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 1-2021-4041-53 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]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 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