FBI Director admits domestic use of drones [Archive]

Doc Safari

06-19-13, 11:41

http://rt.com/usa/fbi-director-mueller-drones-947/

Robert Mueller, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, confirmed to lawmakers that the FBI owns several unmanned aerial vehicles, but has not adopted any strict policies or guidelines yet to govern the use of the controversial aircraft.

“Does the FBI use drones for surveillance on US soil?” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) asked Mr. Mueller during an oversight hearing on Capitol Hill Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Yes,” Mueller responded bluntly, adding that the FBI’s operation of drones is “very seldom.”

Asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) to elaborate, Mueller added, “It’s very seldom used and generally used in a particular incident where you need the capability.” Earlier in the morning, however, Mueller said that the agency was only now working to establish rules for the drone program.

We all knew it was happening. Now, I will say that if the FBI obtains a warrant to use a drone for a specific case then I don't have a problem with it. Mr. Mueller's response indicates that there are no rules and so why should we trust them?

In light of all the other scandals, particularly the NSA leak, I am inclined to err on the side of not trusting them.

SomeOtherGuy

06-19-13, 13:43

PA PATRIOT

06-19-13, 14:48

Drones,

Your filmed every day once you step outside your homes front door, Security Cameras are everywhere both inside and out, Cell phones, Live link GPS, On-Star, Tag readers, Facial Recognition only to name a few ways to track or discover a person.

I would worry more about the above first as the limited use of Drones are the least of your surveillance problems.

Moose-Knuckle

06-19-13, 20:56

While I'm glad this is coming to light, its old news.

The_War_Wagon

06-19-13, 21:06

The new "phrase that pays!" :eek:

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/dontdronemebro_zps00f6d643.jpg

SteyrAUG

06-19-13, 22:27

titsonritz

06-19-13, 22:48

JoshNC

06-20-13, 01:36

Moose-Knuckle

06-20-13, 02:03

I don't see the difference between drones for "surveillance" and helicopters except that drones don't wake you up at night.

UAVs have a much greater loiter time and their presence is pretty much unknown due to the ceiling at which they operate and the fact that they do not produce a lot of noise. With a helo at least you would know its in the vicinity as you can visually observe them and hear them, provided of course you are not being targeted by those non-existent tin foil black helicopters that went into Abbottabad.

Now "armed" drones, like "armed" helicopters would be a very different discussion.

How do we know if they are armed or not? Holder had to pussy foot the question whether or not the .gov has the legal right to kill US citizens in the US with armed drones.

SomeOtherGuy

06-20-13, 09:25

I don't see the difference between drones for "surveillance" and helicopters except that drones don't wake you up at night.

Helicopters are loud and very expensive. Drones are potentially silent and cheap. If drones replace helicopters 1 for 1 and get used for the same legitimate LE activities, I don't see a problem with it. But I don't expect that for one second. If drones are deployed by the thousands and surveiling everyone all the time, that is not the kind of country I want to live in.

For comparison: a police officer could legally park on the street in front of your house and observe you. Assuming you aren't doing something illegal or suspicious, this probably never / almost never happens to you. Now let's say that some massive increase in funding allows the local force to park one police officer in front of each house on your block, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, year round (of course, a rotation of 4+ per house, actually, with normal shifts). There's no particular suspicion of you or your neighbors, but it got very cheap for them to watch everyone all the time. They stay off your property and we'll assume for this argument that their surveillance is entirely lawful. Do you like that kind of world?

Artos

06-20-13, 09:47

How do we know if they are armed or not? Holder had to pussy foot the question whether or not the .gov has the legal right to kill US citizens in the US with armed drones.

DHS had some sort of operation going on last month in a chopper and were so low the house was thumping...went away, then more thumping. Wife said you gotta see this.

So I grab my hunting 10x swaros out of the safe & take a look and were several hundred yards off by the time I got outside...they made another turn towards the house and got within 75yds and went eyeball to eyeball with a nice chap hanging out the side and then got swept with what looked to be his M4. We were so close his eyeball was huge, so using some sort of traditional optic. I could even see his trigger finger outside the guard. I made the peace sign and he smiled and they hung around for another 15-20 mins.

