Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FBI to Rand Paul: Domestic drone surveillance doesn’t require a warrant
Washington Examiner ^ | 07/30/2013 | Joel Gerkhe

Posted on 07/30/2013 7:53:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Drone surveillance in the United States does not require a warrant, but the practice remains limited, the FBI told Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., in a letter after he placed a hold on James Comey’s nomination to be the new FBI director.

“[T]he FBI does not, and has no plans to use [unmanned aerial vehicles] to conduct general surveillance not related to a specific investigation or assessment,” Stephan Kelly, the assistant director at the FBI’s Office of Congressional Affairs, wrote Paul.

Kelly said that UAVs, or drones, have only been used for surveillance in the United States 10 times since 2006, in cases related to “kidnappings, search and rescue operations, drug interdictions, and fugitive investigations.”

Extant Supreme Court rulings suggest that such surveillance does not qualify as a “search” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment, Kelly added, and so does not require a warrant.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: domesticdrones; drone; fbi; randpaul; surveillance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 07/30/2013 7:53:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

We’re the government.

We do as we please.


2 posted on 07/30/2013 7:55:47 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Using technology to spy into people’s homes is no different than entering their home. This is a battle our conservative leaders need to fight with all they have. It will win people over instantly.


3 posted on 07/30/2013 7:56:26 AM PDT by ilgipper (Obama is proving that very bad ideas can be wrapped up in pretty words)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

According to the U.S. Constitution they would need a warrant. Our Founders fought and won a war against a tyrant who used such methods. No general warrants shall be issued!


4 posted on 07/30/2013 8:01:03 AM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

The way I see it is that I don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy while walking down the street.

Taking a leak in my yard shouldn’t get me arrested for indecent exposure when all that can see me is government.


5 posted on 07/30/2013 8:03:43 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

It was less than a decade ago when we were told that these would never be used over American soil and such thoughts were the stuff of conspiracy theorists.

Today the same people tell us that they’ll do as they please with them.


6 posted on 07/30/2013 8:06:04 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

“Using technology to spy into people’s homes is no different than entering their home”

They can use binoculars to scan my windows (with shades drawn, if needed), but don’t smash in my front door with a ram followed by a swat team.

There IS a whole lot of difference there!

Other than a 90 degree (or thereabouts) change in azimuth of observation, there is not much difference between a police car cruising down the street in front of your house and a drone flying over it.

Unless you are sunbathing nude in your fenced back yard. (Not really a good idea. Some teenager with a quad-copter will have the video on YouTube before your sunburns starts to hurt!)

;-)


7 posted on 07/30/2013 8:07:48 AM PDT by BwanaNdege ("To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"- Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

...for helicopters too?


8 posted on 07/30/2013 8:07:48 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

Oddly enough there are things that are completely legal in private but illegal in public.

What happens when there is no private?


9 posted on 07/30/2013 8:09:16 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

No such thing as a 4th Amendment


10 posted on 07/30/2013 8:10:23 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

If you are investigating (surveilling) people, you need warrants.


11 posted on 07/30/2013 8:11:03 AM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“I am perpetual I keep the country clean.”


12 posted on 07/30/2013 8:11:24 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Our Founders fought and won a war against a tyrant who used such methods. No general warrants shall be issued!

One issue which ironically seems to be bringing the Tea Party and the hard Left around to one point of agreement.


13 posted on 07/30/2013 8:12:00 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Citizen, this is a check for your 4th amendment license...


14 posted on 07/30/2013 8:12:15 AM PDT by Darksheare (Try my coffee, first one's free.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Extant” rulings “suggest” ???!!!!

And this is supposed to be the basis for a wanton violation of our liberty?

Methinks it’s time for the FBI director to chat with Mike Kelly, Trey Gowdy and Darrell Issa. These gentlemen, I’m sure, will make it abundantly clear to the FBI that, suggestive “extant rulings” aside, there is no freakin’ way they can conduct domestic surveillance operations without a proper search warrant.

