12 ms·

This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. Despite that, its a dangerou

by pm90 6y ago

This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. Despite that, its a dangerous thing to happen. I am aware of how unlikely it is for the current US Government to use the drone offensively, but once you have a massive fleet of drones flying over the US, patrolling "troubling" neighborhoods constantly, the temptation to use those abilities rises significantly. I hope that Congress takes action to outlaw this practice, but I have little faith it will happen. It seems like everyday the country is falling further into the pit of becoming an authoritarian police state.

beambot 6y ago
Where do you draw the distinction between a drone (presumably unarmed) vs a police helicopter?
- r00fus 6y ago
  Police helicopters don't have hellfire missiles as standard optional armament. Also police helicopters are operated by local/state forces. This is a federal agency which is way out of its jurisdiction.
  - stult 6y ago
    > Police helicopters don't have hellfire missiles as standard optional armament. I mean, they could. And firefighting planes could be rerigged to disperse chemical weapons, doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them existing. >Also police helicopters are operated by local/state forces. This is a federal agency which is way out of its jurisdiction. I'm guessing it's on loan. It's hardly unusual or questionable for the feds to provide assistance to local police during periods of extraordinary crisis. However justified the people of Minneapolis may be in reacting this way to yet another police homicide, what else are the local police supposed to do now except try to restore order using whatever tools are available? Including drones that can provide immediate information about hotspots, crowds, fires, etc.
    - dv_dt 6y ago
      Perhaps this is too political, but the only tool they actually needed was one they had the whole time. Charge the offices based upon the evidence and open a more detailed investigation. The military equipment was entirely unnecessary - but it's very availability makes opportunity for bad decisions.
      - meragrin_ 6y ago
        In all probability, union rules stand in the way of making any quick arrests. Their hands are tied. It is better for them to appear slow and do things by the book than try to appease the irrational mob. They'll eventually get to where the mob wants to go rather than ending up with the cops "winning" in some way due violations of union rules and procedures.
        HarryHirsch 6y ago
        It's hard to see why union rules would trump criminal procedure - if that were true the cops would really be a law above the law. You'd think the much delayed arrest was so that the suspects had time to scrub social media, get rid of Nazi paraphernalia, get their stories straight, that kind of thing. They can't get their fellow officers in trouble, that's part of their code.
        luckylion 6y ago
        Or, hear me out, the "delayed" arrests are so they don't make mistakes that would result in a mistrial because they don't want you to jump up and yell "they intentionally violated their rights so the judge would throw the case out".
        HarryHirsch 6y ago
        There was more than enough probable cause for arrest, and after the perp has been arrested, prosecution has 72 hours to build a case and press charges. This is just more of the usual, also because the career of the prosecutor depends on the goodwill of the cops.
  - ip26 6y ago
    Are you sure? Police use military surplus helicopters, such as the Cobra and Black Hawk, both of which can be armed with hellfires.
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      Which police forces use Cobra helicopters? These are gunships that have no utility what so ever. As for Blackhawks I’ve never seen them used by police forces, those in civilian use are not surplus military helicopters or even the UH-60 but rather it’s civilian version the Sikorsky S-70 which are used by fire departments and search and rescue crews.
      - snypher 6y ago
        The Mexican Federal Police operate 6 Blackhawks provided by the US CBP. But it would be fair to say they serve a more militarized role than say Seattle PD. https://youtu.be/mBTs6BGMa3U https://youtu.be/mBTs6BGMa3U
        dogma1138 6y ago
        I see nothing wrong with Blackhawks in civilian use they are one of the best medium transport helicopters out there. SAR, medevac, fire fightings etc. are all roles that the Blackhawk is perfectly suited for and all for which it has dedicated variants. As for law enforcement use again I don’t see a problem with it, the use of them is mostly restricted to very special cases (FBI/DEA etc) due to cost of both the aircraft itself and the operational costs. The Mexican federal police is indeed essentially an army at this point since they engage in paramilitary operations against the cartels. On the other hand Cobras have no use other than to spray a target with their auto cannon or missiles. So I was really curious what police force in the US or anyone is operating attack helicopters.
      - ip26 6y ago
        Sorry, mixed up UH-1 and AH-1. https://www.army.mil/article/180593/last_uh_1_huey_a_42_year_military_veteran_retires https://www.army.mil/article/180593/last_uh_1_huey_a_42_year... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zunO6iUVUT0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zunO6iUVUT0
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Do 70mm rockets count? https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/local/article/Local-police-well-armed-with-surplus-military-5724525.php https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/local/article/Local-police-... But really, there's little difference between a lot of civilian and light military aircraft. The Bell 206 that your local news station probably flies around was developed as a military helicopter.
    - cameldrv 6y ago
      The police aren't getting the 70mm rockets, or the launchers for them nor are the police pilots trained to use them. There's really almost no difference between the civilian Bell 204/212 and the military Huey, and Bell has sold lots of civilian Hueys. I really can't see what the problem would be with the military surplussing them to the police.
