Drone spotted in the sky over Oakland (how much, crime, carry)

[burdell]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

We have to wrap palm trees in tinfoil here in order for them to survive the winter, so no thanks.

See, here's my point. I shouldn't even have to WORRY about walking around nekkid BEHIND MY PRIVACY FENCE in my own backyard.

I just find this currently fashionable outrage over drones laughable. I remember about 30 years ago or so 2 LEOs in a small airplane over NJ having a bit of a problem because of diverting their marijuana spotting mission to check out the 'scenery' at a local swimming pool. The overwhelming majority of airspace in the US is unrestricted, that's just a fact of life.

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

I also shouldn't have to worry about perverts at airports getting their jollies from my body scan. Even if they're NOT getting off on it, dammit, I shouldn't have to be subjected to STRANGERS groping me for no reason other than "we can't profile, so we'll just randomly choose people to pat down. You're number 17 - today is your lucky day."

I'm sick of it.

Just everyone is all for cutting spending as long as it's spending that doesn't benefit them, everyone wants to be safe just as long as it doesn't inconvenience them.

I don't like it either but what's the solution?

Have a special boarding line for bomb-carriers and those who would harm us and another for everyone else?

[11thHour]

Maybe one of these?:

Draganflyer X6-ES Six Rotor UAV Helicopter Aerial Video Platform

Or even one of these?:

MikroKopter - HexaKopter on Vimeo

[KathrynAragon]

Originally Posted by burdell

Coupla things...

I just find this currently fashionable outrage over drones laughable. I remember about 30 years ago or so 2 LEOs in a small airplane over NJ having a bit of a problem because of diverting their marijuana spotting mission to check out the 'scenery' at a local swimming pool. The overwhelming majority of airspace in the US is unrestricted, that's just a fact of life.

Don't confuse the issue. We're not talking about unrestricted airspace. We're not talking about helicoptors. We're talking about drones - with technology that has much greater capabilities than any helicopter or airplane:

Surveillance drones are equipped with sophisticated imaging technology that provides the ability to obtain detailed photographs of terrain, people, homes, and even small objects.

Gigapixel cameras used to outfit drones are among the highest definition cameras available, and can "provide real-time video streams at a rate of 10 frames a second." On some drones, operators can track up to 65 different targets across a distance of 65 square miles. Drones may also carry infrared cameras, heat sensors, GPS, sensors that detect movement, and automated license plate readers. In the near future these cameras may include facial recognition technology that would make it possible to remotely identify individuals in parks, schools, and at political gatherings.

With special capabilities and enhanced equipment, drones are able to conduct far-more detailed surveillance, obtaining high-resolution picture and video, peering inside high-level windows, and through solid barriers, such as fences, trees, and even walls.

In 2001, the Supreme Court ruled in Kyllo v. US that the use of a device that is not in "general public use" is a search even if it does not physically invade the home. In 2010, the D.C. Circuit Court required the Department of Homeland Security to undertake a new APA rulemaking when the Agency sought to implement Whole Body Imaging technology in the place of metal detectors as primary screening tools at U.S. airports. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled in US v. Jones that the attachment of a GPS device to a car with the intent of gathering information was a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. The Jones decision marks a significant change from the previous doctrine, based on US v. Knotts, that an individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in their location on public roads.

EPIC - Domestic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones

Just everyone is all for cutting spending as long as it's spending that doesn't benefit them, everyone wants to be safe just as long as it doesn't inconvenience them.

I don't like it either but what's the solution?

Have a special boarding line for bomb-carriers and those who would harm us and another for everyone else?

Common sense should prevail. How many would be terrorists have been thwarted by random pat downs? I've never heard of a single one. Have you?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

Coupla things...

Don't confuse the issue. We're not talking about unrestricted airspace. We're not talking about helicoptors. We're talking about drones - with technology that has much greater capabilities than any helicopter or airplane:

You're the one that's confused if you think the same technology carried by drones can't be carried by airplanes/helicopters.

