Commercial Drones in Civil Airspace

I am shocked that this is even a thing. Just google "Drone Lobby".

http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=29223

  Quote

The drone lobby in the US has had a stunning success in pushing its agenda of enabling unmanned drones to fly freely in civil airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Bill has been passed by both Senate and Congress and now simply awaits President Obama’s signature before becoming law. The bill sets a deadline of 30 September 2015 by which the FAA must allow “full integration” of unmanned drones into US civil airspace

What the fuck? If this passes I don't think I could justify living in this country anymore.

Edit: Some other link I posted later: http://digitaljournal.com/article/319564

You can't trust nobody baby, you can't even trust ya own momma

If you're not doing anything illegal then you have nothing to fear.

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:30 PM, Gary C said:

If you're not doing anything illegal then you have nothing to fear.

Church!

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:04 PM, Murveman said:

I am shocked that this is even a thing. Just google "Drone Lobby".

 

http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=29223

  Quote

The drone lobby in the US has had a stunning success in pushing its agenda of enabling unmanned drones to fly freely in civil airspace. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Bill has been passed by both Senate and Congress and now simply awaits President Obama’s signature before becoming law. The bill sets a deadline of 30 September 2015 by which the FAA must allow “full integration” of unmanned drones into US civil airspace

 

What the fuck? If this passes I don't think I could justify living in this country anymore.

what's the problem with that exactly ?

You mean to tell me, Eugene, that you'd be completely alright with the idea of drones flying without their current restrictions. I believe that the drones should only be used for military missions, not for every day surveillance.

Does the police force really need drones? So far that's the only justification I've seen for this.

Didn't realize that my link had so much to do with the UK, this shit is happening in the US though too.

people are doing google searches on me in my internets!

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:45 PM, Murveman said:

You mean to tell me, Eugene, that you'd be completely alright with the idea of drones flying without their current restrictions. I believe that the drones should only be used for military missions, not for every day surveillance.

Does the police force really need drones? So far that's the only justification I've seen for this.

 

Didn't realize that my link had so much to do with the UK. Been reading a bunch of links on this today and it affects both the UK and US.

...well... isn't this just like... helicopters without the pilot?

Actually, I don't care.

*flashes penis for drone camera*

Really? No one cares about this? Ya'll just think I'm paranoid?

Yea, except the drones will be up and at 'em more than helicopters. Read somewhere that 30,000 is the goal amount to have in the skies.

Here's a link that backs that up. There are a bunch though. http://digitaljournal.com/article/319564

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:45 PM, Murveman said:

You mean to tell me, Eugene, that you'd be completely alright with the idea of drones flying without their current restrictions. I believe that the drones should only be used for military missions, not for every day surveillance.

Does the police force really need drones? So far that's the only justification I've seen for this.

 

Didn't realize that my link had so much to do with the UK, this shit is happening in the US though too.

i don't know about restrictions but as i see it they just replace the small planes and helicopters, police and different gov. agencies can surely use more "eyes".

Think of all the chemtrails!

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:51 PM, eugene said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:45 PM, Murveman said:

You mean to tell me, Eugene, that you'd be completely alright with the idea of drones flying without their current restrictions. I believe that the drones should only be used for military missions, not for every day surveillance.

Does the police force really need drones? So far that's the only justification I've seen for this.

 

Didn't realize that my link had so much to do with the UK, this shit is happening in the US though too.

i don't know about restrictions but as i see it they just replace the small planes and helicopters, police and different gov. agencies can surely use more "eyes".

I swear we are the opposite person, Eugene.

"...The only time the American will be galvanized into some action is when he's standing outside his house and it's on fire and burning to the ground."

I find it terrifying.

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/06/nprs_domestic_drone_commercial/singleton/

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/12/the_growing_menace_of_domestic_drones/singleton/

  Quote

One new type of drone already in use by the U.S. military in Afghanistan — the Gorgon Stare, named after the “mythical Greek creature whose unblinking eyes turned to stone those who beheld them” — is “able to scan an area the size of a small town” and “the most sophisticated robotics use artificial intelligence that [can] seek out and record certain kinds of suspicious activity”; boasted one U.S. General: “Gorgon Stare will be looking at a whole city, so there will be no way for the adversary to know what we’re looking at, and we can see everything.”

