Posted on 07/08/2018 4:25:32 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
Drone technology offers the potential to change our world... But the technology also has a dark side. It can be used to spy on us, to threaten our critical infrastructure, or to attack crowds and public places.
For years, the Department of Homeland Security has worried about the dangers of unmanned aerial systems, and we have sought the legal authority to protect Americans against corrupted aerial devices. Today I have a pressing message for Congress: Time is running out.
As secretary of homeland security, I can tell you that threat is outpacing our ability to respond. Without congressional action, the U.S. government will remain unable to identify, track and mitigate weaponized or dangerous drones in our skies.
Unfortunately, the laws on the books today were not written with weaponized drones in mind. As a result, the nation’s two biggest law enforcement departments — DHS and the Justice Department — have their hands tied when it comes to protecting Americans.
While we do have certain limited capabilities for scanning the skies for rogue drones, we largely lack the updated tools and most sophisticated authorities to monitor and mitigate inbound threats.
For instance, DHS should be able to access signals being transmitted between a nefarious drone and its ground controller to accurately geolocate both quickly. This could allow authorities to take control of the device or stop its operator on the ground to prevent a potential attack.
Yet current legal constraints prohibit us from doing so and from addressing other drone-threat scenarios, such as drones configured to operate without a human operator, which will require a separate set of solutions.
Worse still, we are prevented from even testing certain drone-defense technologies where we really need them, such as in urban environments to protect large gatherings and public events.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I thought it was glowbull warming we should be afraid of?
I’m not sure how many people realize this but with some of the commercially available drones, it would be very easy to send these drones into a crowded stadium. It wouldn’t take much of a “payload” to create utter havoc.
Going to need a bigger wall.
Drones seem to have a lot of downside to them. I wonder how it will be possible to stop the threat of the bad guys using drones in ways such as you suggested.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3654800/posts
articles on drone weaponry and counter-drone abilities.
The dangers are real, and the need for strict controls.
Darn shame.
When was the last time we had a cabinet secretary who gave a hoot about ANYTHING going on that can hurt the country let alone writing an article about it to call attention to a big problem? Good for her. She’s doing her job and the libs/weasels can’t stand it!
We could also work on technology to steer meteors into the path of the Earth so that the devastation will destroy all of the infrastructure necessary for the creation and deployment of drones.
Best of all would be to develop ways to funnel taxpayer money to financial institutions so that whatever happens the banksters will not have to go to jail or lose any of their illgotten gains.
Doesn't sound very easy or practical, and politicians would still do nothing. An easier hypothetical scenario is when experimenters use drones on antifa and lib protest gatherings. They would easily panic in utter havoc and chaos. Only then would lib politicians make preparations to curtail use of drones.
Can you imagine drones in the hands of hillary’s goons?
Everything that seems like a good idea under a Republican administration gets exploited and used to target innocent Americans under a dem one. See the Patriot Act.
Not saying we don’t need to address this, but needs careful consideration.
Encryption and ultra wide band spread spectrum.
Free skeet lessons and ammo.
Waiting for the muzzies to start.
Why parrot the liberal and statist talking points?
If the dangers of plastic flying helicopters require strict controls then aren't strict controls even more needed for something dangerous, like a gun?
Any contraption you can think of can be weaponized. I don't need to list them, since anybody who has watched the news, or served in the Middle East knows how many ways people with bad ideas have been able to wreak havoc.
It is true that as technology advances drone and robot based weapons will exist, and in fact they ultimately may join the class of weapons protected by the 2nd Amendment.
There are dozens of ways that someone with evil intent could cause problems at a stadium full of people, and certainly defending against them is something security teams should be doing. But singling out one type of device when it really isn't any different than many others, and is less of a risk in many ways, is just an example of government trying to grow, and trying to expand its power without any real justification or ability to do anything.
Assume for a minute that it became illegal to launch a drone to fly over a stadium (it essentially is already). Would such a law actually stop a terrorist from doing so? Of course not.
The same can be said of the R/C aircraft that had been sold in hobby shops for years (some can be truly massive). The main difference now is that drones are ready to go out of the box.
And what else would be taken out?
I wonder if drones will be banned for public recreational use in America. There is no constitutional right to own a drone.
No amount of bureaucratic hand-wringing and regulations will protect us from people with evil intent. And as technology evolves it will be possible for people with evil intent to use that technology in bad ways.
Most of the schemes that the DHS secretary mentioned would impose great burdens on legitimate users, or create a vast and complicated bureaucratic process, without deterring or preventing individuals, groups, or nation states with bad intentions.
Security approaches that focus on people work, those that focus on machines don't.
We just need personal protection drones (or drone swarms).
2nd A. relevance?
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.