Drones to Spy on US Citizens

Raven, there is a difference between someone keeping their blinds open and bypassers accidentally seeing something in your house, and someone deliberately looking at your house trying to figure out what you're doing. One of those is an accident and generally not intending to intrude on our lives, the other is someone being a creep or you've attracted the attention of law enforcement. We do deserve our privacy, and we shouldn't have to keep our blinds open all the time in order to achieve it. (And well, if you've attracted the attention of law enforcement they're probably watching more than just your home.)

Anyway, I don't see what the big deal of this is, if all they're going to do is use them the same way they use police helicopters. More of the same they're already doing, really.

Because it can be watched again and again. Memory gets fuzzy over time; what somebody mentioned in passing while you were in earshot is probably to no concern to you anyway. But if it is recorded, it can be recalled whenever necessary, analyzed, maybe even used as leverage.

And no, the protection of privacy must extend beyond the boundaries of one's property. Hell, by your warped logic, stalkers are completely justified in what they do - as long as they don't trespass on foreign property. And really, violation of privacy is much more severe than mere trespassing I'd say.

The problem is that drones are better at what they're doing. More mobile, too, so they can get very much closer. Thus, they can cause more intrusion than helicopters, I'd say.

edited 16th Dec '11 10:31:32 AM by Octo

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

I realize that, but if they're going to use it for law enforcement, I fail to see much of a problem aside from those we already have with our justice system. Again, more of the same of, for good and bad. I certainly don't think they're just going to spy on random people for shits and giggles. If they're going to spy on people they think are spies and terrorists (or the crime of your choice) they would do that with or without the drones.

I actually don't have a problem with non-intrusive stalking. So long as the stalker isn't doing anything to bother the stalkee other than being present, I'd say the stalker is well within their rights to wait outside a person's home and workplace and follow them around while they're out in public.

edited 16th Dec '11 10:50:53 AM by RavenWilder

You can probably get a stalker on other grounds, but you have no legal right to privacy in a public place or any place that can be reasonably seen from a public space, and as an amateur photographer I very much want things to stay that way.

This isn't any different than a helicopter patrol, and will only pick things up happening out in the open anyhow.

I'd be infinitely more concerned if this was loosening wire tap requirements or something...

I am now known as Flyboy.

Raven, that is called stalking, which is a fucking crime. Something to do with harassment. A civilian can get arrested for stalking someone. It's harassment and probably counts as causing mental duress. It is also a precursor to more serious and harmful crimes. So no, people are generally not within their rights to follow you except in very specific circumstances. Which, presumably, the people using the drones meet.

Drones? Where is your style America? Brazil uses Zeppelins!!! Seig Hail Dilma russof.

edited 16th Dec '11 1:49:42 PM by Baff

I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.

You do in countries with sufficient basic rights. The right to the own image and the right to informational self-determination. In short, if you photograph somebody, and he or she tells you to destroy the picture, you have to (though the default assumption is consent IIRC). And if you want to publish the photo you have to expressively ask for consent.

That's appaling. So you want to photograph people in their privacy, no matter if they consent or not?

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

He was talking about photographing people out in public. Like say, eating outside at a cafe, or milling around a gas station. Which photographers do; it's quite easy to get people in a shot even if what you're aiming at is the pretty statue or a bird.

edited 16th Dec '11 2:12:12 PM by AceofSpades

I think the other public concern issue with this that I could see is that the public gets worried about is not only being watched by machines, but being watched by machines that we used to stick weaponry on to hunt down insurgents with.

edited 16th Dec '11 2:15:07 PM by RocketDude

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel

I think Rocket Dude has it.

The drones themselves are no problem. They're, in effect, un-manned helicopters.

The problem is that people will think that, drone = BIG MACHINE THINGY WITH MISSILES!!1!!1!!1!11

And people get scared easily.

I'm more worried about wiretapping and email hacking tbh.

All this will do is open up a market for civilian jamming technology.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

Well, those people can suck it up. I imagine we could save quite a bit on these drones versus traditional helicopters, in the long run.

I am now known as Flyboy.

Granted, yeah, what I said falls apart when you remember that helicopters also used to have guns stuck on them, but I'm not sure if it was military demand that created the helicopter.

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel

But the primary view of choppers is that they're a standard thing, even if they have guns.

I assure you, after a few years of these drones roaming the airspaces of urban areas, they'll be as 'normal' as the choppers that preceeded them.

Until we invent hoverboards and the youths of tomorrow express their rebellion by tagging drones with spray paint.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.

"Our neighborhood's drone is obviously more pimp than yours!"

I am now known as Flyboy.

"FUQ DA OPERATING SYSTEM!"

I am going to agree with barkey on this. Likely to be deployed in the same roles as FLIR equipped police helicopters. Bonus is they may be cheaper and easier to run the a high mainntenance helicopter less public money needed to fund them.

Who watches the watchmen?

Now, as much as I like keeping my privacy private, hasn't google already done this?

Moreover, it would be possible for any organization to review what happens in every square inch of land at all times, or viewing at night, or during a storm, or inside, or really anywhere other than certain hotspots during the day with fair weather no glaring lights or obscuring clouds.

Imagine being shown an image of the universe, and being told what species of ant is in it.

Now that you mention it, that has been a big issue as far as privacy concerns go, with Street View and such.

If they use something like an RQ-4 Global Hawk, which has no weapons, then maybe some of those fears of getting splashed by Hellfire missiles could be allayed. Probably too expensive though.

@USAF: But the only thing that makes helicopter surveillance a bit less dystopian is that it's expensive and impractical. A more efficient system of surveillance allows them to snoop on us even further.

Even if it doesn't allow'em to see anything they couldn't see before, widespread drone surveillance allows'em to see stuff they wouldn't see before, just because they wouldn't deem it effective to be snooping.

Privacy does go down quantitatively, even if the jump ain't qualitative.

edited 16th Dec '11 5:25:24 PM by SavageHeathen

You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.

All it picks up is things that are already out in the open to begin with. You lose your pretensions to privacy when you step out of your home, in terms of what physical actions you take.

Besides, I somewhat doubt that they'd waste money to just fly around aimlessly with this thing all that much. They'll probably just use it for car chases and the like. Hell, it'll get used less than a helicopter: you can't transport people in a drone (yet).

I am now known as Flyboy.