Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Decker, May 22, 2010.
Interesting. Good ole' Home Land Security...
ty for posting..
If it's used properly, that has incredible potential. Unfortunately, it has some legal questions that are going to need to be worked out. The search and rescue applications alone are great. I understand the secrecy, especially listening to the assistant chief fumble all over herself. They needed to address some of the concerns a little bit better before letting this out.
Its our job to make sure they behave themselves. If we are too lazy to do that, then we deserve whatever we get...
They watch over themSELVES.
I dont see how a plane that can take high resolution pictures from thousands of feet in the air could find any rapists or murders or child molesters or illegals for that matter.. Explain?
That seems like the common defense for cases like this.
"Oh you're against spy planes? Well you must not want LE to catch any of these horrible people!"
when in REALITY, a plane isnt going to find murders or rapists any better than our detectives can today.
high percentages of molesters are REPEAT offenders (only doing like 3 years).
Perhaps if we took a look at the way we do things now and use our heads a bit to do it BETTER, we wouldnt need to sacrifice some MORE freedom.
Seems like a bit of a drain on resources doesnt it.
The american citizens paying more $ so we can be spied on? I dont think so.
There are far to many people who are "paranoid" on this and for that matter, other forums...
For the taking up more money out of the tax payers pockets: How much does this setup cost, maintain and control in comparison to having a one if not a small unit/squadron of helicopters with the same abilities (i.e. the aircraft, maintainers, pilots, fuel, facilities, etc...). Trust me, maintaining aircraft gets extremely expensive!
Buying a new "spy plane" might pay for itself in a matter of a few years and save money in the years to follow?
And yes, there is alot of real world abilities of such a aircraft for legitimate surveillance and aiding in department functions...
If you trust any group of people to police themselves, then you have no right to complain when they abuse their power. We have an obligation as citizens of this country to hold those accountable whom we elect (figuratively and literally) to watch over us. Without oversight, police would be as corrupt as they were during prohibition.
Putting the abuse of power issue aside, let tell an experince of mine with UAV,s.
While in Iraq we had them in the air for our security (and I'm thankful for that) however one day one came down under full power and crashed right next to our living quarters and a group of people standing there, luckly for us no one was hurt, but it was a close call.
It turned out to be a faulty generator on the UAV that caused the out of control crash.
After considering what happened, here is a thought or two. With no pilot on board no one can try to save the aircraft from going down, cut the power to lessen the impact, or try to steer away from populated spots.
The chance of a problem is more than doubled when something can go wrong at the control base on the ground site as well or a computer glitch (not much chance of that ha ?) or electronic interference.
I don't believe that the same FAA testing and standards are required for the equipment or pilots that regular aircraft go thru.
From my point of view, the cost savings for law enforcement is not worth the risk to the public to be flying over populated areas.
I'm also against the Big Brother thing going on in most areas now, ie., red light and speeding cams, surveillance cameras, electronic surveillance, and etc. for just general information gathering, what is comming next?
We are fast becoming the type of government we used to fight against.
Yes, there are uses for this technology. I don't care. The government has proven time and time again that if they have the power, they will abuse it. I think this needs to be sorted out and specific uses should be set up for it's use. Everything else should be illegal and inadmissable in court. The government isn't here to watch our every move.
Separate names with a comma.