Skip to main content

View Diary: Drones Over Watertown (19 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Plus the "public mindset" (0+ / 0-)

    on drones is not so much about using them for surveillance but for using them to kill people we suspect of terrorism or we think might be dangerous at some point.

    Taking out civilians at the same time.

    Not sure how many people who are not Glenn Greenwald are upset that we use drones for surveillance.

    Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

    by delphine on Sun Apr 21, 2013 at 12:37:42 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Several states have passed laws or are considering (0+ / 0-)

      bills to ban the use of surveillance drones without a warrant. Massachusetts is thinking of joining them. Of course, in this case there was no shortage of probable cause for a warrant after the initial bombings.

      If warrants are issued to go after street crime, including drug gangs, there will be a lot of cases to go through to establish when police and prosecutors can use information not covered by the warrants, specifically whether the rules are different for drones, surveillance cameras, and cops on the beat.

      Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

      by Mokurai on Sun Apr 21, 2013 at 01:23:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't agree with drones for surveillance (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Way too much power for police and too much of a possibility to abuse it.  Their technological capability go far above a police helicopter and I essentially don't trust the privatized companies that would operate them to keep them from being weaponized.

      "Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal."

      by sujigu on Sun Apr 21, 2013 at 03:35:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site