PDA

View Full Version : DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones



Rockntractor
03-02-2013, 10:18 PM
Homeland Security's specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed. Also specified: "signals interception" and "direction finding" for electronic surveillance.

by Declan McCullagh
March 2, 2013 11:30 AM PST

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has customized its Predator drones, originally built for overseas military operations, to carry out at-home surveillance tasks that have civil libertarians worried: identifying civilians carrying guns and tracking their cell phones, government documents show.

The documents provide more details about the surveillance capabilities of the department's unmanned Predator B drones, which are primarily used to patrol the United States' northern and southern borders but have been pressed into service on behalf of a growing number of law enforcement agencies including the FBI, the Secret Service, the Texas Rangers, and local police.

Homeland Security's specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they "shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not," meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify "signals interception" technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and "direction finding" technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.
Read More>http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/

Any privacy that we ever thought we had a right to is gone now.

SarasotaRepub
03-02-2013, 11:49 PM
http://im.ft-static.com/content/images/37a5d573-b869-4c6e-9a4d-624a5d2d95af.img

Articulate_Ape
03-03-2013, 10:28 AM
We are in for some mighty interesting times in the not too distant future I think.

Janice
03-03-2013, 01:04 PM
This is one of things we have all worried about, from the founding fathers to the present:

What happens when Statists get into orifice with all of our might and power and technology at their disposal to use against the citizenry?

I say, we should be worried when we see how the deck is currently stacked. At least from my view we have 2 parties (one of them with a bull horn called the 'media') who (the leadership) do as they please. 1) Democrats = Which are Statists and 2) Republicans (rinos) = Who are Neo-Statists.

At what point do we know that we are no longer citizens but subjects? I'd say 0bamacare is the beginning of the end. Add the drones and the new anti-patriotic domestic policies. Indoctrinate the young ones. Release the criminal elements of the illegal immigrants from the prisons. And now more and more Rep Governors are falling behind our new King (ready to rule from day one) solidifying his power.

Its a very toxic cocktail and the damage may be irreversible at this point with an 'opposing' party thats afraid of its own shadow.

Starbuck
03-03-2013, 03:20 PM
I don't worry about this sort of thing.

In fact, I would like to be able to tell if someone walking through the desert in the middle of the night was carrying a rifle or not.
Tracking cell phones? Track mine. I don't care.

But some guy named Ahmed, who is carrying an AK 47 while walking North from Nogales? I'm in favor of being able to follow him without him knowing it.

And is the country going to get so backward that it takes such an interest in me loading up my car to go hunting, or in the act of hunting that it feels compelled to take me out with a missile? No.

On the other hand, Homeland Security itself was a bad idea. That job should have gone to Border Patrol.

PeterS
03-03-2013, 04:45 PM
Any privacy that we ever thought we had a right to is gone now.

I am not saying or doing anything illegal so I am not really worried about it....

Articulate_Ape
03-03-2013, 04:55 PM
I am not saying or doing anything illegal so I am not really worried about it....

You say that now. What happens when they move the goal posts making one of your typical activities "illegal"? It's the slippery slope you need to be concerned about. One day you might very well be on the wrong side of the law.

Janice
03-03-2013, 07:51 PM
I don't worry about this sort of thing.

In fact, I would like to be able to tell if someone walking through the desert in the middle of the night was carrying a rifle or not.
Tracking cell phones?



You really think they care what illegals are doing in this country?

Starbuck
03-04-2013, 12:55 PM
Slippery slope? Overused term, sometimes. But I wish they had used it back when income tax was established in 1913, and only 1% paid any.

But I think over regulating drones is a slippery slope. The Seattle PD turned theirs in. I don't think that's a good idea. Next thing you know the cops won't be able to use binoculars, or bullets that exceed 2000 ft/sec, or cars that can go faster than 65 MPH.

Drone hysteria jumps party lines, so I think it'll be talked about for a long, long time. In the end, the bad guys will win, probably.

Rockntractor
03-04-2013, 01:13 PM
Slippery slope? Overused term, sometimes. But I wish they had used it back when income tax was established in 1913, and only 1% paid any.

But I think over regulating drones is a slippery slope. The Seattle PD turned theirs in. I don't think that's a good idea. Next thing you know the cops won't be able to use binoculars, or bullets that exceed 2000 ft/sec, or cars that can go faster than 65 MPH.

