 StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
 ·CenturyLink
1 edit | San Fransisco police getting drones quote:
Remote-controlled aircraft known as drones will help their efforts to fight crime and make officers safer, and save taxpayers from the rising costs of fueling and maintaining helicopters.
» www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Pol···2638.phpThey're just trying to save money. Really. I wonder if they'll be using flower power  BTW I heard, through the grapevine, that they'll be getting them from Link Logger  's Drone & Armament Rentals  --
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
 hayc59Im Your HuckleberryPremium
join:2001-02-26
David R.I.P.
kudos:21 | Great Idea bring it on!! |
|
|
|
 sashwaPixie Cat Crunchin' n Foldin'Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-29
Alcatraz
kudos:15 | reply to StuartMW
I believe that is Alameda County Sheriff Dept not SF police. |
|
StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2 | My mistake. I see Alameda County covers Beserkeley. Sweet!
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
sashwaPixie Cat Crunchin' n Foldin'Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-29
Alcatraz
kudos:15 | And Oakland and a bunch of other towns. It's across the Bay from SF. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Charter
| reply to StuartMW
What's the difference between them having a few drones as compared to having helicopters, airplanes, boats, unmarked cars, tracking devices, drug sniffing dogs, long rang hearing devices, infra red scanning devices, phone tapping equipment, or any other device that has been invented in the last 100 years?
The key is not what they have but how within the law they use it. Abuse of authority is the same whether via a nightstick or a drone. Its the law and adherence to it that matters. |
|
 BlackbirdBuilt for SpeedPremium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to StuartMW
said by StuartMW:... BTW I heard, through the grapevine, that they'll be getting them from Link Logger 's Drone & Armament Rentals
Maybe. But in that case Blake would have been the low bidder... which probably means a balsa-wood airframe, rubber-band drive and a Kodak Instamatic camera for photo-recon.
--
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!" -- P.Henry, 1775 |
|
OZOPremium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2 | reply to armed
said by armed:What's the difference between them having a few drones as compared to having helicopters, airplanes, boats, unmarked cars, tracking devices, drug sniffing dogs, long rang hearing devices, infra red scanning devices, phone tapping equipment, or any other device that has been invented in the last 100 years?
They may start falling on our heads (and I mean, literally) right from the sky?
Not to mention, adding one more tool for "all seeing eye" pocket, that common people are rushing to create upon themselves...
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself... |
|
BlackbirdBuilt for SpeedPremium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| said by OZO:said by armed:What's the difference between them having a few drones as compared to having helicopters, airplanes, boats, unmarked cars, tracking devices, drug sniffing dogs, long rang hearing devices, infra red scanning devices, phone tapping equipment, or any other device that has been invented in the last 100 years?
They may start falling on our heads (and I mean, literally) right from the sky? ... Or fly into each other... or into commercial airliners... or into general aviation...
My understanding is that this is a very real problem already in Djibouti where the US flies drones over various hotspots in the Middle East.
Remote U.S. base at core of secret operations quote:
...The drones and other military aircraft have crowded the skies over the Horn of Africa so much that the risk of an aviation disaster has soared. ... Predator drones in particular are more prone to mishaps than manned aircraft, Air Force statistics show. But the accidents rarely draw public attention because there are no pilots or passengers. ... The frequency of U.S. military flights from Djibouti has soared, overwhelming air-traffic controllers and making the skies more dangerous. ... Drones also pose an aviation risk next door in Somalia. Over the past year, remote-controlled aircraft have plunged into a refugee camp, flown perilously close to a fuel dump and almost collided with a large passenger plane over Mogadishu, the capital, according to a United Nations report.
--
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!" -- P.Henry, 1775 |
|
 jaykaykay4 Ever YoungPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-13
Scottsdale, AZ
kudos:22 | reply to OZO
said by OZO:said by armed:What's the difference between them having a few drones as compared to having helicopters, airplanes, boats, unmarked cars, tracking devices, drug sniffing dogs, long rang hearing devices, infra red scanning devices, phone tapping equipment, or any other device that has been invented in the last 100 years?
They may start falling on our heads (and I mean, literally) right from the sky? Not to mention, adding one more tool for "all seeing eye" pocket, that common people are rushing to create upon themselves... "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety...Ben Franklin, 1759"
--
JKK
Age is a very high price to pay for my maturity. If I can't stay young, I can at least stay immature!
