"Public Safety" drones…

As the FAA dickers with trying to find six ‘safe’ testing areas for drones, DHS continues down the path of new ‘public safety’ drones…

The Department of Homeland Security is advancing its plan to use surveillance drones for “public safety” applications, announcing last week that it had received a deluge of “excellent” responses from potential vendors and was set to carry out more tests of the technology.


From Infowars, HERE.


Now the FAA says there will not be any ‘armed’ drones allowed over the US…


“We currently have rules in the books that deal with releasing anything from an aircraft, period. Those rules are in place and that would prohibit weapons from being installed on a civil aircraft,” said Mr. Williams, who heads the FAA’s Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office, formed last year to shepherd drones into already-crowded American skies and integrate drone use with the manned-aircraft system

(bold/italics mine) Note the rules ONLY apply to civilian drones, which the DHS ones would NOT be…

Full article HERE.  


Now when you add in the CIA director Brennen, and the Prez death lists, anybody want to bet there won’t be armed drones flying in the US in the next couple of years???  


I sure as hell don’t…

Comments

"Public Safety" drones… — 21 Comments

  1. I’m not even cool with having unarmed RPAs flying over US territory (the border being an exception). There’s just too much potential for abuse. I don’t care what kind of safeguards are put in place, there will be abuses. Not to mention the safety issues of filling the skies with remotely piloted aircraft.

  2. I’m sure that there are armed Americans out there who may not want to disarm. DHS won’t want to send their people into those areas because they won’t come back. Drones offer a “clean solution” to the problem because we all know what a Hellfire Missile can do to a structure.

  3. Murphy- Yep, and a good ‘lead’ program…

    John- Concur!

    Tim- Yep, you’re right!

    Stretch- LOL

    LL- And they will ‘apologize’ for any collateral damage…

  4. You really trust any information from a dude that swears up and down that Newtown was a hoax, and that there are no dead children?!?

  5. I’ll assume when they say civil they mean non governmental drones. Uncle will exempt himself.

    Time to arm your RC aircraft and dogfight. Tally Ho!

    Gerry

  6. I’d say that this makes a pretty good reason for why the Second Amendment DOES protect FIM-92s.

  7. Scott- No I don’t, but I’ve seen the same info from other sources also…

    Rick- But do you have a ‘license’ for that???

    Gerry- Of course!

    Raptor- Good point, however ‘procurement’ may be an issue…

  8. JR- Concur, but for ‘safety’??? Especially since they’ve now widened the “border” area to 100nm inland from the borders???

  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  10. Have been practicing security of the no fly zone over the bunkhouse using a zong gun loaded with cow pies. 95% kills on clay pigeons… should work on drones…

  11. WSF- Yep!

    Brighid- LOL, that’s gonna leave a ‘skid mark’ or two…

    Mikael- Good point!