Slashdot Mirror
California Governor Vetoes Bill Requiring Warrants For Drone Surveillance
schwit1 sends word that California governor Jerry Brown has vetoed legislation that would have required warrants for surveillance using unmanned drones. In his veto message (PDF), Brown said, "This bill prohibits law enforcement from using a drone without obtaining a search warrant, except in limited circumstances. There are undoubtedly circumstances where a warrant is appropriate. The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution."
The article notes that 10 other states already require a warrant for routine surveillance with a drone (Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Montana, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin). Further, Brown's claims about the bill's exceptions are overstated — according to Slate, "California's drone bill is not draconian. It includes exceptions for emergency situations, search-and-rescue efforts, traffic first responders, and inspection of wildfires. It allows other public agencies to use drones for other purposes — just not law enforcement."
The article notes that 10 other states already require a warrant for routine surveillance with a drone (Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Montana, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin). Further, Brown's claims about the bill's exceptions are overstated — according to Slate, "California's drone bill is not draconian. It includes exceptions for emergency situations, search-and-rescue efforts, traffic first responders, and inspection of wildfires. It allows other public agencies to use drones for other purposes — just not law enforcement."
ask yourself:
which candidate will sell us out and cave to the surveillance state?
answer: both. the fix is in.
happy voting! now move along.
California über alles
California above all others
(California über alles) (2x) [Dead Kennedys]
I'm your governor Pete Wilson, ya know
The baddest governor to ever grab the mic and go
BOOOM!
Gimme a budget and watch me hack it!
Gimme a beat and I'll show you how to jack it!
I give the rich a giant tax loophole
I leave the poor living in a poophole
At a time when Aids is in a crisis
I cut health care and I raise prices
Sales tax, snack tax, excise tax
Information attack with a newspaper tax
Hit the pocket books of working families
Increase tuition at the universities
Some day I'll command all o' you
Even your kids are gonna pray to me in school
Soon I'm gonna be the president
You might remember the last one this state sent
California über alles (4x)
(California über alles) (2x)
I'm so proud to know the Great Communicator
Wanna be known as the Great Incarcerator
I'll blow environmentalists away
And I'll be the führer some day
I'll keep cuttin' Public Education
even though we rank 54th in the nation
I've got a plan for all the minorities
Send'em to the California Youth Authorities
From San Francisco Urban Elementary
to Pelican Bay State Penitentiary
There they can work for the master race
and always wear a happy face
Close your eyes, it can't happen here
Big Brother in a squad car's comin' near
Come enjoy the surf and the sun
and keep California number one!
California über alles (4x)
(California über alles) (2x)
Now it's 1992
Knock knock on your front door, yo guess who
It's the suede denim secret police
They've come to your house for your long haired niece
Gonna send her off to a camp
'cause she's been accused of growing hemp
Don't you worry it's only a shower
And now for your clothes here's a pretty flower
Gonna die on malathion gas
The serpent's egg has already been hatched
People starvin' and livin' in the streets
because they tried to mess with me, President Pete!
California über alles (4x)
(California über alles) (2x)
(Dead Kennedys / Jello Biafra / John Greenway, performed by Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy)
Guess it's time for another California Uber Alles song, huh? Moonbeam gets two.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I guess they would be better off with the "Sperminator".
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
F**king Moonbeam...
The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution.
Wait, so we reject it because it provides more protections than the bare minimum required by law?
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution."
Lamest excuse ever. If it didn't "go beyond" what is required by the US and state Constitutions, there would be no need for the law!
Tyrant.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
I find that hard to believe.
A lot of people on this site probably don't remember that Jerry Brown was once derided as "Governor Moonbeam", and was considered far left.
Because he couldn't do anything. That was glorious. Moonbeam is still loved, so he can still do things, or get away with not doing things that we really want because he doesn't have to give a fuck about his approval rating. The idiots will approve of him (if on no other basis, as the lesser of evils) regardless.
Note, I am about as liberal as they come. But I voted for Arnold, and I'd do it again. The only part of it I'm sorry about is that it cost the people money. We'd have wound up with Moonbeam again regardless.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I posted this one to point out how little things change. I guess I should have posted at least one more versions lyrics
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Probably the sticking point was:
A public agency that uses an unmanned aircraft system, or contracts for the use of an unmanned aircraft system, pursuant to this title shall first provide reasonable notice to the public. Reasonable notice shall, at a minimum, consist of a one-time announcement regarding the agency’s intent to deploy unmanned aircraft system technology and a description of the technology’s capabilities.
