Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not worried about the government as much as I am domestic terrorists. Can you put an automatic weapon on one? Even if inaccurate, with enough people around that wont' matter. Can you attach an explosive to them? A vial of Anthrax powder?
Domestic terrorist could be a problem.
One thing to consider is how FEW actual terror attacks have succeeded in the country since 09/11. A handful have made the news with the Fort Hood killings and the recent Marine recruiting station attacks as examples. Somebody behind the scenes is doing their job well or terror attacks would be in the news daily.
I doubt if there are any citizens more zealous in the defense of the Second Amendment that I. But the way I see it the Second Amendment was adopted by the Founding Fathers as the way for "the People" to defend their property and person against: 1. a tyrannical Government 2. foreign invaders, 3. attacks by others. These are DEFENSIVE uses of a Weapon. A drone with an attached weapon is not a DEFENSIVE use of a weapon it is an OFFENSIVE use.
I will argue until the cows come home that citizens have unlimited right to keep and bear arms for DEFENSIVE use. KABA for OFFENSIVE use is something even I do not support.
Domestic terrorist could be a problem.
One thing to consider is how FEW actual terror attacks have succeeded in the country since 09/11. A handful have made the news with the Fort Hood killings and the recent Marine recruiting station attacks as examples. Somebody behind the scenes is doing their job well or terror attacks would be in the news daily.
Until recently...they can easily find out if the terrorists leave a social media footprint, but this last guy left none at all, he didn't discuss his planes online. IMO organized groups like those behind 9/11 are not as much a worry as the "lone wolf" is, and they can't find them as easily. I think we are just in the beginning of this.
Hmm. That is the sort of response that I'd expect from a 15 year old. No point to it if you have a real point to make. It's obvious that you state opinion on the matter and don't have any technical reason for questioning the accuracy.
I explained the technical reason for the weapon's inaccuracy. If you knew anything about the fundamentals of shooting, you would realize my front sight comment and the shooting distance made a lot of sense. Do you even own a gun? Any small variation in aiming the front sight will make a big difference once you start getting more than 5-10 yards from the target, then you can factor in that the weapon is attached to something that's hovering instead of being stable.
I don't see a camera on the drone that's looking down the front sight with a video feed accessible to the drone operator. Do you? If there isn't a front sight view, then the drone operator is merely pointing the drone a certain direction and hoping for the best.
I explained the technical reason for the weapon's inaccuracy. If you knew anything about the fundamentals of shooting, you would realize my front sight comment and the shooting distance made a lot of sense. Do you even own a gun? Any small variation in aiming the front sight will make a big difference once you start getting more than 5-10 yards from the target, then you can factor in that the weapon is attached to something that's hovering instead of being stable.
I don't see a camera on the drone that's looking down the front sight with a video feed accessible to the drone operator. Do you? If there isn't a front sight view, then the drone operator is merely pointing the drone a certain direction and hoping for the best.
The fact that you are trying to make it about me instead of focusing on the matter at hand, is nothing more than a logical fallacy. i.e. You state opinion, you have offered no proof that this device isn't accurate beyond trying to make yourself an "expert" on the matter (another fallacy).
You are entitled to your opinion but it isn't fact. Get back to us when you actually can backup what you say.
I explained the technical reason for the weapon's inaccuracy. If you knew anything about the fundamentals of shooting, you would realize my front sight comment and the shooting distance made a lot of sense. Do you even own a gun? Any small variation in aiming the front sight will make a big difference once you start getting more than 5-10 yards from the target, then you can factor in that the weapon is attached to something that's hovering instead of being stable.
I don't see a camera on the drone that's looking down the front sight with a video feed accessible to the drone operator. Do you? If there isn't a front sight view, then the drone operator is merely pointing the drone a certain direction and hoping for the best.
We're getting reports every day of drones coming within 20, 50, 100 feet from commercial aircraft at airports. How accurate do you think that sight has to be to hit a Airbus 320 or a Boeing 737? Think that drone skimming alongside a 737 taking off, could bring it down, with a full mag from a Glock 22, .40cal with 15 shots?
The bigger threat is that terrorists would make a "sticky" drone with some C4 and fly it onto some inconspicuous part of the plane. Or maybe I played too much Call of Duty.
Despite the somewhat childish arguments over sights and such, the ability to turn consumer drones into lethal weapons is scary. Even a half decent garage mechanic could figure out most of the engineering needed to make one of these things hurt something or somebody. Something as simple as an ice pick mounted on the front and flown at maximum speed into somebody's back. Not to mention poisons, chemicals, explosives, custom lightweight firearms and targets from people, to planes, to cars, trains, liquid oxygen or propane trucks ... the list of potential mayhem is endless.
Most of this is not necessarily new. RC airplanes have been around for decades. It doesn't make it any less scary.
We're getting reports every day of drones coming within 20, 50, 100 feet from commercial aircraft at airports. How accurate do you think that sight has to be to hit a Airbus 320 or a Boeing 737? Think that drone skimming alongside a 737 taking off, could bring it down, with a full mag from a Glock 22, .40cal with 15 shots?
I do.
Mohawk,
I don't know how many critical vulnerabilities these large Airliners have but I would guess that even with a 20 round magazine (or clip) fired from 50 feet the odds of bringing the plane down would be about as good as winning the Powerball Lottery. IOW with 20 rounds about 1 in 9,000,000. I know it could happen but the odds would be very high. I heard of a few choppers and ground support aircraft being shot down by small arms fire during the Viet Nam War so it could happen.
Last edited by Gunluvver2; 07-22-2015 at 05:57 PM..
Reason: poor sentence structure.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
