Man I HATE being right all of the time!

MacGuyver4.2.0

Well-Known Member
I predicted this wayyy back when I saw the movie "The Terminator" in 1984. We have even scarier things in store for us as well (I already know), but this is the beginning of the whole enchilda.

Day of wide-spread domestic drone use nears
Published 12 June 2012

So far, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration( FAA) has issued 266 active testing permits for civilian-drone applications, but has yet to allow drones wide-scale access to U.S. airspace; law enforcement and industry officials say that it is only a matter of time before the FAA would allow the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies and departments to begin to use drones for surveillance

If you thought that the use of drones in the war against terrorists is controversial, wait until drones are used more widely in domestic surveillance and law enforcement missions. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has already issued permits to several police departments to use UAVs, but the practice is not yet wide-spread.
The Daily Mail reports that on 23 April, Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley issued a 30-page memorandum discussing the issue of drone use in domestic missions. Donley says that drones may be used to “collect information about U.S. persons,” and that the photos that these drones will collect may be retained, used, or even distributed to other branches of the U.S. government as long as the “recipient is reasonably perceived to have a specific, lawful governmental function” in seeking to have access to the photos (Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, offers a different take on the legality of domestic drone use; see his Washington Times article).

Donley writes that the purpose of his memorandum is “balancing … obtaining intelligence information … and protecting individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.”
Officials from law enforcement and the aviation industry, as well as security experts and some lawmakers, argue that the use of drones in domestic mission is inevitable. “It’s going to happen,” Dan Elwell, vice president of civil aviation at the Aerospace Industries Association, told the Seattle Times. “Now it’s about figuring out how to safely assimilate the technology into national airspace.”

The Mail notes that, so far, the FAA has issued 266 active testing permits for civilian-drone applications, but has yet to allow drones wide-scale access to U.S. airspace. The main reason is security: the technology to make sure that drones do not collide with each other or other aircraft, and that they do not fall in densely populated areas, either does not exist or is expensive.
Still, drone manufacturers say they are preparing for the day the FAA give a green light for domestic drone use, and they work on drone prototypes suitable for domestic use. California-based drone maker AeroVironment has been supplying the military with small surveillance drones, and it has recently developed a miniature helicopter drone, dubbed Qube, designed specifically for police use in urban settings. The company says it will find many customers among the more than 18,000 state and local police agencies for the miniature drone.
A typical helicopter used by law enforcement agencies in the United States costs about $1.7 million. AeroVironment notes the Qube will cost about $40,000. (my note- AeroVironment company executives have been recently targeted by Anon)
 

smokinrav

Well-Known Member
Please, please, don't bring this before the Supremes before a few of those psycho fascists are removed.

bin Laden wins again!
 

BA142

Well-Known Member
We're almost 16 trillion dollars in the hole and our gov thinks it's a good idea to spend money on fucking drones?
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
We're almost 16 trillion dollars in the hole and our gov thinks it's a good idea to spend money on fucking drones?
Well, the thing about Terminator, Matrix, I, Robot. etc, it is practically inevitable. But, these stories, like 1984 are only hints.

We will wish it was so broad stroke as a movie. In fact, the actuality of 1984 could not come true, it's too overt. What did come true is the mind control of the News-Congress-Lobby-Entertainment complex. I gladly have an x-box Kenict watching me, my cell phone knows were I am, on and on. The NSA robots are listening to everything.

But, what we are seeing, with this redefining of privacy, is the beginning of the true nightmare.....for the have nots.....For us "have's" (and if you a tax payer, you are a Have) it is the beginning of a new species of Man. Augmented and Robot protected Man. ARPM.

Robot wars on the back side of the moon will decide the advertising rights of Coke vs Pepsi, perhaps? IAC, the future always seems far worse than predicted.
 

iiKode

Well-Known Member
ffs, were all screwed oh well at leats i got my tinfoil hat nobody is controlling me,i dont own a cellphone lol
 

bob jameson

Active Member
Wait for the lawsuits when they crash one of those drones into someone's house or a school. Even better, or worse if you will, they don't seem to be under air traffic control so they will probably be responsible for bringing down a passenger plane.
 

