Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Drone Flying Near White House Causes Lockdown

Posted by timothy on from the just-want-to-keep-tabs-on-the-civil-servants dept.

stowie writes: The White House was placed on lockdown this afternoon after a man allegedly tried to fly a drone near the building, authorities said. The Secret Service detained and is questioning an individual in connection with a drone flying in Lafayette Park, according to a senior official. President Barack Obama is not currently in the White House and is at Camp David. It's the second drone incident at the White House in 2015. Also covered by CNN.

95 comments

  1. Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whaddya bet it's actually a toy helicopter?

    --
    Do you have ESP?
    1. Re:Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Quick, someone throw a paper airplane over the fence, I mean, disposable drone.

    2. Re: Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't wait until drones get so small they can't be detected. Then all this worry about them will go away.

    3. Re: Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't wait until drones get so small they can't be detected. Then all this worry about them will go away.

      Why wait?
      http://www.helipal.com/fineco-fx-1-nano-drone.html

    4. Re:Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess, a white 350mm sized quadcopter (4 rotors). Likely had some mini camera on it.

      Note said company did put a 25km geofence around DC, problem was it create a set of flight bugs that made the copter more dangerous. S/W bugs, gotta love them. They reverted the entire s/w patch from all the users that upgraded. Great: h/w devs not knowing the s/w side of things and vice versa. The next 5 yrs are going to be FUN.

      The again, with the way drones are moving... it will be likely that software bugs will create skynet.

    5. Re:Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is just one more data point to show that Osama and the terrorists won. Despite all the "rah rahing" and boasting about being #1, Americans piss their pants due to a drone flying near a building.

    6. Re:Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      This is just one more data point to show that Osama and the terrorists won. Despite all the "rah rahing" and boasting about being #1, Americans piss their pants due to a toy helicopter flying near a building.

      FTFY. People are right to piss their pants if a legitimate military drone - such as the famed Predator series - is flying near your building. But those aren't sold at toy shops around the country. Toy helicopters, on the other hand, are.

      --
      Do you have ESP?
    7. Re: Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by Q-Hack! · · Score: 1

      Neat toy. Completely useless as a camera platform, but then if all you want to do is annoy the Secret Service...

      --
      Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    8. Re: Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by maliqua · · Score: 1

      Don't blame toy makers because they miniaturize faster and better than camera makers

    9. Re: Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by towermac · · Score: 1

      Although we both know they haven't actually; they have very very tiny cameras nowadays. And the wi-fi chip to beam the signal ain't that big either. Oh wait, they already have that, if it's a drone.

      Why couldn't it have had a camera? Now that I think about it, why don't we see those on the market? You sure it can't have a camera?

      There is such a thing, as too tiny to be noticed, or, almost as good; "I seriously thought it was a horsefly..."

      Dang. I just got scared.

    10. Re: Oooh, a scary drone!!!! by unrtst · · Score: 1

      Why couldn't it have had a camera? Now that I think about it, why don't we see those on the market? You sure it can't have a camera?

      Look up "Estes Proto-X FPV". It's smaller than the palm of your hand, and it has a first person view camera that live streams the feed back to the controller. The controller has a screen and can record the feed onto an SD card.

      That's not the only one - it's just the smallest one that is readily available that I know of that has a FPV camera. It's fairly inexpensive too (around $200). Another, cheaper, FPV one is the Hubsan H107D (around $160). It's *slightly* bigger (mini instead of micro, though those terms have no official meaning), but has more range and a better chance of being able to fly outside. The controllers for both of those are even swappable. Neither of those can fly on its own though - they can't even hover in place without someone actively working a controller to keep them in one place. IMO, that makes both of these toy copters.

  2. What's the big deal? by halivar · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear the president is absolutely in love with drones, and he likes to spread that love.

    1. Re:What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear the president is absolutely in love with drones, and he likes to spread that love.

      He loves them to death. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfSx1PUfEvs

      Please don't mod this funny you assholes.

  3. Come on, that's across the street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That park is across the street from the White House. I get flying around/over the White House premises, but a park seems like a pretty normal place to fly those things.

