Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress

The Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, February 7, 2012 | Shaun Waterman

[rarestia]

Look! Up in the sky! Is it a bird? Is it a plane? It’s … a drone, and it’s watching you. That’s what privacy advocates fear from a bill Congress passed this week to make it easier for the government to fly unmanned spy planes in U.S. airspace.

The FAA Reauthorization Act, which President Obama is expected to sign, also orders the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the testing and licensing of commercial drones by 2015.

[going hot]

No limit on varmints.

[rarestia]

Consider military video you may have seen from Iraq/Afghanistan where some bad guys are running across a road to plant an IED or some such thing.

Weather likely isn’t an impediment. These drones use both line of sight, infrared, and likely even thermal cameras, so trying to duck one or hoping that inclement weather puts a damper on their spying is just a pipe dream.

[Travis McGee]

I've had UAVs in my last three novels. You just can't write these kinds of bleeding-edge novels and not include the all-seeing eyes in the sky.

Especially the kinds that can remotely drop missiles, or fire sniper rifles.



BTW, I just created a new web page, about that Ingram MAC-10 picture.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Who owns the airspace over the US? Serious question and I think I know the answer. I think what I am getting at is whether or not individual states can impose airspace restrictions.

[thesearethetimes...]

Here is the Senate Vote. Read it and weep.

YEAs -—75
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagan (D-NC)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Moran (R-KS)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Rubio (R-FL)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs -—20
Akaka (D-HI)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Brown (D-OH)
Cardin (D-MD)
Casey (D-PA)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lee (R-UT)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Sanders (I-VT)
Stabenow (D-MI)

Not Voting - 5
Barrasso (R-WY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Hatch (R-UT)
Kirk (R-IL)
Vitter (R-LA)

Only 5 Republicans voted NO. Thank you God for DeMint, Crapo, Rand Paul, Lee from Utah and Risch from Idaho.

I am already on DeMint’s and Rand Paul’s Tweet list, and am getting set to get on the other nay voters lists.

God grant us strength.
Tatt

[Chickensoup]

Maybe a good strong laser would fry the camera?

__________________________________

If there isn’t enough intestinal fortitude to eliminate the cameras at traffic stops ... i dont think that there is the will to get rid of drones.

[Travis McGee]

CW2 Ping

And now, a message from the Ministry of Fatherland Security:

"No illegal meetings means NO ILLEGAL MEETINGS!"

[filospinato]

Totally! Anyone up for some bird huntin’? I hear it’s open season all year round on drones, none of them are on any endangered list.

[CodeToad]

“sparsely populated, low-density Class G air traffic airspace “

Not much harm in that one. It is what is coming years down the road that is hazardous to freedom.

Class G airspace is uncontrolled airspace, not unregulated, but uncontrolled. What they want to do is setup a Yuma or White Sands type of area someplace to allow testing of commerical drones. Right now there just isn’t anywhere they are allowed to do that, everything is in a military reservation.

[unkus]

Exactly!

At 250 + yards.

[MaxMax]

Doesn't the Constitution protect the Citizens from the Military?
Using military aircraft/anything to monitor civilians is legal?

Hey Feds, this will not end well for you!
Taunting an action from Citizens will backfire!

[KoRn]

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[thesearethetimes...]

Also from the bill : \

“”Directs the FAA Administrator to make available on the FAA’s website a five-year “roadmap” for introduction of unmanned aircraft systems into the National Airspace System.””

Sadly FRiend, the intent here is clearly for use in domestic air space.

Give us strength Lord.
Tatt

[rarestia]

Posse Comitatus essentially forbids the Federal government from calling up the US military for domestic purposes. Obama’s already promised a new sort of “security detail” for America, and I’d bet the farm that this is step #1 in that implementation.

America’s dominated all of the wars in which She’s engaged because she owned the air and the sea. If the Feds own the air with drones, any attempts by civilians to rise against the Federal government will be met with drone attacks.

This is checkmate, really. I’ve seen the post that answers “what good is one citizen with a gun against an army?” That answers the question for ground operations, but owning the air... I’d like to see a corollary to that.

[Nervous Tick]

>> also orders the Federal Aviation Administration to develop regulations for the testing and licensing of commercial drones by 2015

This sucks.

I’m not just worried about the government drones — I’m kinda worried about the Google drone too. ;-)

[driftdiver]

Depends on the drone. Some fly very high and can see through the cloud cover. Others can only fly in calm weather at low altitudes.

[cbvanb]

They’ve already got the work-around on that one, the proposal is for commercial drones. That means somebody besides the military. What I can’t seem to find anywhere is the justification for this. We won’t secure a border, but we will put thousands of drones into the air, to secure what, exactly?

[rarestia]

OOOOH! Stinger! This could work too:

9K38 Igla

[cbvanb]

I disagree that this is checkmate. There isn’t any information yet that drones will be armed. And, Afghanistan is an example of what committed people, no matter how wrong, can stand up to this kind of technology. Despite drones and all the other technology we are bringing to bear, we will end up leaving that place just as the Russians did.