ToDaZeD Chilling Phrase
Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
0.522 Powered by WordPress
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
0.522 Powered by WordPress
Gee, I think somebody said “The drones are a-comin’” a while ago, didn’t they?
Tip of the iceberg, really.
Comment by mojo — May 16, 2012 @ 7:34 am
Brits don’t have a tradition of target practice.
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 16, 2012 @ 7:44 am
Amazing what the brane stores in memory: I just recalled a scene from a cartoon I saw as a little kid! It was a little dog, bouncing around a big bulldog and saying, “Whadda wanna do Rocky, huh? Wanna knock out some street lights Rocky? Huh, huh, huh…..?????”
Comment by Colonel Jerry USMC — May 16, 2012 @ 9:10 am
Artwork? There goes the uncooperative John Galt into the rotating knives…
I’m seeing a new use for old tires coming here.
Skeet practice too.
Comment by dick, not quite dead white guy — May 16, 2012 @ 9:23 am
The putrified corpses of Hitler and Stalin are sprouting wood just thinking about this new technology.
Comment by joe — May 16, 2012 @ 9:29 am
Don’t see any potential abuses here. When do we get to install intellihome?
BTW, I have a friend that just flew and she received a pat-down. Half way through the pat down, the TSA agent started talking about her wife at home. She was already about half way done so my friend just let her pat her down the rest of the way.
I thought the whole idea of having someone of the same gender pat you down was to reduce the possibility of sexually groping someone or reduce the possibility of sexual harassment charges.
And since the war with terrorists is over, do we get to scale down the TSA and abolish DHS?
Comment by Paladin — May 16, 2012 @ 9:34 am
How about civilian ownership of drones? Since our tax dollars probably funded the R&D aspect of these things why not try to find a useful application of the technology? I’m thinking ranchers or farmers with lots of acreage dealing with problems they would otherwise have to hire a more expensive plane or chopper to address.
Could that be practical? Keep in mind I live on the East coast where there aren’t a whole lot of large scale ranches or farms.
Comment by Zipser — May 16, 2012 @ 9:51 am
I can think a few ranches on the border that could use one of those.
Maybe with a hellfire or two attached.
Comment by Paladin — May 16, 2012 @ 10:02 am
I don’t know if I first saw this here, but it bears rewatching. I particularly like the “Can I shoot it, Daddy?” comment!
Comment by PeggyU — May 16, 2012 @ 11:45 am
Well, it helps to remember to include the link!
Comment by PeggyU — May 16, 2012 @ 11:52 am
Private drones?: Don’t make me laugh, you peons. O-fficial use only. Wanna bet?
Shooting ‘em down over your own property?: Well, good luck with that. If you succeed, expect a visit from the laws. Guaranteed to be a crime.
Comment by mojo — May 16, 2012 @ 12:16 pm
They aren’t so interested in using drones in the city, as they are using them in the rural areas where they have had a hard time getting people to give up and move to the city.
They’ve been trying to force rural folks into the cities for decades, because they can be controlled easier.
Remember all those vids of Al Qaeda guys getting the shit blown out of them by laser guided bombs that everyone was cheering at. I wasn’t cheering at them. I was seeing the future.
Think about it.
Comment by Caged Insanity — May 16, 2012 @ 12:35 pm
How about civilian ownership of drones? Since our tax dollars probably funded the R&D aspect of these things why not try to find a useful application of the technology? I’m thinking ranchers or farmers with lots of acreage dealing with problems they would otherwise have to hire a more expensive plane or chopper to address.
Could that be practical? Keep in mind I live on the East coast where there aren’t a whole lot of large scale ranches or farms.
Comment by Zipser
Zipser, they’re called radio-control planes and you can get them from any hobby store or on-line catalog company. With cameras transmitting down to monitors or first-person-view goggles, too. I’ve been flying r/c planes for 30+ years and the jump in technology we’ve gotten from the drone programs in the past 10 years has been astounding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wu1Bwhuh4M
Personally, I’d rather see police spend 1/100th the cost and danger of helicopters on drones. Remember that the law has long held that if you are outside you have NO expectation of ‘privacy’ and police helicopters have helped in many many situations….
Comment by TimO — May 16, 2012 @ 1:18 pm
Oooh,
shooting wolves, coyotes, and caribou from drones.
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 16, 2012 @ 1:26 pm
Thanks TimO. I can’t go YouTubin’ at the office but I’ll check it out from home.
I wasn’t thinking of keeping them unarmed after purchase :-)
Z
Comment by Zipser — May 16, 2012 @ 1:35 pm
If Congress allows this without VERY strict rules on useage, then—–it`s on!
(…right in there with: ‘…quartering British soldiers in your homes…’ :(
Comment by Colonel Jerry USMC — May 16, 2012 @ 1:53 pm
Our pants should have an elastic waist band so we can easily moon them—-we ladies can wear a skirt and
thong underwear’s.
Comment by geezerette — May 16, 2012 @ 2:38 pm
Collimated light in a range of frequencies for the varieties of cameras. Even a spotlight can squirrel out many cameras without harm–just confuse the crap out of the ccd so a good pic can’t be had.
