5 ms·

I'm the last one to try to support the theatre of fear the media and government maintain, but the dollars and skill required to acquire and operate an RC vehicl

by aedocw 11y ago

I'm the last one to try to support the theatre of fear the media and government maintain, but the dollars and skill required to acquire and operate an RC vehicle have dropped massively in the last few years. Yes, 20 years ago you could build from balsa a sweet RC airplane that had tremendous range (and try to strap some home made explosives to it for nefarious purposes). You could build an RC helicopter but you were going to have a hell of a time learning to fly it (and probably wreck your first few helis before you get the hang of it). That required serious patience and skill on the model building front. It required decent understanding of the radio, setting up the servos and trimming for flight, and to be honest the damn things (planes) are hard to fly at first. (RC helicopters border on impossible!) You also needed to find a field with room to practice take off and landing, etc. Today I can buy a pre-built quad-copter that can fly for 15-20 minutes with no assembly required. It's stabilized and ridiculously easy to start flying. I can practice for hours in private (in my living room, or back yard). That same quad copter can be given an autonomous course to follow, becoming a "fire and forget" delivery vehicle which can be discretely launched far enough away from a target to be completely unobserved. What if I load it up with as much anthrax as it can carry and set up a timed trigger to open the bag as it flies over a crowded festival, protest or some other gathering? How many victims would result from the downwash at 30' above ground level? I don't think this can be solved with legislation to be honest (you won't ever be able to stop a bad actor from getting the equipment, and bad actors will not register their gear). I also don't think this is a nightmare scenario - but I do think it's a legitimate concern we should be talking about.

nitrogen 11y ago
So we have to make sure nobody with the means to perform such an attack would ever have the motive. That means better social equality, better access to healthcare, etc.
- aedocw 11y ago
  That would certainly solve a lot of other problems. No need for gun control, knife control. No need for airport security. No need for armies, police, jails, judges... I like it! </snark> Apologies, I know we're not meant to be snarky here, and sarcasm rarely forwards a conversation in a useful direction, but this comment really struck me as silly, as you are proposing the solution to protecting people from random bad actors who might buy a quad copter is "make the world peaceful and remove motivation for personal harm". That does not seem possible. People should have access to good healthcare and social equality, but that is orthogonal to this conversation (IMHO).
  - nitrogen 11y ago
    That does not seem possible. It's a heck of a lot more possible than perfect security without putting everyone into padded cells, alone. Some countries in Northern Europe are evidence of this, as are declining crime rates after the banning of leaded gasoline and legalization of abortion. If you want to solve a problem, solve it at its roots. Focusing on the symptoms instead of the disease is a harmful attitude that is far too prevalent in America and elsewhere.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      Solving it at its roots doesn't preclude attacking the symptoms as well, though.
- marak830 11y ago
  I think this is 100% on point. Removing the reason is the best defence we could ever have. There always have been many ways to hurt a lot of people, as it gets easier we are learning that we cant defend against everything. At least i hope were learning.
- superuser2 11y ago
  Promoting social equality is the best way to get as many people as possible slaughtered as brutally as possible. Oppressors tend to lash out when their power is threatened. See: Boko Haram, the Taliban's reaction to buildout of civilian communications infrastructure in the backwaters of Afghanistan, etc. Nothing quite like America coming in to your home, insulting your religion and customs, and eroding your ownership of your women to motivate you to attack it. The price of peace is leaving horrible people alone when they do horrible things to other people.

by aedocw 11y ago

nitrogen 11y ago

So we have to make sure nobody with the means to perform such an attack would ever have the motive. That means better social equality, better access to healthcare, etc.

aedocw 11y ago
That would certainly solve a lot of other problems. No need for gun control, knife control. No need for airport security. No need for armies, police, jails, judges... I like it! </snark> Apologies, I know we're not meant to be snarky here, and sarcasm rarely forwards a conversation in a useful direction, but this comment really struck me as silly, as you are proposing the solution to protecting people from random bad actors who might buy a quad copter is "make the world peaceful and remove motivation for personal harm". That does not seem possible. People should have access to good healthcare and social equality, but that is orthogonal to this conversation (IMHO).
- nitrogen 11y ago
  That does not seem possible. It's a heck of a lot more possible than perfect security without putting everyone into padded cells, alone. Some countries in Northern Europe are evidence of this, as are declining crime rates after the banning of leaded gasoline and legalization of abortion. If you want to solve a problem, solve it at its roots. Focusing on the symptoms instead of the disease is a harmful attitude that is far too prevalent in America and elsewhere.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    Solving it at its roots doesn't preclude attacking the symptoms as well, though.
marak830 11y ago
I think this is 100% on point. Removing the reason is the best defence we could ever have. There always have been many ways to hurt a lot of people, as it gets easier we are learning that we cant defend against everything. At least i hope were learning.
superuser2 11y ago
Promoting social equality is the best way to get as many people as possible slaughtered as brutally as possible. Oppressors tend to lash out when their power is threatened. See: Boko Haram, the Taliban's reaction to buildout of civilian communications infrastructure in the backwaters of Afghanistan, etc. Nothing quite like America coming in to your home, insulting your religion and customs, and eroding your ownership of your women to motivate you to attack it. The price of peace is leaving horrible people alone when they do horrible things to other people.