»www.pbase.com/jaykaykay
|
|
StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2 | And they'll get neither--at least not in the long run.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
 DustynPremium
join:2003-02-26
Ontario, CAN
kudos:10 | reply to StuartMW
Where's RoboCop!?!?   |
|
StuartMWWho Is John Galt?Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2 Reviews:
·CenturyLink
| said by Dustyn:Where's RoboCop!?!?
Alameda County evidently
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow! |
|
quatrixPremium
join:2005-02-11
South FL
kudos:2 | reply to armed
said by armed:What's the difference between them having a few drones as compared to having ... The difference is that they're getting more efficient at enforcing the law, and that's what some people don't like. Look at the people who whine about red-light cameras. Few people complain about rolling through red lights being illegal because there aren't enough police to bust them for it. But as soon as cameras make it much more efficient, they whine and claim it's only about "revenue". |
|
Reviews:
·Charter
| reply to OZO
said by OZO:said by armed:What's the difference between them having a few drones as compared to having helicopters, airplanes, boats, unmarked cars, tracking devices, drug sniffing dogs, long rang hearing devices, infra red scanning devices, phone tapping equipment, or any other device that has been invented in the last 100 years?
They may start falling on our heads (and I mean, literally) right from the sky? Not to mention, adding one more tool for "all seeing eye" pocket, that common people are rushing to create upon themselves... Dangerous? So what about helicopters or airplanes? What about cops with weapons? What about cop cars in car accidents? What about tazers that kill? Is it only new technology that must meet unstated safety requirements? Got an evidence that drones are more unsafe than planes?
I had a neighbor that set his house on fire then hid on the hill behind my house with guns. They had no idea where he was because he had delay timers to start the fires. He damned near burned down the whole neighborhood.
They found him because they tracked his cell phone and used helicopters to pin point him. I had helicopters hoovering over the top of my house so low I could see the guys inside and I'm glad they were there.
So they used modern technology to track him. He was angry, dangerous and armed and committed suicide as the formed a line of cops to go up and get him. What.... they should have used nothing invented in the last 75 tears to track him?
Its a new tool, not anymore invasive nor dangerous to us than any other tool they have to track and arrest criminals. There is no evidence that use of a drone has anymore implications in the loss of our rights than when they fist started to use helicopters or planes and they are a lot cheaper to boot.
In reply to the old "its an invasion of our rights and loss of our freedoms" crowd I must ask.... when cops first started to use horses and buggies did we lose it all and become a controlled society? How about cars? I find most responses in this vein to be without merit and fueled more by paranoia than reason.
|
|
| reply to quatrix
said by quatrix:Look at the people who whine about red-light cameras. Few people complain about rolling through red lights being illegal because there aren't enough police to bust them for it. But as soon as cameras make it much more efficient, they whine and claim it's only about "revenue".
Probably because red-light cameras have been shown definitively to (a) not increase safety, and (b) raise revenue.
Are you seriously equating drones to red-light cameras? |
|
BlackbirdBuilt for SpeedPremium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to armed
said by armed:said by OZO: ...
They may start falling on our heads (and I mean, literally) right from the sky?
Not to mention, adding one more tool for "all seeing eye" pocket, that common people are rushing to create upon themselves...
Dangerous? ... Got an evidence that drones are more unsafe than planes? ... The only real direct comparison at present is for one of the few agencies that actually flies drones and other kinds of aircraft, the USAF:
Drones Most Accident-Prone U.S. Air Force Craft quote:
...
The U.S. military’s three biggest drones, made by Northrop Grumman Corp. (NOC) and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., are the most accident-prone aircraft in the Air Force fleet.
...
The Air Force in a 15-year period through Sept. 30 recorded 129 accidents involving its medium- and high-altitude drones: the MQ-1 Predator, MQ-9 Reaper and RQ-4 Global Hawk. ...
Vertical-lift aircraft, including helicopters and the tilt- rotor V-22 Osprey made by Boeing Co. (BA) and Textron Inc. (TXT), had the second-highest accident rate, with 6.33 per 100,000 flight hours.
...
The Predator, made by General Atomics, has had 9.26 accidents per 100,000 flight hours, while its Reaper has had 7.96. ...