  - Simulacra 6y ago
    I don't think this drone has any hellfire missiles. While it's true, it could, it's not a stretch to imagine a door mounted machine gun on a police helicopter. Both can be used for peace, or war.
  - 2019-nCoV 6y ago
    The local forces failed (rather told to stand down) in Minneapolis. You really think they'd let the city just burn to the ground before bringing federal agencies?
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  One is purposefully designed to surveil and kill (the Predator drone), while the other has a variety of uses. That’s where I draw the line: what was the purpose of creating it?
  - bdesbrisay 6y ago
    The drone is also controlled remotely and thus has more of a disconnect between the “pilot” and the subject. The police helicopter has a human element to/in it so the pilot would feel more responsibility for the destruction they caused if it were right in front of their eyes.
    - jandrese 6y ago
      This seems speculative to me. Helicopter pilots are already hundreds or thousands of feet away from the action, they're not looking people directly in the eyes.
    - outworlder 6y ago
      This is unsupported by evidence. Drone operators have a high incidence of PTSD. > Studies have found similar levels of depression and PTSD among drone pilots working behind a bank of computers as among military personnel deployed to the battlefield. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-dron...
      - koheripbal 6y ago
        This is for ATTACK drones, where they are actually killing people or coordinating fire. We are talking here about SURVEILLANCE drones.
        catalogia 6y ago
        > The police helicopter has a human element to/in it so the pilot would feel more responsibility for the destruction they caused if it were right in front of their eyes. This comment sounds like it's about attack drones. I concede that it's not necessarily about attack drones; a surveillance drone operator might facilitate and witness a lethal attack, and in that sense "cause" the destruction.
- jointpdf 6y ago
  One of the factors is the potential persistence and scale of drone-based surveillance systems. I think asking that question is important, because we have the capability to deploy (and shockingly, have deployed, at least on a trial basis) constant wide-area surveillance via drones in the US (Gorgon Stare): https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-battlefield-surveillance-comes-to-your-town-11564805394 https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-battlefield-surveillance-c...
- kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
  One is operated by a federal institution that is not responsible for internal domestic affairs.
- ortusdux 6y ago
  Philly, 1985: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE#1985_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE#1985_bombing "There was an armed standoff with police,[5] who lobbed tear gas canisters at the building. The MOVE members fired at them and a gunfight with semi-automatic and automatic firearms ensued.[32] Police went through over ten thousand rounds of ammunition before Commissioner Sambor ordered that the compound be bombed.[32] From a Pennsylvania State Police helicopter, Philadelphia Police Department Lt. Frank Powell proceeded to drop two one-pound bombs (which the police referred to as "entry devices"[31]) made of FBI-supplied Tovex, a dynamite substitute, targeting a fortified, bunker-like cubicle on the roof of the house.[29]" Police helicopters are modified civilian aircraft and yet they have been used by the police, through improvised means, to bomb people. The drone over Minneapolis is a MQ-9 reaper, aka "predator B", hunter-killer UAV. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper "In 2006, the then–Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force General T. Michael Moseley said: "We've moved from using UAVs primarily in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance roles before Operation Iraqi Freedom, to a true hunter-killer role with the Reaper."[6] The MQ-9 is a larger, heavier, and more capable aircraft than the earlier General Atomics MQ-1 Predator; it can be controlled by the same ground systems used to control MQ-1s. The Reaper has a 950-shaft-horsepower (712 kW) turboprop engine (compared to the Predator's 115 hp (86 kW) piston engine). The greater power allows the Reaper to carry 15 times more ordnance payload and cruise at about three times the speed of the MQ-1.[6] "
  - mattkrause 6y ago
    It's obviously sinister and is a pretty good hint at the end goals, but "Hunter-Killer" is also the project name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAF_Hunter-Killer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAF_Hunter-Killer
    - outworlder 6y ago
      > Hunter Killer So Skynet's schedule is coming back on track once again. https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/HK-Aerial https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/HK-Aerial
    - 6y ago
- chrismcb 6y ago
  I think the difference is in cost (time and money) as well as stealth. A small drone is easily deployed and fairly unobtrusive. A helicopter takes a bit more time and I think it's more expensive. Plus it isn't exactly stealthy.
- _jal 6y ago
  Economics and automation. To look at a related question, where do you draw the line between stakeouts and planting GPS devices? The question should not be some sort of line-drawing based on looking at the narrow capabilities of a particular device or practice change. It needs to be a look at what those capabilities do to the current balance of civilian rights and responsibilities, and whether we wish to live in a world of robotic surveillance and law enforcement.
- Alupis 6y ago
