Support NeoGAF

[Barrett2]

It doesn't have weapons, though. It could possibly carry weapons in the future.

I also find it odd that it's cool for thousands of cops to walk around with lethal weapons on their person at all times, but one unmanned drone with a camera on it is what makes you nervous. Okay, dude.

Stop being afraid of technology.

A lot of you guys are missing the broader implications. This thing will be sent in to capture surveillance footage that would otherwise only be accessible via a formal warrant allowing cops to gain entrance to a facility, or take a look inside a 3rd floor office window. Forget the weapons, the more immediate point is that this further accelerates the cops abilities to obtain warrantless surveillance on citizens. That's a bad thing.

 

[Jenga]

A lot of you guys are missing the broader implications. This thing will be sent in to capture surveillance footage that would otherwise only be accessible via a formal warrant allowing cops to gain entrance to a facility, or take a look inside a 3rd floor office window. Forget the weapons, the more immediate point is that this further accelerates the cops abilities to obtain warrantless surveillance on citizens. That's a bad thing.

uh huh


but it'd still be illegal wouldn't it

 

[neutralgamer02]

They probably really need them. Houston is a shithole from what I hear. (Sorry, Houstonites. I live near a shithole city too, it's OK.)

Live in Houston, and it isn't a shithole. There are bad spots, but overall it is a nice place.

Also, if you read the article this isn't the city of Houston Police, also known as HPD, but Montgomery County Police. The title should be changed to clarify that.

HPD fueled that 2007 controversy even further by suggesting that drones could be used for writing speeding tickets.

The backlash prompted Mayor Annise Parker to scrap HPD's plans for using drones when she took office.

Our police department, the actually HPD, scraped our program when she got into office. This isn't going to effect us.

Ever been to South Houston? They really need this shit.

South Houston, I guessing you mean Southeast Houston, isn't that bad. Not to the point that we would need drones. Crime is way down for this year and the past two years anyway.

Also, again, these drones aren't going to effect the city of Houston.

 

[News Bot]

Guys, really, none of you have said why this is militarization, and a regular helicopter is not. You're knee jerk reacting to technology, you've watched terminator too many times and are getting old.

This is one flying non-weaponized robot, get a grip.

thats how it starts!!!11!

 

[Barrett2]

uh huh


but it'd still be illegal wouldn't it

Not under the scenarios I described.

So, nuh uh.

 

[Jenga]

Not under the scenarios I described.

So, either we A. don't give police updated tech or B. have harsher regulations on what they can and can not do with this tech

im for B

 

[Barrett2]

So, either we A. don't give police updated tech or B. have harsher regulations on what they can and can not do with this tech

im for B

Yes, that's it. Let's give police departments equipment which they will abuse the hell out of in violating all sorts of reasonably anticipated Constitutional rights solely for the purpose of making their job easier, and then try to counteract that by expecting state legislators to pass smart laws counteracting every instance of abuse created by giving them the unnecessary tools to begin with.

 

[Jenga]

Yes, that's it. Let's give police departments equipment which they will abuse the hell out of in violating all sorts of reasonably anticipated Constitutional rights solely for the purpose of making their job easier, and then try to counteract that by expecting state legislators to pass smart laws counteracting every instance of abuse created by giving them the unnecessary tools to begin with.

ok so you choose A

thanks for playing

 

[Joates]

A lot of you guys are missing the broader implications. This thing will be sent in to capture surveillance footage that would otherwise only be accessible via a formal warrant allowing cops to gain entrance to a facility, or take a look inside a 3rd floor office window. Forget the weapons, the more immediate point is that this further accelerates the cops abilities to obtain warrantless surveillance on citizens. That's a bad thing.

Couldnt the cops just use a Manned helicopter to go spying??? How would using a RC heli differ on admissible grounds in the courtroom?

Forget the weapons, the more immediate point is that this further accelerates the cops abilities to obtain warrantless surveillance on citizens. That's a bad thing.

And theyll be able to use that in court how???

 

[Barrett2]

ok so you choose A

thanks for playing

So instead of addressing the substance of my post your response is "thanks for playing"?

