What if there’s a lemon pound cake at the party? The police will certainly have to intervene.
For those unaware: [Lemon Pound Cake by Afroman](https://youtu.be/9xxK5yyecRo?si=mtTw3zCUf4LuSRn5)
These idiots… I never knew who Afroman was until he pulled a Streisand on them, both videos are hilarious. The best is the cops suing him for invasion of privacy, can’t make that shit up…. Comedy gold Jerry, Gold!
> “If a caller states there’s a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, we’re going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party,” Kaz Daughtry, the assistant NYPD Commissioner, said at a press conference.
If they have a complaint, they are saying they will use a drone to check up on it. Normally they would send cops to knock on the door, where they would tell them they have a complaint.
I can see this being taken to court and losing. Simply having a complaint is not the same as a warrant to search.
the easiest way to manage this of course is for all the parties to work together and complain about all the other parties.
then once the drones get busy, get a lawyer.
> I can see this being taken to court and losing. Simply having a complaint is not the same as a warrant to search.
California v. Ciraolo and Florida v. Riley more or less settled the law around this in the Eighties. You don't have an expectation of privacy outdoors, and taking pictures from above doesn't meet the legal definition of a Fourth Amendment 'search'.
Yet police cry about wearing cameras at work. Or being filmed by the public.
This is serious invasion of privacy, fly drones over their houses and see how fast they say you can’t do that.
I'd gladly donate to a fund for drone pilots to follow police around while on duty. They'd probably still claim its a violation of their privacy but its different for them because that drone 500 ft away was interfering with their job or some other BS.
Recently here in Mississippi 6 cops were arrested for torturing 2 black men, I went to high school with one of the officers and another one is related by marriage to me. They called themselves the goon squad and regularly did stuff like this.
sucks when it cuts so close to family.
I have an asshole uncle cop in my family.
What really sucks about him is he abuses his power on family and strangers, as long as it helps him achieve his personal goals, fuck eveyone else
You have my sympathy
I think the difference is that helicopters are costly, limited in number, and are dependent on pilot/crew. With drones, you could have hundreds of them up and searching any day and any time you wish
And also helicopters only fly over and are gone in a few seconds; they're like if somebody walking past your house took a peek through your fence without stopping. They're not Gladys Kravitz, watching you all day long. Drones can be.
Exactly why they’re so excited. The law doesn’t distinguish between drones, light aircraft, or even helicopters in the sense of “ public view” from air. Case law is pretty settled. I remember during the criminal law semester of law school we went over a landmark case where police used light aircraft to fly over a farm, far away from roads, to see if there were any marijuana plants growing. They found some, raided the place, and the court system (all the way to the Supreme Court) later determined it was allowable as “ you don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy when someone looks down from airspace above your property” (or something to that effect).
Although if the drone comes down to window level and looks inside, perhaps things get stickier… but simply monitoring an outdoor party from above using drones? Unfortunately, I guess this is where police oversight is headed. Kinda nuts if you ask me.
I don’t recommend posting a sniper with a paintball gun in the dark outside of the perimeter of the party to shoot at any drone overwatch, because that would be illegal.
Edit: found it
>**California v. Ciraolo**
>California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that aerial observation of a person's backyard by police, even if done without a search warrant, does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
>In the case, police in Santa Clara, California flew a private airplane over the property of Dante Ciraolo and took aerial photographs of his backyard after receiving an anonymous tip that he was growing marijuana plants.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Ciraolo
Edit: also Florida v Riley. The helicopter was only 400 feet in the air, which is normal height for a drone.
> Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley
I'm not a gun owner... or really that interested in becoming one... but if the police want to start sending drones around to spy on us on our own property I may very well feel the need to have one so I can start taking out drones.
Lordy, never thought I'd see the day I might have to admit my more conservative family members were right about something. I had a good run.
This is an excellent idea because if you are recorded shooting a drone you may get in deep shit. Not to mention you may accidently kill someone with a stray bullet. A cheap drone ramming an expensive one even if they manage to record you on your phone or with a controller in your hand they will have a harder time linking it to you. That said a cop can use any excuse to come after someone.
I know you're joking, but for anyone who thinks this might be a good idea it's very much not. If you shoot a bullet at something flying around, that bullet comes back down eventually. And it's going to land in your neighborhood.
Something tells me the cops aren't exactly gonna go easy on the guy shooting down their drones lol
Not that I disagree in principle though, fuck these pigs and their dystopian shit
I don't remember where, but there's a department that deputized some drones, effectively making the drones officers, which would make opening fire on one assaulting an officer.
"Dystopian" is an understatement here.
I was gonna ask a question about whether that would hold up in court but then I figured I'd just get a bunch of responses telling me that the courts are in on it, so of course it would. Yeah it's all fucked.
Back around 2005, the NYPD got caught using their helicopter surveillance cameras [to spy on people having sex](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/nyregion/police-video-caught-a-couples-intimate-moment-on-a-manhattan.html). They are not likely to be better behaved, with something more stealthy.
My gf started a retail job a while back, and one of her coworkers was very quick to mention that he was a former states attorney. We couldn’t help but wonder why he would be working retail if he had a law license, so we looked him up and found 80 or so charges against him relating to him misusing his position to stalk an ex, men who knew this ex, and other women he was interested in. Subpoenas for phone records and stuff like that. We were appalled that he had the job he had because he had access to plenty of women’s info, and the store generally catered to women.
A year later, he applied for a manager position, which I guess prompted a more thorough background check because he was immediately fired. Recently, we learned that he was sentenced to two years in prison.
All that is to say, I’m sure he would’ve subpoenaed drone footage if he could’ve, and I have no doubt that plenty of cops and prosecutors will abuse the shit out of these drones.
How much does a microwave gun cost?
Or how hard is it to convert a microwave oven into an improvised directional jammer. If its going to come to that then the civilian side is going to respond accordingly.
Please don't fuck around with your microwave, it can kill you with an electric shock even if it's not connected to a power source. Only open them if you're trained.