  I think we first need to determine what is upsetting about this, specifically. Is it that they are flying a UAV that was originally designed for military use? Or is it that they are flying a UAV period? What if it was a new UAV, designed just for law enforcement? No problems then? Presumably this UAV has no weapons on it, so I'm unsure what the problem could be unless we just flat oppose former military equipment being used? It's safer and cheaper to fly a UAV than a manned vehicled - helicopters crash routinely and need multiple crews to keep them on station for extended duration. If it was a decommissioned military UAV that's being repurposed - then the tax payer has been saved a great deal of money as well. So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?
  - NegativeLatency 6y ago
    The military industrial police state
  - koheripbal 6y ago
    I think you are expecting logical reasoning from a group of people who are acting emotionally. any form of government law enforcement personnel or equipment is drawing anger - regardless of form, function, or origin.
  - _jal 6y ago
    As I said in another comment, the importance of the change doesn't lie in a narrow look at the changed component. It is formally about the overall balance of rights, responsibilities of citizens and police/military[1], and less formally about trust between the two and the overall climate we want to live in, as a country. If you make a given police enforcement mechanism cheaper, it will be used more. What does that do to your average person's sense of privacy/fear/trust? What kind of relationship do we want to have between citizens[2] and its government? [1] That line is being blurred. [2] Not subjects
    - Alupis 6y ago
      I suppose, to that end, what about my rights to not be looted or have my car flipped over and set ablaze? I suppose in those situations, I'd be grateful for some law enforcement presence monitoring the situation and guiding folks on the ground to the most appropriate places needing the most attention.
- natch 6y ago
  I can’t speak for OP but a distinction with any drone is there is no crew being put in (physical) harm’s way. One significant consequence of that is it’s way easier to ramp up to a larger scale for whatever they might have in mind.
jorblumesea 6y ago
> It seems like everyday the country is falling further into the pit of becoming an authoritarian police state. Let's be honest, the country is voting to become an authoritarian police state. US voters have historically had a flirtatious relationship with strong authoritarian style presidents. Trump just more openly so than others. When you look at voting patterns over the last 40 years, it's pretty clear we've been trending in this direction for quite awhile.
- armitron 6y ago
  Let's be absolutely honest. Who the President may be at any moment in time is totally irrelevant in US being (not becoming, it's already there) an authoritarian police state.
  - jorblumesea 6y ago
    > Who the President may be at any moment in time is totally irrelevant in US being This is not the case and has never been the case. Presidents have different interpretations of executive powers. Trump clearly has an extremely authoritarian take on where the President sits in our government. This is plainly obvious for everyone to see and a very non-controversial observation.
    - armitron 6y ago
      Again, the President's "take" is totally irrelevant in US being an authoritarian police state. The issue is systemic and can not be attributed to an individual or office. I'm not an American but have lived there in the past for many years. It has always baffled me how Americans are willing to blame the left or the right instead of the system as a whole. Maybe because if they did so, they would be undermining the very foundations that their country was built on.
      - jorblumesea 6y ago
        The DOJ is part of the executive branch and is instrumental in setting national standards and investigating police departments. FBI as well. The executive branch has a fair amount of sway in how policing is done in the US and largely can help set direction, set policies, investigate departments and "clean house". for example: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-agreement-city-seattle-implement-reforms-seattle-police https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-... Who is President is very much matters. You clearly see this in the Reagan/Bush/Clinton years, where mass incarceration was in vogue, at the direction of the Attorney General (William Barr), who is part of the executive branch, leading the charge.
thescriptkiddie 6y ago
"fascism is imperialist repression turned inward" - Zak Cope
apta 6y ago
> Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. The second R in reduce, reuse, and recycle. /s
ColanR 6y ago
This has been happening for at least 4 years already. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-rapid-rise-of-federal-surveillance-drones-over-america/473136/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-rap... https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-the-skies https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-t...
- heelix 6y ago
  Even longer - I remember seeing one circle over the 2009 Fargo flood while we were sand bagging.
  - littleweep 6y ago
    Question -- what is 'sand bagging'?
    - CapitalistCartr 6y ago
      Assembling and placing sandbags to hold back floodwaters.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - heelix 6y ago
      https://i.imgur.com/BlUJxIj.jpg https://i.imgur.com/BlUJxIj.jpg Was my parent's home. We were south of Fargo, outside of the city dike. Fargo is very, very flat farmland. Our house was 40' above the river. The top of the city dike was around 43'. We melted down the ice, put down a sheet of plastic, and then built a wall of sandbags. Bonus, it was very cold, so you essentially had to bag and place the sandbag before the sand froze. We put around 10k sacks around the house -- and saved it. Nothing like paddling a canoe to my brothers to resupply fuel for the generators powering the sump-pumps that handled the water that seeps in. We got very, very lucky. The weather froze the ice a few inches thick and it stopped rising. Had water reached that last bag, Fargo would have been a giant swimming pool.
hindsightbias 6y ago
