A Texas Sheriff's Department is Launching an Unmanned Helodrone that Could Carry Weapons

The Government will keep pushing these weapons under the guise of homeland security but are intended to spy and kill US citizens. But of course the citizens could care less along they have their smartphones and SUVs and Bacon Double Cheeseburgers. Pathetic.

As a Texan I don't mind the drone by itsself, but as soon as you get the idea of putting guns on it, even if less-lethal, I say hell no.

@Boka you've obviously never had a bacon double cheeseburger.

On a serious non trolling note. I live just south of the area , and I believe its a good idea. Less manpower is needed which means (hopefully) the funds can be used for other better causes....education for instance.

I don't much like the idea of a government operated drone with guns, lethal or not. but in the case of border control it could be useful, i would say no though to any use of it as a general public weapon/surveillance it violates our amendment rights and the rights to privacy and general well being

The less we leave up to others is the more we command our lives

I wonder how this will turn out in the long run. It seems Texas wants to test the legal system and if possible strength the laws towards this. It is in the hands of the voters.

Prior to launching any drone, they best use do process and get a court order from a judge. Imagine any innocent people getting hurt by this and hell will have to be paid by the state.

Boka, your opinion that the USA citizens could care less is just trolling attitude and useless dribble.

boka sounds like the usual democrat

-Knock knock
-Who's there?
-The Doctor.
-Doctor Who?
-Yes

I'm not a democrat. I'm a liberal. Obama is a lying scumbag.

I'm truly surprised that Sheriff Joe "media hound" Arpio (sp) isn't doing this in this "crime suppression sweeps" except that he would arm his with Hellfire missiles and chainguns and all in the name of 'protecting' the citizens of Arizona. Hey, Joe, who will protect us from you?

This is a good idea. it's just removing the human being inside the helicopter. it's not like it's an AI calling all the shot.

porsche469,
You make a great comment. Yes, a human has to make the final judgment of the shot and it's not A.I. as you say.

@Boka, I don’t say this much to you, but you are right on the money with that first comment. You couldn’t be more right.

FYI a taser is a lethal weapon, tasers have caused many deaths.

You guys are so clueless; they are just testing the waters with this thing. In a few years they are going to roll out PETMAN on your a$$’s

@justin, yes I’m sure they will put the money they save paying for officers towards education….LMAO get a clue.

American is turning into a police state. Machines giving out tickets…pathetic….I would rather my tax dollars go to a human police force, with families and morals. Not these machines. They will be autonomous one day.

America is so turning into a totalitarian government….Hitler, Stalin and Mau would be so proud of the socialists running the government.

Boka,
I do too agree with your first comment.

Aldrons Last Hope,
You make a good point too. I was thinking if a drone tazes someone ( yes a human made the choice remotely) and there is no human near them and this person dies, not good.

And yes, once PETMAN gets its own power suppyly and strong network link, all solders will be robotic\drones.

Step forward?..............?
Really?
You published THAT?
Anyone have the stats on how many people police needlessly shoot every year?
this is not just a step BACKWARDS... it's insane!

This is a big step forward for law enforcement. This does not violate people's constitutional rights.You have the right not to have your privacy invaded, but a drone will not invade your privacy any more than a police helicopter, which often has guns on it. This may actually enhance your quality of life because it will be able to more efficiently deploy officers and it will lessen the number of cops that need to be in the field. It will also save tax money so that the money can be used for better things.

Aldrons last hope-
America is not a police state. A taser is known as a LESS THAN LETHAL weapon because there is risk that someone could die. Someone with a family and morals is controlling the drone. Also do you even know what socialism is? I suggest you get a dictionary and look up the definition before you start calling the government socialists.
And Boka, The police are an important part of maintaining security and order for american citizens, and trashing them is really pointless. You should all try living without the government. I bet you wouldn't even last one day!

Oh and one last thing, Aldron's last hope, Hitler was a Fascist not a socialist. The Nazis and socialists were sworn enemies. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU PUT THEM ONLINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boka you are making un american coments, and the fact that people are reding and posting this shows that Americans do care!

Some people fall into a lake and are drowning.
Some people cross the wrong border and are droning.
Interesting article!

