Is big brother watching you?

[Avorysuds]

I could see justification for their use during a crime but not to just randomly spy. Much like I consider the red light cameras bogus.

Weren't you paying attention when Bush admitted on camera to authorizing warrantless wiretaps on Americans even after he had pledged to the American people that warrants were still a requirement?

Weren't you paying attention when Congress later granted the phone companies blanket immunity for all actions they took to comply (illegally, at the time) with Bush's order? And why did they do that? GOVT CONTRACTS worth hundreds of millions of dollars?

Believe it or not there are some progressives in this very thread that think it's impossible for Government to break it's own laws... Unless it's a Republican in power!!!!!!

 

[S.J.]

Anybody who thinks it's gonna stop with harmless, unarmed drones, is in denial. This is another incremental step by our "new government". Our Constitution is being made obsolete and the stupid ass liberals are making jokes about it.

I'm not aware of an constitutional prohibitions of drone aircraft?

You'll be saying the same thing about detention centers when that starts happening too.

 

[g5000]

Well then, tell me who was flying it and what they were doing... OP's! you can't can you?

Prove it was a drone first.

Ooops! You can't, can you?

You have no idea if it was someone's toy, or what.

Here you go, dipshit: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt381/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt381.pdf


The government's legislation for domestic drones. Read it and weep as you realize your paranoid fantasy has no basis in reality.

Well now with Obama's NDAA and ability to assassinate American citizens without trial, I'll assume the giant document you gave me is voided when it comes to Government doing something in the name of the "greater good."

I was more discussing the possibility of a drone spying, not if it was or was not a drone. If it were a drone you can't prove it just like you can't prove it, again, thanks to Obama being just as poor of a President as Bush.

Take you CT chit and crap it up your fuckin ass you ******* dumb ****. Is everyone a racist/paranoid/old/white/male/tea party or whatever else your bigoted ass can crap out at that moment just because they rightfully don't agree with you?

If you want to spew the "no accountability" paranoid shit, that would apply to black helicopters as well. Blowing a lot of smoke about some other crap the government does does not hide that fact.

So, as I said, no one has been able to answer the question what civil liberties are jeopardized by drones that are not jeopardized by manned helicopters.

Because there aren't any new threats to our civil liberties by drones. Sorry to make your butt hurt.

 

[Avorysuds]

Anybody who thinks it's gonna stop with harmless, unarmed drones, is in denial. This is another incremental step by our "new government". Our Constitution is being made obsolete and the stupid ass liberals are making jokes about it.

I'm not aware of an constitutional prohibitions of drone aircraft?

You'll be saying the same thing about detention centers when that starts happening too.

The only un-constitutional detention centers existed under Bush... Guantanamo bay might not be closed under Obama but I and many progressives on these boards will assure you it simply does not count under Obama... Bush made him do it, again.

 

[g5000]

DRONE OPERATOR: Sir, we can now spy on Americans from the air without accountability!

PREZ: We could not do that with helicopters?

DRONE OPERATOR: Duhhhhhh...ummmm...hmmmmm...

 

[Avorysuds]

Prove it was a drone first.

Ooops! You can't, can you?

You have no idea if it was someone's toy, or what.

Here you go, dipshit: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt381/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt381.pdf


The government's legislation for domestic drones. Read it and weep as you realize your paranoid fantasy has no basis in reality.

Well now with Obama's NDAA and ability to assassinate American citizens without trial, I'll assume the giant document you gave me is voided when it comes to Government doing something in the name of the "greater good."

I was more discussing the possibility of a drone spying, not if it was or was not a drone. If it were a drone you can't prove it just like you can't prove it, again, thanks to Obama being just as poor of a President as Bush.

Take you CT chit and crap it up your fuckin ass you ******* dumb ****. Is everyone a racist/paranoid/old/white/male/tea party or whatever else your bigoted ass can crap out at that moment just because they rightfully don't agree with you?

If you want to spew the "no accountability" paranoid shit, that would apply to black helicopters as well. Blowing a lot of smoke about other shit does not hide that fact.

So, as I said, no one has been able to answer the question what civil liberties are jeopardized by drones that are not jeopardized by manned helicopters.

Because there aren't any new threats to our civil liberties by drones. Sorry to make your butt hurt.

You mentioned black helicopters you lying hyper partisan ****. We're talking about the possibility of this, that's it, that's all. You're acting as if I said there are drones in fact right now flying around taking my picture or some bullshit.