Blue Thunder was 37 years ago. Not seeing why drones will be so much more easily weaponized than manned helicopters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Thunder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Thunder
- save_ferris 6y ago
  There are a couple of major differences. My understanding is that helicopters can’t typically reach and maintain the altitude that unmanned drones can, making drones more effective to be used in less conspicuous ways. There’s also the difference in the baseline level of security between the two. Helicopters do go down from time to time, thus creating a human risk that isn’t present in drones. I feel that since drones pose less risk to the lives of their operators, the desire to use them will be greater.
  - serf 6y ago
    >thus creating a human risk that isn’t present in drones. most unmanned drones used today have a far higher history of 'unintended forced landings' than most other military craft -- when you use planes that have a high risk of crash over metropolitan and suburban areas, the human risk multiplies. The US military has 'lost' about 400 'large' drones between 2001 and 2014. To put that 400 number into perspective, the US had 5 or 6 major airliner crashes between 2001-2013, and about 400 accidents (including non-crashes and minor incidents) over the period of 2004-2013. I'd rather have any fighter jet in production right now over me than anything General Atomics had designed. Here's an older WaPo article from 2016. From 2001-2016 400 military drone crashes occured. Military incidents are harder to find out about, otherwise I would have used that number. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/drone-crashes/database/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/drone-crash... >I feel that since drones pose less risk to the lives of their operators, the desire to use them will be greater. absolutely true -- but don't let that make you think that loss-of-personnel is the most important metric for whether or not a mission flies.
    - BEEdwards 6y ago
      Oh No they might crash more! They totally wouldn't use them offensively because it's easier and less "risk". Oh wait, we have nearly 20 years of the endless war that proves that they will. https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2015/07/living-beneath-drones-150719090817219.html https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2015/07/l...
vmchale 6y ago
Also nuts that CBP is the one doing it.
- stefantalpalaru 6y ago
  > Also nuts that CBP is the one doing it. Maybe they extended the 100 mile constitution-exempt border zone: https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
  - meroes 6y ago
    In r/law someone said they are using the int'l airport as a border, which is apparently legal.
gremlinsinc 6y ago
I seem to think they wrote a book on things just like this... it was named after some year...back in the 80's if i recall /s... George Orwell would be proud (not of what we've become but for his predictions being so damn accurate).
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
partiallypro 6y ago
People will just make the argument that a drone patrolling is no worse than a police officer in his vehicle patrolling or a helicopter patrolling, both of which are incredibly common.
roenxi 6y ago
There seems to be a slightly schizophrenic relationship between the public and the government. The rather vocal wings of political discourse understand that half the time government will be controlled by people they really don't like. However the practical resistance to giving said people access to and control over major aspects of people's lives seems to be rather weak.
- StylusEater 6y ago
  No kidding about the schizophrenia. I don’t understand how people can implore the government to do more such as UBI or universal healthcare yet in the same breath complain about not being able to trust the “police state.” I doubt we can have privacy and a strong effective government. A strong government will be one that’s in your life a lot. Whether it’s under the auspices of good intent or not is probably irrelevant by that point. edited for clarity
  - ghettoimp 6y ago
    I might be one of these people? I want a government that trusts us and respects our rights (e.g., non police state) and that helps to provide for the poor and vulnerable (e.g., healthcare). I don't see any conflict between these goals. Our medicare providers are not flying drones and kneeling on necks.
    - StylusEater 6y ago
      There is massive conflict between the goals when power and money enter the discussion. I’m also not sure where what you describe exists and how it’s implemented. I am curious to learn if anyone has any sources on such a place: great healthcare, highly involved citizens and low government intervention in daily life. And no, I’m not being sarcastic, I am sincerely wondering about it.
      - 0xFF0123 6y ago
        Scandinavian countries generally seem to tick those boxes, although I'm not sure what your threshold is for low government intervention.
WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
> This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. I've been saying for ages that these overseas actions are proving grounds for testing malicious tech - for it's eventual deployment against US citizens.
BurningFrog 6y ago
The government also has fighter jets if it wants to massacre protestors. If this form surveillance makes it so I don't have to listen to as many helicopters outside my downtown widow, I'm all for it.
inscartwheelies 6y ago
It's only a matter of time before Hellfires leave the rails from so-called "surveillance drone" Reapers. The corporate Empire has been built and it's occupying the lands of 280 million Americans. It's Rome 2.0 and the Rubicon isn't as clear, but it's already crossed. --- Minneapolis is in a de-facto state of war, there is no police presence in numerous areas currently, and locals have already setup their own road-blocks and community defense forces. The Minnesota State Police have been arresting more reporters since CNN and targeting them with tear gas canisters and rubber-bullets at point-blank range. The MSP doesn't respect the Governor, and John Harrington and/or Matt Langer should be disciplined. That is, unless they want a full rebellion.