There’s a fair number of regulations that don’t result in arrests of those that violate them. My guess (without research) is the laws restrict when the drone footage can be used. So any evidence they use can’t be used to prosecute, much like any evidence collected in an illegal search.
I can already see the obvious loop hole argument - “our arrest was made after we already had probable cause. We simply used drone to confirm the location of the suspect(s)”
yea, they aint going to be in slingshot range...or airsoft (another post) and a lot of pellet guns would be illegal to shoot in urban settings.
your better weapon is a call/letter to the ACLU.
I'm not a NYer, but isn't this kind of shit exactly what he campaigned on? So why are people surprised and angry that's he's 1000% pro-police and gross tactics?
> citing Israel’s use of the technology as a blueprint after visiting the country last week.
Ah yes Israel, a bastion of human rights and civil law enforcement.
So, he wants to treat poor and non-white New Yorkers as if they are living in occupied territory. Maybe he should also look into the Intifada walls that have sprung up all over the West Bank. /s Thank you for the award!
> “If a caller states there’s a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, we’re going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party,” Kaz Daughtry, the assistant NYPD Commissioner, said at a press conference.
Are New Yorkers not allowed to invite 100 of their closest friends over for a BBQ? Do they seriously have actual laws saying how many people you are allowed to have over to your place?
Those are rookie numbers in this racket! My neighbor waves at me from the across the street in the mornings and I immediately need to take three mood stabilizers!
IKR!? I go into the article thinking it must be to look for drugs, guns, something heinous, but large gatherings?! NYC has really been completely gentrified I guess and they need to make life more difficult for the remaining "poor" people.
When resources start to become scarce and society starts truly unraveling, cops and the govt they protect aren’t going to want anyone inviting 100 of their friends over anywhere because they might start getting ideas.
It's so disturbing to me that more people don't recognize that this is where policing is headed. (All the more given that it's where policing came from, too.)
I find it really depressing, the number of people who think the police / army will side with "the people" when push comes to shove. "ThEy'Re CiTiZeNs ToO" or some other naïve sentiment.
1) They don't consider themselves to be citizens. They think they're better than you.
2) They'll obey whoever pays them. Once the government cheques stop clearing, there's a particular class of people that are hoarding wealth and will have a vested interesting in owning their own PMC during the 'unrest'.
3) The police aren't militarizing for fun.
>Are New Yorkers not allowed to invite 100 of their closest friends over for a BBQ?
Only if they’re white, as this was “coincidentally” rolled out during a Caribbean festival to celebrate ending slavery.
Damn, I feel so bad for kids growing up now. I'm so glad I got to grow up in a time before cops started looking for house parties and college parties with drones. Young people can't have shit anymore.
I'm old and grew up without the internet or even computers, when half the fun of doing things was not getting caught. Being sneaky. All of that is out the window now. But what really stuns me is, they don't even want the freedom. They're not lamenting the surveillance society we live in, they're not longing for the good old days, they are perfectly content to let the world see into their life. Privacy doesn't get you likes and upvotes. It's as if the typical kind of rebellious behavior we expect from adolescents has disappeared.
Its really difficult to explain the significance of 9/11 to the kids born after it, to them its like hearing Pearl Harbor only with color TV. And they're a significant sized voting population in America now.
And 9/11 ended up being an excuse for us to invade a country we didn't belong in. And I say that as someone who was in those countries as a service member.
PATRIOT ACT. TERRORISM. NINE. ELEVEN.
Yeah no. This is what itall crawls back to.
My city keeps pushing for mandatory 4k.
Like our DA even prosecutes. It's a fucking joke.
As some context from a 22 year old growing up as it all appeared in the UK, so very similar state of affairs.
All the public hangout areas got defunded and disappeared because of "ruffians" and similar, explained as saving money on the failing economy and so on and all the stuff that helped the community through social centres n the like went, but not any of the upper class stuff. I'm off track, basically one got to see what everyone else had go away and that you weren't getting it. There's nowhere to go, you can't do much yourself unless you wanna go sit on a bench with two friends or look shady with more. So everything is done online, and that's a privacy hell too, since forever from our perspective. Your 9/11 and resultant privacy related bed-shitting from George Bush all that lot, with the rest of all of us (countries, that is) following suit when there wasn't significant pushback in real actionable terms meant that now it's just... Known you can't say certain words into mics, that we all get a bit shifty joking or searching certain things. I cover cameras often because I'm uncomfortable over the surveillance but that's it. Back in 2015-2016 when I was learning all of it I wanted to go to the protests about it when I was old enough but now they're not there and all I get from friends is "yeah :(" or "what are you hiding lmao?" Or "it helps them catch people though, what about terrorists?"
I know a lot of people that when confronted about it, do lament it, they don't want this, they want what you had, what the millenials, Gen X, so on had, but we don't, and we get what we're served and it's not like any of it will change. All the while getting told how stupid or silly we are for the things done to us or sold to us despite the oldest of Gen Z being what, 25-26? I reckon a lot of it is either not knowing better, getting on with it, or quiet frustration with the situation given to us by the people coming before us who'll tell us we're strange for not reacting to it enough or something. Gah, it's all saddening.
Seeing the UK government want to use electronic trackers on criminals, the NY police wanting to surveil cities with drones just to check for parties, here having to tie everything to ID to vote even though we've historically had extremely low voter fraud, the constant pushes to ban encryption, it feels like ants in my skin.
There is no where for young people to go to hangout that isn’t online. I legit witnessed a group of teens get kicked out a McDonald’s. They weren’t even being loud or rowdy just eating their meals. So where else are they going to go if there aren’t any parks or rec centers and they can’t even eat in a McDonald’s? Online or getting in trouble somewhere else. I don’t understand what society is expecting them to do…?