Damn, dude, you really put me in my place with that quip. I assure you, I am sufficiently intimidated by your response, i'll turn off my browser now, go play some video games.

 

[Jenga]

So instead of addressing the substance of my post your response is "thanks for playing"?

Damn, dude, you really put me in my place with that quip. I assure you, I am sufficiently intimidated by your response, i'll turn off my browser now, go play some video games.

smoke a bowl dude it'll calm you down

 

[Barrett2]

smoke a bowl dude it'll calm you down

I would, but im' pretty sure the NYPD has an RC helicopter hovering outside my building recording footage of my living room right now.

 

[Maddness]

Ha! Drones here in Houston. Probably constantly hovering over Missouri City. Call me when it's an actual scare.

 

[echoshifting]

Well, this is some scary shit

 

[Jenga]

I would, but im' pretty sure the NYPD has an RC helicopter hovering outside my building recording footage of my living room right now.

nah it's ok with proper legislation that would be illegal without a warrant

pass the bong bro

 

[Joates]

nah it's ok with proper legislation that would be illegal without a warrant

pass the bong bro

Not according to him...

A lot of you guys are missing the broader implications. This thing will be sent in to capture surveillance footage that would otherwise only be accessible via a formal warrant allowing cops to gain entrance to a facility, or take a look inside a 3rd floor office window. Forget the weapons, the more immediate point is that this further accelerates the cops abilities to obtain warrantless surveillance on citizens. That's a bad thing.

...Im still waiting for him to explain this.

Must be the whole RC aspect makes it legal... somehow?

 

[echoshifting]

Not according to him...



...Im still waiting for him to explain this.

Must be the whole RC aspect makes it legal... somehow?

The police don't need a warrant to look in your window.

Not sure what's scarier, that they now have access to it or that so many of you are so willing to hand it over to them. Because...why? This won't make you any safer, so why would you want your local police to have it?

 

[Joates]

The police don't need a warrant to look in your window.

And his argument is shot to shreds by window blinds...

So its the "unmanned" nature of it that has you paranoid... I dont get it.

 

[Professor Beef]

...Are people really scared of a giant robo-helicopter peeking through your blinds?

Well, I guess that is kinda scary, but couldn't you thwart it by shutting said blinds?

 

[echoshifting]

And his argument is shot to shreds by window blinds...

Ha ha, yeah. Okay. That'll stop em. You got me!

You have no idea what you're talking about. The police are very patient when it comes to surveillance, window blinds and curtains aren't perfect by any means, and I sure as shit shouldn't have to shut every last bit of light out of my house on every side of the building to keep the police from spying on me. That's ridiculous.

So its the "unmanned" nature of it that has you paranoid... I dont get it.

No, it's the fact that they can fly and they are smaller and less obvious than a uniformed police officer, and therefore much more effective spies.

 

[Joates]

Ha ha, yeah. Okay. That'll stop em. You got me!

You have no idea what you're talking about. The police are very patient when it comes to surveillance, window blinds and curtains aren't perfect by any means, and I sure as shit shouldn't have to shut every last bit of light out of my house on every side of the building to keep the police from spying on me. That's ridiculous.

Now when I said paranoid I had no idea how bad it actually was...

And for the bold, why the fuck do the police care whats behind your blinds, unless you got something to hide...

No, it's the fact that they can fly and they are smaller and less obvious than a uniformed police officer, and therefore much more effective spies.

And quiet as a mouse too I bet. Hover right over your head without you noticing :lol

And it all goes back to none of that being admissible in Court, so what is your point, other than pure paranoia?

 

[echoshifting]

Now when I said paranoid I had no idea how bad it actually was...

And for the bold, why the fuck do the police care whats behind your blinds, unless you got something to hide...

That's not their business, or yours. We should all have rights to a reasonable degree of privacy, and I believe this is an unreasonable infringement on those rights.

I can't believe that the arguments against the invasive nature of these machines are basically...