by pm90 6y ago

beambot 6y ago

Where do you draw the distinction between a drone (presumably unarmed) vs a police helicopter?

r00fus 6y ago
Police helicopters don't have hellfire missiles as standard optional armament. Also police helicopters are operated by local/state forces. This is a federal agency which is way out of its jurisdiction.
- stult 6y ago
  > Police helicopters don't have hellfire missiles as standard optional armament. I mean, they could. And firefighting planes could be rerigged to disperse chemical weapons, doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them existing. >Also police helicopters are operated by local/state forces. This is a federal agency which is way out of its jurisdiction. I'm guessing it's on loan. It's hardly unusual or questionable for the feds to provide assistance to local police during periods of extraordinary crisis. However justified the people of Minneapolis may be in reacting this way to yet another police homicide, what else are the local police supposed to do now except try to restore order using whatever tools are available? Including drones that can provide immediate information about hotspots, crowds, fires, etc.
  - dv_dt 6y ago
    Perhaps this is too political, but the only tool they actually needed was one they had the whole time. Charge the offices based upon the evidence and open a more detailed investigation. The military equipment was entirely unnecessary - but it's very availability makes opportunity for bad decisions.
    - meragrin_ 6y ago
      In all probability, union rules stand in the way of making any quick arrests. Their hands are tied. It is better for them to appear slow and do things by the book than try to appease the irrational mob. They'll eventually get to where the mob wants to go rather than ending up with the cops "winning" in some way due violations of union rules and procedures.
      - HarryHirsch 6y ago
        It's hard to see why union rules would trump criminal procedure - if that were true the cops would really be a law above the law. You'd think the much delayed arrest was so that the suspects had time to scrub social media, get rid of Nazi paraphernalia, get their stories straight, that kind of thing. They can't get their fellow officers in trouble, that's part of their code.
        luckylion 6y ago
        Or, hear me out, the "delayed" arrests are so they don't make mistakes that would result in a mistrial because they don't want you to jump up and yell "they intentionally violated their rights so the judge would throw the case out".
        HarryHirsch 6y ago
        There was more than enough probable cause for arrest, and after the perp has been arrested, prosecution has 72 hours to build a case and press charges. This is just more of the usual, also because the career of the prosecutor depends on the goodwill of the cops.
- ip26 6y ago
  Are you sure? Police use military surplus helicopters, such as the Cobra and Black Hawk, both of which can be armed with hellfires.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    Which police forces use Cobra helicopters? These are gunships that have no utility what so ever. As for Blackhawks I’ve never seen them used by police forces, those in civilian use are not surplus military helicopters or even the UH-60 but rather it’s civilian version the Sikorsky S-70 which are used by fire departments and search and rescue crews.
    - snypher 6y ago
      The Mexican Federal Police operate 6 Blackhawks provided by the US CBP. But it would be fair to say they serve a more militarized role than say Seattle PD. https://youtu.be/mBTs6BGMa3U https://youtu.be/mBTs6BGMa3U
      - dogma1138 6y ago
        I see nothing wrong with Blackhawks in civilian use they are one of the best medium transport helicopters out there. SAR, medevac, fire fightings etc. are all roles that the Blackhawk is perfectly suited for and all for which it has dedicated variants. As for law enforcement use again I don’t see a problem with it, the use of them is mostly restricted to very special cases (FBI/DEA etc) due to cost of both the aircraft itself and the operational costs. The Mexican federal police is indeed essentially an army at this point since they engage in paramilitary operations against the cartels. On the other hand Cobras have no use other than to spray a target with their auto cannon or missiles. So I was really curious what police force in the US or anyone is operating attack helicopters.
    - ip26 6y ago
      Sorry, mixed up UH-1 and AH-1. https://www.army.mil/article/180593/last_uh_1_huey_a_42_year_military_veteran_retires https://www.army.mil/article/180593/last_uh_1_huey_a_42_year... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zunO6iUVUT0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zunO6iUVUT0
- kube-system 6y ago
  Do 70mm rockets count? https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/local/article/Local-police-well-armed-with-surplus-military-5724525.php https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/local/article/Local-police-... But really, there's little difference between a lot of civilian and light military aircraft. The Bell 206 that your local news station probably flies around was developed as a military helicopter.
  - cameldrv 6y ago
    The police aren't getting the 70mm rockets, or the launchers for them nor are the police pilots trained to use them. There's really almost no difference between the civilian Bell 204/212 and the military Huey, and Bell has sold lots of civilian Hueys. I really can't see what the problem would be with the military surplussing them to the police.
- Simulacra 6y ago
  I don't think this drone has any hellfire missiles. While it's true, it could, it's not a stretch to imagine a door mounted machine gun on a police helicopter. Both can be used for peace, or war.
- 2019-nCoV 6y ago
  The local forces failed (rather told to stand down) in Minneapolis. You really think they'd let the city just burn to the ground before bringing federal agencies?
colejohnson66 6y ago
One is purposefully designed to surveil and kill (the Predator drone), while the other has a variety of uses. That’s where I draw the line: what was the purpose of creating it?
- bdesbrisay 6y ago
  The drone is also controlled remotely and thus has more of a disconnect between the “pilot” and the subject. The police helicopter has a human element to/in it so the pilot would feel more responsibility for the destruction they caused if it were right in front of their eyes.
  - jandrese 6y ago
    This seems speculative to me. Helicopter pilots are already hundreds or thousands of feet away from the action, they're not looking people directly in the eyes.
  - outworlder 6y ago
