Drones

[jazzimov]

Most people equate the word "drone" with the UAV (Unmanned Arial Vehicle). A UAV is a type of drone, but the term "drone" encompasses much more that UAV's. For example, there are drone ants. We constantly use ground-based drone robots to defuse bombs. But when you say the word "drone" people tend to automatically think of weapon-equipped UAV's such as has been deployed in the war.

So, when someone uses the catchphrase "domestic drone" everyone automatically envisions the weaponized UAV's that have been so successful in Afghanistan and Pakistan. So, when someone talks about "domestic drones" people tend to freak out thinking that means that these UAV's are going to be weaponized and used to kill people.

Actually, any remote controlled or RC airplane, helicopter, etc. is a "drone". If you add a camera to it to take pictures or videos, VOILA! You have an example of the "domestic drones" that so may people are freaking out about!

Consider the people who are mountain climbing and get lost in the snow. Or the people who go hiking in the woods and get lost.

We can send manned helicopters to try and find them, sometimes in conditions that could down a helicopter and kill everyone on board.

What if you could send a dozen UAV's or "drones" to cover the same are in less time? Plus, these drones could go into more dangerous areas - because a manned helicopter could be destroyed and kill a person, whereas we could send a RC into the same area and if it crashes we're only out the cost of a cheap RC vehicle. Why wouldn't we go for that?!

Well, because we have convinced ourselves that "domestic drones" means a narrow definition that actually does not apply. Therefore, in the effort to avoid a tragedy that should not happen, we block a beneficial technology that would save many lives and we would all be FOR if it weren't advertised under that unfortunate term that really doesn't apply.

Sort of like Eric Holder's comments - is it "possible?" Well anything is "possible".

Is it probable? No.

[arely staircase]

1. you can have your own for 75 bucks

Spy Copter 3.5 Ch Electric RC Helicopter w/ Video Camera
Spy Copter 3.5 Ch Electric RC Helicopter w/ Video Camera World 14" Remote Control Helicopter • Built-In Gyroscope • 3.5 Channel Control • Detailed Paint ...
www.sonicelectronix.com/item_42430_Spy-Copter-3.5-Ch... - Cached

[jazzimov]

4. Yep! nt

[MadHound]

2. Like any technological innovation, drones are a two edged sword,

They can be used for noble purposes, as you mention, or not so noble purposes, covert surveillance, and yes, killing people.

And again, like much of technology, it appears that drones are quickly headed for that not so noble purpose, at least in a majority of cases.

[jazzimov]

3. Is it, really?

And again, like much of technology, it appears that drones are quickly headed for that not so noble purpose, at least in a majority of cases.

Are they really? Or is that just the hype that we are being told to spread?

It's up to us. And it's up to us to be logical and informed about it.

I think we need a LOGICAL and INFORMED discussion. When local LE is asking for "drones", I have no problem with us pushing for legislation to make sure that the drones are being used properly.

But when people try to keep local LE from obtaining drones just because they are called "drones" - I have a problem with that.

It seems to me that many people here are against "domestic drones" because they automatically equate them with "targeted killing machines".

This is the kind of ignorance that I am trying to counter.

[MadHound]

5. So are you comfortable with your local, state and federal LEOs having surveillance drones?

Because the fact of the matter is that such surveillance drones makes surveillance cheaper and more widespread than if your LEOs had to rely on manned helicopter and/or plane surveillance. Not to mention more covert, since we now have drones that are the size and shape of insects. Furthermore, large drones can maintain surveillance on a target for much longer periods of time. Me, I'm not comfortable with that sort of expansion of government surveillance capability.

You keep saying that many or most people make the association between drones and killing machines. I think you are wrong on that score, it seems as though most people are concerned about drones for a multitude of reasons.

And frankly, you're not going to win many people over by essentially calling them ignorant.

[Zax2me]

6. Well, probable 'no' can mean many things.

You trust any of these people with this kind of power?
Not trusting the far right is a given, just wait a day or two for the knife to sink into your back.
But been around too long to trust anyone with the keys to everything all of the time.
I'd go as far to say I'd expect abuse.
That's how many times I've been surprised by those in govt I trust.