[quote](CNN) - Sen. Rand Paul's latest statements on the use of drones in the United States, which caused some outrage among his loyal group of Libertarian followers, aren't a shift in position, the Kentucky Republican explained in a statement Tuesday.
In his original comments, Paul explained his parameters for using drones on American soil.
“We shouldn’t be willy-nilly, looking into their backyard at what they’re doing. But if there is a killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I’m not against drones being used to search them out, heat seeking devices being used,” Paul said in an interview on Fox Business Network.[/quote]
[url]http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/23/rand-paul-faces-blowback-after-new-drone-comments/?hpt=hp_t3[/url]
I actually agree with Rand Paul for once in my lifetime. On the one thing that he gets flak from his own supporters for.
It's no different than using a helicopter with infrared cameras to track down a violent criminal. It's just remotely-controlled.
they still shouldn't patrol or survey.
i mean i don't really see the difference between it and a helicopter in a chase, but i definitely don't want them spying on people or flying overhead as part of a routine.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40404586]they still shouldn't patrol or survey.
i mean i don't really see the difference between it and a helicopter in a chase, but i definitely don't want them spying on people or flying overhead as part of a routine.[/QUOTE]
Exactly what he said. He doesn't want them just flying around watching people, but he's fine with them being used to catch killers and violent criminals. I mean, I despise Rand Paul, but his standpoint on this is one of the most acceptable and rational ones I've seen and I can't see why libertarians are giving him so much shit for it.
You can't really make specific decisions on what UAVs can and can't do because the data isn't there, (for non military use), and without the proper data you can't make a measurement and without measurement you can't make judgement.
[url]http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/[/url]
FAA is currently in the process of tackling this issue and Rand Paul is far away from a technocrat and more close to basing the decisions on fear.
well most people hear "drone" and think of "drone strike"
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40404586]they still shouldn't patrol or survey.
i mean i don't really see the difference between it and a helicopter in a chase, but i definitely don't want them spying on people or flying overhead as part of a routine.[/QUOTE]Why not? Plenty of highways are patrolled by air. The most this would do on a typical day is spot people breaking traffic regulations and alert a patrol car on the ground. Its not like its going to be armed to the teeth. "Target Identified: Red Honda Civic. Target Driving 71 miles-per-hour in a 65 miles-per-hour zone. Searching Target's Internet History and Releasing Hellstorm."
Something I can agree with, it's cheaper than using a helicopter. If there was a system that a warrant was needed to issue a drone search, since with infrared they can in fact see into objects/property that would also require a warrant normally to search. I would have next to no problem with it.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;40407139]Why not? Plenty of highways are patrolled by air. The most this would do on a typical day is spot people breaking traffic regulations and alert a patrol car on the ground. Its not like its going to be armed to the teeth. "Target Identified: Red Honda Civic. Target Driving 71 miles-per-hour in a 65 miles-per-hour zone. Searching Target's Internet History and Releasing Hellstorm."[/QUOTE]
um because i don't like the idea of living in a police state with drones circling over head wherever i go thank you.
[editline]24th April 2013[/editline]
call it paranoid or w/e but
[img]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/drone%20sky%20full%20reuters%20.jpg[/img]
should not be a daily site.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40408113]um because i don't like the idea of living in a police state with drones circling over head wherever i go thank you.
[editline]24th April 2013[/editline]
call it paranoid or w/e but
[img]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/drone%20sky%20full%20reuters%20.jpg[/img]
should not be a daily site.[/QUOTE]
This is a daily sight
[img]http://www.fearofflyinghelp.com/photos/flyoverhead.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;40408345]This is a daily sight
[img]http://www.fearofflyinghelp.com/photos/flyoverhead.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure passenger jets aren't being used for surveillance though.
[QUOTE=MercZ;40408381]I'm pretty sure passenger jets aren't being used for surveillance though.[/QUOTE]
They're both a silhouette in the sky
[editline]24th April 2013[/editline]
And that's assuming they're the same drones used in the middle east for dropping bombs, which they probably won't.
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;40408345]This is a daily sight
[img]http://www.fearofflyinghelp.com/photos/flyoverhead.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
passenger jets are transportation, not surveillance.
[editline]24th April 2013[/editline]
it's not just that surveillance is bad, it's that you get a visual reminder that the government is watching you. it won't just help the police track people, it can be used for fear and repression as well.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40408113]um because i don't like the idea of living in a police state with drones circling over head wherever i go thank you.
[editline]24th April 2013[/editline]
call it paranoid or w/e but
[img]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/drone%20sky%20full%20reuters%20.jpg[/img]
should not be a daily site.[/QUOTE]Ok, I will call you paranoid. Why not? Why does a drone running highway patrol equate to "Police State" any more than have actual police patrolling the highway? What, because the drone can do its just quicker and cover more area? Seriously, this idea that "Ohh no, drones will take our freedoms! Nazis, Big Brother, and Oppression, Oh my!" is a hilariously slippery slope.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;40408439]Ok, I will call you paranoid. Why not? Why does a drone running highway patrol equate to "Police State" any more than have actual police patrolling the highway? What, because the drone can do its just quicker and cover more area? Seriously, this idea that "Ohh no, drones will take our freedoms! Nazis, Big Brother, and Oppression, Oh my!" is a hilariously slippery slope.[/QUOTE]
It's why I think calling them drones is a bad idea. That word carries the connotation of the same weapons we use to remotely bomb people in the middle east, when they're nothing alike in function.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;40408113]um because i don't like the idea of living in a police state with drones circling over head wherever i go thank you.
[editline]24th April 2013[/editline]
call it paranoid or w/e but
[img]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/drone%20sky%20full%20reuters%20.jpg[/img]
should not be a daily site.[/QUOTE]
They won't be a daily sight anymore than SWAT teams are now.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;40408684]They won't be a daily sight anymore than SWAT teams are now.[/QUOTE]
says who?
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;40408737]Are you afraid of police helicopters?[/QUOTE]
i don't see police helicopters circling overhead all the time and if i did then yea i would be a little concerned.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.