"Unmanned aerial vehicles can be used by search and rescue officers to find missing children, to monitor weather or wildlife and to provide disaster relief, said Melanie Hinton, a spokeswoman for the Arlington, Virginia-based Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, in an e-mail," Bloomberg wrote.
Colorado town bans shooting down drones
— By Mark Halper on April 2, 2014, 4:55 AM PST
Unfortunate that drones have a bad reputation. Like any technology there are good reasons and then there are wrong reasons to use. This is mostly a knee jerk action on the use of drones after so many news stories about using drones to spy, hunt and kill people we couldn't find. That drone program does not seem to be effective in making the locals feel safe while the designated bad guys are targeted; too bad about the collateral damage that keeps the locals angry.
In defense of drones in the US, I would say that these can be used beneficially to study wild animal populations as well as cover a large area in search of lost or kidnapped people. Law enforcement has used small planes and helicopters for the same reasons they would use drones, to look for the missing and to hunt criminals.
The idea of selling permits to shoot down drones is stupid. Shooting bullets at a drone can have the unfortunate result of striking someone on the ground, what goes up comes down. What if the drone that gets shot down was looking for a lost child? How would people know if the drone is doing something good or if it is spying on them?
There are better solutions to dealing with drones that won't get people hurt.
Awfully Close ........
Seems like a coincidence that this story was so close to APRIL FIRST ........(April Fool's Day) :-)
Reading between the lines, I can't help but suppose the reason the Good Citizens voted down this proposal was the potentially unaffordable cost of the $100 bounty on Federal Drones. Surely this ordnance would pass if the bounty were lowered to say, $5 + the cost of the ammunition expended.
In New Hampshire there have already been discussions that a low flying drone over private property is trespassing under state stalking laws and can be shot down.
I see no problem with shooting down a drone that is being operated illegally. In fact those drones should be shot down so that the operators can be located, arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned.
If The State flies a drone to my home without a warrant, that is clearly illegal. It is the same as a law enforcement officer peeking into windows and listening to my conversations without probable cause - it is against the law.
Because criminals that work for The State are seldom prosecuted for their crimes, shooting down these drones is one of the few ways I can protect my constitutional rights.
A misleading and ultimately dishonest headline.
The town didn't vote to ban shooting down drones. They failed to pass legislation that would legalize shooting down drones. There is a large and distinct difference.
We've come to expect that sort of rhetoric regarding gay marriage whereupon any failure to expand the definition of marriage is reported as a vote to ban gay marriage. But, it apparently is now slated to become the norm.
@da philster That's the first thing I thought DA. But as I said in the story, this went to a public vote only after town authorities couldn't reach a decision last year, according to Bloomberg. And if this is a hoax, then bravo - it sucked in lots of well established, credible media organizations. It's all so weirdly plausible in the United Shooters, I mean States, of America...
@z2217 Cost of ammo? I can just see someone collecting the bounty with a Stinger missile and blowing the town's budget with one shot.
@z2217 Yes, but it's a vicious circle, because then health care costs will increase to treat all those injured on te ground by drone shrapnel!
@Hates Idiots I guess drones will either live free or die... Another solution: Just ban the things. Drones, that is. Well, guns too!...
@Kevin D. Jackson Would you shoot the law enforcement officer? ...
@da philster Actually it was TIME, as I said in the story, not BloombergBusinessweek as I stated in the previous comment, that reported that town authorities failed to decide last year..