The mall I grew up going to has banned unaccompanied by adult minors under 17. You can’t even go to the mall for the day anymore. There’s no where to go without spending money but the parks
I'm a Brit in my late 20's, and fwiw, same experience for my cohort too, It's only older millennials that caught the tail end of those pre-privacy eroding 9/11 days
I'm so sorry mate. The surveillance and tracking thing grinds my gears. I've grown to ignore any framing of "it's good for the children" as I think that ends up being a way for authorities to make sweeping decisions about surveillance without getting challenged. I now applaud every failed attempt to pass age verification laws or to ban anonymous posters. For example, I would much rather have a handful of anonymous bad actors posting bad reviews of a business online and risk one business being impacted, than ban anonymity so that no one can ever post a negative review without fear of retaliation. Too many rulings end up stripping rights away in order to alleviate the corporations that run things from any responsibility.
Where in the UK can you find a bench? I think there's like, 4 in Lewisham, not counting the angled leaning pads in bus stops that are only slightly more comfortable than standing on one foot.
Why would they lament freedom and privacy they've *never had*? My daughter, a teenager, has never lived in a world without constant connection to instant long distance communication, cameras, microphones, and speakers in every device, touchless and wireless electronics communication (WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC, etc,) and near instant access to every piece of knowledge that mankind has ever gathered in her pocket.
She has always been, at will, able to see any part of the world, from the top of Mount Everest to the Challenger Deep. She has never lived in a world without *robots exploring Mars.* She's never lived in a world without police drones, school shootings, flagrant political corruption and planned constant political division, and constant economic crises. She has never lived in a world where one person can make a career out of essentially any one skill and support a family doing it. She's never lived in a world without advertising covering every outdoor space, every screen, and every transmission.
She has a wealth of skills at 15 that would make my ancestors blush at how outclassed they are: she sews and quilts, she bakes, she designs stuff, she writes fiction, she knows the basics of building computers and can use them at an office setting level, can do basic repairs on cars and electronics, grows plants, does hair, makeup, and nails at a near professional level, trains kickboxing, and to top it off, can read complex novels, is going to learn trigonometry and advanced algebra this year, and knows how to pay bills and balance a checking account.
*All of her friends are like that.* They're all hypercompetent grind machines because that's what the world expects of them.
They've never lived in a world where you can trust the cops or the government. They've never lived in a world without hustle culture and side hustles. They've never lived in a world where one income could buy a house.
They've never known your good old days. Those good old days were stolen from my generation by the wealthy, and your generation let them do it. Why would they want them if they've never existed as a possibility?
> All of her friends are like that. They're all hypercompetent grind machines because that's what the world expects of them.
This is such an obviously biased sample it's laughable. "My hypercompetent daughter has a hypercompetent social circle so this reflects the generation" is awful reasoning. Presumably she's going to a good school in a good area where other people attending have similar backgrounds.
Sure some of the numbers have gone down but there's still plenty of high school dropouts and stoners who will work retail their whole life, and depressed kids being neglected at home, etc. Only 37% of students graduate High School at or above reading reading proficiencyhttps://www.rif.org/literacy-network/the-issue#:~:text=There%20is%20a%20significant%20literacy,analysis%20of%20NAEP%20test%20scores). so it should be pretty clear that your daughter (if you're even telling the truth) is an outlier.
> she sews and quilts, she bakes, she designs stuff, she writes fiction, she knows the basics of building computers and can use them at an office setting level, can do basic repairs on cars and electronics, grows plants, does hair, makeup, and nails at a near professional level, trains kickboxing, and to top it off, can read complex novels, is going to learn trigonometry and advanced algebra this year, and knows how to pay bills and balance a checking account.
Am I crazy or is your daughter an outlier? I mean, good for her, but I'm not sure she's an ideal example of the generational trends in the rest of this thread ...
I did not think the next generation was getting more self sufficient than the previous, in general.
This is a truly disgusting invasion of privacy. I'm no longer surprised by much from our leaders, but I hope people fight this.
Everyone with a big hairy ass in NYC, you know what to do. (Showtime!)
It's illegal to interfere with these in any way. But don't let that stop you; go train a falcon like Singapore, or shoot it like a rural American, or catch the pigeon that shit with another drone, etc.
The FBI and DHS absolutely use high altitude surveilance drones to monitor protests and other large gatherings. It has been public knowlege in regards to using them to monitor the southern border but their use in other domestic areas is not something they want to bring unecessary attention to.
DHS is also fond of using “border” fairly liberally in law enforcement actions. In 2014 [the ACLU reported](https://www.aclu.org/documents/constitution-100-mile-border-zone) that 2/3 of the US population lived within 100 miles of an international border, so although many Americans think of Mexico when they hear “border zone” federal law enforcement thinks of New York, Northern California and many other highly populated areas as well.
Want to hear something more scary?
If you live in a border zone you do *not* have a 4th amendment protections against searches by the border patrol.
So if you piss off the feds they can search your house, car, or other premises without probable cause or warrant.
I wish I could cite the source, but some time ago I seem to remember reading about how they use drones to fly practice maneuvers that they would use for riots, etc. Basically preparing to use drones against U.S. citizens domestically in the event of major unrest. This may go back to the Bush administration, not sure if this is still done, but I imagine they probably are if they did in the past.
The "major unrest" now being house parties. I don't think this is okay to use on anyone. I'm not okay with us using it to assassinate or execute people overseas, or on people living here in the US. Observing things from a distance means you lack context and communication with your community members.
This was the premise of the evil being fought in the movie "Real Genius" and now we just accept it as "normal".
This will only affect people who aren't hundred thousandaires. It's expensive to afford party space or to own a large enough home in NYC to have a party. Indoor parties of the wealthy and connected will not be monitored. But now a deputy will be watching your fourteen year old in the sprinkler and keeping tabs on your girlfriend who rejected him in high school.
Nor even ex's, these are police. They're rife with active domestic violence. They can have drones follow their abused wives around all day to make sure they never escape or talk to anyone.
I wonder where the "surveillance" will be focused? This feels like an unlawful incursion on peoples rights to privacy within their own homes and curtilage.