Unless you wana get into the game of proving Government has never broken any laws they set I suggest you shut your ignorant fuckin mouth before you make yourself look even more bigoted than you already are. Yeah, I'm libertarian, but I don't wear a tin foil hat despite you hinting at.

 

[Avorysuds]

DRONE OPERATOR: Sir, we can now spy on Americans from the air without accountability!

PREZ: We could not do that with helicopters?

DRONE OPERATOR: Duhhhhhh...ummmm...hmmmmm...

Wow, you have shown how little you understand the difference between a drone and helicopter.


Hey, here's a question... Why invent and use drones when helicopters can do alllllll the same chit a drone does... Hint, because a drone is WAAAAY ******* different than a giant, loud, MANED helicopter.

Bye.

 

[Mustang]

I could see justification for their use during a crime but not to just randomly spy. Much like I consider the red light cameras bogus.

Weren't you paying attention when Bush admitted on camera to authorizing warrantless wiretaps on Americans even after he had pledged to the American people that warrants were still a requirement?

Weren't you paying attention when Congress later granted the phone companies blanket immunity for all actions they took to comply (illegally, at the time) with Bush's order? And why did they do that? GOVT CONTRACTS worth hundreds of millions of dollars?

Believe it or not there are some progressives in this very thread that think it's impossible for Government to break it's own laws... Unless it's a Republican in power!!!!!!

Let's not miss the point, shall we?

As a general rule, I think it's highly foolish for people to allow our Constitutional freedoms to be stripped away under an administration from one political party and then complain when the abuses continue (albeit, now they're possibly legal because of the precedent that was set earlier) just because a different party is in power.

I liked the way the previous system worked, and it DID work. Look it up! Research it! But Bush (and Cheney, no doubt) didn't like working under constraints, even if they were only formalities. They (ESPECIALLY Cheney) wanted to expand presidential power. Now look where we are. To paraphrase Oliver Hardy, "This is ANOTHER fine mess you've gotten us into!"

 

[Avorysuds]

Weren't you paying attention when Bush admitted on camera to authorizing warrantless wiretaps on Americans even after he had pledged to the American people that warrants were still a requirement?

Weren't you paying attention when Congress later granted the phone companies blanket immunity for all actions they took to comply (illegally, at the time) with Bush's order? And why did they do that? GOVT CONTRACTS worth hundreds of millions of dollars?

Believe it or not there are some progressives in this very thread that think it's impossible for Government to break it's own laws... Unless it's a Republican in power!!!!!!

Let's not miss the point, shall we?

As a general rule, I think it's highly foolish for people to allow our Constitutional freedoms to be stripped away under an administration from one political party and then complain when the abuses continue (albeit, now they're possibly legal because of the precedent that was set earlier) just because a different party is in power.

I liked the way the previous system worked, and it DID work. Look it up! Research it! But Bush (and Cheney, no doubt) didn't like working under constraints, even if they were only formalities. They (ESPECIALLY Cheney) wanted to expand presidential power. Now look where we are. To paraphrase Oliver Hardy, "This is ANOTHER fine mess you've gotten us into!"

Hey I agree, but you need to fast forward to today, where Obama expanded the very things you seem to not like about Bush and Cheney.

It's very old hearing about Bush and his admin, we all know the story... Problem is I'm asking where are these policies today, and the answer is under Obama, with his name on them, these horrible policies are expanded. Today is what matters, not going into 5 years ago.

This of course leads into the failure of the Obama administration as a whole. People claim the country voted for Obama for a second term, site polling that shows there are people that approve of Obama... Yet Bush served 2 terms, Bush had high approval ratings in his first term. Point is we need to look at policy. So is it possible the Government under Obama is spying on people? Lol yes.... yes it is very very very ******* possible.

Over 4 years later and not a single Bush era policy I can think of has been repealed. So if it were possible then, it’s possible now… Odd, now that I think of it I can pump out bad Bush era policies that have been expended upon by Obama and his admin, something ells me so could you and g5.

 

[g5000]

Well now with Obama's NDAA and ability to assassinate American citizens without trial, I'll assume the giant document you gave me is voided when it comes to Government doing something in the name of the "greater good."

I was more discussing the possibility of a drone spying, not if it was or was not a drone. If it were a drone you can't prove it just like you can't prove it, again, thanks to Obama being just as poor of a President as Bush.