1) Who cares if it's illegal? You're paranoid.
and
2) Ooooo you must have something to hide! You must be a criminal.

That is some seriously irrational garbage. I mean, at this point I just have to ask how old you are, because I find myself wondering if you have any memory at all of what the world was like before 9/11...? That one event, and now every time something like this happens, people who are concerned with the increasingly militarized nature of police are dismissed by some as "lol, paranoid!" There's no real argument there. You aren't arguing for the drones at all, you're just trying to shut down any rational discussion weighing the pros and cons, and I find that very disturbing.

 

[MWS Natural]

I guess there won't be an OCCUPY HOUSTON movement.

 

[kehs]

Now when I said paranoid I had no idea how bad it actually was...

And for the bold, why the fuck do the police care whats behind your blinds, unless you got something to hide...



And quiet as a mouse too I bet. Hover right over your head without you noticing :lol

And it all goes back to none of that being admissible in Court, so what is your point, other than pure paranoia?

Drone flies around your house and looks in, sees all your shit.

Cops get an "anonymous tip" that can be used as probably cause to get a warrant.

Nah, that's cool, cause...well it's just a little rc copter.

 

[Joates]

That's not their business, or yours. We should all have rights to a reasonable degree of privacy, and I believe this is an unreasonable infringement on those rights.

First off, no ones rights have been infringed upon by the police merely owning and operating this. Hypotheticals do not make your case.

I can't believe that the arguments against the invasive nature of these machines are basically...

1) Who cares if it's illegal? You're paranoid.

Youve given no examples where this would be illegal.

and
2) Ooooo you must have something to hide! You must be a criminal.

That is some seriously irrational garbage. I mean, at this point I just have to ask how old you are, because I find myself wondering if you have any memory at all of what the world was like before 9/11...? That one event, and now every time something like this happens, people who are concerned with the increasingly militarized nature of police are dismissed by some as "lol, paranoid!" There's no real argument there. You aren't arguing for the drones at all, you're just trying to shut down any rational discussion weighing the pros and cons, and I find that very disturbing.

Youre phone was wiretapped as a part of the patriot act and you were shipped off to syria for interrogation, right? Yeah Id say most of what youre saying stems primarily from paranoia.

 

[Joates]

Drone flies around your house and looks in, sees all your shit.

Cops get an "anonymous tip" that can be used as probably cause to get a warrant.

Nah, that's cool, cause...well it's just a little rc copter.

How is that different from a cop walking around your house and finding out the same fucking shit? Oh because they can do it remotely, omg.

 

[echoshifting]

First off, no ones rights have been infringed upon by the police merely owning and operating this. Hypotheticals do not make your case.

Youve given no examples where this would be illegal.

Youre phone was wiretapped as a part of the patriot act and you were shipped off to syria for interrogation, right? Yeah Id say most of what youre saying stems primarily from paranoia.

Thank you for completely skating past the fact that you have yet to present any kind of an argument for the machines. Proves my point. If all you're going to do is brush off my concerns with this ad hominem garbage I don't have anything else to say to you.

 

[Joates]

Thank you for completely skating past the fact that you have yet to present any kind of an argument for the machines. Proves my point. If all you're going to do is brush off my concerns with this ad hominem garbage I don't have anything else to say to you.

Pilots safety?

Bystander safety?

Cost reduction?

Three off the top of my head. Got anything besides paranoia to back your argument with?

And none of those things are particularly hard to deduce from the information present, I can see how paranoia of your "rights" being "infringed" upon could make you completely overlook those though.

 

[Parallax Scroll]

Jesus christ guys, it doesn't have any weapons on it.

 

[kehs]

How is that different from a cop walking around your house and finding out the same fucking shit? Oh because they can do it remotely, omg.

Yes?

Human = Accountable

Drone = Not Accountable

 

[Joates]

Jesus christ guys, it doesn't have any weapons on it.

But it can be easily retrofitted with a stun-baton (according to vid).

 

[HeySeuss]

Serious chicken little going on. Do you really think they are going to use a multi million dollar piece of equipment to look into your window hoping to find you growing that pot plant in your closet? Fuck sakes guys get a grip.