    1. Re:Come on, that's across the street by g0bshiTe · · Score: 2

      True, but the DC FRZ includes toy rc aircraft.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    2. Re:Come on, that's across the street by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      a park seems like a pretty normal place to fly those things.

      Lafayette park is small and crowded. It would not be an appropriate place to fly an RC helicopter even if it wasn't right next to the White House.

    3. Re:Come on, that's across the street by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Your sentance was one third initialisims. Out of interest do you work in DC?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Come on, that's across the street by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      Answering that question is above my pay grade.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  4. interview with drone operator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    An interview with the recent drone operator who flew too close to the Whitehouse, which led to a lockdown and his detainment, was leaked to wikileaks.

    "So, why'd you do it?"
    "lel trolled."
    "That isn't exactly an answer, why did you fly the drone purposefully too close to the whitehouse? For what purpose?"
    "jej tricked."
    "Okay get the nipple clamps."
    "fug :-DDDD"

  5. Ruining it for the rest of us by captaindomon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What makes me mad in this case is that the pilot is ruining it for everyone else. Every time an idiot does something like this, it's going to contribute to locking down the ability for everyone else to fly them.

    --
    Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    1. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      This is very true.

      While the proliferation of equipment is great, it's also leading to tons of issues.

      You must enjoy the hobby, like me.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    2. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The horse is already out of the barn. They can't lock it up now.

      The bad thing here is this implies that the secret service is not able to distinguish 2.4 GHz radio control signals from normal laptop/phone signals. Which I find hard to believe.

      That or this is all false flag, trying to give potential attackers confidence to use commercial radios.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or someone, you know, saw it flying around. With their eyes.

    4. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      What makes me mad in this case is that the pilot is ruining it for everyone else.

      I'm somewhere between agreeing with you and believing it was inevitable. Let's be honest: These machines will only get better and better, meaning they'll be able to carry heavier and heavier payloads. I agree his stunt will result in heavy-handedness. Where I'm not sure I agree about is if a time-traveler plucked this stunt out of history if, ten years later, we'd be in a spot that is, at all, any different.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    5. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by arth1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What makes me mad in this case is that the pilot is ruining it for everyone else. Every time an idiot does something like this, it's going to contribute to locking down the ability for everyone else to fly them.

      I'm good with that. I don't want have to build an opaque dome over my property to keep privacy. And I don't want to become collateral damage of a drone strike either.

    6. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by captaindomon · · Score: 2

      The problem is that the criminals will still have drones. And the media will still have them. And the police will still have them. And the terrorists will still have them. You just won't be able to have your own.

      --
      Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    7. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the mandatory cavity search will be a good deterrent.. for most, anyway.

    8. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What does that have to do with defending a place from an attack?

      You'd want to take it down with ECM. If they have to fire up the phalanx's on the White House roof there will be casualties downrange.

      Putting out this story might prevent attackers from going to a custom radio setup.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      One of these should do the trick, without any collateral damage.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    10. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the criminals will still have drones. And the media will still have them. And the police will still have them. And the terrorists will still have them. You just won't be able to have your own.

      Nobody is going to be able to keep people from having their own. They're just way too easy to build these days. They can't even keep people from building GPS devices that don't have the speed/altitude limits designed to prevent them from being used in ballistic missiles.

      Keeping people from flying drones will be like keeping people from sharing music on the internet or from speeding.

      The White House is going to have to cope with the upcoming day when anybody can stick a drone in their trunk with a 200 lbs payload. Sooner or later the day will come.

    11. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Let's be honest: These machines will only get better and better, meaning they'll be able to carry heavier and heavier payloads.

      We're talking about aircraft, not electronics, you know. There's no Moore's Law going on there. They'll continue to get better and better at flying autonomously and whatnot, but they're only going to improve in terms of load capacity, range, speed, etc. at the same slow rate regular helicopters have been improving at in for the last 50 years or so.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    12. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe instead of being mad at the pilot you should be mad at all the people who pee themselves over a drone flying in a park near the White House?

      Land of the free? Home of the brave? More like Land of the sissies. Home of the babies.

    13. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Batteries. Not Moore's law but similar.

