I've seen one of these somewhere else:
Posted on 01/03/2006 4:23:08 PM PST by SandRat
WASHINGTON, Jan. 3, 2006 – Troops conducting urban operations soon will have the capabilities of superheroes, being able to sense through 12 inches of concrete to determine if someone is inside a building.
The new "Radar Scope" will give warfighters searching a building the ability to tell within seconds if someone is in the next room, Edward Baranoski from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Special Projects Office, told the American Forces Press Service.
By simply holding the portable, handheld device up to a wall, users will be able to detect movements as small as breathing, he said.
The Radar Scope, developed by DARPA, is expected to be fielded to troops in Iraq as soon as this spring, Baranoski said. The device is likely to be fielded to the squad level, for use by troops going door to door in search of terrorists.
The Radar Scope will give warfighters the capability to sense through a foot of concrete and 50 feet beyond that into a room, Baranoski explained.
It will bring to the fight what larger, commercially available motion detectors couldn't, he said. Weighing just a pound and a half, the Radar Scope will be about the size of a telephone handset and cost just about $1,000, making it light enough for a soldier to carry and inexpensive enough to be fielded widely.
The Radar Scope will be waterproof and rugged, and will run on AA batteries, he said.
"It may not change how four-man stacks go into a room (during clearing operations)," Baranoski said. "But as they go into a building, it can help them prioritize what rooms they go into. It will give them an extra degree of knowledge so they know if someone is inside."
Even as the organization hurries to get the devices to combat forces, DARPA already is laying groundwork for bigger plans that build on this technology.
Proposals are expected this week for the new "Visi Building" technology that's more than a motion detector. It will actually "see" through multiple walls, penetrating entire buildings to show floor plans, locations of occupants and placement of materials such as weapons caches, Baranoski said.
"It will give (troops) a lot of opportunity to stake out buildings and really see inside," he said. "It will go a long way in extending their surveillance capabilities."
The device is expected to take several years to develop. Ultimately, servicemembers will be able to use it simply by driving or flying by the structure under surveillance, Baranoski said.
I've seen one of these somewhere else:
And count one staunch conservative.
You may be thinking of the war on terror but I am concerned with unrelated applications.
welcome aboard!
Exactly.
Except if we're scared. Then anything is reasonable.
/gagging sarcasm
I'm not sure which is worse, your apparent lack of knowledge regarding the Constitution or the seeming lack of a backbone that you portrayed in that post.
Here's a hint. . .
We don't get our rights from the Constitution. Or from the government.
Here's another. . .
Rights do not have to be named to exist.
Clue #3. . .
If we have no right to privacy, why would it even be necessary to remind the government that it "...SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED"?
But who gets it first, our troops overseas, or the local cops looking to see what you may own?
What does an honest person have to fear? I wish they had gotten a warrant for Moussaui.
There's a picture of one over here...
http://kotp.blogspot.com/2006/01/pentagon-20-eyes-like-supermans.html
If an honest person has nothing to fear, then why did the founding fathers prohibit warrantless searches? And if you want warrantless searches, then why can't you just repeal the Fourth Amendment and be honest about it rather than trying to sidestep it?
Nope. How do you think I got a lot of the stuff I use? I follow the Milton Berle theory; "I'll steal no joke line or image until it's time."
In my opinion (and I think that of most reasonable people) a judge is capable of determining if a search was reasonable either subsequent to or prior to a search. In effect your rights are still protected to the same extent.
Of course you need an honest judge. The older I get the more I realize those are few and far between.
For starters, the motive behind anyone who advances a sophistic argument such as that.
You have nothing to worry about from me - my motives are to ensure that people don't have to choose between being burned to death or leaping out a window to a certain death. If Americans have business with Osama and his friends, I hope there are people listening in.
Due to the number of warrants that have been denied the Bush administration and the various leaks to the media, I would prefer that warrantless searches be made rather than no searches at all.
Sometimes i make my own like this one but my better ones are hand drawn but with the lack of a scanner it's hard to get'em to the net !
Can it work to see IED's buried in the ground?
They shouldn't worry: the technology described can only see through concrete; it hasn't a prayer of penetrating a Liberal's skull.
The populist view of rights is that they must be enumerated to exist. That is incorrect.
The Federalists argued, correctly, that an enumeration such as the Bill of Rights (BOR) would lead to the erroneous conclusion that those rights not enumerated were not reposed in the people. Please see Federalist No. 84, here: http://patriotpost.us/fedpapers/fed_84.html
The Anti-Federalists however, refused to ratify the Constitution without a specific enumeration of rights. Ultimately the Federalists acquiesced, and in exchange for Anti-Federalist support and ratification of the Constitution, agreed to include a BOR at their first opportunity.
The proposed BOR can be found here: http://patriotpost.us/histdocs/madamend.htm
The people never surrendered or delegated their right of privacy, or control thereof to the government. In teh case of Griswold v. Connecticut, it was therefore entirely unnecessary for the Supremes to examine the emanations of the prenumbras of the BOR to "FIND" a right of privacy or make one up....we never surrendered it in the first place.
The Fourth Amendment is likewise superfluous to a free people, where the only authorized government action, or delegated authority, is specifically enumerated in the body of the Constitution. Absent a specific grant of authority to search, there is no authority to search.
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.