There's also some reasonable limitations on data captured by drones (can't be kept long) and a requirement to log who requests drone missions. If only there was some federal body that could come up with some reasonable standard for all states...
News Flash! Californians keep electing him.
News Flash! Democracy is the best system for crushing freedom.
I love this part, too:
"It includes exceptions for emergency situations, search-and-rescue efforts, traffic first responders, and inspection of wildfires. It allows other public agencies to use drones for other purposes — just not law enforcement."
First off, everything's an "emergency situation" now that we have a war on terror and a war on drugs. Second, this let's the use the old "inspection" ruse to use the drone as long as they can get some inspector to tag along.
I would recommend you all remember this when it's time to vote. Make stuff like this a big deal. Call them to the carpet at town hall meetings. Etc.
Do you have ESP?
Did you know Jerry Brown is using drones of the USA military, the oldest drones in existence are the hundreds of satellites and ground and sea based phase arrays. They have building, car, clothing penetrating tomography, and can direct energy at people for covert assaults and assassinations, warrantless surveillance, police covert mind to mind communicate through the system, and more. The capabilities are fully patented and this information is backed by DOD, CIA, us DOJ, NASA and USIS whisteblowers. The most invasive surveillance they can do is image two people fucking inside a building, or access their memories through an EEG memory probe (this is backed by Robert Malech's 1974 patent, which enabled military radar to pick up, decode, and manipulate brain waves remotely). Got all the evidence anyone could possibly want at http://www.obamasweapon.com/ this system has been deployed since 1976, according to Dr. Robert Duncan, a surveillance system architect for the government. His biography and books are on my site plus interviews .. He also worked on a system allowing license plates to be tracked from space for the us DOJ, heart rate and breathe to be tracked so they could track and monitor us from space, and they can see what we see, hear, think, dream, and store in our minds (the ultimate storage device is the human mind, and all of its tapable). What if I told you police, FBI, NSA, CIA, Senators and Congressman, and Governor Jerry Brown had full access to this system and just didn't want to give it up? BTW I am in Modesto, CA, and the system works all over Cali, in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Modesto, Turlock, Redding, its nationally deployed so not a square inch isn't monitored with the system.
"could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution."
Yes, dumbass, that's why they made the law. If everything the law required was already covered, there wouldn't be a need for a law. If you disagree, just say so. Don't hide behind pseudo justifications.
is just too good to say no to...
The constitution is there to limit government. There is nothing wrong with limiting government more than the bare minimum limits defined by the constitution. In fact, I would say there is a good case today for rewriting the constitution using far more strict, unambiguous modern language with far more limitations than it currently has.
The thing is, search and rescue efforts, wildfire inspection, all make sense for this sort of exception; but you are right a blanket "emergency situation" may as well be no requirement at all because anything can be viewed as an emergency and anyone claiming emergency is almost always given the benefit of the doubt for anything short of an outright hoax.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I love this part, too:
"It includes exceptions for emergency situations, search-and-rescue efforts, traffic first responders, and inspection of wildfires. It allows other public agencies to use drones for other purposes — just not law enforcement."
First off, everything's an "emergency situation" now that we have a war on terror and a war on drugs.
Reminds me of the old "Everything we do is by definition an emergency, so we "own" your radio systems" argument used by a lot of Whackers when Amateur radio started bing used more in emergency communications. They'd try to defend ordering Pizza as an emergency.
Didn't work then, and declaring everything as an emergency doesn't work now either.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
"The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution."
If the legislature's intention was to protect only constitutionally guaranteed rights, then this bill would be redundant. The point was to *increase* the protections above what the constitution requires.
Like Clinton, he gets a lot of hate from the right despite pushing a right wing agenda:
Killed single payer health care, which passed three times under Arnie
Opposed a serious increase in the minimum wage
Opposes marijuana legalization
And that's off the top of my head. I'm sure someone who lives there could come up with more stuff.
ask yourself: which candidate will sell us out and cave to the surveillance state?
answer: both. the fix is in.
happy voting! now move along.
I don't live in California, but I'm voting against anyone currently in office.
Keep churning the pot. Eventually, they'll become pro-public just to stay in office.
The situation in California is dire. People are leaving the state in droves.
It is not that surprising, given that the executive branch has determined it has the right to kill anyone, anywhere on earth, for secret reasons, based on secret evidence.
one of the reasons why the geek remains politically impotent is that he can't remember the most basic distinctions between state and federal governments.
what he has is a set of memes that he shoehorns into every argument.