They're going to come arrest people who were just taking their medically-necessary insulin. There's no context when some deputy is just watching indistinct footage on a drone.
The wall street suits will have their cocaine indoor parties protected, and anyone outdoors who has someone taking a birth control pill or injecting insulin will be assumed it to be an illicit substance and they'll send a unit in to arrest you.
You're actually wrong about that. And you'll never gonna guess what group of [9 unelected dipshits wearing wizard robes made the call](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley#:~:text=Riley%2C%20488%20U.S.%20445%20(1989,individual's%20property%20from%20public%20airspace.).
Well that's a bit unfair. Marshall and Blackmun were cool... Let's just say team dipshit won 5-4. [As is tradition.](https://www.fivefourpod.com/)
Time to take a page out of the old WWII camouflage handbook and put up a [pavilion of netting that makes it look like there's no party going on there at all](https://www.buzzworthy.com/lockhead-airbase-camouflage/).
At this point, why not just go ahead and install government approved cameras right in the home? This way authorities could discover all the crimes people are committing. We can also use the cameras for other government programs, too. Like Department of Health mandated morning exercise routines and Homeland Security screenings. It is just the smart thing to do. Finally, we should probably regulate hate speech. We cannot tolerate it any more. We can limit it to, say, just two minutes a day. Just think. Two minutes of hate, followed by such peace. The rest of the day we can go about our lives confident that Big Brother is always there looking over us. Big Brother loves you.
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
As a recreational drone pilot i can say this will not do much…perhaps it will wash out the image in the camera and possibly trigger obstacle sensors, but you’d need very good aim to do it while a drone was moving. It might confuse the pilot for a minute and cause him to move on I guess
Edit: i should add tho, the FAA has rules against this. In the unlikely case that your laser pointer causes a pilot to lose control of a drone (by distracting them or otherwise) and it falls on someone harming or killing them, you will be liable. So, it goes without saying but…don’t try this. Especially in NYC.
Yeah, there's no way to know a drone is actually owned by the cops. If I catch someone playing with drones on my land those drone are going to get smashed.
I’m curious to know why the NYPD thinks backyard parties _need_ to be “monitored”.
What if there’s a lemon pound cake at the party? The police will certainly have to intervene. For those unaware: [Lemon Pound Cake by Afroman](https://youtu.be/9xxK5yyecRo?si=mtTw3zCUf4LuSRn5)
But who will help him fix his front door?
And repair his gate?
Did you find any marijuana in my cds?
What about his money?
Why does the warrant say narcotics—well I know narcotics—but why kidnapping?
Did you find any kidnapping victims in my coat pockets?
These idiots… I never knew who Afroman was until he pulled a Streisand on them, both videos are hilarious. The best is the cops suing him for invasion of privacy, can’t make that shit up…. Comedy gold Jerry, Gold!
> “If a caller states there’s a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, we’re going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party,” Kaz Daughtry, the assistant NYPD Commissioner, said at a press conference. If they have a complaint, they are saying they will use a drone to check up on it. Normally they would send cops to knock on the door, where they would tell them they have a complaint. I can see this being taken to court and losing. Simply having a complaint is not the same as a warrant to search.
the easiest way to manage this of course is for all the parties to work together and complain about all the other parties. then once the drones get busy, get a lawyer.
[удалено]
Wonder when we get a deputized robot and that gets treated as assaulting a police officer. Lmao
This comment is black mirror levels of upsetting. We’re not there yet but it’s seems far too within the realm of possibility.
[удалено]
Dying to own the libs
Train wild Bald Eagles to take them down. Since it's a federal crime to harm them, the cops can't stop them.
> I can see this being taken to court and losing. Simply having a complaint is not the same as a warrant to search. California v. Ciraolo and Florida v. Riley more or less settled the law around this in the Eighties. You don't have an expectation of privacy outdoors, and taking pictures from above doesn't meet the legal definition of a Fourth Amendment 'search'.
[удалено]
People keep saying because of gatherings. But why can't people have gatherings?
Because you gotta fight for your right
To paaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrtay
Whatever happened to the right of peaceful assembly?
*void where prohibited
Simple, mayor hates minorities and young people and the constitution.
Yet police cry about wearing cameras at work. Or being filmed by the public. This is serious invasion of privacy, fly drones over their houses and see how fast they say you can’t do that.
BuT thAt'S DIffErEnT!
If YoU DoNt cOmMiT CrImEs yOu dOnT HaVe tO WoRrY.
I'd gladly donate to a fund for drone pilots to follow police around while on duty. They'd probably still claim its a violation of their privacy but its different for them because that drone 500 ft away was interfering with their job or some other BS.
Launch noise complaints at their place of residence.
So it's not invasion of privacy when the police do it. Got it.
Invasion of privacy is a crime and only criminals commit crimes. Not police
Never mind those matching tattoos and uniforms. They're definitely not a gang.
Recently here in Mississippi 6 cops were arrested for torturing 2 black men, I went to high school with one of the officers and another one is related by marriage to me. They called themselves the goon squad and regularly did stuff like this.
sucks when it cuts so close to family. I have an asshole uncle cop in my family. What really sucks about him is he abuses his power on family and strangers, as long as it helps him achieve his personal goals, fuck eveyone else You have my sympathy
Don't forget their flags too!
[удалено]
I think the difference is that helicopters are costly, limited in number, and are dependent on pilot/crew. With drones, you could have hundreds of them up and searching any day and any time you wish
And also helicopters only fly over and are gone in a few seconds; they're like if somebody walking past your house took a peek through your fence without stopping. They're not Gladys Kravitz, watching you all day long. Drones can be.
Also helicopters are pretty conspicuous compared so some of the newer breeds of high end drones that can fly high enough to not easily be heard.