Only your Mother gets away with, “Because I said so.”


15 posted on 07/30/2013 8:19:20 AM PDT by Walrus (America died on November 6, 2012 --- RIP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

You think you’ve private lives
Think nothing of the kind
There is no true escape
I’m watching all the time

I’m made of metal
My circuits gleam
I am perpetual
I keep the country clean

I’m electric, electric spy
I’m protective electric eye

Always in focus
You can’t feel my stare
I zoom into you
You don’t know I’m there

I take a pride in probing
All your secret moves
My tearless retina
Takes pictures that can prove


16 posted on 07/30/2013 8:24:57 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Extant Supreme Court rulings suggest that such surveillance does not qualify as a “search” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment, Kelly added, and so does not require a warrant.

OK. By this reasoning, some group of private citizens should be able to put up a fleet of drones to monitor our treasonous politicians and bureaucrats 24/7/365, and we should expect no complaints.

17 posted on 07/30/2013 8:28:29 AM PDT by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Those against the Patriot Act were labeled as such as well.


18 posted on 07/30/2013 8:34:49 AM PDT by autumnraine (America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to thoe tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I live in LA (though hopefully not much longer), and we have police helicopters whopping about at all hours of the day and night. Sometimes they even help in interfering with ongoing criminal activity. They should have a warrant for this?

Drones would theoretically spread out the distance as to how such other police assets could be utilized...in addressing crime, that is. There’s the catch, one guesses. But would I like the LAPD to stop using helicopters? I don’t think so.


19 posted on 07/30/2013 8:44:38 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

Fighting crime in progress is one thing, but surveilling citizens is quite another.


20 posted on 07/30/2013 8:47:43 AM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

This is a battle our conservative leaders need to fight with all they have.


Conservative leaders? On the federal level I can only name two.


21 posted on 07/30/2013 8:47:50 AM PDT by DH (Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Take it to court. Better than doing nothing.

LLS

22 posted on 07/30/2013 8:51:27 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege
Other than a 90 degree (or thereabouts) change in azimuth of observation, there is not much difference between a police car cruising down the street in front of your house and a drone flying over it.

Except that what we are talking about here is a technology that will enable the government to park an invisible police car outside your house and watch (and record) it continuously, and to simultaneously track (and record) everywhere you go when you leave it.

23 posted on 07/30/2013 8:51:34 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades (Hold your face to the light, even though for the moment you do not see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege; cripplecreek

There’s the rub right there...SHOULDN’T

Now, as for ‘drone’ vs. ‘cruiser’: There’s a reason I put up a PRIVACY fence. A cop can only see up the boundaries I may put up, a drone does so much more.

Soon we’ll all be reading of the great new high-tech gadgets mounted on said drones. Infrared, sonar, electronic surveillance, etc. Even the cops are not allowed to use those wall penetrating ‘viewers’.

How soon before it becomes a crime to shield your home from the outside world....You know, ‘if you have nothing to hide....’


24 posted on 07/30/2013 8:59:47 AM PDT by i_robot73 (We hold that all individuals have the Right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives - LP.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

I agree. When I see “no different than” statements I usually disregard them because there there are almost always differences.


25 posted on 07/30/2013 9:13:23 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I’m with you there.

Best to You and Yours.


26 posted on 07/30/2013 9:22:43 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

citizens to FBI - yes it does


27 posted on 07/30/2013 9:25:51 AM PDT by Wuli (uir)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Oddly enough there are things that are completely legal in private but illegal in public.

What happens when there is no private?

This sorta thing makes me wanna start digging down underground and become a “mole-person”... The after centuries of “Progressive utopia” us Morlocks can pop up and eat some of them tasty Eloi


28 posted on 07/30/2013 9:25:59 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

“Unless you are sunbathing nude in your fenced back yard. (Not really a good idea. Some teenager with a quad-copter will have the video on YouTube before your sunburns starts to hurt!)”