    This is unsupported by evidence. Drone operators have a high incidence of PTSD. > Studies have found similar levels of depression and PTSD among drone pilots working behind a bank of computers as among military personnel deployed to the battlefield. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-dron...
    - koheripbal 6y ago
      This is for ATTACK drones, where they are actually killing people or coordinating fire. We are talking here about SURVEILLANCE drones.
      - catalogia 6y ago
        > The police helicopter has a human element to/in it so the pilot would feel more responsibility for the destruction they caused if it were right in front of their eyes. This comment sounds like it's about attack drones. I concede that it's not necessarily about attack drones; a surveillance drone operator might facilitate and witness a lethal attack, and in that sense "cause" the destruction.
jointpdf 6y ago
One of the factors is the potential persistence and scale of drone-based surveillance systems. I think asking that question is important, because we have the capability to deploy (and shockingly, have deployed, at least on a trial basis) constant wide-area surveillance via drones in the US (Gorgon Stare): https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-battlefield-surveillance-comes-to-your-town-11564805394 https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-battlefield-surveillance-c...
kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
One is operated by a federal institution that is not responsible for internal domestic affairs.
ortusdux 6y ago
Philly, 1985: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE#1985_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE#1985_bombing "There was an armed standoff with police,[5] who lobbed tear gas canisters at the building. The MOVE members fired at them and a gunfight with semi-automatic and automatic firearms ensued.[32] Police went through over ten thousand rounds of ammunition before Commissioner Sambor ordered that the compound be bombed.[32] From a Pennsylvania State Police helicopter, Philadelphia Police Department Lt. Frank Powell proceeded to drop two one-pound bombs (which the police referred to as "entry devices"[31]) made of FBI-supplied Tovex, a dynamite substitute, targeting a fortified, bunker-like cubicle on the roof of the house.[29]" Police helicopters are modified civilian aircraft and yet they have been used by the police, through improvised means, to bomb people. The drone over Minneapolis is a MQ-9 reaper, aka "predator B", hunter-killer UAV. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper "In 2006, the then–Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force General T. Michael Moseley said: "We've moved from using UAVs primarily in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance roles before Operation Iraqi Freedom, to a true hunter-killer role with the Reaper."[6] The MQ-9 is a larger, heavier, and more capable aircraft than the earlier General Atomics MQ-1 Predator; it can be controlled by the same ground systems used to control MQ-1s. The Reaper has a 950-shaft-horsepower (712 kW) turboprop engine (compared to the Predator's 115 hp (86 kW) piston engine). The greater power allows the Reaper to carry 15 times more ordnance payload and cruise at about three times the speed of the MQ-1.[6] "
- mattkrause 6y ago
  It's obviously sinister and is a pretty good hint at the end goals, but "Hunter-Killer" is also the project name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAF_Hunter-Killer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAF_Hunter-Killer
  - outworlder 6y ago
    > Hunter Killer So Skynet's schedule is coming back on track once again. https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/HK-Aerial https://terminator.fandom.com/wiki/HK-Aerial
  - 6y ago
chrismcb 6y ago
I think the difference is in cost (time and money) as well as stealth. A small drone is easily deployed and fairly unobtrusive. A helicopter takes a bit more time and I think it's more expensive. Plus it isn't exactly stealthy.
_jal 6y ago
Economics and automation. To look at a related question, where do you draw the line between stakeouts and planting GPS devices? The question should not be some sort of line-drawing based on looking at the narrow capabilities of a particular device or practice change. It needs to be a look at what those capabilities do to the current balance of civilian rights and responsibilities, and whether we wish to live in a world of robotic surveillance and law enforcement.
Alupis 6y ago
I think we first need to determine what is upsetting about this, specifically. Is it that they are flying a UAV that was originally designed for military use? Or is it that they are flying a UAV period? What if it was a new UAV, designed just for law enforcement? No problems then? Presumably this UAV has no weapons on it, so I'm unsure what the problem could be unless we just flat oppose former military equipment being used? It's safer and cheaper to fly a UAV than a manned vehicled - helicopters crash routinely and need multiple crews to keep them on station for extended duration. If it was a decommissioned military UAV that's being repurposed - then the tax payer has been saved a great deal of money as well. So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?
- NegativeLatency 6y ago
  The military industrial police state
- koheripbal 6y ago
  I think you are expecting logical reasoning from a group of people who are acting emotionally. any form of government law enforcement personnel or equipment is drawing anger - regardless of form, function, or origin.
- _jal 6y ago
  As I said in another comment, the importance of the change doesn't lie in a narrow look at the changed component. It is formally about the overall balance of rights, responsibilities of citizens and police/military[1], and less formally about trust between the two and the overall climate we want to live in, as a country. If you make a given police enforcement mechanism cheaper, it will be used more. What does that do to your average person's sense of privacy/fear/trust? What kind of relationship do we want to have between citizens[2] and its government? [1] That line is being blurred. [2] Not subjects
  - Alupis 6y ago
    I suppose, to that end, what about my rights to not be looted or have my car flipped over and set ablaze? I suppose in those situations, I'd be grateful for some law enforcement presence monitoring the situation and guiding folks on the ground to the most appropriate places needing the most attention.
natch 6y ago
I can’t speak for OP but a distinction with any drone is there is no crew being put in (physical) harm’s way. One significant consequence of that is it’s way easier to ramp up to a larger scale for whatever they might have in mind.