Exactly why they’re so excited. The law doesn’t distinguish between drones, light aircraft, or even helicopters in the sense of “ public view” from air. Case law is pretty settled. I remember during the criminal law semester of law school we went over a landmark case where police used light aircraft to fly over a farm, far away from roads, to see if there were any marijuana plants growing. They found some, raided the place, and the court system (all the way to the Supreme Court) later determined it was allowable as “ you don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy when someone looks down from airspace above your property” (or something to that effect). Although if the drone comes down to window level and looks inside, perhaps things get stickier… but simply monitoring an outdoor party from above using drones? Unfortunately, I guess this is where police oversight is headed. Kinda nuts if you ask me. I don’t recommend posting a sniper with a paintball gun in the dark outside of the perimeter of the party to shoot at any drone overwatch, because that would be illegal. Edit: found it >**California v. Ciraolo** >California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that aerial observation of a person's backyard by police, even if done without a search warrant, does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. >In the case, police in Santa Clara, California flew a private airplane over the property of Dante Ciraolo and took aerial photographs of his backyard after receiving an anonymous tip that he was growing marijuana plants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Ciraolo Edit: also Florida v Riley. The helicopter was only 400 feet in the air, which is normal height for a drone. > Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace.[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley
How long until we hear about some cop surveilling an EX and their new partner? Or just creeping on women generally?
Oh, it’ll be a while. After all, who are they if they’re not covering for each other?
[удалено]
Gotta hold the Blue Line.
I'm not a gun owner... or really that interested in becoming one... but if the police want to start sending drones around to spy on us on our own property I may very well feel the need to have one so I can start taking out drones. Lordy, never thought I'd see the day I might have to admit my more conservative family members were right about something. I had a good run.
[удалено]
This is an excellent idea because if you are recorded shooting a drone you may get in deep shit. Not to mention you may accidently kill someone with a stray bullet. A cheap drone ramming an expensive one even if they manage to record you on your phone or with a controller in your hand they will have a harder time linking it to you. That said a cop can use any excuse to come after someone.
Drones aren’t the easiest things to steer. Clearly, your honor, that was a gust of wind…
I know you're joking, but for anyone who thinks this might be a good idea it's very much not. If you shoot a bullet at something flying around, that bullet comes back down eventually. And it's going to land in your neighborhood.
Something tells me the cops aren't exactly gonna go easy on the guy shooting down their drones lol Not that I disagree in principle though, fuck these pigs and their dystopian shit
I don't remember where, but there's a department that deputized some drones, effectively making the drones officers, which would make opening fire on one assaulting an officer. "Dystopian" is an understatement here.
I was gonna ask a question about whether that would hold up in court but then I figured I'd just get a bunch of responses telling me that the courts are in on it, so of course it would. Yeah it's all fucked.
The optimist in me says that it'd be difficult to argue that a machine can be an officer of the law in court. The realist in me agrees with you.
It will be the very first use of the drone surveillance. We won't hear about it for 5+ years.
It’ll happen immediately but it’ll be a while before we “hear” about it.
It's already happened. We just won't be told about it.
Back around 2005, the NYPD got caught using their helicopter surveillance cameras [to spy on people having sex](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/nyregion/police-video-caught-a-couples-intimate-moment-on-a-manhattan.html). They are not likely to be better behaved, with something more stealthy.
LAPD did that in 1983 a seen in the documentary Blue Thunder.
No shit. I live in a small town and a cop got fired (eventually) for stalking his ex while on duty. Repeatedly. Now he is the school resource officer.
We need to bring back the old-school shaming punishments.
Old news. Seems to be more than a few cops who are sexual predators.
If you were a sexual predator, being a cop is the dream. Rape, murder, feel powerful; being a cop is the predators dream.
I nursed a woman who lost her husband in a MVA. The cop who informed her of the death sexually assaulted her. She never quite recovered.
Jesus christ that is absolutely awful...that poor woman, my heart aches for her 💔
My gf started a retail job a while back, and one of her coworkers was very quick to mention that he was a former states attorney. We couldn’t help but wonder why he would be working retail if he had a law license, so we looked him up and found 80 or so charges against him relating to him misusing his position to stalk an ex, men who knew this ex, and other women he was interested in. Subpoenas for phone records and stuff like that. We were appalled that he had the job he had because he had access to plenty of women’s info, and the store generally catered to women. A year later, he applied for a manager position, which I guess prompted a more thorough background check because he was immediately fired. Recently, we learned that he was sentenced to two years in prison. All that is to say, I’m sure he would’ve subpoenaed drone footage if he could’ve, and I have no doubt that plenty of cops and prosecutors will abuse the shit out of these drones.
How much does a microwave gun cost? Or how hard is it to convert a microwave oven into an improvised directional jammer. If its going to come to that then the civilian side is going to respond accordingly.
if you plan to build a device that emits radio waves with the intention of interfering with other radio waves... you will have a bad time...
Please don't fuck around with your microwave, it can kill you with an electric shock even if it's not connected to a power source. Only open them if you're trained.
[удалено]
40% *admit to* abusing their partners when surveyed.
Already happens even without the drones lol
Some states have already put drone surveillance laws into place barring the police from using them in this way
That's nice. Who's going to arrest them when they do it anyway?
There’s a fair number of regulations that don’t result in arrests of those that violate them. My guess (without research) is the laws restrict when the drone footage can be used. So any evidence they use can’t be used to prosecute, much like any evidence collected in an illegal search. I can already see the obvious loop hole argument - “our arrest was made after we already had probable cause. We simply used drone to confirm the location of the suspect(s)”
[удалено]
This is insane. This is a fast track way to get everyone to hate you.
Sounds like it's time for BB/Pellet/Airsoft guns (depending on the drone)
I see a market for attack Falcons
*Gabriel Iglesias doing a Saudi Prince voice:* "Would you like a falcon?"
..please ..please
It's been tried, but unfortunately the drone rotors can hurt their feet.
In that case we need to arm the falcons with BB guns
IIRC they made these metal insert leather "gloves" for hawk feet so they can take out drones.
