Gun detecting drones roaming SW OK.

[Spata]

I loved how the headline of the story didn't exactly match the story (or the graphic they used--a revolver). It's not a drone for detecting firearms in the "black helicopters" sense (as was, IMHO, implied), but it carries sensors that can be used to distinguish between armed and unarmed persons. That actually has some legitimate uses...

Yep, this group here are po'd armed gun owners and that group there is waiting for their steak and lobster.

 

[RugersGR8]

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/04/08/peta-plans-to-fly-drones-that-would-stalk-hunters
PETA Plans to Fly Drones That Would 'Stalk Hunters'
PETA says it's actively shopping for a drone to monitor hunters
By Jason Koebler
April 8, 2013

 

[TwoForFlinching]

 

[RugersGR8]

Better stock-up and start hoarding these now along with TwoForFlinching's ammo:


http://image.patriotpost.us/2013-03-19-humor-4.jpg

 

[AKguy1985]

Now we need some APIT ammo. That'd be a good drone load.

 

[11b1776]

Yet another reason to put a 50BMG on my purchase list, but you will probably never see or hear one when they are really using them in the capacity they speak of.

 

[reddog1]

Funny how this is all a joke to you guys.

 

[cjjtulsa]

The publication Homeland Security Today says the testing is taking place at the Oklahoma Training Center for Unmanned Systems operated by Oklahoma State University. The group doing the work is "a trusted agent" of the federal government.

Trusted agent of the federal government - but are either a trusted agent of the U.S. citizens?

 

[Fyrtwuck]

Funny how this is all a joke to you guys.

I don't see it as a joke. Things have already gotten out of hand.

 

[SMS]

Like I said in the other thread on the same subject a while back...Imagine conducting testing to find out/fine tune the capabilities of drones. How horrible.

If one is concerned about using drones, I get it...but getting concerned because the systems are being tested? What do you expect them to do, duct tape a monkey with a set of binoculars to 'em?

Surveillance systems must be capable of detecting and identifying stuff, or more importantly the sensors on board the systems need to be able to deliver imagery that allows the operator to detect and identify stuff. There are standards out there; XX system must be capable of detecting movement at XX miles, capable of allowing operator to identify man vs. vehicle at xx miles, capable of allowing operator to discriminate between a truck and a car at xx miles etc...having a requirement for the on board sensors be capable of delivering imagery that allows the operator to identify if a person is armed is a useful thing. Otherwise why have them?

Getting outraged over a drone that can detect and identify stuff is as stupid as being outraged that your mugger has bullets in his gun. Get pissed about the gun if you want, but not that it's being used for what it is designed to be used for.

I'd be more pissed to find out that we spent all this money on drones and nobody bothered to find out if they worked as advertised first.

(good luck hitting one with a .50bmg)