Drone hysteria jumps party lines, so I think it'll be talked about for a long, long time. In the end, the bad guys will win, probably.

You are like most Americans, yours would be considered the majority view.
When the time comes you will willingly hand in your guns without resistance, you will likely save them a trip and drive them to a pick-up point, When speech becomes curbed you will carefully study the offensive words list as to not mistakenly use one, you like most law abiding citizens will obey any and all new laws without any open complaint.
I'm glad our forefathers weren't like you.

Starbuck
03-04-2013, 06:01 PM
You are like most Americans, yours would be considered the majority view.
When the time comes you will willingly hand in your guns without resistance, you will likely save them a trip and drive them to a pick-up point, When speech becomes curbed you will carefully study the offensive words list as to not mistakenly use one, you like most law abiding citizens will obey any and all new laws without any open complaint.
I'm glad our forefathers weren't like you.

Your post is over the line. You have no idea what I would do.

And with that I am outta here.

Goodbye:blue:

Rockntractor
03-04-2013, 06:16 PM
Your post is over the line. You have no idea what I would do.

And with that I am outta here.

Goodbye:blue:

That is what most people will do and you seem to be with them with your talk of the slippery slope being an exaggeration, don't you see what is going on around you and this is just what we know about, people need to wake up, freedom is falling away from us.

Rockntractor
03-04-2013, 06:24 PM
Your post is over the line. You have no idea what I would do.

And with that I am outta here.

Goodbye:blue:

What you are doing is being a pragmatist, you are going with what works, there is a lot of that in all of us but soon it won't work. Starbuck they are painting us in a corner and we both will see it in our lifetime.
A robotic eye that flies through the air peering at American citizens to see what is taxable and whether they are armed is way over the line and the argument has far surpassed this level, now they are debating whether it should deliver lethal punishment, remotely. the president say's yes to all of the above.
Slippery slope hell, we are in the abyss.

patriot45
03-04-2013, 07:45 PM
Slippery slope? Overused term, sometimes. But I wish they had used it back when income tax was established in 1913, and only 1% paid any.

But I think over regulating drones is a slippery slope. The Seattle PD turned theirs in. I don't think that's a good idea. Next thing you know the cops won't be able to use binoculars, or bullets that exceed 2000 ft/sec, or cars that can go faster than 65 MPH.

Drone hysteria jumps party lines, so I think it'll be talked about for a long, long time. In the end, the bad guys will win, probably.

Ha let em go wild with drones! would you be good with something along the lines of Minority Report too!! Give em an inch and they will take a mile.:frown-new:

Madisonian
03-04-2013, 08:03 PM
I don't worry about this sort of thing.

In fact, I would like to be able to tell if someone walking through the desert in the middle of the night was carrying a rifle or not.
Tracking cell phones? Track mine. I don't care.

But some guy named Ahmed, who is carrying an AK 47 while walking North from Nogales? I'm in favor of being able to follow him without him knowing it.

And is the country going to get so backward that it takes such an interest in me loading up my car to go hunting, or in the act of hunting that it feels compelled to take me out with a missile? No.

On the other hand, Homeland Security itself was a bad idea. That job should have gone to Border Patrol.

I mind because it may be a chunk of desert that I own and have every legal right to be in possession of a handgun, rifle or M-16 if I have the stamp for it and while you may not care if they track your cell phones, I care if they track mine (even though they probably are anyway).
From what I read the drones may be able to tell armaments, but I doubt they can pick up nationalities or ethnicity so it does not know if it is a guy named Ahmed or Billy Bob legally hunting jack rabbits.

Retread
03-04-2013, 11:34 PM
Bird hunting target practice......

Rockntractor
03-05-2013, 03:17 PM
Your post is over the line. You have no idea what I would do.

And with that I am outta here.

Goodbye:blue:

Yes my post did presume too much, I was making a point. I don't know what you would do under gun control rulings or freedom of speech infringement, but to deny that we are on a slippery slope to a loss of our personal freedom is willfully blinding yourself to reality.
You imply here that you would stand up and that I don't know what you would do in the circumstance I stated yet you are willing to leave over a post of mine that you think was too severe.
I really don't understand why one post is enough to make you mad to the point of leaving.

PeterS
03-05-2013, 05:02 PM
That is what most people will do and you seem to be with them with your talk of the slippery slope being an exaggeration, don't you see what is going on around you and this is just what we know about, people need to wake up, freedom is falling away from us.