      Today they can leapfrog most by going back to delicious nutritious nitro-methane.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    14. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not necessarily,

      From the C-RAM (Phalanx on land) Wikipedia page:

      "Whereas naval Phalanx systems fire tungsten armor-piercing rounds, the C-RAM uses the 20MM HEIT-SD (High-Explosive Incendiary Tracer, Self-Destruct) ammunition, originally developed for the M163 Vulcan Air Defense System.[24][32] These rounds explode on impact with the target, or on tracer burnout, thereby greatly reducing the risk of collateral damage should any rounds fail to hit their target."

      Given the drone's likely low altitude this may not have been much help in this particular instance.

    15. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Um, no, they're going to improve at the rate of battery improvements. Whether or not that's faster or slower than you suggest, time will tell, but it is a high-priority development right now.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    16. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      They will just make it 10 years federal time. Same as a machine gun. Which are also just way too easy to build.

      That said; I haven't made a full auto sense I was 15. 10 years federal...

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    17. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you say the same whenever there is a traffic accident? What about when a tech worker causes some mayhem? It is never right to punish a group for an individual's actions and it is just as bad to roll over and accept unjust punishment.

    18. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      Once airborne it really doesn't need a radio signal.

      I have a 250mm quad that can be programmed to fly a route without my interaction once launched.

      I could also go as far as to hack the software and the bit of code that is told "Return To Home" on signal loss I could input my own coords say the WH, if signal is then lost the device would continue to it's destination as it's programmed to do.

      An ECM may or may not work against it. Depends, if it's close enough an ECM may not matter, these things tend to freak out and do very odd things when the GPS goes haywire.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    19. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd get a laugh out of someone sending a fleet of 32768 nano drones in formation directly through an open window at the Capitol Building sending the politicians into a state of "mosquito sound" induced terror as they cannot see the nano annoyances. If the SS shows up the drones simultaneously implode causing a massive vacuum and sucking the breath out of the SS agents. Osama, meanwhile, has been living like a prince in a major US city.

    20. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      What makes me mad in this case is that the pilot is ruining it for everyone else. Every time an idiot does something like this, it's going to contribute to locking down the ability for everyone else to fly them.

      No it's not. The pilot isn't ruining anything. The government is ruining it by placing arbitrary rules on where your eyes can and cannot go.

      Now if the pilot was flying it at aircraft altitudes, or flying around the local runway, or at head height through a busy park I'd be right with you. But the fact is the only thing he's guilty of is crossing some arbitrary line that the government decided should exist around some government building because of ...erm .. terrorist are everywhere.

    21. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You meant Tharack Othama right?

    22. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, I was making missiles when I was 9 - Estes model rockets, steel pins, balsa cones and .410 guage shotgun shells. Used fletching for the fins, fired from 2 hollow aluminum tubes, ala Street-Hawk, to make sure they exploded even if they missed the target, used 2 stage estes rocket motors.

      Fun stuff..

    23. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by khallow · · Score: 1

      Any plan that depends on idiots behaving themselves is even dumber than the idiots because we are never going to run out of idiots.

    24. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      LOL, batteries?! Cheap plastic toys run on batteries. You show me a drone that runs on batteries, and I'll show you an R/C helicopter that with an actual fuel-burning engine that's a better aircraft in every way. Batteries have nothing to do with the state of the art, except maybe for running the guidance computer.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    25. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about state of the art? The drones you go buy at the store are all battery operated. More battery power, more lifting power.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    26. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you see it as the pilot's fault instead of the government's fault how exactly?

    27. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The more logical defence against possibly explosive wired drones is a compressed air gun firing pellets of ice. Enough impact force to disable the drone and beyond target range the ability to evaporate to nothing depending upon ambient temperatures. Preferably mounted low and firing within a set angular range from vertical depending upon location. The ice likely might need to be reinforced with some kind of decomposing fibre to aid tensile strength. A portable self enclosed unit, just add power and water and it does it's own thing, bit tough on birds though, likely need a dead bird patrol to stop the public's feathers from being ruffled.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    28. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by stooo · · Score: 1

      >> Or someone, you know, saw it flying around. With their eyes.