FlyLikeAnEagle

Well-Known Member
This drone is small enough to fit through a screen in a window and can take a blood sample and you wouldnt even know.






 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local/alameda-county-sheriff-vows-no-spying-use-drone/nTNZG/


OAKLAND, Calif. —

The Alameda County sheriff has vowed that his department won't use an aerial drone to spy on ordinary people, but civil liberties groups say there still needs to be some guidelines to ensure privacy.
Alameda County Sheriff Greg Ahern said Tuesday that a drone his department is pursuing would be used for search and rescue missions, responding to wildfires and to capture fugitives, not for surveillance and intelligence gathering on civilians.
"This device is used for mission-specific incidents," Ahern told the San Francisco Chronicle. "We strive to gain the public's trust in everything we do, and I would never do anything of this nature that would destroy the public's trust beyond repair."
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
In the concept car showing this year, BMW fielded a line of Police "vehicles." Some were pretty far out, beyond the current tech, etc. But, they all had drones. Each unit had a Drone to deploy in the performance of Duty. For some people in this world the future is already here. They just haven't told us, yet.
 

aknight3

Moderator
Nice to hear. Wish he was on the national stage.
i feel like thats how it starts though, all the depts throughout the country get them, tell us they wont use em for that, but once every dept has one in 5 or 10 yrs....wells whos the say then? thats what they do, ween us into this type of shit...its actually pretty scary if you think about it, just slowly dosing the american people down to be dumb enough to eventual kill :lol:
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
i feel like thats how it starts though, all the depts throughout the country get them, tell us they wont use em for that, but once every dept has one in 5 or 10 yrs....wells whos the say then? thats what they do, ween us into this type of shit...its actually pretty scary if you think about it, just slowly dosing the american people down to be dumb enough to eventual kill :lol:
No, it is not us and them, it is us, we the people. We want this. The guys that say they can't stand to have their girlfriend oogled, will not say anything when the girlfriend is saved from rape. It is like the inconvenient truth about guns and how there are used for protection, millions of times a year, and no shots fired. We only hear the bad stuff. The NEWS-joke.

And, the people that harp about the rights of privacy will just, get over it. First off, there is no mention of the word privacy in the US Constitution. It is a synthetic concept, like freedom of religion, when we actually have freedom from Religion.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constfaq_q113.html
The right to privacy is not a part of the Constitution, at least not in so many words. The right to privacy would best be seen in the 9th Amendment, which basically says that just because a right is not in the Constitution, does not necessarily mean that it does not exist. The justices of the Supreme Court, in several cases over the past half century, have found that a right to privacy does exist in the Constitution, to a degree. The cases that started the process of the "finding" of this new right began with cases like Loving v Virginia, where it was ruled that the state cannot prevent mixed-race marriages; and like Griswold v Connecticut, where it was ruled that a state cannot prevent a married couple from buying and using condoms. The first mention of a right to privacy was in a dissenting opinion in Olmstead v US in 1928, in which Justice Brandeis argued that the Framers had created a framework for the greatest right of all: "the right to be left alone."
 

smokinrav

Well-Known Member
In the concept car showing this year, BMW fielded a line of Police "vehicles." Some were pretty far out, beyond the current tech, etc. But, they all had drones. Each unit had a Drone to deploy in the performance of Duty. For some people in this world the future is already here. They just haven't told us, yet.
The worst part is, it's not the stuff we're finding out about now that should worry us, especially in miltary R&D. It's the 'what have they developed since then that they feel free to release this information' technology that should have us scared.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
Why should we be worried, again? We the People, want this. Besides the protection of Posse Comitatus, the miltary is behind the less lethal, less collateral damage, developments. Area control by microwaves burst or uber-loud sound. Self steering bullets. The military protects us. Get over it.
 
Top