jorblumesea 6y ago

> It seems like everyday the country is falling further into the pit of becoming an authoritarian police state. Let's be honest, the country is voting to become an authoritarian police state. US voters have historically had a flirtatious relationship with strong authoritarian style presidents. Trump just more openly so than others. When you look at voting patterns over the last 40 years, it's pretty clear we've been trending in this direction for quite awhile.

armitron 6y ago
Let's be absolutely honest. Who the President may be at any moment in time is totally irrelevant in US being (not becoming, it's already there) an authoritarian police state.
- jorblumesea 6y ago
  > Who the President may be at any moment in time is totally irrelevant in US being This is not the case and has never been the case. Presidents have different interpretations of executive powers. Trump clearly has an extremely authoritarian take on where the President sits in our government. This is plainly obvious for everyone to see and a very non-controversial observation.
  - armitron 6y ago
    Again, the President's "take" is totally irrelevant in US being an authoritarian police state. The issue is systemic and can not be attributed to an individual or office. I'm not an American but have lived there in the past for many years. It has always baffled me how Americans are willing to blame the left or the right instead of the system as a whole. Maybe because if they did so, they would be undermining the very foundations that their country was built on.
    - jorblumesea 6y ago
      The DOJ is part of the executive branch and is instrumental in setting national standards and investigating police departments. FBI as well. The executive branch has a fair amount of sway in how policing is done in the US and largely can help set direction, set policies, investigate departments and "clean house". for example: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-agreement-city-seattle-implement-reforms-seattle-police https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-... Who is President is very much matters. You clearly see this in the Reagan/Bush/Clinton years, where mass incarceration was in vogue, at the direction of the Attorney General (William Barr), who is part of the executive branch, leading the charge.

thescriptkiddie 6y ago

"fascism is imperialist repression turned inward" - Zak Cope

apta 6y ago

> Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. The second R in reduce, reuse, and recycle. /s

ColanR 6y ago

This has been happening for at least 4 years already. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-rapid-rise-of-federal-surveillance-drones-over-america/473136/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-rap... https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-the-skies https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/spies-in-t...

heelix 6y ago
Even longer - I remember seeing one circle over the 2009 Fargo flood while we were sand bagging.
- littleweep 6y ago
  Question -- what is 'sand bagging'?
  - CapitalistCartr 6y ago
    Assembling and placing sandbags to hold back floodwaters.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - heelix 6y ago
    https://i.imgur.com/BlUJxIj.jpg https://i.imgur.com/BlUJxIj.jpg Was my parent's home. We were south of Fargo, outside of the city dike. Fargo is very, very flat farmland. Our house was 40' above the river. The top of the city dike was around 43'. We melted down the ice, put down a sheet of plastic, and then built a wall of sandbags. Bonus, it was very cold, so you essentially had to bag and place the sandbag before the sand froze. We put around 10k sacks around the house -- and saved it. Nothing like paddling a canoe to my brothers to resupply fuel for the generators powering the sump-pumps that handled the water that seeps in. We got very, very lucky. The weather froze the ice a few inches thick and it stopped rising. Had water reached that last bag, Fargo would have been a giant swimming pool.