Not sure who or what they were after but first time to have ever had any LE sweep me...nothing ever came out on the news, none of my LE buddies heard of anything either?? Weird deal...

markm

06-20-13, 11:24

At what point will I wake up an post a thread in GD about this ****ed up nightmare I'm having about our government.

markm

06-20-13, 11:50

I don't think they're armed... but in the context of all the Chicago style corruption, abuse, and lies... it's not very encouraging.

Ryno12

06-20-13, 11:59

I don't think they're armed...
I'd bet the ones flying over your house are. And who knows, the operator may even be wearing one of those M4C patches on his shoulder. :p

Sent via Tapatalk

markm

06-20-13, 12:08

I'd bet the ones flying over your house are.

Now that WOULD BE prudent. :p

Moose-Knuckle

06-20-13, 15:31

DHS had some sort of operation going on last month in a chopper and were so low the house was thumping...went away, then more thumping. Wife said you gotta see this.

So I grab my hunting 10x swaros out of the safe & take a look and were several hundred yards off by the time I got outside...they made another turn towards the house and got within 75yds and went eyeball to eyeball with a nice chap hanging out the side and then got swept with what looked to be his M4. We were so close his eyeball was huge, so using some sort of traditional optic. I could even see his trigger finger outside the guard. I made the peace sign and he smiled and they hung around for another 15-20 mins.

Not sure who or what they were after but first time to have ever had any LE sweep me...nothing ever came out on the news, none of my LE buddies heard of anything either?? Weird deal...

Were these the guys over head?

TXDPS Ranger Reconnaissance Team:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a144/AKS-74/texasdpshelo1_zps3c96e719.jpg (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/AKS-74/media/texasdpshelo1_zps3c96e719.jpg.html)

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a144/AKS-74/texas_dps_swat-174_phatch_zpscebaf1e3.jpg (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/AKS-74/media/texas_dps_swat-174_phatch_zpscebaf1e3.jpg.html)

Moose-Knuckle

06-20-13, 15:32

We've been on a decline since Woodrow Wilson and on a fast spiral since FDR. I doubt we'll ever see the toothpaste back in the tube.

Spot on.

obucina

06-20-13, 15:49

They've been using small fixed-wing planes for decades. They are quiet, have long loiter time, and are so common as to not cause undue concern. They are also cheap to fly. I've spent many hours flying covert surveillance in various Cessenas.

If you are using a helo for surveillance it's not covert. Helos are good for man hunts or arial marijuana detection not for watching people covertly.

As much as all of this irritates me, a surveillance drone isn't doing anything a Cessena hasn't done for decades. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's nothing even remotely new. If anything, it may save us some taxpayer money.

Florida Highway Patrol uses them for traffic duty. I got pinged and relayed to one of the banana split-mobiles on my way to class a few years back. I really hated wasting my day to attend a 50 minute philosophy class I "had" to take, but I always slow down when I get close to the lines on the turnpike used to time the cars....or so it was 'splained to me that way!

trinydex

06-20-13, 17:47

trinydex

06-20-13, 17:50

The new rules of the USSA are most simple, Komrade!

1) If you want privacy, you must have subterranean metal-lined vaulted bunker with no telecoms going in or out! Bug zapper for microminiature drones is highly recommended!

2) If you have said bunker, you are highly suspicious and a warrant will be issued to enter your premises and copy all your files and records!

So simple, even a Chekist could understand!

anyone is free to live like osama bin laden, using couriers and avoiding all technology beyond the 20th century. but very likely the united states of america isn't really that interested in you. the people who actually have something to be concerned about already practice the threshold of tradecraft they're willing to endure for the purposes of hiding their illegal activities.

trinydex

06-20-13, 17:54

Spot on.