Even unfocused IR LEDs clipped on the top of a 9v battery can prove a distraction to cameras on these remotely piloted vehicles night vision. Dispense semi randomly as needed.
Actually I have some ideas (thanks for the reminder) for making life difficult for paparazzi without harming the critters. Same concept for these. . .
Comment by mech — May 16, 2012 @ 3:56 pm
Let’s think about this:
Miscellaneous islamic dirtbags in various primitive places have already demonstrated a variety of drone vulnerabilities. E.g.:
- Using readily available off the shelf technology and cheap software downloaded from the internet to monitor & record the drone info feeds.
- Using basic technology to hijack the drone.
Does anyone think our gang-bangers, drug runners, para-militarys, mob guys, general all-around criminals, and just plain citizens are stupider and less able than third world dirtbags?
…okay, it might be a close contest on the stupider thing, but I still think our dirt bags are better than their dirtbags…
Think what rich opportunities are here:
- Bank robberies depending in part on monitoring police surveillance drones for security.
- Cross border drug & human traffic running: first there’s utilizing the surveillance feeds, and then if it looks like the drones are about to see the wrong thing, just turn off the feed — or crash them.
- Overriding the surveillance video feed — hey, let’s send something interesting to the guys running the drones: Three Stooges reruns, the latest porn movie, video text of The Bill of Rights, or just maybe… the footage from yesterday, which of course doesn’t show the crime being committed today.
- Will any of these drones be armed? Possible not, but if so…. can anyone say “launch codes?”
- Oh, and great new movie plot lines.
There’s so much else to comment on in this post, but time precludes it. The real issue here (beside governments everywhere spending yet more money they don’t have on technology that’s already obsolete) is of course civil liberties. On this matter our culture is in a sharply accelerating decline, and I fear where we are going.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 16, 2012 @ 4:01 pm
mech (18): OMG! The paparazzi drone. Should have seen that coming. paparazzi aren’t the greatest threat to most of us, but still…
…and according to me, maybe they don’t even need to buy one. They can just hijack the video feed (undetectable) or maybe even the operations of ones the cops or whoever already have up for security.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 16, 2012 @ 4:05 pm
Oh yeah, about Turkey:
They haven’t been our ally, even a little bit, for at least a decade.
People who think they still are, live in the past. Those who think they can be sweet-talked into being our ally again are living in a fantasy world. They get a lot from us and give little in return, and they are more likely to work against our interests than for them. We’re the folks with the wherewithal, and therefore we should be the ones making demands.
And should we be involved with Turkey’s problems with Kurdish separatist fighters at all? If we’d stop doing the wrong things we could make the Kurds better allies for us than any regular moslems anywhere, and boy could we use that.
…not that it’s a surprise to anyone, but our entire foreign policy has long needed a major overhaul both high level and in detail.
It’s a different topic, be we’ve gone drone crazy, and now we’re ready to share that craziness with folks who are bad choices for receiving our largess.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 16, 2012 @ 4:14 pm
http://www.infowars.com/judge-napolitano-first-patriot-to-shoot-down-a-government-spy-drone-will-be-a-hero/
When I was working in the bidness, Posse Commitatus prevented us from looking at the illegals coming across the border, so AF, Border Patrol and Contractor personnel had to tormp through the brush to simulate illegals.
If that law survives, then
fatherlandHomeland Security will just run it instead of the military. Simple.Comment by mech — May 16, 2012 @ 4:40 pm
^ Oh good, the child gropers staffing DHS will now be controlling drones to intrude yet further into the lives of innocent American citizens.
I hope BHO is out this fall (not in the gay sense, but in the un-elected sense), and I hope the housecleaning his replacement brings to the government goes though DHS like a white tornado… or like a pound of Exlax through a five pound monkey.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 16, 2012 @ 8:23 pm
The environazis already spy on people, although usually they just trespass on foot.
Comment by PeggyU — May 16, 2012 @ 9:33 pm
Peggy, saw your link in (10) above.
^ environazis already spy on people
I’d forgotten how obnoxious, self-rigeous, and intrusive those people can be. Don’t they have lives of their own to take care of?
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 16, 2012 @ 11:10 pm
Can we all wear masks? The progs are using the Guy Fawkes mask. Maybe we all can get Breitbart masks.
Comment by Walt — May 17, 2012 @ 9:37 am
Paintball guns for the cameras. Only the paintballs are filled with flat clear-coat. From a distance, the camera looks OK, but the matte finish clear-coat fuzzes up the image.
Comment by Fat Baxter — May 17, 2012 @ 3:59 pm
Well, it will soon be clear “who’s in charge here.”
Three guesses as to who it *isn’t*. And what happens to them if they get “uppity.”
(Here’s a hint: it’s you.)
Comment by Merovign — May 17, 2012 @ 6:37 pm
Oh yeah, and nice communist iconography on that “total surveillance society” panopticon device.
Comment by Merovign — May 17, 2012 @ 6:38 pm
For any who doubt it, here’s the shape of things to come:
http://www.infowars.com/spy-drone-almost-causes-mid-air-collision-with-jet-over-denver/
The United States air space, particularly the urban areas, is just not like the air space in some 6th Century, ass-wipe, 3rd or 4th world country…. duhhh!
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 17, 2012 @ 8:36 pm