hindsightbias 6y ago

Blue Thunder was 37 years ago. Not seeing why drones will be so much more easily weaponized than manned helicopters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Thunder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Thunder

save_ferris 6y ago
There are a couple of major differences. My understanding is that helicopters can’t typically reach and maintain the altitude that unmanned drones can, making drones more effective to be used in less conspicuous ways. There’s also the difference in the baseline level of security between the two. Helicopters do go down from time to time, thus creating a human risk that isn’t present in drones. I feel that since drones pose less risk to the lives of their operators, the desire to use them will be greater.
- serf 6y ago
  >thus creating a human risk that isn’t present in drones. most unmanned drones used today have a far higher history of 'unintended forced landings' than most other military craft -- when you use planes that have a high risk of crash over metropolitan and suburban areas, the human risk multiplies. The US military has 'lost' about 400 'large' drones between 2001 and 2014. To put that 400 number into perspective, the US had 5 or 6 major airliner crashes between 2001-2013, and about 400 accidents (including non-crashes and minor incidents) over the period of 2004-2013. I'd rather have any fighter jet in production right now over me than anything General Atomics had designed. Here's an older WaPo article from 2016. From 2001-2016 400 military drone crashes occured. Military incidents are harder to find out about, otherwise I would have used that number. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/drone-crashes/database/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/drone-crash... >I feel that since drones pose less risk to the lives of their operators, the desire to use them will be greater. absolutely true -- but don't let that make you think that loss-of-personnel is the most important metric for whether or not a mission flies.
  - BEEdwards 6y ago
    Oh No they might crash more! They totally wouldn't use them offensively because it's easier and less "risk". Oh wait, we have nearly 20 years of the endless war that proves that they will. https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2015/07/living-beneath-drones-150719090817219.html https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2015/07/l...

vmchale 6y ago

Also nuts that CBP is the one doing it.

stefantalpalaru 6y ago
> Also nuts that CBP is the one doing it. Maybe they extended the 100 mile constitution-exempt border zone: https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
- meroes 6y ago
  In r/law someone said they are using the int'l airport as a border, which is apparently legal.

gremlinsinc 6y ago

I seem to think they wrote a book on things just like this... it was named after some year...back in the 80's if i recall /s... George Orwell would be proud (not of what we've become but for his predictions being so damn accurate).

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

partiallypro 6y ago

People will just make the argument that a drone patrolling is no worse than a police officer in his vehicle patrolling or a helicopter patrolling, both of which are incredibly common.

roenxi 6y ago

There seems to be a slightly schizophrenic relationship between the public and the government. The rather vocal wings of political discourse understand that half the time government will be controlled by people they really don't like. However the practical resistance to giving said people access to and control over major aspects of people's lives seems to be rather weak.

StylusEater 6y ago
No kidding about the schizophrenia. I don’t understand how people can implore the government to do more such as UBI or universal healthcare yet in the same breath complain about not being able to trust the “police state.” I doubt we can have privacy and a strong effective government. A strong government will be one that’s in your life a lot. Whether it’s under the auspices of good intent or not is probably irrelevant by that point. edited for clarity
- ghettoimp 6y ago
  I might be one of these people? I want a government that trusts us and respects our rights (e.g., non police state) and that helps to provide for the poor and vulnerable (e.g., healthcare). I don't see any conflict between these goals. Our medicare providers are not flying drones and kneeling on necks.
  - StylusEater 6y ago
    There is massive conflict between the goals when power and money enter the discussion. I’m also not sure where what you describe exists and how it’s implemented. I am curious to learn if anyone has any sources on such a place: great healthcare, highly involved citizens and low government intervention in daily life. And no, I’m not being sarcastic, I am sincerely wondering about it.
    - 0xFF0123 6y ago
      Scandinavian countries generally seem to tick those boxes, although I'm not sure what your threshold is for low government intervention.

WarOnPrivacy 6y ago

> This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. I've been saying for ages that these overseas actions are proving grounds for testing malicious tech - for it's eventual deployment against US citizens.

BurningFrog 6y ago

The government also has fighter jets if it wants to massacre protestors. If this form surveillance makes it so I don't have to listen to as many helicopters outside my downtown widow, I'm all for it.

inscartwheelies 6y ago

It's only a matter of time before Hellfires leave the rails from so-called "surveillance drone" Reapers. The corporate Empire has been built and it's occupying the lands of 280 million Americans. It's Rome 2.0 and the Rubicon isn't as clear, but it's already crossed. --- Minneapolis is in a de-facto state of war, there is no police presence in numerous areas currently, and locals have already setup their own road-blocks and community defense forces. The Minnesota State Police have been arresting more reporters since CNN and targeting them with tear gas canisters and rubber-bullets at point-blank range. The MSP doesn't respect the Governor, and John Harrington and/or Matt Langer should be disciplined. That is, unless they want a full rebellion.