BOL! Even pre teeners might do the scanning.


29 posted on 07/30/2013 9:41:44 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (Having a discussion with liberals is like shearing pigs. Lots of squealing & little fleece!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Drone surveillance in the United States does not require a warrant...

Okay.

Just so long as you agree that blowing them out of the air with a 12 gauge, 3 inch magnum turkey load doesn't require a hunting permit.

30 posted on 07/30/2013 9:46:53 AM PDT by OldSmaj (I am an avowed enemy of islam and obama is a damned fool and traitor. Questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Putting a camera in someones back yard to collect evidence has always needed a search warrant, but flying a camera into someones backyard does not?

Idiots.

Totalitarian, Unconstitutional Traitors to the Union, who are... idiots.


31 posted on 07/30/2013 9:47:37 AM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Who needed the Fourth amendment anyway? Just some words on paper. And since 0bama doesn't enforce current law, we at the FBI won't either. After all, we are part of Eric Holder's justus dept.

My country is slipping away...

5.56mm

32 posted on 07/30/2013 9:54:08 AM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

33 posted on 07/30/2013 10:04:43 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
We need Granny Clampett to come out with her shotgun every time a drone spies on a citizen w/o a warrant.
34 posted on 07/30/2013 10:09:23 AM PDT by PATRIOT1876 (The only crimes that are 100% preventable are crimes committed by illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

The technology might be more sophisticated than you think.


35 posted on 07/30/2013 10:37:11 AM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

fine, but do you want police to follow you everywhere you go and not hve a reason to do it other than they just can?

it is one thing to see officer shoot-yer-dog just driving by the neighborhoodperiodically and noticing you doing something in your yard. it’s another when the state actively surveils you constantly to build huge case files on you and know what you’ve done better than yourself, and you have no idea why. we are not east germany.


36 posted on 07/30/2013 10:51:09 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

thank you, exactly. why some people are just fine with a police state unchecked is beyond me. “technology” is NOT and acceptable excuse to just allow it unchecked and to ignore the law of requiring warrants.


37 posted on 07/30/2013 10:52:48 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Walrus

“Methinks it’s time for the FBI director to chat with Mike Kelly, Trey Gowdy and Darrell Issa. These gentlemen, I’m sure, will make it abundantly clear to the FBI that, suggestive “extant rulings” aside, there is no freakin’ way they can conduct domestic surveillance operations without a proper search warrant.”


You are kidding right???? These three chest pounders are going to do something about it?

So far they are 0 out of 4 on the “phony scandals”.

Holder is still walking around free and not in jail for his contempt of congress and perjury charges...

These three have been lied to some many times by people under oath that most of the Obama admin would be in jail for perjury and they do........nothing but pound their chest for the TV.


38 posted on 07/30/2013 11:27:45 AM PDT by eartick (Been to the line in the sand and liked it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“FBI does not, and has no plans to use...”

Hold them to that statement, Rand!


39 posted on 07/30/2013 4:03:18 PM PDT by In Another Time... (..In another place...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eartick

Kidding? No.

Chest thumpers? Hah. Who would YOU suggest ? Lindsey Graham? John McCain?

Troll.


40 posted on 07/30/2013 6:06:56 PM PDT by Walrus (America died on November 6, 2012 --- RIP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

Conservative leaders? Where?


41 posted on 07/30/2013 9:22:38 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (If you vote for evil because you can't see evil, you ARE evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

FUMFCSMF’s. Prattle to your boots, you bastards of humanity.


42 posted on 07/30/2013 10:27:02 PM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Do you support drones along the border to enhance border security and interdict smuggling? Do you support drones off our coast for the same reason?

I think drones can make sense in specific situations, but you could make a good argument that drones along the border would unfairly intrude on persons who live near the border.

For specific uses - tracking criminal suspects instead of several surveillance units being needed they seem to be a good fit. It would save taxpayers lots of money. I also agree that non-stop 24/7 drone coverage for no articulated reason would violate the spirit of the constitution.

