Imagine if it thr subject were encryption instead of drones.
Police are able to shoo people away from crime/accident scenes, that should apply to devices too, and can't they solve it by having a device that shoots out a net? (Or does that only exist in movies?) US police can apply for federal military gear for cheap anyway (not that that's a good thing, police should deescalate, not escalate situations).
> hostage rescue team set up an elevated observation post
> the head of the agency’s operational technology law unit told attendees of the AUVSI Xponential conference here.
We don't know when this incident occurred nor do we know if this was a surveillance op or part of an actual raid. The article is possibly FUD, but this isn't outside of the realm of possibility.
In my neck of the woods, drones have been known to drop contraband in prime locations at our state maximum-security prison[0]. Surveillance, and counter-surveillance is not a huge leap to make from there. Being able to disrupt a top-tier police unit for a few grand is money well spent.
[0] - https://www.postandcourier.com/news/in-south-carolina-the-fi...
Moderately sophisticated people can do all sorts of things to undermine police activity, especially raids. Think about things like detecting WiFi, tactical radios or Bluetooth devices.
The police operate in a dark world, and the counterparties that they interact with are fundamentally bad actors.
> One would make it illegal to “weaponize” consumer drones.
> The other — and arguably more important — amendment would require drones that fly beyond their operators’ line of sight to broadcast an identity allowing law enforcement to track and connect them to a real person.
Literally neither of these would have had any effect on the case at hand. I'm reminded of gun control legislation - except you can't build a gun from scratch in your basement and quadcopters are very ineffective at killing people.
You can't? While the equipment isn't something everyone owns, there are those who do own it and can do it.
Take this for example (warning, language!) https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/diy-shovel-ak-...
That guy is building a receiver, then assembling. Most people who are into it are just assembling.
This is like saying you didn't make homemade bread if you didn't grow the wheat out back. It is a pointless statement countering an assertion no one asserted because the rest of us know that home made bread means from store bought ingredients unless specified otherwise.
Making primers and smokeless powder might be tricky, but the mechanical stuff is easy peasy.
Blatantly false for that bit, but I agree with the rest of what you're saying.
> The other — and arguably more important — amendment would require drones that fly beyond their operators’ line of sight to broadcast an identity allowing law enforcement to track and connect them to a real person.
Not terribly hard to circumvent, just put in the data of a public official.
To bring it back, it is perfectly legal to build guns or even vehicles in your basement or garage, but if you wish to operate either of them then they must conform to some standards in order to make them legal. Same with quadcopters, if you build one in your basement and wish to operate it legally, it should be required to identify you as the owner. Whether that is compiling in a hash identifier that's tied to a national database of registered operators, or a postit note with your name on it taped to the bottom is irrelevant. If you're found operating a drone without the identifier, you should be charged with violating the laws. There will always be people that build untraceable "ghost" drones or guns, but from my quick research untraceable guns make up less than one percent of all known weapons used in crimes. Until it starts reaching a couple percent, it seems like off the shelf guns or drones will continue to be the issue. There is almost zero barrier to entry outside of cost to owning a drone. They'll continue to become cheaper as time moves on, so the problem will only get worse. Until they get banned entirely, drones made in a non-production facility like a basement intended to evade law enforcement are a non-issue.
i dunno. i hear these 'backyard' gun makers in the Philippines are pretty advanced
https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2013/04/08/backyard-gun-sh...
Can't build a a very sophisticated gun, but it is certainly possible to fabricate something that shoots bullets after nothing but a trip to the hardware store. For both your legal and physical well being, I do not recommend trying it.
https://www.budk.com/ProductDetail.aspx?itemno=56%20BU4303
3-Pack is $19
"Using 12 gauge rounds as the delivery system, the shells separate into tethered pieces after firing them. As these parts separate and extend outward, a web is created that is 5' in diameter. When the SKYNET round reaches the drone, the tethers and round pieces wrap around the drone, interfering with the propellers and forcing the drone to the ground. If the SKYNET round misses the target, it is designed to parachute safely to the ground to reduce any unwanted damage or injury. There are three in the pack."
(edit, parenthetical for clarity)
Effectiveness: When they outlaw drones, then only outlaws will have drones. Wait a second, the outlaws already have drones, so if they make drones illegal then they're not actually doing anything but causing problems for law abiding citizens. The criminals will continue breaking the law.
Liberty: Combine the previous two and you get liberty. Outlawing drones will not be effective in protecting citizenry or the interests of the state in serving the citizenry. Owning a drone is pretty cool. If there is a cool thing that I can own AND me owning it doesn't cause effect the well-being of my fellow citizens then a state that is interested in freedom and liberty will allow me to own it.
On the other hand if the state is interested in oppressing the citizenry, then outlawing drones would be an acceptable action to take.
Personally, I would rather live in a state that tends towards enabling liberty in the citizenry instead of one that tends towards oppressing the citizenry.
What regulation? You can build your own drone with open source software. People with criminal intent are not going to build their drones according to regulations and put in a transponder that broadcasts their ID.
If you don't want drones around just plug your taser into a magnetron...
The guys at the top are much smarter, and are running in some cases multi-billion dollar operations. You have to be smart to be in charge of something at that scale, whether it's Wal-Mart or MS-13. I'm not saying the gang bosses are good, but many of them are smart. They have "technology teams" of sorts. After all, somebody thought to strap drugs to drones and experimented with payloads before sending them...
Most criminals are honestly pretty dumb. Real life isn't like the movies.
You don't have to know how to build it yourself, you just need to stick a gun in the ribcage of someone who does.