|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Unchecked government drones? Not over my backyard
Submitted by:
Anonymous
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On last Thursday, the Federal Aviation Administration gave Amazon the green light to begin testing drones
While you aren’t likely to be getting your Amazon order delivered by drone anytime soon, as the approval is limited to research and testing, the fact remains that this technology is already part of our lives. Drones are already helping the federal government observe and track us in new and often troubling ways, without our knowledge or consent. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(3/26/2015)
|
Most state's/municipalities prohibit you from taking aggressive action against a drone, (i.e. shooting it down). But why ? I've long complained about balloonists surreptitiously/silently sweeping over backyards and private spaces. How are camera-carrying drones any different from a creeping "peeping tom" ?
Me, I'd shoot first and deal with the consequences. But there's also more surreptitious means to disable drones without the echo/evidence of gunfire. And, ultimately, disabled is......disabled. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege. [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. Rep. 52, at 54 (1878)] |
|
|