Take you CT chit and crap it up your fuckin ass you ******* dumb ****. Is everyone a racist/paranoid/old/white/male/tea party or whatever else your bigoted ass can crap out at that moment just because they rightfully don't agree with you?

If you want to spew the "no accountability" paranoid shit, that would apply to black helicopters as well. Blowing a lot of smoke about other shit does not hide that fact.

So, as I said, no one has been able to answer the question what civil liberties are jeopardized by drones that are not jeopardized by manned helicopters.

Because there aren't any new threats to our civil liberties by drones. Sorry to make your butt hurt.

You mentioned black helicopters you lying hyper partisan ****. We're talking about the possibility of this, that's it, that's all. You're acting as if I said there are drones in fact right now flying around taking my picture or some bullshit.

Unless you wana get into the game of proving Government has never broken any laws they set I suggest you shut your ignorant fuckin mouth before you make yourself look even more bigoted than you already are. Yeah, I'm libertarian, but I don't wear a tin foil hat despite you hinting at.

I asked what special new violations of our civil liberties drones bring that manned helicopters do not.

What freedoms does a drone take away that a manned helicopter does not? What new threat to our civil liberties do they pose?

No one has ever answered this question.

They are faceless, zero accountability.

Your "no accountability" reply falls short. A drone has no more or no less accountability than a helicopter.

FAIL.

 

[Avorysuds]

If you want to spew the "no accountability" paranoid shit, that would apply to black helicopters as well. Blowing a lot of smoke about other shit does not hide that fact.

So, as I said, no one has been able to answer the question what civil liberties are jeopardized by drones that are not jeopardized by manned helicopters.

Because there aren't any new threats to our civil liberties by drones. Sorry to make your butt hurt.

You mentioned black helicopters you lying hyper partisan ****. We're talking about the possibility of this, that's it, that's all. You're acting as if I said there are drones in fact right now flying around taking my picture or some bullshit.

Unless you wana get into the game of proving Government has never broken any laws they set I suggest you shut your ignorant fuckin mouth before you make yourself look even more bigoted than you already are. Yeah, I'm libertarian, but I don't wear a tin foil hat despite you hinting at.

I asked what special new violations of our civil liberties drones bring that manned helicopters do not.

What freedoms does a drone take away that a manned helicopter does not? What new threat to our civil liberties do they pose?

No one has ever answered this question.

They are faceless, zero accountability.

Your "no accountability" reply falls short. A drone has no more or no less accountability than a helicopter.

FAIL.

You got me, the Government can now break the law just as much as it was able to do before... So lets just be ok with it because g5 likes Obama!

Don't ask questions because then you wear tin foil hats! Good call g5.

And for the last time, having an un-manned vehicle will always, always... get this g5, always... be less accountable than a manned one. I really don’t care to debate this with you if you don’t understand that incredibly basic and true fact.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

just remember, the constitution was written over 200 years ago and needs to change with the times. none of your rights are sacred. or at least they won't be if we continue to allow our government to erode them one step at a time

Yes my rights are sacred.

What part of inalienable do you not understand?

inalienable: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred

That which is inalienable cannot be bought, sold, or transferred from one individual to another. The personal rights to life and liberty guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States are inalienable. Similarly, various types of property are inalienable, such as rivers, streams, and highways.

tell that to congress and the supreme court

I'm telling you. You're the idiot that said "none of your rights are sacred".

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

just remember, the constitution was written over 200 years ago and needs to change with the times. none of your rights are sacred. or at least they won't be if we continue to allow our government to erode them one step at a time

Nonsense.

The courts have consistently ruled – including the Supreme Court – that there is no expectation to privacy outside of one’s home, and that aerial surveillance is perfectly Constitutional.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You'll be saying the same thing about detention centers when that starts happening too.

5th Amendment.

We have open assaults on liberty. The Obama administration is engaged in a concerted effort to revoke basic civil liberties. He has attacked the rights of speech, religion, assembly, the right to bear arms in defense of oneself, he has violated the 5th and 14th in regard to due process.

Sorry, I've got bigger issues to worry about than remote control airplanes.

Besides, drones are easily defeated in a technological savvy society.

 

[S.J.]

You'll be saying the same thing about detention centers when that starts happening too.

5th Amendment.

We have open assaults on liberty. The Obama administration is engaged in a concerted effort to revoke basic civil liberties. He has attacked the rights of speech, religion, assembly, the right to bear arms in defense of oneself, he has violated the 5th and 14th in regard to due process.