      What do you mean ?

      --
      aaaaaaa
    29. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      You did, in the initial claim I quoted: "Let's be honest: These machines will only get better and better, meaning they'll be able to carry heavier and heavier payloads."

      The point I'm trying to make is that you could have a drone capable of lifting a fuckton of payload right now, just by (for example) retrofitting autonomous controls to one of these.

      In other words, since helicopters already exist in a wide range of sizes and capacities and autonomous controls could be fitted to almost any of them, there's no reason to think drones will get "better and better" (from an aircraft perspective) because were already so to begin with. The only part that's going to be getting "better and better" at a rapid pace is the software driving the damn things.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    30. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I apologize for being thick, but I'm having trouble figuring out exactly where the conflict in our discussion is.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    31. Re:Ruining it for the rest of us by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I did the same. Also ten years federal. Don't do it as an adult.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  6. Also in the news... by countSudoku() · · Score: 2, Funny

    A 6 year old girl was taken down by 8 FBI agents when she tried to fly a Hello Kitty Kite within 600 miles of a white house

    --
    This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
    1. Re:Also in the news... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Funny

      Given that she got an A on her examination on "Sharing & Caring", she got on a watch list due to her communist tendencies. Then she clearly attempted a workers overthrow. You can't really blame the government there.

    2. Re:Also in the news... by Falos · · Score: 1

      Samantha's internet and phone logs suggest she's a pedophile and is also exploiting a local addiction to cheese sticks. Financial analysis links her activity to drug lords and the Disney store. Satellite imagery shows she's either privatized a military force or likes to jump-rope.

      Samantha has three-hop ties to KNOWN TERRORIST GROUPS. Certain liberties must be compromised in order for us to protect you from the Samanthas out there.

  7. To all the idiot drone users... by Last_Available_Usern · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please don't fuck up recreation drone use for the rest of us.

    Sincerely,

    The rest of us

    1. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 2

      Um . . . no.

      The fix isn't banning all flying things from around the self proclaimed important people hangouts.
      The fix is for the Government to quit over-reacting for obviously trivial issues.

      It's an RC toy. . . who gives a shit ? Go pick it up and toss it back over the fence.

      I might understand the concern if we're talking landing a fully armed Reaper drone on the front lawn, but in all
      likelihood, this is some silly ass toy. Thus, pure Benny Hill style security theater.
      ( And it's every bit as amusing I might add )

      If an RC device flies near your home, do you:

      1) Look up and wave at it
      2) Ignore it
      3) Dress up like a Ninja, go all commando and proceed to lose your mind over it ?
      ( Insert obligatory " Get to the choppah " and " Get DOWN " vocalizations here )

    2. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like asking "Please don't fuck up the morning commute for the rest of us" or even "Please don't fuck up the environment for the rest of us". Totally useless request.

      Sincerely,

      Not like the rest of you

    3. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by chihowa · · Score: 1

      I think that our government is planning to become increasingly unpopular with its citizens and overreactions like these will prove important to the continued well-being of the self proclaimed important people.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    4. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If normally the Grand Poobah is always kept behind a bulletproof wall or window from the outside, then yes it is somewhat of an over-reaction. The WH has AA defenses, and it would be criminally negligent if they don't have anti-drone defenses. I bet the problem is that shooting the drone down would be dangerous to bystanders, and so would be reluctant to do it unless it was a more serious threat.

    5. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Please don't fuck up recreation drone use for the rest of us.

      Calling the government out on placing arbitrary limits on arbitrary buildings is not "fucking it up for the rest of us". If anything it's pushing the boundaries and raising attention to the stupidity of the very people who are fucking it up for you, the government who thinks because terrorists are hiding in the bushes people shouldn't be allowed to look at anything anymore.

    6. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So true. The POTUS should be less important. He should dispose of less money, less power, and fewer protections. He should, in sum, be a man who, if he should meet an unfortunately untimely end, could be easily replaced, with little bother.

      That is the way the system was designed: two consuls; president, vice president; no muss, no fuss if one goes away.