It will be used the same way manned helicopters are used now. With the added benefit of being able to drop tear gas canisters into riot situations.

 

[Joates]

Yes?

Human = Accountable

Drone = Not Accountable

Its not autonomous people. Its being remotely pilotted by someone, does that person hold zero accountability?

 

[Gospel]

one step closer to robocop

 

[kehs]

Its not autonomous people. Its being remotely pilotted by someone, does that person hold zero accountability?

Probably not as much as a cop being on site.

IA: "Who was piloting the drone?"

Captain: "Don't know, must have been the rookie who shot his wad to early"

 

[demon]

Yes?

Human = Accountable

Drone = Not Accountable

That's pretty much it. Kind of the same issues some people have with the drones used by the military, and you can relate it to the problems people have with traffic light cameras too. There's no person behind it, at least at the scene, and so there's much less accountability. Less accountability = more room for abuse of power. And this is police departments we're talking about. Some are good, some not so much. I just don't trust them with this kind of technology, not to mention what this could lead to years down the road.

Its not autonomous people. Its being remotely pilotted by someone, does that person hold zero accountability?

Not zero, but less.

 

[echoshifting]

Pilots safety?

Valid point. Have a cookie!

Bystander safety?

Nope. There is just as much of a chance that this will create additional hazards for everyone else.

The GAO report points out several concerns as more police departments and commercial ventures try to gain more widespread use of this technology, which has been reserved for military and battlefield uses in the past.

The report states that turbulence and other dangerous conditions that would keep pilots from flying manned aircraft for their own safety may not deter police from launching unmanned aircraft right into danger.

"The difference is, if you're onboard the aircraft, you can tell that you're into turbulence and you can maneuver to get the plane or aircraft out of the turbulence," said Dillingham. "But if you're using a UAV and there are no sensors aboard, you don't really know that and, again, if you lose that communication link as a result of that turbulence, or for any other reason, then you have an aircraft that is not in control and can in fact crash into something on the ground or another aircraft."

The GAO cited data from the Defense Department and NASA in several years of testing drones. In 199 crashes of unmanned aircraft on battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan, 65 percent were caused by mechanical failures. The report notes this is common with a new technology.

Seventeen percent were caused by operator error and 12 percent were listed as "causes unknown."

The Pentagon reported that unmanned aircraft crash twice as often as manned military aircraft, but the rates get better as operators get more experience.

Source. This is a three year old report, but I expect there will be more now that they've resurrected the program.

Cost reduction?

Is this conjecture or do you have something to back that up? My understanding is this equipment is being purchased and maintained with federal money on top of the state's normal operating budget for its police departments.

Three off the top of my head. Got anything besides paran-awww

You were doing so well. -10 points. Still, good effort at actually having a discussion.

 

[Joates]

Probably not as much as a cop being on site.

Great answer. But why stop there, why not just completely back peddle out of the corner youve put yourself in?

 

[rohlfinator]

And quiet as a mouse too I bet. Hover right over your head without you noticing :lol

Um, yeah? Probably not to that extreme (yet), but one of the main reasons they're using them in the military is because they're a lot less detectable than a traditional plane or helicopter. I'm sure there is a ridiculous amount of research being done to make these things as invisible as possible.

 

[Joates]

Valid point. Have a cookie!



Nope. There is just as much of a chance that this will create additional hazards for everyone else.



Source. This is a three year old report, but I expect there will be more now that they've resurrected the program.



Is this conjecture or do you have something to back that up? My understanding is this equipment is being purchased and maintained with federal money on top of the state's normal operating budget for its police departments.



You were doing so well. -10 points. Still, good effort at actually having a discussion.

Hmm. Would a full-sized helicopter cause more damage crashing than its 50lb counterpart? Perhaps.

It should reduce costs by replacing older tech with this. Like using this rather than a full size heli.

And yet youve still got nothing besides paranoia backing up your argument, its really hilarious.

THEY MIGHT SPY ON US!!!!

And then they might try (and fail) to use that information in court.