Obviously with other, smaller types of drones that civilian agencies will probably use, these military craft will not be equivalent in safety. For the smaller drones, the safety records are... unpublished. So we'll be left to assume the operation and maintenance performed by your friendly local police (or whomever) will exceed the US military's aircraft maintenance and standards or the FAA monitored/inspected commercial and general aviation requirements. Which, frankly should scare the daylights out of anyone. In particular, there's the operation of a drone in potentially crowded airspace: FAA Documents Raise Questions About Safety of Drones in U.S. Airspace quote:
...Many drones and other small aircraft don’t have elaborate on-board detection systems to help them avoid crashes in the air, said Mel Beckman, a California mechanic and pilot who’s been flying for more than 30 years. People who don’t fly planes often are surprised to learn that pilots are required to “see and avoid,” which is exactly what it sounds like – keep a naked eye out for other aircraft. "There’s no way for a drone pilot to do that,” Beckman said. “He’s on the ground, and he’s looking through a small aperture..."
...
The FAA predicted four years ago that a sophisticated collision-avoidance system for drones could cost as much as $2 billion and was still far into the future. Regulators also anticipated then that a framework for broader drone flights in the United States wouldn’t be ready until sometime around 2020, according to the Government Accountability Office (.PDF), the investigative arm of Congress.
--
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!" -- P.Henry, 1775 |
|
OZOPremium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2 | reply to armed
said by armed:Its a new tool, not anymore invasive nor dangerous to us than any other tool they have to track and arrest criminals. There is no evidence that use of a drone has anymore implications in the loss of our rights than when they fist started to use helicopters or planes and they are a lot cheaper to boot. Please read followed cite again. I really hope you'll finally get to its essence some day:
said by jaykaykay:"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety...Ben Franklin, 1759"
This cite reminds us about extreme importance to keep the right balance between desire to have an "absolute safety" (even though there is no such thing and never will be) and what we could loose, when we ask our government to provide it to us...
said by armed:In reply to the old "its an invasion of our rights and loss of our freedoms" crowd I must ask.... when cops first started to use horses and buggies did we lose it all and become a controlled society? How about cars? I find most responses in this vein to be without merit and fueled more by paranoia than reason.
We may easily slip into "controlled society", if people continue to ask powers to make it this way... Be careful with what you're asking for - you may get your wish to become a reality.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself... |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to StuartMW
Just wait, a drone will crash into a house and the cops will weasel out of the huge lawsuit and the defense contractor that built it will get mysterious immunity even though it was their faulty aircraft.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
Reviews:
·Charter
1 edit | reply to OZO
said by OZO:said by armed:Its a new tool, not anymore invasive nor dangerous to us than any other tool they have to track and arrest criminals. There is no evidence that use of a drone has anymore implications in the loss of our rights than when they fist started to use helicopters or planes and they are a lot cheaper to boot. Please read followed cite again. I really hope you'll finally get to its essence some day: said by jaykaykay:"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety...Ben Franklin, 1759"
This cite reminds us about extreme importance to keep the right balance between desire to have an "absolute safety" (even though there is no such thing and never will be) and what we could loose, when we ask our government to provide it to us... said by armed:In reply to the old "its an invasion of our rights and loss of our freedoms" crowd I must ask.... when cops first started to use horses and buggies did we lose it all and become a controlled society? How about cars? I find most responses in this vein to be without merit and fueled more by paranoia than reason.
We may easily slip into "controlled society", if people continue to ask powers to make it this way... Be careful with what you're asking for - you may get your wish to become a reality. You have been less than convincing that using drones in lawful methods is any more an erosion of our rights than using say a helicopter, under cover surveillance cars, binoculars, infared machines, high powered guns, mace, tazers, dogs, undercover ops, riding bikes in the park, or using horses or wearing sneakers when on foot patrol.
You can quote old saws but it doesn't change the fact that if your argument holds water it has to apply to all tools use by the police. In fact there is no law in our Constitution, or in the plethora of federal, state or local jurisdiction laws that says modern inventions cannot be used by police unless they were available in 1776.
If your contention is that police can abuse power (and they can and do sometimes) then that issue is for the courts as they apply the use of these new tools. But I find it interesting that the hue and cry from the unwashed is that the police hands are tied by legal restrictions of liberals and criminals are running rampant in the streets.
So despite your hysteria drones are not the issue but proper use of our laws in using them is.
I'm on your side on not eroding our rights but we separate quickly when you argue that drones are bad but cars and helicopters and binoculars are fine. |
|