When America has 5% of the world's population and has 25% of the worlds inmates in american prisons something is wrong. When USA spends $700,000,000,000 on military spending, 5% of of GDP and only 4% spent on education something is wrong. Our government is un-american. Because the government is run by religious wackos. But hey stick your head in the sand or play video games.

All I see is a new remote controlled toy for the hackers to seize control of. Which we all know - they eventually will. Hell, weren’t drone video feeds already broken into by Taliban? Hopefully this thing doesn’t run on the Play station network ;)

@sgtshor really?? You are hanging your hat on the term “less-leathal”? That is just semantics to put mindless sheep to sleep. Fact is a taser can be much more lethal than a gun. For instance a gunshot to the leg might not kill you, but a taser shot to the chest is more likely to kill you.

I also said one day all of these things will be autonomous, the only reason they are not is because they haven’t figured it out yet. But rest assured they will. So no there will be no cop at a desk controlling these things.

Why are you saying the money will be used for better things?? LOL Do you know ANYTHING about economics? 90% + of all tax payer money is used to pay off the national debt paid to the Federal Reserve. Haven’t you noticed all of your services, including policing budgets getting smaller and smaller? America in totally owned by foreign interests at this point. And they are treating the American people like cattle. And here you have a high tech cattle prod.

Please rephrase your comment….America is not a totalitarian government….YET!

Please allow me to rephrase, Hitler would be very proud of the Fascists running this country. Stalin would be very proud of the communist interests running the country.

In reality, Communism, Socialism, Fascism all have one thing in common that make them very similar in my eyes, they are all against personal liberty. They fly in the face of what the founding fathers intended America to be….(you want to know what that is)….read the constitution and bill of rights.

Men should fight face to face with swords. And the battles should be led by the leaders. It was a honorable time!

An article on a drone sends you all into a tangent on how America is doomed and military spending is out of control. Its been in decline since the mid fifties. Its about half what it was(% GDP of course) and has been replaced by health care(which is highest in the world btw).

Anyway, the drone sounds great and a lot cheaper than a regular helicopter. I don't have any problem with tasers or bean bags being used on criminals(or the 99% -joke) fired by police. And speeding? Wow how horrible. As long as your eyes are peeled for cop cars you should be able to drive as fast as you want I guess.

Really though, there are RC enthusiasts with helicopters bigger then this, its nothing new.

@aldron I'd rather take a taser to the face than a bullet to the ass; about 50 people die from tasers every year which is shockingly(HA) low considering how many thousands are tasered and what it does to the body.

And cut the crap about everything being autonomous like we're in a Terminator movie. Drones have cameras, police don't. They can't abuse a drone just like they can't break the law in front of their own dashboard cameras.

Nuclear weapons and drones can end the world but they won't. They make total war impossible and remove the need for expensive and human sacrificing traditional military.

Warfare is diminishing and countries are forming a more and more equal global economy, BUT remember its the end of the world; just like always.

@Boka Obama is also a liberal, so that is two things you have in common!

OT the fact that the Department of Homeland Security helped pay for this is the first red flag - but regardless, the idea of an unmanned and armed police drone is a sure win for government abuse.

@calebscape808 We already have drones that are more than suitable for border patrol, and more importantly they are US Military/National Guard drones. The problem with the border right now is that there are simply not enough resources being placed there to make it secure, and the fact that Obama and his pals sue every attempt made by any State to do something about it does not help.

@Aldrons Last Hope Actually absolutely NONE of the tax money goes towards paying off the debt - the Federal Reserve does not accept Federal Reserve notes for payment of debts, they only accept gold. But the best part is this: the money used to pay off the debt? Borrowed. The money used to pay off the loan used to pay off the debt? Borrowed. Of course its going to fail... that was the idea. BTW i'm in total agreement of your last paragraph.

@Grunt I was definitely born in the wrong century :(

@funkyskunk2 Your statement is, quite frankly, false. Lets use Europe as an example:

13th Century - 8 wars
16th Century - 38 wars
19th Century - 41 wars
20th Century - 56 wars
Past 10 Years - 7 wars

In 13th Century Europe there was a war every twelve and a half years. At our current rate, 21st Century Europe will see a war every one and a half years. Your statement is not only false - its utter nonsense.

