at quad copters are stupid, although I would not appreciate one in my yard, or filming me in private from public spaces.

[Hatedbysheeple]

I don't want the government doing those things whether they are constitutional or not.

People shooting at quad copters are stupid, although I would not appreciate one in my yard, or filming me in private from public spaces.

That's fine to not like it, I'm not a huge fan of aspects of it myself, but yelling it's against the constitution when it's not does not lend strength to the argument.

Also there are times when I think it's ok to knock down a drone, one that comes to mind is the guy that was perving on the 15-16 year old girls in their back yard while they were sun bathing and dad shot it down.

I don't like adding laws to books and I honestly don't know how it would be enforced because it's a complicated problem. The genie is out of the bag drone wise. You could say no loitering over private residence but when does a slow controlled turn become loitering or just flying over, or just no flying over private property period? If someone flys over my house at 300 feet they can't see much but they could at 75 feet so altitude minimums? And of course how would any of this be enforced because anything capable of knocking down a drone whether kinetic, laser, or jamming based can also do a lot of damage to other systems or things, which would never get the go ahead.

[5.56NATO]

There's a thing called the 10th amendment, you may have heard of it.

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, which strictly supports the entire plan of the original Constitution for the United States of America, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution. All remaining powers are reserved for the states or the people.

[Hatedbysheeple]

There's a thing called the 10th amendment, you may have heard of it.

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, which strictly supports the entire plan of the original Constitution for the United States of America, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution. All remaining powers are reserved for the states or the people.

So how do you feel about interstate highways? Or the CDC?

[5.56NATO]

So how do you feel about interstate highways? Or the CDC?

I'll just refer you to the 10th amendment.