      Now, we have Empire, and an emperor. So when this man, who seems to be the head of a republic, but is really and emperor--let's call him Augustus--does die, it seems to threaten the stability of the imperium. And so the Praetorian Guard is born to protect him, when previously, for centuries, there was just a couple of guys with fasces, because after all, who would kill the consul?

      And a couple of decades pass, and you get Caligula, and it comes about that the Guard decides who the next emperor is.

      And after that, the Guard kills the emperor with impunity, year in and year out.

      And then there is the descent into chaos.

    7. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by towermac · · Score: 1

      I know right. Where's Teddy Roosevelt when you need him?

      He dares them to shoot him, and when they finally do, he's not done with his fuckin' speech yet. 'I'll go to the hospital when I damn well feel like it...'

      Dang. We could use him.

    8. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by Libertarian_Geek · · Score: 1

      I think that this "personal computer" thing is going to catch on and "web sites" like this one will be a common source of information to hundreds of people.

      --

      www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

      www.fairtax.org
    9. Re:To all the idiot drone users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fix isn't banning all flying things from around the self proclaimed important people hangouts.

      It's far too late for that, it's already been done. Good luck flying a kite in DC, you'll get assaulted by drunken, hooker infected SS agents.

  8. Did he get his drone back? by Whiteox · · Score: 1

    Another over reaction? The drone did not go into Whitehouse property. He got a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again.

    --
    Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    1. Re:Did he get his drone back? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      The drone did not go into Whitehouse property.

      So what? It's illegal to fly any toy RC gadget (let alone the bigger stuff) within 15 miles in every direction of downtown DC. If you're hovering a $20 mall kiosk toy copter four feet above your back yard grass way out in the Virginia or Maryland suburbs, you're eligible for a $10,000 fine and worse.

      This idiot was deliberately flying out of a federally run park (oh yeah: flying any RC machine of any kind is now illegal in ALL federally administered parks and lands, which includes millions acres of wilderness, river/ocean coastlines, and more - not just downtown parks and monuments) so that he could take photos of the White House. Think it does seem a little bit reasonable to not be launching flying robots a couple hundred yards from the White House? Sure. But ... fifteen miles away in Fairfax, VA or in places like a farm field outside Rockville or Greenbelt, MD? That's the government, here to help you.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Did he get his drone back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Who said it was illegal, it certainly wasn't us, the people that control the people that are in the government.

      Mr Obama, you're fired. All Alphabet agency fucktards, you're fired too.

  9. Overreaction over a toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was a shopping-mall toy helicopter that didn't even go over the fence.

    As usual, a completely disproportionate over-reaction from the US government to a benign situation. Obama wasn't even at the WH - he's at Camp David.

    1. Re:Overreaction over a toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty soon, they'll "lock down" the capitol because a hello kitty birthday balloon floats over it.

      The premise is that something of value exists in the building. I believe they're inflating the issue.

  10. Cartman, Kenny & the "Go Go Action Bronco" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    am I the only one who pictures that scene every time there's a drone over dc story?

  11. Tiny Drones Coming Soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait until the day comes (probably not far away) when anybody can buy a remote controlled drone with the size and appearance of an insect. At that point you won't be able to stop anybody from flying a drone anywhere they want.

    1. Re: Tiny Drones Coming Soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $40k raised of $11k requested, they ship in July ;-)
      https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/wallet-drone-world-s-smallest-quadcopter

    2. Re: Tiny Drones Coming Soon by drpimp · · Score: 1

      No need to wait until July ... among others the Cheerson CX-10 is available TODAY!

      --
      -- Brought to you by Carl's JR
  12. Anti-drone net over the building and the garden by Max_W · · Score: 1

    It is becoming obvious that there should be an anti-drone net over these premises.

    1. Re:Anti-drone net over the building and the garden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make sure to cover the barns where all of the congress-critters congregate too. That way they can all get brain cancer, and not hurt their political careers because they've never been allowed to use their brains by their corporate overlords.

  13. Photo of the Drone by stowie · · Score: 1

    Looks like story was updated with image of the drone. Anyone know what model that is?

