PDA

View Full Version : Judge Nap - Is There a Drone in Your Backyard?




Anti Federalist
05-17-2012, 01:06 PM
Is There a Drone in Your Backyard?

by Andrew P. Napolitano

http://lewrockwell.com/napolitano/napolitano54.1.html

Earlier this week, the federal government announced that the Air Force might be dispatching drones to a backyard near you. The stated purpose of these spies in the sky is to assist local police to find missing persons or kidnap victims, or to chase bad guys.

If the drone operator sees you doing anything of interest (Is your fertilizer for the roses or to fuel a bomb? Is that Sudafed for your cold or your meth habit? Are you smoking in front of your kids?), the feds say they may take a picture of you and keep it.

The feds predict that they will dispatch or authorize about 30,000 of these unmanned aerial vehicles across America in the next 10 years. Meanwhile, more than 300 local and state police departments are awaiting federal permission to use the drones they already have purchased – usually with federal stimulus funds.

The government is out of control.

If the police use a drone without a warrant to see who or what is in your backyard or your bedroom, or if while looking for a missing child the drone takes a picture of you in your backyard or bedroom and the government keeps the picture, its use is unnatural and unconstitutional.

I say "unnatural" because we all have a natural right to privacy; it is a fundamental right that is inherent in our humanity. All of us have times of the day and moments in our behavior when we expect that no one – least of all the government – will be watching. When the government watches us during those times, it violates our natural right to privacy. It also violates our constitutional right to privacy. The Supreme Court has held consistently that numerous clauses in the Bill of Rights keep the government at bay without a warrant.

Even when we don't have an expectation of privacy, we do have a right to be left alone. But merely watching us in public isn't enough for the police, as many street corner cameras are equipped with listening devices and tiny megaphones. We can expect that these devices will soon bark commands: "Put down that BlackBerry." "Look to your right before crossing." "Don't kiss her; a car is coming." Actually, Big Brother is coming, and he's not smiling.

Big Brother is watching from the skies, as well as the streets. This started when the Department of Defense decided to offer help to police – and they are prepared to accept. Never mind that the military may not lawfully operate within our borders, except in the case of rebellion, and then only when publicly authorized by the president. Never mind that the military may not lawfully be used for law enforcement, except in the case of disaster, and then only when publicly authorized by the president. And never mind that this use of drones by the Air Force was not the result of legislation debated and enacted by Congress, but was done under the authority of the president alone.

Add to all this the use of drones to kill people. President Obama has argued that he can use drones to kill Americans overseas, whose deaths he believes will keep us all safer, without any constitutional due process whatsoever. His attorney general has argued that the president's careful consideration of each target and the narrow use of deadly drones are an adequate substitute for due process. Of course, no court has ever ruled that way. The president's national security adviser has argued that the use of drones is humane since they are "surgical" and only kill their targets. Of course, that's not true, but it misses the point. Without a declaration of war, the president can't lawfully kill anyone, no matter how humane his killing.

How long will it be before the Air Force and the police adopt the unconstitutional arguments of the president's wrongheaded advisers and use the drones not only to spy but also to kill Americans in America?

The whole reason we have a Bill of Rights is to assure that tyranny does not happen here, to guarantee that the government to which we have supposedly consented will leave us alone. Do you think the government accepts that? Would you feel safe with a drone in your backyard?

Would you feel like you were in America? (This hasn't felt like America in at least ten years, probably longer than that. Fuck the future. - AF)

tod evans
05-17-2012, 01:12 PM
Awfully expensive skeet...

VoluntaryAmerican
05-17-2012, 03:37 PM
Check this out:

At 1:11

the guy in this new Hollywood movie shoots a drone... while it's spying on him and his girlfriend...

But don't worry, it's all fun and games in this screwball comedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZqHhN4hVmg

Lucille
05-17-2012, 04:10 PM
Loved Lew's (http://www.lewrockwell.com/) title for the piece:

The US Has Become a Dystopian Novel
Andrew Napolitano on the unconstitutional spy drone above your backyard.

Anti Federalist
05-17-2012, 05:07 PM
A CIA spook shoots it down.

With a handgun.

At about 150 yards.

From a moving car.

And it explodes.

Ah, Hollywood.

If you or I tried that:

Felony assault on a police officer, felony resisting an officer, (yeah if their dogs are "officers" you can bet that their drones will considered "officers" as well) and felony destruction of government property.

Probably throw in a couple of terrorism charges as well.


Check this out:

At 1:11

the guy in this new Hollywood movie shoots a drone... while it's spying on him and his girlfriend...

But don't worry, it's all fun and games in this screwball comedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZqHhN4hVmg

Liberty74
05-17-2012, 05:29 PM
I wish I could GTFO of here. Or a state have the balls to secede.

Anti Federalist
05-17-2012, 06:02 PM
Spy drone almost causes mid air collision over Denver.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?377218-Spy-Drone-Almost-Causes-Mid-Air-Collision-With-Jet-Over-Denver

ronpaulfollower999
05-17-2012, 06:06 PM
There was an episode on Harry's Law where Kathy Bates character shoots down a Cincinnati police drone. Apparently it was spying on her neighbor because she was making dirty movies.

Lucille
05-17-2012, 06:18 PM
You know it's bad when Krauthammer agrees w/ The Judge (well, partly anyway).

Charles Krauthammer Goes "Hard Left" and Rants Against Domestic Drones: Or, Killing People Abroad is Okay, But Spying at Home is Wrong (http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/16/charles-krauthammer-goes-hard-left-and-r)


Krauthammer, who has a pretty high tolerance for American intervention overseas (and occasionally waves away congressional safeguards like the War Powers Act because to declare war properly is so archaic) went downright libertarian recently on the question of whether drones should be come a normal part of the skies, the horizon, and the purple mountains' majesty. Because dammit, war is war, but at home — Americans live there.

So Krauthammer went on Fox News this week and told Brett Baier:


I'm going to go hard left on you here, I'm going ACLU. I don't want regulations, I don't want restrictions, I want a ban on this. Drones are instruments of war. The Founders had a great aversion to any instruments of war, the use of the military inside even the United States. It didn't like standing armies, it has all kinds of statutes of using the army in the country.
[...]
Krauthammer went on to bemoan the fact that London has a terrifying amount of CCTV cameras and generally went on a bizarrely great (especially given his history) pro-privacy and pro-liberty rant. He also said he predicted "the first guy who uses a second amendment weapon to bring a drone down that's been hovering over his house will be a folk hero in this country." Though he was not "encouraging" that of course.

Hard left, huh? Where are all these hard leftists who want this police state BS to end (aside from Hedges et al.)?

RickyJ
05-17-2012, 06:26 PM
People aren't doing anything about the drones in Washington D.C., which steal from them and help destroy this country, so I doubt they will do anything about the drones over their houses.