This is one of those difficult issues that will require conservatives to articulate reasonable exceptions or we will lose the arguments. I don’t think we can fall back to a blanket negative response. Drones would definitely be the best way to patrol the northern border with Canada and there are lots of spots on the southwest border where they would be extremely effective.

I think the recent case law on police placing GPS trackers on vehicles in public places seems to indicate that the courts may view some drone use as an unreasonable intrusion on privacy requiring a warrant if it is targeted against an individual and does not involve the border.


43 posted on 07/31/2013 12:35:11 AM PDT by volunbeer (We must embrace austerity or austerity will embrace us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Oddly enough there are things that are completely legal in private but illegal in public.

What happens when there is no private?

Great point. The less privacy there is, the more Tyrannical government will become.

44 posted on 07/31/2013 12:55:41 AM PDT by sargon (I don't like the sound of these here Boncentration Bamps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

45 posted on 07/31/2013 1:17:25 AM PDT by Fresh Wind (The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

“Other than a 90 degree (or thereabouts) change in azimuth of observation, there is not much difference between a police car cruising down the street in front of your house and a drone flying over it.”

When drones are regularly equipped with thermal imaging equipment that can see right through you fences, window shades, and walls, then there is a world of difference.


46 posted on 07/31/2013 8:14:47 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

Won’t work, they’ll just get the FAA to declare it “restricted airspace”, or require civilians to get “drone licenses” and file their flightpaths with the FAA for approval.

Drones for me, but not for thee!


47 posted on 07/31/2013 8:25:50 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades; BwanaNdege

Yes, good point. We should also remember that these things will drop off in cost dramatically over the next few years. So, while the government could never pay enough officers’ salaries to do general surveillance of the citizenry 24 hours a day, they WILL be able to afford swarms of drones to accomplish the same task.


48 posted on 07/31/2013 8:28:12 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: volunbeer

“For specific uses - tracking criminal suspects instead of several surveillance units being needed they seem to be a good fit. It would save taxpayers lots of money. I also agree that non-stop 24/7 drone coverage for no articulated reason would violate the spirit of the constitution.”

The problem with saying that we need to allow them for “reasonable uses”, is that they will not only be used for those “reasonable uses”. Remember when SWAT teams were only going to ever be used for hostage rescue situations? Now they are used daily as a matter of course whenever the police feel like it.

You can’t give the government a sledgehammer and expect them to use it delicately. Government is an unthinking beast that will abuse whatever tools you give it access to.


49 posted on 07/31/2013 8:34:06 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

If the government wanted to watch you or your home they can already do that with satellites - they would not need drones. Drones already exist and they grow every 6 months in capability and decrease in price. Period. There is no way to prevent them - we can only attempt to put safeguards in place to protect personal liberties pursuant to the constitution.

However, outside of your home there is very little legal basis for privacy - if I can see your house in a plane there is no way to legally prevent the government to see your home with a drone. Google Earth is pretty darned accurate and we can’t legally stop them. I have heard of cases where county tax assessors have used it to locate new construction on homes, new swimming pools, and new decks/patios and levy new property taxes on homeowners.

Technology is here to stay and it will continue to grow- the key question for those of us concerned with personal liberties is how we protect personal freedoms. The blanket “no” is not going to win us a chair at the table and it does not reflect reality. They already do the same stuff with planes and the blanket negative response is not realistic and it will preclude conservatives from shaping the debate.

Do you think a majority of Americans would oppose the use of a drone to find a lost 10 year old in the forest, or track a wildfire from the air, or catch smugglers on the border? The obvious answer is a majority of Americans would be fine with it.

Your SWAT analogy is very valid and I agree that it is now far overused and abused. However, the answer to that problem is the same as the drone problem - have a government that people can trust and demand accountability from them.


50 posted on 07/31/2013 8:07:15 PM PDT by volunbeer (We must embrace austerity or austerity will embrace us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson