Slashdot Mirror
Domestic Use of Aerial Drones By Law Enforcement
PatPending writes "Aerial drones are now used by the Texas Department of Public Safety; the Mesa County Sheriff's Office, Colorado; the Miami-Dade County, Florida, Police Department; and the Department of Homeland Security. But what about privacy concerns? 'Drones raise the prospect of much more pervasive surveillance,' said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. 'We are not against them, absolutely. They can be a valuable tool in certain kinds of operations. But what we don't want to see is their pervasive use to watch over the American people.'"
But its ok for Google?
A budget shortfall as high as $25 billion is projected as lawmakers head into the 2011 legislative session,
Nice to know they have money to burn to spy on me...
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
Cheap drones can also be used to do surveillance of police stops by civil rights organizations.
Let's wait how they like that.
So long as the drones are used to create only hatcheries and no sunken colonies, I will be ok. But in all seriousness, I do believe that the aerial drones can play a vital role to Law Enforcement. So long as they are quite secure (so not to be used by a third party) and that they have enough red tape in their use so at least minimize abuse, I am all for them. I will not be so idealistic in believing that there would be enough regulation in their uses that their will be absolutely zero abuses. I hate to be a consequentialist, but I think their uses outweigh the potential harm in some people's liberties. Granted, it is a slipper slope. But for me, I do realize that nothing in life is free. With freedom comes responsibility, and with protection comes restrictions on said freedoms freedoms. There is no perfect balance, nor is is perfect with either extreme. Just hope it is regulated enough to where it creates some form of balance.
If you can make out the details so you know it's a drone, it's probably close enough for the field of an EPFCG to fry it. Not that I'd condone that sort of thing, just sayin'...
Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
Holy shit. I just wiki'd EPFCG :
An explosively pumped flux compression generator (EPFCG) is a device used to generate a high-power electromagnetic pulse by compressing magnetic flux using high explosive.
An EPFCG can be used only once as a pulsed power supply since the device is physically destroyed during operation. An EPFCG package that could be easily carried by a person can produce pulses in the millions of amperes and tens of terawatts, exceeding the power of a lightning strike by orders of magnitude. They require a starting current pulse to operate, usually supplied by capacitors.
Like I say, HOLY SHIT.
yes, www.dotcomforwardslash.com is my real URL.
The same police who shoot people and routinely lie about it and almost never get punished can be trusted not to use these new toys to spy on people salaciously ? What BS. What will happen if they are caught ? Nothing. So, it will go on.
An EPFCG can be used only once as a pulsed power supply since the device is physically destroyed during operation.
Which implies that you will depositing a generous supply of forensic evidence for the investigation to come.
Well the government has these "catch all" laws, like "obstruction of justice" and "destruction of government property" if they fail to come up with specific charges to throw against you.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Because they don't just operate n the visible spectrum. Using infrared, they know people are in specific locations in a house. In England, where this practice is common, it is a regular event for houses to be raided for drug "grow rooms" just because of an unusual heat signature. Often, it's just been a poor insulation job in winter, and you DON'T get any apology.
Worse, in the UK for example, if your electricity usage unexpectedly increases, you'll have the same raid and lack of apology.
It's the combining of this archived video data with other data sources that makes this an intrusion that goes INSIDE your home and crosses the line to being an unlawful search, if you hold the view that infrared is not "in plain sight" as many do.
It is honestly no different that police forces using helicopters to patrol high crime areas.
I'd disagree. One of the reasons the military uses drones is that they are more stealthy than helicopters or planes, so the "enemy" has less chance of detecting them. But to give you an (obvisously imaginary example) if you heard/saw a chopper flying around the neighborhood, you wouldn't have sex on your roof top in the middle of the day. However you are likely to miss the presence of a drone, and I can guarantee that a drone operator would certainly take a diversionary break for a bit of peeping tom foolery. And yes I agree that the crims would also hide if they saw a chopper or drone, but if you know of new stealthy drones in the area you would start to modify your *legal* behavior or face potential embarrasment and humiliation. Once that happens you are one step closer to the police state.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
What do the drones do that is different that police helicopters? Aside from being cheaper?
Potentially impact other aircraft which DO have people and/or passengers aboard. Or create legal problems for pilots for "pop up" airspace changes.
...how to down these things with something other than a bullet? If they start using them for anything other than special occasions, I want to see them drop out of the skies like those birds from a couple weeks ago..
Hack them.
It's just a flying government computer.
And that's in fact what scares me the most... they're just flying government computers... so any fool can probably hack into a flying weapon system.
(All the EMP stuff is fun, but not very practical).