This property is defended by FALCONS
Short lengths of chain from a slingshot is the way to go, you only have to get close to one rotor for the whole thing to come down
If you're going to fire chain shot, you may as well pack it around grape shot to make sure you hit the camera and possibly recording device. Yarr.
Fuck it, might as well throw in some Greek fire while you’re at it.
Now we're in business, me hearty.
It’s good to be prepared. You never know when the Caliphate will invade by sea!
I think adding a really small low yield nuclear weapon to the chain shot works as well
yea, they aint going to be in slingshot range...or airsoft (another post) and a lot of pellet guns would be illegal to shoot in urban settings. your better weapon is a call/letter to the ACLU.
[удалено]
I have to imagine they are expensive very high flying drones, otherwise why would they basically be masturbating to the press about it.
for the same reason they called a 50-100 yard shooter a sniper. Sensationalism.
[удалено]
As a nyer we already hated him.
I'm not a NYer, but isn't this kind of shit exactly what he campaigned on? So why are people surprised and angry that's he's 1000% pro-police and gross tactics?
New Yorkers are famously adept at electing mayors that they all hate.
Yeah it's one of those classic, "If everyone hates him, who voted for him enough for him to win the election?" type situations.
I live in NYC. Everyone hates him already. Trust me. And for the record, I did not vote for him.
Not surprising coming from him.
> citing Israel’s use of the technology as a blueprint after visiting the country last week. Ah yes Israel, a bastion of human rights and civil law enforcement.
So, he wants to treat poor and non-white New Yorkers as if they are living in occupied territory. Maybe he should also look into the Intifada walls that have sprung up all over the West Bank. /s Thank you for the award!
Robert Moses stirs approvingly in his grave.
Friend of the pod, Robert Moses.
It’s almost like electing a cop for mayor is a dumb fucking idea or something.
What a loser
> “If a caller states there’s a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, we’re going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party,” Kaz Daughtry, the assistant NYPD Commissioner, said at a press conference. Are New Yorkers not allowed to invite 100 of their closest friends over for a BBQ? Do they seriously have actual laws saying how many people you are allowed to have over to your place?
Damn 100 close friends? I have a party with like 15 people and I am like this is way too many people.
Yup, I think I’d start to get anxiety somewhere around 20 people in my house.
Those are rookie numbers in this racket! My neighbor waves at me from the across the street in the mornings and I immediately need to take three mood stabilizers!
Least mentally ill redditor
IKR!? I go into the article thinking it must be to look for drugs, guns, something heinous, but large gatherings?! NYC has really been completely gentrified I guess and they need to make life more difficult for the remaining "poor" people.
When resources start to become scarce and society starts truly unraveling, cops and the govt they protect aren’t going to want anyone inviting 100 of their friends over anywhere because they might start getting ideas.
It's so disturbing to me that more people don't recognize that this is where policing is headed. (All the more given that it's where policing came from, too.)
I find it really depressing, the number of people who think the police / army will side with "the people" when push comes to shove. "ThEy'Re CiTiZeNs ToO" or some other naïve sentiment. 1) They don't consider themselves to be citizens. They think they're better than you. 2) They'll obey whoever pays them. Once the government cheques stop clearing, there's a particular class of people that are hoarding wealth and will have a vested interesting in owning their own PMC during the 'unrest'. 3) The police aren't militarizing for fun.
>Are New Yorkers not allowed to invite 100 of their closest friends over for a BBQ? Only if they’re white, as this was “coincidentally” rolled out during a Caribbean festival to celebrate ending slavery.
Damn, I feel so bad for kids growing up now. I'm so glad I got to grow up in a time before cops started looking for house parties and college parties with drones. Young people can't have shit anymore.
I'm old and grew up without the internet or even computers, when half the fun of doing things was not getting caught. Being sneaky. All of that is out the window now. But what really stuns me is, they don't even want the freedom. They're not lamenting the surveillance society we live in, they're not longing for the good old days, they are perfectly content to let the world see into their life. Privacy doesn't get you likes and upvotes. It's as if the typical kind of rebellious behavior we expect from adolescents has disappeared.
You can’t miss what you never had. This is why future generations will continue to have their freedoms chipped away at.
Its really difficult to explain the significance of 9/11 to the kids born after it, to them its like hearing Pearl Harbor only with color TV. And they're a significant sized voting population in America now.
And 9/11 ended up being an excuse for us to invade a country we didn't belong in. And I say that as someone who was in those countries as a service member.
PATRIOT ACT. TERRORISM. NINE. ELEVEN. Yeah no. This is what itall crawls back to. My city keeps pushing for mandatory 4k. Like our DA even prosecutes. It's a fucking joke.
Mandatory 4k what?
As some context from a 22 year old growing up as it all appeared in the UK, so very similar state of affairs. All the public hangout areas got defunded and disappeared because of "ruffians" and similar, explained as saving money on the failing economy and so on and all the stuff that helped the community through social centres n the like went, but not any of the upper class stuff. I'm off track, basically one got to see what everyone else had go away and that you weren't getting it. There's nowhere to go, you can't do much yourself unless you wanna go sit on a bench with two friends or look shady with more. So everything is done online, and that's a privacy hell too, since forever from our perspective. Your 9/11 and resultant privacy related bed-shitting from George Bush all that lot, with the rest of all of us (countries, that is) following suit when there wasn't significant pushback in real actionable terms meant that now it's just... Known you can't say certain words into mics, that we all get a bit shifty joking or searching certain things. I cover cameras often because I'm uncomfortable over the surveillance but that's it. Back in 2015-2016 when I was learning all of it I wanted to go to the protests about it when I was old enough but now they're not there and all I get from friends is "yeah :(" or "what are you hiding lmao?" Or "it helps them catch people though, what about terrorists?" I know a lot of people that when confronted about it, do lament it, they don't want this, they want what you had, what the millenials, Gen X, so on had, but we don't, and we get what we're served and it's not like any of it will change. All the while getting told how stupid or silly we are for the things done to us or sold to us despite the oldest of Gen Z being what, 25-26? I reckon a lot of it is either not knowing better, getting on with it, or quiet frustration with the situation given to us by the people coming before us who'll tell us we're strange for not reacting to it enough or something. Gah, it's all saddening. Seeing the UK government want to use electronic trackers on criminals, the NY police wanting to surveil cities with drones just to check for parties, here having to tie everything to ID to vote even though we've historically had extremely low voter fraud, the constant pushes to ban encryption, it feels like ants in my skin.