    1. Re:Photo of the Drone by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Parrot BeBop. A toy, basically.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  14. Who cares about drones... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm still waiting for flying cars. Now that would be a mess for the future.

  15. also covered by by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTOP News: http://wtop.com/national-security/2015/05/man-detained-for-flying-device-near-white-house/

    Man claims that he didn't know that flying drones in the Washington, D.C. violates the airspace. I forgot the exact wording of the law. Um, I guess he didn't watch the news about the previous owner who flew a drone. Maybe the Federal Aviation Administration or local police needs to post signs saying: "Do not fly drones from the Ellipse, Lafayette Park, National Mall, U.S. Capitol grounds, Freedom Park, West Potomac Park, Tidal Basin ect..."

    Just saying

    1. Re:also covered by by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Freedom Park doesn't sound very free if you're not allowed to fly your drone there.

  16. Re:When encryption is outlawed, by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 0

    CIgxNlLIZkWuDS8JcvqjwzXAqjVADEDwwCBml6tbrEaUF5aR42XNlbjwBLwtTC+38yBXvxm9fSpE/Hi0
    FwJ1tk2R4aCmvulqMYX3mexWd6Gc2oKQVkcAGh/Q+cPfDUO5sgPlphSoO5fuBNl6dhZFjQ

  17. Standing order by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Secret Service Head: "If a drone gets near the President, shoot it."

    [drone flies near President]

    [Secret Service Agent shoots President]

    Secret Service Head: "You misunderstood..."

  18. Well the usual reaction is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Typically the approach to the public having a new weapon in its already vast arsenal, is for the US military to develop a new weapon to defend against it? I feel this approach makes the most sense, i'm sure with only a few dozen billion dollars a new weapon can be developed that can identify and destroy any potentially hostile aircraft. I see no reason why this can't be used on embassies and any other facility of value world wide.

    1. Re:Well the usual reaction is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually in sci-fi space battles there is a mothership along with a swarm of fighters to protect it. I'd say in this case the mothership is the whitehouse, and they need to deploy their own superior (Agility, speed, etc) mini-drones to monitor the premises and take out intruders of like kind. They are well funded enough that even doing this via kamikaze drone should work, perhaps once it matches the intruders speed and gets close enough it could deploy a net to safely bring it back to base. Maybe two drones flying with a net in between would work. A few people in the basement should be able to monitor and control what is going on. I'm not kidding, this drones in DC issue appears to be a real problem. What is wrong with the ideas? Too much like star wars so it seems childish?

  19. Whats all the fuss about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he is over 15 and under 65 so he is a legitimate enemy combatant.

  20. Re:When encryption is outlawed, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CIgxNlLIZkWuDS8JcvqjwzXAqjVADEDwwCBml6tbrEaUF5aR42XNlbjwBLwtTC+38yBXvxm9fSpE/Hi0
    FwJ1tk2R4aCmvulqMYX3mexWd6Gc2oKQVkcAGh/Q+cPfDUO5sgPlphSoO5fuBNl6dhZFjQ==

    FTFY.
    And yes, I kind of agree.

  21. laser defense by deathguppie · · Score: 1

    Missile intercepts and Gatling guns are loud and and exciting, but a nice quite laser would let them take out these pesky little things. This would actually be a decent static deployment opportunity.

    --
    once more into the breach
  22. How did 'lockdown' become a non-prison thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'lockdown' used to just be a prison thing. Now schools do it, government offcies did in and in the Boston marathon bombing an entire city attempted it.

  23. buy hundreds of drones. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    Assuming each drone flight shuts down the executive branch for an hour, for a mere $10,000 a day the government could be disabled indefinitely.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    1. Re:buy hundreds of drones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is an excellent idea. Good luck.

    2. Re:buy hundreds of drones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That seems like a bargain compared to spending $150k/year per teabagging RepubliCan't.

  24. On a loosely-related note by snookiex · · Score: 1

    Last night, some football fans in Argentina managed to smuggle a whole drone into a stadium and flew it over the field (see picture 3/11) just before to start an epic disturb.

    --
    Open Source Network Inventory for the masses! Kuwaiba