Seriously, no ones mentioned Blue Thunder in this thread yet?
Ok, so it wasn't unmanned, but definitely relevant...
The imdb summary http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085255/ even states:
"The cop test pilot for an experimental police helicopter learns the sinister implications of the new vehicle."
1983 wants its privacy concerns back.
This is criticized by the typical /. crowd as "OMFG look at the fascist government spying on us!" but really it's exactly what many of you wanted, if you just looked at your expectations rationally.
Every iota of power you give government (and in the US we have nobody to blame but ourselves and our neighbors), understand that is an equal amount of control they give you.
Let's look at government-run health care: the moment you say that the government must be attentive to everyone's health care needs (regardless of their own stupid choices in life), you immediately give the government logical power over your health care as well: do you smoke? what do you eat? do you participate in risky sports? All of these things suddenly become part of the government's purview.
Further, if you insist that the government and the law is required to correct every (perceived or real) defect in civil behavior, then you concede that the law has the DUTY to observe every facet of civil behavior, everywhere. Need to make sure I have enough women in my company? Need to make sure I have doorknobs the right height for handicapped access? Someone used the "N" word you say?
Rather than being intelligent humans, who are expected to evaluate risk and make rational decisions based on that risk, we flee to the skirts of Mother Government. Some scary crazy dudes crashed some airplanes? Let's create a multibillion-dollar bureaucracy that will finger every crevice of 90-year old Norwegian grandmothers searching for explosives, but which dares not actually look twice at Muslim men in fear of lawsuits.
In fear for the children, we have moronic legislators working nights trying to figure out a way to regulate the Interwebz, instead of just expecting that parents pay attention to what their goddamn kids are doing, and what sorts of people they become, knowing that perverted and disgusting porn is out there, and really can't harm someone with a reasonable view of sexuality.
Also in fear for the children, we spend billions if not trillions chasing down trivial drug crimes (because they're the easiest to catch), and trying to stop the flow of drugs as if it's not an example of a nearly victimless crime. Can't we just let the potheads and crackfiends just destroy themselves and get it over with?
We claim we want a 'free' society, but then we demand to be protected from all risk. Essentially, the society that we have ASKED for, is the society that we are getting.
Hell, it's even in the financial market: instead of letting people get punished for making ignorant or greedy choices, we spend $1 trillion bailing out junk bond dealers and "rescuing" people whose mortgages left them underwater. Hey stupid, if someone says your $30,000 job can afford a $450,000 house, and you believe them? YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU GET. Further, we have a giant shell-game called social security that takes money from the workers to give to former-workers, so that nobody needs to save for themselves. As long as the pyramid holds up, we're great. We pay millions and billions to men who could be working but don't, to women who continue to drop litters despite abject poverty, and then millions more to incarcerate their permanently-damaged young. In this system, it's the people who work for a living every day, pay their taxes, and live within their means that are the idiots - we're stupid enough to continue paying these bailout taxes, and accepting a government that sees us as nothing more than a financial teat that they can continually pull for more money for 'the unfortunate' and 'the downtrodden'.
We've said "nanny state, please take care of everything for us!" - and empowered them to do so. Yet we're surprised that in turn the nanny state deploys its formidable resources to cover us with a stultifying blanket of surveillance and a Gulliverian web of laws.
Congrats. We're the idiots to blame.
-Styopa
...there's another Ghetto Bird for Ice Cube to run from?
I wonder what would be the minimum legal height at which one can fly.
If a plane goes twenty thousand feet above your property, that seems to be perfectly legal. If one of those drones flies two feet above your property that seems like trespassing to me.
Is there some minimum height agt which an aircraft must fly over private property without authorization from the owner?
"Let's look at government-run health care: the moment you say that the government must be attentive to everyone's health care needs (regardless of their own stupid choices in life), you immediately give the government logical power over your health care as well: do you smoke? what do you eat? do you participate in risky sports? All of these things suddenly become part of the government's purview."
No I think the health of the nation is a legitimate role for government. Like lets say, getting the word on on scientific findings that say DDT or Dioxin or smoking or Lead Paint are harmful to people, or baby cribs that can trap and kill babies inadvertently. To get that word out is one role and benefits us all. The second role is to outlaw or use fines or other legal tools to say prevent people from harming other people, like using lead paint in buildings, or exposing people to second hand smoke that don't want to die of lung cancer. These are not personal choices that effect only the person painting or the person smoking as much as you would like to think.
The country's children are obese, why, because our food industry has made economic choices, often without knowing long term effects on our bodies and the bodies of our children. It seems resonable to take collective action to say we need to come off that fat roller coaster if we want to outlive our children. Economic incentives is the way to go, tax breaks and taxes combined to make it in peoples and companies economic interest to not continue with unhealthy practices.
