OT: Unmanned Aerial Drones for SPD - Public meeting

[BigDave]

And all this time I thought it took an amendment to the Constitution to prohibit the anonymous exercise of Constitutional Rights and Civil Liberties currently protected under the penumbra of the Bill of Rights. Now, I learn that all it takes is a vote by the city council. That sure is convenient for them!

As with anything, someone wants to do something but that path will likely be blocked before the City could enact such an ordinance and they likely would not stand up to a challenge, well in my view anyways.

Note I posted the link and others to provide more information about the subject not that I support SPD views on this issue.

Not that I am totally against the use of these mini helicopters with cameras mounted but limited to areas that are considered public or come with a warrant.

 

[Freedom1Man]

[video=youtube;ZYFN6seSBSo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYFN6seSBSo[/video]

GO GOVERNMENT!!!

 

[sudden valley gunner]

[video=youtube;ZYFN6seSBSo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYFN6seSBSo[/video]

GO GOVERNMENT!!!

But don't you see our government will never abuse these technologies and only does it for your good and if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't mind.

(I heard purple is to indicate sarcasm)

This is why I am against unconstitutional "proactive" policing. It automatically takes out the victim part of the criminal process and substitutes we need to watch you and make sure you obey state malum prohibitum laws.

 

[Freedom1Man]

But don't you see our government will never abuse these technologies and only does it for your good and if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't mind.

(I heard purple is to indicate sarcasm)

This is why I am against unconstitutional "proactive" policing. It automatically takes out the victim part of the criminal process and substitutes we need to watch you and make sure you obey state malum prohibitum laws.

I thought that Cyan was for sarcasm.

Then again I've never read one word of sarcasm on this forum.

 

[gogodawgs]

4th amendment must be outdated....

Heck it doesn't even look like warrants are needed anymore, that dreaded 4th amendment must be outdated.... might as well let a rookie cop decide law instead of an experienced and impartial judge.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-5...rrantless-use-of-hidden-surveillance-cameras/

Police are allowed in some circumstances to install hidden surveillance cameras on private property without obtaining a search warrant, a federal judge said yesterday.

 

[amlevin]

Those in Seattle probably don't need to worry too much about any more drones being flown by SPD. The City Council said "NO MORE MONEY"!

I guess even the "libs" in Seattle aren't too happy about the "eyes in the sky".

 

[Freedom1Man]

Those in Seattle probably don't need to worry too much about any more drones being flown by SPD. The City Council said "NO MORE MONEY"!

I guess even the "libs" in Seattle aren't too happy about the "eyes in the sky".

Well yeah, do you think they want the police finding their grow ops with even greater ease?

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Heck it doesn't even look like warrants are needed anymore, that dreaded 4th amendment must be outdated.... might as well let a rookie cop decide law instead of an experienced and impartial judge.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-5...rrantless-use-of-hidden-surveillance-cameras/

It's for the good of the collective! Resistance is futile!

 

[Trigger Dr]

Heck it doesn't even look like warrants are needed anymore, that dreaded 4th amendment must be outdated.... might as well let a rookie cop decide law instead of an experienced and impartial judge.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-5...rrantless-use-of-hidden-surveillance-cameras/

If you leave any gear, (camping, fishing, etc) in a national forest, park,etc, the Gov claims ownership as it is "abandonded property"

I would presume that if you found a camera on your property you could claim ownership as "abandonded property". Let the hunt begin.