Govt. Has The Right to Kill American Citizens?

[Ladywriter 7,783]

http://youtu.be/yjqZJveJb2Q

 

yeah....

[Myk JL 1,731]

Sometimes I wonder if Marvel's Dark Reign was a jab at Obama. With the phrase "Accept Change". Eventually followed by The List where Norman Osborn had a list of (American) Super Heroes he wanted out of the way.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

The government is suppose to work for the people, not kill them. It starts out small and only grows. The vagueness of what qualifies as a legal hit is disturbing and can only be used to broaden the governments power.

 

Things like this make a very strong argument why its NOT a good idea to have any gun bans.

 

[Sledgstone 8,672]

First it was FEMA camps and now Drones can kill US citizens.

 

btw, Hancock Field Air National Guard Base in Syracuse does a lot of Drone training missions. I remember reading something about how they would fly drones around the central NY area and some of the details about it. Such as the pilots were not allowed to have their vehicles lock onto or observe citizens and that their training targets would always be military style vehicles with camouflage paint. Of course I can't find any information on that now. The only thing I could find was this old article from last year:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/us/drone-pilots-waiting-for-a-kill-shot-7000-miles-away.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

Props to Rand Paul for enduring a 13 hour filibuster to get an answer out of the Department of Justice that the President does not have the power to use a drone strike on Americans on our own soil. A small step in the millions of hypotheticals. Also Props to Dick Durbon and Ron Wyden for supporting this effort across party lines. These old guard politicians like McCain and Lindsay Graham need to go, they define what is wrong with the Republican party. Both sides of the aisle need fresh blood instead of these career politician jackasses that only have their best interests in mind rather than those that voted their worthless asses into office.

The government should not have weaponized drones over our cities. This is not a police state, this is a republic.

[Ladywriter 7,783]

We need more politicians that understand the science of our times and in what ways old and new legislation have an impact on that and us.

You wanna kill a mutherfucker in pukesatan before he can kill our troops or citizens go the fuck ahead but don't even think of playing that shit here. We are a fucking civilized society and we have specially trained law enforcement that can go arrest the bad guy.  If they're so fucking worried they can't charge/hold the terrorist...well aint that what Gitmo is still the fuck open for? Come the fuck on motherfuckers  

[Sledgstone 8,672]

I remember reading somewhere that many police departments are now budgeting for non-military drones. It looks like they could use the drones for surveillance in hostage situations.. but if they equip a gun on it, they could technically use a drone to get the right angle to snipe a criminal. Do you guys think that should be allowed? It wouldn't be federal drones, it'd be county, state or city police. It would still be considered the govt killing americans with drones on American soil tho.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

They are currently funding a project where a surveillance drone can determine if you are carrying a gun, and at the same time the DHS is ordering hundreds of military style vehicles. Its like they are gearing up for war against the homeland.

[Sledgstone 8,672]

Damn.
 
I wouldn't mind seeing drones used for border security or having the coast guard get a nice supply of them. But any military drone use inside our borders shouldn't be happening. I never cared for the F-16s in Syracuse for that matter. They would do test / maneuver runs on an almost daily basis (at least twice a week). Those jets were loud as hell. A 747 landing was loud, but those F-16s were noticeable. Since they've switched to military drones, I have not seen a single one in the sky. Maybe they fly only at night. I have no idea. At night, I wouldn't be able to distinguish their lights compared to other planes and these drones are quiet.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hancock_Field_Air_National_Guard_Base

 

Btw, I've read other articles about airspace and commercial drones and I figured I'd quote this article:
 
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/Why_a_drone_can_hover_over_your_home_and_you_cant_stop_it.html

 

Lost in the controversy over the federal government’s use of military drones is an issue that hits home: commercial drones that can videotape you in your backyard.

Under limited circumstances, the FAA has approved the use, starting in 2015, of drones owned and operated by citizens. Some will be used for commercial purposes; others will used for recreational purposes.

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 was approved by Congress and the president. It tasks the Federal Aviation Administration with setting policies for the commercial drone business by September 2015.

The act is mostly focused on air safety issues, but the implications of drones, with photo and infrared cameras, flying over personal air spaces is fraught with privacy issues.

Then there are the implications for commercial drones, news gathering and the First Amendment. Television stations spend millions of dollars on helicopters, which can show live video from a distance. Drones are the fraction of a helicopter’s cost, but they can’t fly as high as a helicopter under normal circumstances.

So what happens if a drone is hovering over your house as journalists gather news? Or what if it is drone owned by a police department? Or a news entertainment show like TMZ?

The Congressional Research Service prepared a detailed analysis of these conflicting issues in January 2013, and its conclusions were that until the civilian drones are tested and in service, the legal problems probably won’t be resolved.

“The legal issues discussed in this report will likely remain unresolved until the civilian use of drones becomes more widespread,” the Congressional Research Service said. “Once these regulations are tested and promulgated, the unique legal challenges that could arise based on the operational differences between drones and already ubiquitous fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters may come into sharper focus.”

 

As it is right now, some jack ass can own a drone and fly it around in your backyard. It could be 10 feet in the air and watch everything you are doing and its not illegal because you don't own your own airspace. And if you shoot it down, you can get sued because you are destroying their property.

 

If random people can harass me with small drones, I'm assuming the government or police probably will too. I don't like the idea of it. Its like Britain's CCTV cameras, except these will be flying everywhere.

 

I'm wondering how long it will be until some asshole wants to arm his drone with a paintball gun. Or the next psycho out there wants to drone attack a school during lunch recess. I'm not looking forward to the future of drone development.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

I know FL has already passed an anti-drone state law, and I think a few other states have as well. Drones can have a good purpose in the US, but no one that wants to use them seems to have those intentions.

Drones could keep track of wildfires, used for find people in mega disasters like Katrina or Sandy. They could be used to find missing hikers in the forest, they could give us a better view of dangerous places to fly in like the grand canyon.

If we are to use drones in our skies, they should be non weaponized, and ONLY used for emergencies like missing people in the woods or desert. Trying to find a suspect/convict on the run isn't really effective as we saw with that whack job in LA where the cops shot up several innocent people they "thought" was him.

[Sledgstone 8,672]

I think more laws regarding drones should be put into place before a major incident happens.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/05/drone-in-nycs-jfk-airport_n_2811271.html

 

The FBI said the unmanned aircraft was described as black with four propellers and no more than 3 feet wide. It came within 200 feet of the Alitalia plane, the FBI said.

 

I wonder how long it will be before a drone gets sucked into an airplane engine over a populated area.

 

Some drone use in the circumstances you mentioned could be very beneficial.

 

Non-weaponized in the US is a must. Theres enough accidental killings from drone strikes in other countries as it is.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

The fact that the FBI is looking for information is troublesome.... makes me think it wasn't even an US drone.

[Sledgstone 8,672]

Exactly.. some guy could have bought a drone kit online (quite a few are starting to become available) and started flying it around at high altitudes. People might start treating these things like model aircraft. Sure a small RC airplane can get pretty high, but at least it is constantly moving. Most of the drones people are making on small scale can hover. Hell, someone with enough small hovering drones at a busy airport could cause some real damage. They could be like floating land mines considering jets only have to suck one into a turbine to cause major damage.