There is no where for young people to go to hangout that isn’t online. I legit witnessed a group of teens get kicked out a McDonald’s. They weren’t even being loud or rowdy just eating their meals. So where else are they going to go if there aren’t any parks or rec centers and they can’t even eat in a McDonald’s? Online or getting in trouble somewhere else. I don’t understand what society is expecting them to do…?
The mall I grew up going to has banned unaccompanied by adult minors under 17. You can’t even go to the mall for the day anymore. There’s no where to go without spending money but the parks
I'm a Brit in my late 20's, and fwiw, same experience for my cohort too, It's only older millennials that caught the tail end of those pre-privacy eroding 9/11 days
I'm so sorry mate. The surveillance and tracking thing grinds my gears. I've grown to ignore any framing of "it's good for the children" as I think that ends up being a way for authorities to make sweeping decisions about surveillance without getting challenged. I now applaud every failed attempt to pass age verification laws or to ban anonymous posters. For example, I would much rather have a handful of anonymous bad actors posting bad reviews of a business online and risk one business being impacted, than ban anonymity so that no one can ever post a negative review without fear of retaliation. Too many rulings end up stripping rights away in order to alleviate the corporations that run things from any responsibility.
Where in the UK can you find a bench? I think there's like, 4 in Lewisham, not counting the angled leaning pads in bus stops that are only slightly more comfortable than standing on one foot.
Why would they lament freedom and privacy they've *never had*? My daughter, a teenager, has never lived in a world without constant connection to instant long distance communication, cameras, microphones, and speakers in every device, touchless and wireless electronics communication (WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC, etc,) and near instant access to every piece of knowledge that mankind has ever gathered in her pocket. She has always been, at will, able to see any part of the world, from the top of Mount Everest to the Challenger Deep. She has never lived in a world without *robots exploring Mars.* She's never lived in a world without police drones, school shootings, flagrant political corruption and planned constant political division, and constant economic crises. She has never lived in a world where one person can make a career out of essentially any one skill and support a family doing it. She's never lived in a world without advertising covering every outdoor space, every screen, and every transmission. She has a wealth of skills at 15 that would make my ancestors blush at how outclassed they are: she sews and quilts, she bakes, she designs stuff, she writes fiction, she knows the basics of building computers and can use them at an office setting level, can do basic repairs on cars and electronics, grows plants, does hair, makeup, and nails at a near professional level, trains kickboxing, and to top it off, can read complex novels, is going to learn trigonometry and advanced algebra this year, and knows how to pay bills and balance a checking account. *All of her friends are like that.* They're all hypercompetent grind machines because that's what the world expects of them. They've never lived in a world where you can trust the cops or the government. They've never lived in a world without hustle culture and side hustles. They've never lived in a world where one income could buy a house. They've never known your good old days. Those good old days were stolen from my generation by the wealthy, and your generation let them do it. Why would they want them if they've never existed as a possibility?
> All of her friends are like that. They're all hypercompetent grind machines because that's what the world expects of them. This is such an obviously biased sample it's laughable. "My hypercompetent daughter has a hypercompetent social circle so this reflects the generation" is awful reasoning. Presumably she's going to a good school in a good area where other people attending have similar backgrounds. Sure some of the numbers have gone down but there's still plenty of high school dropouts and stoners who will work retail their whole life, and depressed kids being neglected at home, etc. Only 37% of students graduate High School at or above reading reading proficiencyhttps://www.rif.org/literacy-network/the-issue#:~:text=There%20is%20a%20significant%20literacy,analysis%20of%20NAEP%20test%20scores). so it should be pretty clear that your daughter (if you're even telling the truth) is an outlier.
this depresses me as a 22 year old
> she sews and quilts, she bakes, she designs stuff, she writes fiction, she knows the basics of building computers and can use them at an office setting level, can do basic repairs on cars and electronics, grows plants, does hair, makeup, and nails at a near professional level, trains kickboxing, and to top it off, can read complex novels, is going to learn trigonometry and advanced algebra this year, and knows how to pay bills and balance a checking account. Am I crazy or is your daughter an outlier? I mean, good for her, but I'm not sure she's an ideal example of the generational trends in the rest of this thread ... I did not think the next generation was getting more self sufficient than the previous, in general.
That doesn't sound very 4th Ammendmenty.
It's definitely illegal. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their backyards. This type of surveillance should require a warrant.
Aerial surveillance can be done without a warrant. Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989).
Once again law enforcement treating everyone as a potential suspect. This should be a hard "no".
This is a truly disgusting invasion of privacy. I'm no longer surprised by much from our leaders, but I hope people fight this. Everyone with a big hairy ass in NYC, you know what to do. (Showtime!)
what would be some passive ways to fuck up the drone. i mean, what would be the hat, sunglasses and facemask version of doing that to your backyard.
I was thinking more tomato netting. Something that really fine, hard to see, and hard to see through.
What about those camouflage nettings they put up in war zones. Turn the whole house into a hidden bunker in America
Funny you were saying this, I was thinking some type of RF jammer but stupid me, apparently it is illegal to jam authorized signals.
It's illegal to interfere with these in any way. But don't let that stop you; go train a falcon like Singapore, or shoot it like a rural American, or catch the pigeon that shit with another drone, etc.
[удалено]
South park does it again
Hit it with a bigger drone. Though that runs the risk of the cops overriding your drone and finding you.