>snip<

Homeland Security's specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they "shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not," meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify "signals interception" technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and "direction finding" technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.


Unless you are up to no good what freedom have you lost?

Rockntractor
03-05-2013, 05:09 PM
>snip<

Homeland Security's specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they "shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not," meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify "signals interception" technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and "direction finding" technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.


Unless you are up to no good what freedom have you lost?

We have a right to our privacy, surprisingly the tone of the left have changed since Bush wanted to listen to suspect international calls during the height of the war on terror, you were all about privacy then, you sniveling little hypocrite.

PeterS
03-05-2013, 05:11 PM
but to deny that we are on a slippery slope to a loss of our personal freedom is willfully blinding yourself to reality.


Bull, conservatives live in a world of logical fallacies. To be blind to that reality simply means we see reality...

PeterS
03-05-2013, 05:13 PM
We have a right to our privacy, surprisingly the tone of the left have changed since Bush wanted to listen to suspect international calls during the height of the war on terror, you were all about privacy then, you sniveling little hypocrite.

I wasn't hiding anything from Bush and would have actually enjoyed farting in his face...

Retread
03-06-2013, 12:58 AM
I wasn't hiding anything from Bush and would have actually enjoyed farting in his face...

You enjoy getting kicked in the ass? We got another member around here you should get acquainted with....

Adam Wood
03-06-2013, 01:26 AM
I don't worry about this sort of thing.

In fact, I would like to be able to tell if someone walking through the desert in the middle of the night was carrying a rifle or not.
Tracking cell phones? Track mine. I don't care.

But some guy named Ahmed, who is carrying an AK 47 while walking North from Nogales? I'm in favor of being able to follow him without him knowing it.

And is the country going to get so backward that it takes such an interest in me loading up my car to go hunting, or in the act of hunting that it feels compelled to take me out with a missile? No.

On the other hand, Homeland Security itself was a bad idea. That job should have gone to Border Patrol.
I am not saying or doing anything illegal so I am not really worried about it....That's all fine and dandy until your concepts of "legal" and "illegal" get turned on their heads by some legislature or Congress. Then you're in a real pickle if you're doing the same thing that you did yesterday that was legal, but today is deemed illegal.

I go out of my way not to be a tin-foiler. I don't really have a problem with, say, traffic cameras that aren't there to do anything but show when a wreck happens on the interstate or whatever. I don't have a problem with drones wasting terrorists, even terrorists who are American citizens, on foreign soil who are engaging in attacking this country or plotting same. But I have a problem with drones (or hot air balloons, or helicopters, or really tall poles) with cameras on them for the purpose of determining if I'm handling a gun with a large-capacity magazine in my own back yard or if I'm reading some sort of "forbidden" literature. That's a pretty short step away from a vidiscreen in my living room to watch me as I watch the Two Minutes Hate. If some policeman came along and insisted that he has the right to stand in your living room and watch all of your movements and listen to all of your conversations every minute of every day, you (either of you) would call it police harassment in no time whatsoever. Having the police peering into your life through a camera is no different.

Odysseus
03-06-2013, 03:24 AM
I am not saying or doing anything illegal so I am not really worried about it....

Nothing illegal? You don't jaywalk? Drink a 20 ounce Coke once in a while? Smoke within 50 feet of a government building? Bought an incandescent bulb?

With the absurd proliferation of new laws, you can be charged with just about anything today.


>snip<

Homeland Security's specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they "shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not," meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify "signals interception" technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and "direction finding" technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios.


Unless you are up to no good what freedom have you lost?

I made the same argument when the Patriot Act was passed, and that only codified existing law and applied it to counter terrorism operations. The issue here is not the tech, which is going to be built regardless, but the constraints on its use. Will the feds get warrants before looking into our homes to see if we own weapons? Will our domestic cell calls be monitored? I may not be doing anything illegal, but I still value my privacy, and quite frankly, there are a number of things that we all do that are none of the government's business. What it comes down to is do you trust a government that does not abide by its Constitutional limits in every other sphere of its operations to abide by them here?

Remember that any power that you give to a political party that you like will inevitably end up in the hands of a political party that you don't like, unless you eliminate the opposition, in which case the ruling party will have all the power that it wants, and you'll have none.