http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/29/123...tional-in-texas

Original article here. Given that's it's only a 50lb helicopter drone, it ain't gonna carry a lot of weaponry, but I could see a shotgun on it. The nicest thing for the users is that it has a FLIR system.

I love living in Texas.

By the way, this has already been done in the UK, and the second day of operation it aided in an arrest. It's not neccessarily a bad thing for the police force to get more advanced tools to do their job more efficiently.

EDIT: The arguments I heard against it were that it could see people from above (like a police helicopter...) or that it could attack people from above (.... like a police helicopter). Weak arguments, IMHO. Even the constitutional lawyer said that as long as it is not used for surveillance against people without warrant it is perfectly legal.

Are they black and stealthed?

Being legal doesn't make it good. Personally, I'd rather not have a flying drone with a *grenade launcher* in the hands of, say, the Oakland anti-99% thugs. And I'm sure they'll never break any of the rules using it. But, I wasn't posting this as a political statement.

One issue I can think of with a Drone Helo rather than a Piloted one is this: Hackability. If you get someone that's able to take control over the bloody thing... Well...

'Course, we haven't heard of too many UAVs going rogue, so maybe that thought is not as problematic as I might think...

I wonder if any criminals will start learning how to build broad band spectrum jammers to inhibit drones like this one...

There are non-lethal ammunition types for grenade launchers- beanbags, rubber pellet canister, stacked rubber slugs, and tear gas. One could make a RL Taser round (there is one for 12 ga. shotguns, and I doubt it would be much trouble to scale the design up). Pretty much anything made for shotguns also works for 40mm.

This design certainly couldn't mount a Mk-19 or AGS-17, though. Those weigh more or almost as much as the drone, respectively, and then you still need ammo. Certainly no room for a water cannon to use on all those unwashed hippies.

It's called a Baby Monitor from the 1980s. Yeah, 'cause those worked so well for the Oakland PD, eh?

Last I heard, nobody died, so... yep.

Not really. There's a reason they call them "Less-Lethal" rather than "Non-Lethal" these days, and it's not just semantics.

I wonder if the Police have done something to deal with the UAV video feed hacking issues...

Indeed, but just about anything can be used to kill, whether it was designed for that purpose or not. The responsibility usually lies with the user, not the manufacturer. If you look hard enough, you'll probably find a case where someone was killed with a pool noodle.

I'm really not sure of that. It would be a lot easier to kill bare knuckled. In fact, the only way I can think of, would be to force the person to swallow a big enough chunk that it gets stuck in their throat. Beating won't work, it's too thick for a noose-like idea, and I imagine it's too sturdy, but soft, to strangle someone. Unless you just used it as a cushion to hide marks, but that's more a tool for masking cause, then actually causing death with.

Pool Noodle + Wool Sock + Arrow = Flammable Launcher according to the Toronto Police Department.

According to the guy that made them, he was going LARPing, and was nowhere near the summit where the security was.

I stand corrected.

To be fair, I'm pretty sure the guy in this case was just a LARPer, unless the G&M forgot to mention that he had a buddy with a can of gasoline. I was really thinking more along the lines of using pool noodles for suffocation.

He is a LARPer, and used to travel on the Bus and Subways in Toronto to the events frequently. He was very upset that his armour was shown as well, as he worries he'll be figured to be some kind of terrorist.You know, this might explain why I was never teased or bullied in Woodworking or Auto Shop. The teachers were scared of me in those classes.

Didn't help in Electrical Class. I only electrocuted myself in that class twice.

And, um, once in Auto Shop. Still trying to figure that one out.

Unless my eyes deceive me, that armor is scale armor, not chain as is stated in the article.

Yep, and it looks like it's made from the scales that The Ring Lord sells.

Journalism in Canada has fallen very downhill, according to my Great Aunt (Who used to be, amongst other things, an Editor. And reads a half-dozen newspapers a day or some insane thing like that. She also smokes like a chimney and could probably out drink Sir John A. MacDonald... Well, aside from him being dead and all.).

The only thing they get worse than names and anything military (Even ancient military) is firearms of any types: "It was a ultra-modern, high-caliber, bolt-action, fully automatic assault rifle." = SMLE Mk. III/No.1 or No. 4 shown on the TV screen.

It's the user we're concerned about, Erik. And if that user doesn't have these toys, he can't abuse them.

First Beatniks, next Hippies, now it's Gamers?

I think it's great. I always believe in giving any group the toys/tools to either enhance themselves or hang themselves. Either 1 of 3 things happen...

1. The drone is used well, spots dangerous/illegal activities & proves to be a useful tool.
2. The drone does badly (accidentally kills someone & the police are sued for wrongful death) and the entire project goes away.
3. The drone does neither well or bad, proves to be useless & is scrapped/tabled & collects dust until its sold to a collector or someone with enough disposable income to want to have it.

2 out of the 3 cases has the drone shelved & collecting dust until it's sold to someone's private collection. Good thing out of that is someone gets their own drone.

4. Criminals go "Bird Hunting" for drones using Shotguns.

... And get stuck with the $300,000 bill for the drone, not to mention a charge of Destruction of City Property.

By that logic, no one should have a car, so they won't run anyone over; no one should be allowed a knife because they might cut something other than their steak. I disagree with that logic.