Sorry, I've got bigger issues to worry about than remote control airplanes.

Besides, drones are easily defeated in a technological savvy society.

Eventually, the drones will be used to kill American citizens. I'm surprised you are not able to see that.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Eventually, the drones will be used to kill American citizens. I'm surprised you are not able to see that.

Drones have already been used to kill American citizens.

You're falling into the same failed logic that the leftists use to demand guns be outlawed, that of assigning blame to the technology.

We as a people, if we are to remain free, must hold accountable to the law those who would lead us. Barack Obama is guilty of high crimes and must be impeached, then prosecuted. That, what amounts to a radio control, model airplane with a camera, flies about the country is of no concern. We cannot hold machines accountable, we must focus on the men behind them.

I see no functional difference between an unarmed drone and a surveillance camera mounted on a high building.

Drones don't kill people, people kill people. If American citizens are killed without due process, then people, particularly Barack Obama, must be held accountable.

 

[S.J.]

Eventually, the drones will be used to kill American citizens. I'm surprised you are not able to see that.

Drones have already been used to kill American citizens.

You're falling into the same failed logic that the leftists use to demand guns be outlawed, that of assigning blame to the technology.

We as a people, if we are to remain free, must hold accountable to the law those who would lead us. Barack Obama is guilty of high crimes and must be impeached, then prosecuted. That, what amounts to a radio control, model airplane with a camera, flies about the country is of no concern. We cannot hold machines accountable, we must focus on the men behind them.

I see no functional difference between an unarmed drone and a surveillance camera mounted on a high building.

Drones don't kill people, people kill people. If American citizens are killed without due process, then people, particularly Barack Obama, must be held accountable.

I think you misunderstand me, or perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I absolutely agree that it's not the drones, it's the people using them. Having said that, good luck trying to prosecute or hold the government accountable for it.

 

[Spoonman]

Believe it or not there are some progressives in this very thread that think it's impossible for Government to break it's own laws... Unless it's a Republican in power!!!!!!

Let's not miss the point, shall we?

As a general rule, I think it's highly foolish for people to allow our Constitutional freedoms to be stripped away under an administration from one political party and then complain when the abuses continue (albeit, now they're possibly legal because of the precedent that was set earlier) just because a different party is in power.

I liked the way the previous system worked, and it DID work. Look it up! Research it! But Bush (and Cheney, no doubt) didn't like working under constraints, even if they were only formalities. They (ESPECIALLY Cheney) wanted to expand presidential power. Now look where we are. To paraphrase Oliver Hardy, "This is ANOTHER fine mess you've gotten us into!"

Hey I agree, but you need to fast forward to today, where Obama expanded the very things you seem to not like about Bush and Cheney.

It's very old hearing about Bush and his admin, we all know the story... Problem is I'm asking where are these policies today, and the answer is under Obama, with his name on them, these horrible policies are expanded. Today is what matters, not going into 5 years ago.

This of course leads into the failure of the Obama administration as a whole. People claim the country voted for Obama for a second term, site polling that shows there are people that approve of Obama... Yet Bush served 2 terms, Bush had high approval ratings in his first term. Point is we need to look at policy. So is it possible the Government under Obama is spying on people? Lol yes.... yes it is very very very ******* possible.

Over 4 years later and not a single Bush era policy I can think of has been repealed. So if it were possible then, it’s possible now… Odd, now that I think of it I can pump out bad Bush era policies that have been expended upon by Obama and his admin, something ells me so could you and g5.

the answer is under obama becasue he is npw the man in charge. not to mention part of his hope and change campaign was blasting the bush policies and promising to change them. not only didn;t he do that, he gave them more teeth and expanded them

 

[Spoonman]

just remember, the constitution was written over 200 years ago and needs to change with the times. none of your rights are sacred. or at least they won't be if we continue to allow our government to erode them one step at a time

Nonsense.

The courts have consistently ruled – including the Supreme Court – that there is no expectation to privacy outside of one’s home, and that aerial surveillance is perfectly Constitutional.

how about aerial firning on someone? heck libs ***** when we do that to wolves

 

[skye]

Anybody can buy a drone and anybody can fly them.

-Most drones are much smaller and much more readily available than you might imagine. They're basically remote controlled aircraft very much like the helicopters routinely sold at shopping mall kiosks. -

It's crazy!