Many risk their lives many times traveling across South America to reach the USA boarder. Then in crossing the USA boarder they risk their lives again. All for the belief at the end of the rainbow is a pot of GOLD.

I think it would be most helpful to public worldly broadcast (And spreading information with the internet is not that hard) if you come in USA and look for a job illegally, you will be tossed out of the country. Whatever the reason a large mass of people in South America are not getting this knowledge.

Second, there should never be a pot of gold at the rainbow if you break the law.

Third, those employers that employee them are breaking the law and should be Federally Punished.

Let’s get rid of the pot of gold for the illegal’s!

I am very much for legal immigration of all cultures.
I like and believe in the concept of legal immigration.
I am for USA laws first!

if you dont like it, move somewhere else.

-Knock knock
-Who's there?
-The Doctor.
-Doctor Who?
-Yes

@no one you know

I'm speaking of relatively modern times, though ancient times you were many times more likely to be killed in war. Remember wars would last decades often cutting countries populations in half. Sure the numbers killed would be small compared to world wars but the human population was smaller too.

Who cares how many wars there are, its about how many die.

http://www.hsrgroup.org/docs/Publications/HSB2007/Figures/2007HSBrief_fig3_1-StateBasedArmedConflictsByType.jpg

Civil wars in developing nations are high,

http://www.hsrgroup.org/docs/Publications/HSB2007/Figures/2007HSBrief_fig3_2-ReportedBattleDeathsStateBasedConflicts.jpg

actual deaths are down.

Read as much as you want, wherever you look there is fewer casualties from war.

http://www.hsrgroup.org/

Besides as the population rises, even if casualties were flat the percent death would be declining, but its not. Casualties overall are down percent death is even lower.

yo man "aldrons last hope" you're so damn right.keep talking about this and do not let your government take your free speech.this is a an instrument of social control and the time to stop this is now.power to the people

@Grunt, I agree, if the people who start wars by signing a piece of paper had to lead their troops or send THEIR children off to war, there would be a lot less wars.

@NoOneYouKnow thanks. It has already failed, they need to get out of the Federal Reserve system. The system was put into a place in 1913. Many people at the time including ex presidents said that in 100 years the U.S would be bankrupt…it took a little less than 100 years, in fact if they stopped the system right now, it would take 100 years to pay off the dept @ 15 trillion a year (WOW)

@FunkySkunky, I’d rather take a bullet to the leg than a taser to the face. First off tasers aren’t supposed to be fired into the face. People who have suffered taser shots to the face have been killed or suffered brain damage and/or nerve damage to the face. Saying “less-lethal” is like saying less pregnant or less dead. It’s semantics.

Also I guess you don’t keep up with your A.I. reading. They are already working on this. Google S.W.O.R.D.S (Special Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Detection Systems)

Lastly I want to know if you are living in Bizarro world, because you are not in touch with reality. “Wars are diminishing” are you kidding me!? The U.S is involved with at least 7 wars right now, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. And they have their guns trained on North Korea, Venezuela & Iran.

Also those stats you posted are bogus. They do not account for the MILLIONS of civilian casualties. Yes the U.S soldiers are sustaining less casualties, because they are not really engaging in war, more like slaughter. They are not fighting an enemy on equal ground to them ( I guess Russia, France, U.K would be the closest thing to that) They are murdering civilians in those countries by the millions. The residual death isn’t counted in your bogus stats. For instance the cancer rate in Iraq has gone since the illegal invasion for oil (learn about D.U)

Go put the drones in the border, so it can shoot drug smugglers and los zeta mercanaries.

Could someone tell me if it's considered OK to shoot people from a manned helicopter in the U.S.?

ejfineran,

Just so you know, this topic is about a remote controlled drone, so it is not manned. But, yes it is remotely manned.

From what perspective are you asking this question of shooting? Are you the shooter of people? Or are you one of the shot people? What exactly do you mean by shooting? What kind of weapon will you use and what is your intent in shooting? Are you shooting them with a warning from a loud speaker, go home! Are you shooting them with a tazer? Are you shooting with a 22 rounds, 45 rounds, and missile? Why are you shooting these people? If you are one of these people being shot, why are you provoking the drone to be shot in the first place?

Must I quote Uncle Ruckus for the situation in Houston? For law-enforcement agencies to be pulling that string of surveillance says something about that city.

" Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

Grunt,
I assume by your crude attempt at humour, you are from the U.S.

The article seemed to imply that the controversy hinged on the unmanned nature of the vehicle and that firing a wide variety of weapons from a manned vehicle was OK. You might not be aware that in civilised countries this attitude would not be tolerated.

So again I ask - Could someone tell me if it's considered OK to shoot people from a manned helicopter in the U.S.?

I was not trying to be funny.

What you do not realize is the word shooting implies a life and death situation. And the word shooting is also ambiguous. And every situation is unique and actions and judgments of these situations are dire.

You question is ambiguous and so then impossible to answer.

A camera man shoots his camera. So in other words, what the heck are you asking and describe the exact situation you are speaking about.

We are a civilized country and we do not just kill people randomly. I asked my original questions, because as a civilized society you prompted a worded response. Had I not been civilize, maybe I just shoot you.

What a waste of taxpayer money! There are numerous unmanned vehicles that can take pictures and live video that cost a few thousand dollars. The cops should never have airborne munitions for any reason. This is a job for the military.

Thank you Harvey1

I thought they were just going to slap some IR on it and patrol the border. Unless this is cheaper than a normal helicopter then it sounds useless. Especially sense a normal helicopter can have 2 or more observers, carry supplies and cargo etc depending on the particular vehicle. this a superbly overpriced flying camera.

Arming it is silly. What's it going to do? Fire fairy dust from a mile high in the middle of nowhere? It would take millions more to make the weapons mentioned any effective. even in the form of grenades and bombs. Weapons don't zoom the way cameras do.

and someone will shoot at it for feeling threatened or something and get away with it. and that would be the end.

It cracks me up when people try and use the "invasion of privacy" argument in reference to this drone. At least once a week like clockwork, there is a police helicopter circling my block for 20 mins, shining a spotlight into every yard and building.

Some keep repeating the tiresome refrain that we are constantly taking one step closer to that imaginary police state. So when does that arrive again? The sad truth is, people currently travel farther and much easier than they ever have in the past. Cheaper too by far when you adjust for inflation. Boo hoo that your speed on the highways is limited, or that you're gonna get a bit of a grope at the airport. But blame others for messing that up for you. We wouldn't have needed a TSA if we were able to take care of all that stuff on our own before 9/11 happened. I know my first post 9/11 flight had my nerves a bit on edge. I looked at every single passenger I was in line with and every single person that boarded the plane. Prob spent half the flight running various scenarios thru my head. It's not such a problem for me now, but the days I got on a plane and sat innocently watching the in-flight movie are long gone.

I see a new wave of private operated scanning equipment coming up next. Then hardened circuitry and better encryption on the drone, then higher quality processor stacks for the consumer, then armor on the drone.......

They could be useful for shooting illegals and smugglers

Ladies, ladies, you're all pretty! now @Boka, your first comment had a few points, as did a few of your others, @Aldron, same deal. YOu two have something in common, overly HOSTILE!!!!!!!!! There's no reason to be a jack a$$ about it. I agree America is headed to he!! on a high speed train, but may as well try to fix it and not complain.

Now over the REAL topic. This is slightly against privacy rights, and also brings in the problem of hackers. I have a friend who could crack this puppy wider than Vallis Marineris and not even have his computer get warm. Now you muppets need to understand that this is and isnt a problem. This was coming. I forsaw it when I first saw that Universities were allowed to use UAV's for research. First the military, universities, law enforcement was simply the next step, mail after. Now I don't say you strap a pair of M-134's and a few Hydra rocket pods onto it, but maybe a small M14 with a seperate gunner/pilot arrangement, just like with chopper snipers in ordinary law enforcemnt. Simple, easy to remember.

@Boka, @Aldron, try to use a little more diplomacy, and a little less leering. Females prefer it if you show it a little more decorum.

Just to blow all of your minds, I'm 16 and still in high school.

The development of flying drones with weapon capablities is technological evolution. It was pretty much inevitable. What has to evolve with it is the human intellect to use it responsibly.

Texans are tough and well armed. If they feel that the drone is being miss-used, it will most likely be (accidentally) shot down. It may have offensive capabilities, but it doesn't look terribly well shielded.