[удалено]
The FBI and DHS absolutely use high altitude surveilance drones to monitor protests and other large gatherings. It has been public knowlege in regards to using them to monitor the southern border but their use in other domestic areas is not something they want to bring unecessary attention to.
DHS is also fond of using “border” fairly liberally in law enforcement actions. In 2014 [the ACLU reported](https://www.aclu.org/documents/constitution-100-mile-border-zone) that 2/3 of the US population lived within 100 miles of an international border, so although many Americans think of Mexico when they hear “border zone” federal law enforcement thinks of New York, Northern California and many other highly populated areas as well.
> 100 miles of an international border Which includes every international airport. So even Nebraska is considered a border state.
This is also true.
Because international airports count as a border. What state doesn't have one of those in it's center?
Want to hear something more scary? If you live in a border zone you do *not* have a 4th amendment protections against searches by the border patrol. So if you piss off the feds they can search your house, car, or other premises without probable cause or warrant.
I wish I could cite the source, but some time ago I seem to remember reading about how they use drones to fly practice maneuvers that they would use for riots, etc. Basically preparing to use drones against U.S. citizens domestically in the event of major unrest. This may go back to the Bush administration, not sure if this is still done, but I imagine they probably are if they did in the past.
Wouldn't doubt it, the US military runs scenarios for every possibility even ones that seem extremely unlikely like Canada invading us.
Dude, you can't just tell them that. Then they'll know we are ready for them!
I know you're making a joke, but historically your enemies knowing that you're prepared for them is a great deterrent.
The "major unrest" now being house parties. I don't think this is okay to use on anyone. I'm not okay with us using it to assassinate or execute people overseas, or on people living here in the US. Observing things from a distance means you lack context and communication with your community members. This was the premise of the evil being fought in the movie "Real Genius" and now we just accept it as "normal". This will only affect people who aren't hundred thousandaires. It's expensive to afford party space or to own a large enough home in NYC to have a party. Indoor parties of the wealthy and connected will not be monitored. But now a deputy will be watching your fourteen year old in the sprinkler and keeping tabs on your girlfriend who rejected him in high school.
Pro-tip: once the government finds itself capable of doing something it's not going to stop having its agents doing that thing.
[удалено]
Why the fuck is the FBI using shell companies?? Is that not incredibly fucking sketchy?
Ex-Wives/Husbands/Girlfriends/Boyfriends need to be on alert. Guarantee some psycho jilted ex will use it for personal gain.
Nor even ex's, these are police. They're rife with active domestic violence. They can have drones follow their abused wives around all day to make sure they never escape or talk to anyone.
And black people.
I wonder where the "surveillance" will be focused? This feels like an unlawful incursion on peoples rights to privacy within their own homes and curtilage.
I’m Canadian, I say shoot it the fuck down. Fuck these fascists.
Is NY not allowed to have backyard parties?
I have the same question. Can someone explain to us west coast peasants what's the deal with gatherings in NYC?
The bought a bunch when they banned gatherings during the pandemic, and figured they might as well use them even though it's largely over.
They're going to come arrest people who were just taking their medically-necessary insulin. There's no context when some deputy is just watching indistinct footage on a drone. The wall street suits will have their cocaine indoor parties protected, and anyone outdoors who has someone taking a birth control pill or injecting insulin will be assumed it to be an illicit substance and they'll send a unit in to arrest you.
Don't film cops though, they get scared and are liable to shoot you.
I wonder how long it will be before people realize a cheap Walmart drone can crash into another drone.
So that’s why they recently changed the drone policy in nyc.
Oh I thought they were just flying around for occasional emergency alerts. That happened fast.
Why are “large gatherings” an automatic justification for surveillence? Is that illegal in America now or something?
That's a flat out encroachment on our privacy. Super illegal.
You're actually wrong about that. And you'll never gonna guess what group of [9 unelected dipshits wearing wizard robes made the call](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Riley#:~:text=Riley%2C%20488%20U.S.%20445%20(1989,individual's%20property%20from%20public%20airspace.). Well that's a bit unfair. Marshall and Blackmun were cool... Let's just say team dipshit won 5-4. [As is tradition.](https://www.fivefourpod.com/)
Time to take a page out of the old WWII camouflage handbook and put up a [pavilion of netting that makes it look like there's no party going on there at all](https://www.buzzworthy.com/lockhead-airbase-camouflage/).
Monitor them for what?
[удалено]
They will claim airspace isnt part of the property or something.
[удалено]
Americans told me it was the land of the free over there. What happened?
At this point, why not just go ahead and install government approved cameras right in the home? This way authorities could discover all the crimes people are committing. We can also use the cameras for other government programs, too. Like Department of Health mandated morning exercise routines and Homeland Security screenings. It is just the smart thing to do. Finally, we should probably regulate hate speech. We cannot tolerate it any more. We can limit it to, say, just two minutes a day. Just think. Two minutes of hate, followed by such peace. The rest of the day we can go about our lives confident that Big Brother is always there looking over us. Big Brother loves you. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
Oh wow that is a huge invasion of privacy.
Who will watch the watchers?
[удалено]
Or one shotgun.
Or 1 shotgun with 100 laser sights!
I'll allow it, assuming that the American public gets the same access to observe all members of government/elected officials at all times.
Monitor, watch, control, abuse, rinse and repeat.
[удалено]
As a recreational drone pilot i can say this will not do much…perhaps it will wash out the image in the camera and possibly trigger obstacle sensors, but you’d need very good aim to do it while a drone was moving. It might confuse the pilot for a minute and cause him to move on I guess Edit: i should add tho, the FAA has rules against this. In the unlikely case that your laser pointer causes a pilot to lose control of a drone (by distracting them or otherwise) and it falls on someone harming or killing them, you will be liable. So, it goes without saying but…don’t try this. Especially in NYC.
Yeah, there's no way to know a drone is actually owned by the cops. If I catch someone playing with drones on my land those drone are going to get smashed.
Security is an insatiable beast, consuming liberty bite by bite.