If the obese did not end up in the hospitals and health clinics which expensive treatments we would all save money, not to mention our children would not be sick. We have see how the economy got sick, almost terminally ill when we let peoples greed drive the mortgage market and derivitives self regulated. If we have learned anything from history (the Savings and Loan crisis, the Energy Crisis, the morgage crisis, the BP spill...) is that it is our best interest to be involved with things that can effect all of us.
It seems like your comment on stupid choices would suggest that if someone makes a wrong choice, they should starve, or be homeless, or suffer and die on their own, what do you care, its not your dollar. Well it is your dollar that picks up the mess and my dollar, that runs the emergency rooms and the soap kitchens and Medicaid and Social Security. You don't want to pay but you do, just more and at the end the process and after people have suffered needlessly. I guess its a heart thing, a we are all Americans and we pull together thing. The wild west shootem up died a long time ago, except maybe in Tuscon. I just hope civilization comes quickly to those parts of the country that have not experienced it yet.
Dear Citizen,
We have noticed that you have been experiencing an uptake in visitors that meet you at your door and leave within a minute. This is suspect to charges of drug distribution. If this process continues, we will seek further action.
Signed,
Your Local Police
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
Thus far, in the police tests, drones have been limited to a maximum altitude of 200 feet and 1,000-foot range from their operator. The FAA is expected to issue an NPRM (notice of proposed rulemaking) this year to streamline the Certificate of Authorization process for law enforcement. The NPRM process will likely include an opportunity for the public to comment.
Yep, an EMP warhead using this technique is used on the head of Tomahawk cruise missiles. The system is basically a coil, a cap, and an explosive. Highly engineered but simple in operation. On the other hand, high explosive tends to make quite a mess, it's not something you're going to get done quietly and cleanly.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Ah, now for the Good Old Days of East Germany and the STASI! I think, if they were still alive, Honecker and Mielke would each have blown a batch in their pants over what we can do today in the Good Ol' US of A.
Protect the Homeland, Comrades!
Similar to the upcoming US election results
The simplistic refutation of this simplistic refutation is: Because my neighbors aren't cops.
More precisely, it's because my neighbors are not officers duly authorized by me (via my citizenship) to observe my behavior looking for violations of the laws I have also authorized.
It's not the observation that's the problem. Real problems are infringements on things like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, unreasonable search and seizure... you know, all those things that are granted in the Constitution.
It's not unreasonable for police to look for people breaking the law. It's their job. Why should they be prevented from looking at an area from any particular angle? If you really want to hide something, make sure it stays in a room without transparent windows. The police need to have clear evidence of wrongdoing before they can get a search warrant. If you're storing a pile of explosives in your backyard, expect a search warrant. You're stockpiling explosives, which is usually illegal. Does it really matter that the police saw the pile from the air, rather than through a knothole in the fence?
Unreasonable searches are ones that are without a good reason. That's what's worth fighting against. If a search warrant is issued based on "This guy is has a room we can't see into," fight it. Fight the search warrant, fight any evidence found in that room, and absolutely vote against any judge to approve such a thing. Likewise, fight against any legislation banning things you want to have, and encourage others (especially your representatives) to do the same.
To put things in simple terms: Make sure that whatever you're doing is not considered wrong.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
People like to think Texas is a throw back to the wild west
Crickey, you're complaining that you can't carry a handgun when driving from your house to the local shops ("the laws prevent most people from being able to protect themselves while in transit")?
Sounds like the wild west to me if you need to carry a gun to safely buy a pint of milk from your corner store...
Apologies, crazy European who doesn't see a lot of guns. I accept you live in a very different culture. And I understand you were making a different point. But wow, that's a heck of a different culture that needs to carry guns to the shops and back to feel safe. Sounds pretty cowboy movie territory.
It's not that guns are needed to feel safe, especially not in Texas. The issue by most I feel is purely political and idealistic. It's a right granted in the US Constitution (with valid debate about how far it actually goes). And if there's one big difference between Europeans and Americans is that many Americans put idealism above pragmatism. From the far left to the far right in the US there's a strong streak of "you can't tell me what to do!" that Americans have in common.
So the problem with "in transit" here is not that people don't feel safe in transit, but that some feel this is a flaw in the implementation of the law. Of course most Americans won't really go that far in this case, but for people who believe in unrestricted firearm ownership and bearing it's a big snag. Some would love to have the right to openly carry a gun where anyone can see it 24 hours a day no matter where they are. It's not that they want to actually use the gun, but instead it's a matter of principle.