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

Common sense should prevail. How many would be terrorists have been thwarted by random pat downs? I've never heard of a single one. Have you?

What's your version of common sense?

Since you say random pat downs don't work, what's it going to be?

Seems the only other options would be everybody gets searched or nobody gets searched.

Choose one.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

The government thinks so. They will demand you hand over the camera and if you don't they will arrest you.
They seem to think pictures is akin to planning a terrorist overthrow.
So why isn't the reverse thinking of citizens allowed ?

Really? I have taken thousands of pictures, many with people in them, but the evil goverment has not taken my camara from me. Have they taken your camera?

[Dorthy]

Originally Posted by burdell

You're the one that's confused if you think the same technology carried by drones can't be carried by airplanes/helicopters.

Even if this statement was true (it's not), drones are far cheaper then helicopters and that makes them far easier to use and abuse. Why would we want to make it even easier for the government to spy on us? Two drones can effectively cover and spy on all of Manhattan. It is predicted that we will have 30,000 drones in the sky by the year 2020. That's 600 per state. That's a lot of spying.

[KathrynAragon]

[quote=burdell;28213378]

You're the one that's confused if you think the same technology carried by drones can't be carried by airplanes/helicopters.

I'm not confused on that point. There are multiple reasons why drones are more advantageous to use for surveillance than either airplanes or helicopters. Apparently I'm going to have to line those out for you:

"A "drone," or "unmanned aircraft," is an aerial vehicle designed to be used without a human pilot onboard. Drones can be remote controlled or purely automated.

Due to the heights at which drones can fly, they are often beyond the range of sight for most people. In addition, drones can also be designed to be very small and maneuverable. This means drone surveillance often occurs without the knowledge of the individual being monitored.

Drones are designed to undertake constant, persistent surveillance to a degree that former methods of video surveillance were unable to achieve. By virtue of their design, their size, and how high they can fly, [drones] can operate undetected in urban and rural environments."
EPIC - Domestic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones

What's your version of common sense?

Since you say random pat downs don't work, what's it going to be?

Seems the only other options would be everybody gets searched or nobody gets searched.

Choose one.

I don't have to "choose one." There are more than two options.

Law enforcement agents are TRAINED to "profile" and should be allowed to do so. That's a start when it comes to "my version of common sense."

I notice, by the way, that you didn't answer my question, so I'll repeat it: How many terrorist attacks on airliners or in airports have been thwarted by random pat downs?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Dorthy

Even if this statement was true (it's not),

Have anything factual to support your allegation that drones carry technology other aircraft can't?

Originally Posted by Dorthy

drones are far cheaper then helicopters and that makes them far easier to use and abuse. Why would we want to make it even easier for the government to spy on us? Two drones can effectively cover and spy on all of Manhattan. It is predicted that we will have 30,000 drones in the sky by the year 2020. That's 600 per state. That's a lot of spying.

It's also far cheaper to use drones for things like geologic surveys, mapping, traffic watch, fish spotting, aerial photography, etc., etc., etc.

Are you suggesting we should spend more than necessary because DRONES! are evil?

Since when do you think cost has ever been an issue for spy agencies?

[Harrier]

Why put drones over Oakland?

"There is no there there."

- Gertrude Stein

[burdell]

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

I don't have to "choose one." There are more than two options.

Law enforcement agents are TRAINED to "profile" and should be allowed to do so. That's a start when it comes to "my version of common sense."

If I was trying to snealk thru I'd LOVE for profiling to be the order of the day.

You're looking for middle-eastern men?

GREAT

I'll send my goods with Irish looking women.

Profiling is a GREAT start to getting hit again.

Originally Posted by KathrynAragon

I notice, by the way, that you didn't answer my question, so I'll repeat it: How many terrorist attacks on airliners or in airports have been thwarted by random pat downs?

I don't know, do you?

Have a factual answer?

And in places like Heathrow where everyone gets patted down, how can we ever know how many attacks have been thwarted when some may just be deterred from trying at all?