 

I think no one care because well all live in normal countries. Not that crazy one.

gov. can already see anything if it wills to, it's just a cheaper tech.

commercial drones are way too mainstream.

  On 3/5/2012 at 11:03 PM, eugene said:

gov. can already see anything if it wills to, it's just a cheaper tech.

perhaps, but when it gets cheap it gets more widespread. just because something is possible, doesn't mean it's embedded into the normal daily lifestyle.

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:31 PM, Dan C said:

Church!

not liking this church thing

  On 3/5/2012 at 11:09 PM, tauboo said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:31 PM, Dan C said:

Church!

not liking this church thing

It's okay. It's already old enough to be ironic.

  On 3/5/2012 at 11:14 PM, Gary C said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 11:09 PM, tauboo said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:31 PM, Dan C said:

Church!

not liking this church thing

It's okay. It's already old enough to be ironic.

+1

people will be trying to shoot them down left and right.

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:52 PM, Murveman said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:51 PM, eugene said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:45 PM, Murveman said:

You mean to tell me, Eugene, that you'd be completely alright with the idea of drones flying without their current restrictions. I believe that the drones should only be used for military missions, not for every day surveillance.

Does the police force really need drones? So far that's the only justification I've seen for this.

 

Didn't realize that my link had so much to do with the UK, this shit is happening in the US though too.

i don't know about restrictions but as i see it they just replace the small planes and helicopters, police and different gov. agencies can surely use more "eyes".

I swear we are the opposite person, Eugene.

Here I come in the middle...

I'm bothered by the complete lack and oversight of the bill but not the concept of commercial "drones." I have no qualms with civilian operated drones monitoring national forests, conducting geographical survey's, monitoring large tracts of private ranches, etc. Likewise I have no qualms with military drones operating from their bases and over restricted training grounds. But I don't want local and national police forces using drones with very little, if any, warrants and restrictions, especially as the machines become smaller and cheaper (we're also talking potential mini copters here, not just easy to spot aircraft). Texas has a National Guard unit that switched from F-16s to RQ-1s a couple of years ago, and which is now operating border patrol and anti-narcotics missions and is technically under the command of Governor Rick Perry if he declares an emergency. I'm not exactly ok with that. So yeah I'm bothered by the bill too.

Cameras will be absolutely everywhere in the future that much is obvious. There's no point being bothered about it because it's a done deal. What is important is how we manage this future where everything is captured. We need to focus on people and governments and their intentions.

  On 3/5/2012 at 11:19 PM, joshuatxuk said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:52 PM, Murveman said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:51 PM, eugene said:

  On 3/5/2012 at 10:45 PM, Murveman said:

You mean to tell me, Eugene, that you'd be completely alright with the idea of drones flying without their current restrictions. I believe that the drones should only be used for military missions, not for every day surveillance.

Does the police force really need drones? So far that's the only justification I've seen for this.

 

Didn't realize that my link had so much to do with the UK, this shit is happening in the US though too.

i don't know about restrictions but as i see it they just replace the small planes and helicopters, police and different gov. agencies can surely use more "eyes".

I swear we are the opposite person, Eugene.

 

Here I come in the middle...

 

I'm bothered by the complete lack and oversight of the bill but not the concept of commercial "drones." I have no qualms with civilian operated drones monitoring national forests, conducting geographical survey's, monitoring large tracts of private ranches, etc. Likewise I have no qualms with military drones operating from their bases and over restricted training grounds. But I don't want local and national police forces using drones with very little, if any, warrants and restrictions, especially as the machines become smaller and cheaper (we're also talking potential mini copters here, not just easy to spot aircraft). Texas has a National Guard unit that switched from F-16s to RQ-1s a couple of years ago, and which is now operating border patrol and anti-narcotics missions and is technically under the command of Governor Rick Perry if he declares an emergency. I'm not exactly ok with that. So yeah I'm bothered by the bill too.

is there any indication that the restrictions that are put on surveillance by police choppers won't be the same for drones ?

  On 3/5/2012 at 11:19 PM, Rambo said:

Cameras will be absolutely everywhere in the future that much is obvious. There's no point being bothered about it because it's a done deal. What is important is how we manage this future where everything is captured. We need to focus on people and governments and their intentions.

totally, Black Mirror episode 3..