In Washington State, our State Constitution guarantees your Right of Privacy, and even the feds can't follow you without a court issued warrant.
Freedom.
It's what's for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Even Hong Kong knows that.
Do you want to be Free?
The weather's fine (as in we have water and energy) in Seattle.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
nice gesture, but the reason this is inadequate may be summed up with the monkey-water-spray experiment.
http://www.answers.com/Q/Did_t...
Did I mention that it's anonymous? No lists, no donations, no polls, no canvassing. Just resolve to vote against all incumbents when you're in the voting booth.
Thanks for the threat, but I think everyone here realizes that voting in the US is safe.
Join the boot party: anonymous and safe!
Just like a compromised computer system, once you are infected you can't repair the system reliably unless you know everything possible about the infection. In a government system, once you have been compromised enough you pass the point of no return where the system is unable to repair itself reliably. This is the point we've been at since JFK, probably since FDR.
You can't rewrite or amend or even just pass laws to address smaller issues like corporations===people or bribery of officials; things with 90%+ public support can't even come up for debate let alone pass a vote. Filibusters are the norm and we can't even discuss how literally unconstitutional they are because of lawyer speak that denies common sense (it says specifically in the constitution what voting thresholds are and just because they can make their own rules doesn't mean that those rules can contradict the constitution-- and they can't, but we allowed it. We allow them to ignore a whole lot, a great deal more every decade. 30 years later it becomes enshrined tradition. We all love tradition sooo much it's an argument in itself... despite it being a classic fallacy. )
Starting over again would be a huge problem in choosing WHO writes it. It is rare that the people in position and power would not think selfishly and with too great a bias; which is why the US constitution was quite unusual... The enlightenment period, respect for learning and wisdom, Ben Franklin, idealists, proven revolutionaries (not false heroes,) etc. We don't value wisdom, knowledge, or intelligence at even HALF the levels of that time period - the people with power and influence are the wrong sort of people (from celebrity to leaders.) The few good ones are easily drowned out. The public doesn't read and is easily swayed with propaganda like FOX NEWS -- just think back to the "death panels" and the healthcare mess with all the morons who made huge contributions to the mess of a system we have (and the near anarchy we've had for generations before 2014.) We'd have Foxtards out with their guns fighting over "death panel" like fabrications who'd shoot first rather than actually READ the thing they are up in arms against.
The religious fanatics we have birthed in great numbers are so close to the religious terrorists of other regions of the world that only poverty and desperation keep them from similar methods. (Even still we have a tiny number who'll bomb and assassinate in the name of abortion.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution.
And I'm sure that the California government has never done ANYTHING that imposes requirements above and beyond the national or state constitution.
Should this be read as, "We already wish you had less privacy then you do now, so we'd rather stick to the minimum"?
Just remember that you own the airspace up to about 100 feet. If you want to jam communications, or shoot down anything that enters your space, that's your decision to make. A good net, or ball, or maybe some silly string may do the trick.
This might be a good time to start a drone interceptor service. Another drone that intercepts big brother drones by dropping damaging their propellers, or communications, etc.
What is fundamentally different from drone surveillance and any other surveillance like from a taller building or helicopter? Why are new laws required?
Fire or search and rescue... 10 lbs "drone" at 100 ft or a 3000-9000lbs copter at 2000 feet?
Overflight, privacy... What exactly is different besides cost, ease of use, and possibly safer due to it's size?
These generally aren't predators were talking about, but even if they are... What differs from using a helicopter?
If there is a problem with rights or privacy, fix those laws so they apply uniformly not make band-aid laws for drones while failing to address any other form of infringing.
>The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution."
That was sort of the fucking point...
In the event I find myself senile, I would like to continue operating as long as possible without that information.
If I still have my wits about me, I would prefer that nine people have to reread my speculation so that one set of virgin ears were reached. It's for the children.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Consider this decision whenever technology is used to affect a persitent surveillance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jones_(2012)
A blog (a truncation of the expression web log) is a discussion or informational site published on the World Wide Web and consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed in reverse chronological order (the most recent post appears first). swietlówki led Monitoring Pojazdów sprawozdanie finansowe System ERP przepywy pienine NAVISION consolidation
So if you want to "inspect" someone, just start a wildfire nearby, and you've got all the excuse you need!
Well, this IS Governor Moonbeam, after all... if he is for or against something, best consider cui bono.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?