Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2011, 09:02 PM
 
45,221 posts, read 26,431,296 times
Reputation: 24972

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Better stay away from my business then...Cameras everywhere...They have aided in the conviction of 4 thieves and two vandals in the last two years....Great tool, and I think those small drones will be too...They will make police work a lot safer...

I don't know why you would object, unless you are doing something illegal...Are you?
I'm not speaking to cameras on private property.I have a choice to patronize your business or not.
How would you feel about random cavity searches?...if you aren't hiding anything,should be no problem ...right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-24-2011, 07:16 AM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,735,123 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Great tool, and I think those small drones will be too...They will make police work a lot safer...

I don't know why you would object, unless you are doing something illegal...Are you?

I object because I value my privacy. And there are numerous cases of police abuse of their authority. Giving them one more tool to abuse is not a good idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Houston, Tx
3,644 posts, read 6,304,160 times
Reputation: 1633
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
How is this REALLY any difference than other forms of surveillance already in place? Most major cities already have closed circuit television systems monitoring parts of cities.
The difference is that a closed circit camera isn't going to run in to my plane at 150 mph. These drones are a navigational menace and, if allowed at all, need to be limited to altitudes of no more than 500 feet and be required to be flown by individuals with a pilot's license.
Small planes don't have radar. They practice "see and avoid", which is just like it sounds. It is hard enough to see a small plane coming right at you at a combined closing speed of 300 mph. Seeing a tiny drone would be impossible and a collision would still cause catastrophic damage and death. Ban UAVs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 11:56 AM
 
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,407,894 times
Reputation: 2394
The trade-off with hi-tech is the loss of privacy. Soon, we will see frequency/video jammers flood the market, only to be banned by the government. Beware of governments with this kind of control over it's people. All of us break laws and statutes (spitting on sidewalks, jay-walking . . .) all the time and this just gives them the ammo they need to build a case against anyone they feel like going after.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 02:23 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,832,973 times
Reputation: 20030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Does anyone think the police will not use this to invade our privacy? Before long, we will have drones flying overhead and photographing whatever they choose to look at.

Domestic use of aerial drones by law enforcement likely to prompt privacy debate
and how is this different from the small airplanes and helicopters that law enforcement uses now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerbacon View Post
The difference is that a closed circit camera isn't going to run in to my plane at 150 mph. These drones are a navigational menace and, if allowed at all, need to be limited to altitudes of no more than 500 feet and be required to be flown by individuals with a pilot's license.
Small planes don't have radar. They practice "see and avoid", which is just like it sounds. It is hard enough to see a small plane coming right at you at a combined closing speed of 300 mph. Seeing a tiny drone would be impossible and a collision would still cause catastrophic damage and death. Ban UAVs.
right. all those collisions between GA planes and UAVs need to be addressed immediately.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 02:47 PM
 
26,639 posts, read 36,711,783 times
Reputation: 29906
Seems like the 4th Amendment is under attack almost constantly these days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,464,288 times
Reputation: 27720
Hey..be thankful they will be starting out with nothing stronger than a camera mounted to them
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Between Seattle and Portland
1,266 posts, read 3,223,021 times
Reputation: 1526
This says it all:

"It is quite easy to envision a future in which (UAVs), unaffected by pilot fatigue, provide 24-7 border and port surveillance to protect against terrorist intrusion," said Mike Heintz on behalf of the UNITE Alliance which represents Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. "Other examples are limited only by our imagination."

Drone aircraft may prowl U.S. skies - CNET News



Well, the almighty Google Maps makes mistakes, so keep a good thought about the data the flyovers report.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Denmark
657 posts, read 697,355 times
Reputation: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Fox controls nobody.
Of course they do. In fact that is a well known tactic amongst propagandists: Constantly repeat the lies until people come to believe they are the truth.

Rupert Murdoch and his henchmen have been using this tactic very effectively for years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2011, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,532 posts, read 37,132,711 times
Reputation: 13999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
I'm not speaking to cameras on private property.I have a choice to patronize your business or not.
How would you feel about random cavity searches?...if you aren't hiding anything,should be no problem ...right?
Random cavity searches don't happen in Canada...We aren't that paranoid, nor is this country full of anti government conspiracy nuts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top