I think the big difference between this and a police helicopter, is that the latter is noisy as hell.

Well in some parts of the world you need to get fair bit of training before you allowed behind the controls of a car...

There's really no need to go to extremes, Erik; slippery slope isn't a very useful argument. Everything is obviously a balancing act to find that spot in the middle. What we do know is that (some!) police *often* abuse the options available to them (more notably in these protest situations, but how many taser incidents have you heard, etc.?), and we also know some initial things about drones (in military applications). These are enough to give serious pause.

We do have knife and gun laws, we do have driver's licensing, we do have traffic laws, etc. Obviously, the world rejects the extreme end of your position just as much.

Sir Terry Pratchett is upset over knife laws, BTW. He's a knight of the realm, yet can't carry his sword around.

It is a nice sword. Again, I'm just illustrating that radical deregulation is just as crazy as radical regulation-'ism'. There's plenty of reason to be concerned about something like flying police drones with a variety of serious weapons (and in the hands of Texans ;P ).

Hell, I'd hate it being in the hands of the cops back home.

"Hey guys, watch this!" *BLAM* "That's what the Hi-Ex Grenades can do!" "SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!"

Texans are very responsible and law abiding people.

When they're not drunk.

"Here, hold my beer. I wanna try something."




-k

formerly a Texas resident

Heh... Often very true...

Also Former Resident...

All these former Texans, and one of my players is from Texas (we play on skype). He's working with the military overseas, so not home often, and I have to ask, is there a reason I only know of former residents, and not current residents?

The only problem that I can see with this type of drone is escalation. If the police have a drone that can fly in and subdue subjects how will the criminal element react to this?

I know hacking was mentioned earlier in this thread, while I doubt it who knows.
another possibility is for the criminal organizations to get their own drones.

"We start carrying semi automatics, they buy automatics, we start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds,"
Jim Gordon

Just food for thought anyways.

Relecs

Do you know of me? Look at my "From" park to the side there...

Don't get me started on these protests. How long do police officers have to deal with a group that is a health risk, defecates in public (and on police vehicles), rapes, does drugs, and is naked in public before they finally forcibly disperse them. There's a limit to how much civil disobedience you can take, and apparently it's about a MONTH AND A HALF.

I had to move because of the Heat. After the Gulf War, I could no longer tolerate the 8 months of Summer in San Antonio. So I moved to Denver. At least here, there are 4 actual seasons.

Uh huh, Neraph. Public health and nests of rape is the reason they're hurting people. But, this is not at all about politics, so… I *didn't* get you started. It's about nifty SR-esque tech, and of course the basic inability of people to responsibly handle power, especially in the form of flying weaponized drones.

That's part of my point. The presence of a tool doesn't somehow make people want to ab-use the tool; it's the person using the tool. The person is using an available tool that suits their need. If one tool isn't available, they will find another way to do what they want, whether the person is a vindictive cop or thuggish yob.

Knife laws? as in laws against stabbing people?

Laws about ownership and the carrying of bladed weapons.

Britain particularly has about the most restrictive knife laws on the planet.



-k

Erik, this is hardly a new argument, so you know my lines. Yes, a bad person might do bad things regardless… but having more powerful tools significantly alters their potential bad things. In addition, more powerful tools also significantly increase the potential for *mistakes* to be bigger or worse.

In a job where dehumanizing effects are so endemic and problematic, a remote drone is a particular issue. It's like you didn't even *watch* the Robocop series.

I guess we'll have to disagree about what to make of evil men and their toys....

And no, I never did see the Robocop cartoons. After seeing what they did with the second movie, I didn't want to watch anymore of those, either.

Not the cartoons (?), the movies.

Isn't the drone a dumb drone (and by dumb drone, i mean a drone w/o a Pilot program). If so, then a member of the police will have to be actively piloting/guiding the thing. If some criminal hacks it, then they actively have to do it... which is crime (not like they care), but it ups the level of intent & such. In court, premeditation & intent carry heavier weight. As for shooting it out of the sky... self explanatory.

The police have been using helicopters for a while & no airborne dogfights between police & criminals have occurred yet. So I don't see crooks escalating to having their own airdrones. If they do... well then, that's a new direction & level of debate we can all chime in on.

Frag, one more thing flying through my yard. I just hope they're quieter than the ghetto birds the po-po fly over my house now.

I barely got started. I could rant about them for a while (and make valid points while doing it, too).

In any event: knife laws are interesting. I think it's Austin (maybe Houston) that has a law against carrying any lock-bladed knife, yet they do not have any laws against carrying the otherwise-legal sheath-bladed knives. So in effect you cannot carry a 1-inch folding knife but can walk freely with a 5.5 inch fixed knife sheathed at your hip. They had a semi-valid reason for it*, but that's silly now.

A group of thugs in about 1987 decided to hold people up by weakening the screws on their folding blades so they could flick their wrists and the knife blade would snap out and lock, similar to but not exactly like a switch blade. They used that as a method of intimidation (and it worked), so the city outlawed all folding knives. Let's ignore that criminals by definition break laws and restrict the possibility of the law-abiding citizen to live freely, and let's also ignore the illogic of outlawing 1-inch folding knives while still allowing 5.5 inch knives that require a sheath. Yeah.