 

[HeySeuss]

Probably not as much as a cop being on site.

IA: "Who was piloting the drone?"

Captain: "Don't know, must have been the rookie who shot his wad to early"

No way they allow it to be piloted by someone that isn't commissioned as a police officer, just like the actual pilots are police officers.

They would have exactly as much accountability as any other officer. The drone will video everything and the pilot sees everything that goes on as he's operating the drone. If you think for a second of somebodys fourth amendment rights are violated no defense attorney is going to say, "oh well nothing we can do he's not accountable...".

Get fucking real.

 

[AlimNassor]

Live in Houston, and it isn't a shithole. There are bad spots, but overall it is a nice place.

Also, if you read the article this isn't the city of Houston Police, also known as HPD, but Montgomery County Police. The title should be changed to clarify that.



Our police department, the actually HPD, scraped our program when she got into office. This isn't going to effect us.



South Houston, I guessing you mean Southeast Houston, isn't that bad. Not to the point that we would need drones. Crime is way down for this year and the past two years anyway.

Also, again, these drones aren't going to effect the city of Houston.

it's scary that it's in my own country. This isn't even a high crime area. We're a real rich area or at least the Woodlands is fairly nice. Makes no sense.

 

[Joates]

Um, yeah? Probably not to that extreme (yet), but one of the main reasons they're using them in the military is because they're a lot less detectable than a traditional plane or helicopter. I'm sure there is a ridiculous amount of research being done to make these things as invisible as possible.

This isnt your military brand predator, its more closely related to an off the shelf RC helicopter that has been around for quite some time now...

 

[Maddness]

it's scary that it's in my own country. This isn't even a high crime area. We're a real rich area or at least the Woodlands is fairly nice. Makes no sense.

The Woodlands is like the shire. They have no idea anyone exists out of it. Conroe rich? Maybe in oxygen. They've got lots of trees out there.

 

[echoshifting]

Hmm. Would a full-sized helicopter cause more damage crashing than its 50lb counterpart? Perhaps.

It should reduce costs by replacing older tech with this. Like using this rather than a full size heli.

And yet youve still got nothing besides paranoia backing up your argument, its really hilarious.

THEY MIGHT SPY ON US!!!!

And then they might try (and fail) to use that information in court.

I mean, wow.

 

[Joates]

[/IMG]

I mean, wow.

So now even youve stopped trying to justify your own stupidity?

 

[echoshifting]

So now even youve stopped trying to justify your own stupidity?

Sure, okay. Think whatever you want to think about how this went pal.

 

[Joates]

Well it kinda started here...

Well, this is some scary shit

And it might as well have ended here...

That's not their business, or yours. We should all have rights to a reasonable degree of privacy, and I believe this is an unreasonable infringement on those rights.

I can't believe that the arguments against the invasive nature of these machines are basically...

1) Who cares if it's illegal? You're paranoid.
and
2) Ooooo you must have something to hide! You must be a criminal.

That is some seriously irrational garbage. I mean, at this point I just have to ask how old you are, because I find myself wondering if you have any memory at all of what the world was like before 9/11...? That one event, and now every time something like this happens, people who are concerned with the increasingly militarized nature of police are dismissed by some as "lol, paranoid!" There's no real argument there. You aren't arguing for the drones at all, you're just trying to shut down any rational discussion weighing the pros and cons, and I find that very disturbing.

All of which screams paranoia, hell you even threw in a 9/11 reference :lol

Be sure to close all the blinds before bed, wouldnt want anyone or thing watching you sleep

Oh and the reason I say youre strictly paranoid is because you still havent been able to give one instance where the use of this would be illegal...

 

[rohlfinator]

This isnt your military brand predator, its more closely related to an off the shelf RC helicopter that has been around for quite some time now...

A $300k off-the-shelf RC helicopter? Okay.

 

[Joates]

A $300k off-the-shelf RC helicopter? Okay.

With advanced controls that let you pilot it from where ever and not be interfered with by other wireless devices or frequencies? Thats an expense upgrade Id imagine.