Exactly.

i suppose it is possible to you guys that the united states would shoot a guided missile at someone on this forum... if that were the case why hasn't the united states already done so with jets, helicopters, anything that's not an unmanned aerial vehicle (not the dirty word, drone).

isn't it much more likely that armored vehicles show up with armored and armed men inside that throw deploy destraction devices and break windows and yell a lot?

trinydex

06-20-13, 17:57

Helicopters are loud and very expensive. Drones are potentially silent and cheap. If drones replace helicopters 1 for 1 and get used for the same legitimate LE activities, I don't see a problem with it. But I don't expect that for one second. If drones are deployed by the thousands and surveiling everyone all the time, that is not the kind of country I want to live in.

For comparison: a police officer could legally park on the street in front of your house and observe you. Assuming you aren't doing something illegal or suspicious, this probably never / almost never happens to you. Now let's say that some massive increase in funding allows the local force to park one police officer in front of each house on your block, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, year round (of course, a rotation of 4+ per house, actually, with normal shifts). There's no particular suspicion of you or your neighbors, but it got very cheap for them to watch everyone all the time. They stay off your property and we'll assume for this argument that their surveillance is entirely lawful. Do you like that kind of world?

if there's no crime to stop why would they be watching?

if there were no crime why would there be a need for an increased force?

if there were crime and they were able to address the crime with said observation powers and it reduced crime, would that world be better?

if there were crime and they were able to address the crime with said observation powers and it didn't reduce crime, what would that mean?

Safetyhit

06-20-13, 19:10

As much as all of this irritates me, a surveillance drone isn't doing anything a Cessena hasn't done for decades.

Unlike helicopters and planes drones can be used in stealth, especially as the advancements in technology allow for smaller and quieter designs. In addition any vast number that any authorized agency or organization can afford to purchase can be covertly operated by individuals in an undisclosed location for undisclosed reasons. There are no pilots to brief and no compliance needed beyond the guy operating them from a central base or even mobile location.

As well we know that it is only a very limited amount of time until these drones are much smaller and much more difficult to detect, with current technology already allowing for some helo models that can silently circle one's home discretely while observing.

In other words except for those that need to carry a hellfire, soon drones will be also known as small, silent and invasive beyond anything we've dealt with before.

trinydex

06-20-13, 19:49

Unlike helicopters and planes drones can be used in stealth, especially as the advancements in technology allow for smaller and quieter designs. In addition any vast number that any authorized agency or organization can afford to purchase can be covertly operated by individuals in an undisclosed location for undisclosed reasons. There are no pilots to brief and no compliance needed beyond the guy operating them from a central base or even mobile location.

As well we know that it is only a very limited amount of time until these drones are much smaller and much more difficult to detect, with current technology already allowing for some helo models that can silently circle one's home discretely while observing.

In other words except for those that need to carry a hellfire, soon drones will be also known as small, silent and invasive beyond anything we've dealt with before.

i don't understand the parallel here.

is there anything quieter than a guy in a van with some binoculars? or with a camera? is there anything smaller than the cameras that are available today?

was there concern when camera technology started getting smaller? and was the concern warranted? are there cameras all over spying on specifically you? or are they deployed the way they are and in case you do something wrong they're able to backtrack and find you out?

if you are actively attracting enough attention in your wrongdoings i'm sure the modern camera can be deployed to see you doing your deeds unless you enter an area that can't be seen...

entering areas that have reasonable expectation of privacy will create privacy. being out in the open is being out in the open... drones would just save taxpayers money on fuel cost.

if there is a cricket uv that can sneak into your house, a walking recording device, it would require a lot of cause for law enforcement to deploy. these tactics were already used in the past, just with a person operating and maneuvering the recording device. the case law and written legislation exists on how to regulate this type of action.

the cia and nsa play spy games. but why worry about a walking bug from the cia when they can plant them? the fact that the bug walks isn't even that much of an advantage.

Safetyhit

06-20-13, 20:21

i don't understand the parallel here.

is there anything quieter than a guy in a van with some binoculars? or with a camera? is there anything smaller than the cameras that are available today?

So you're saying that when it comes to residential surveillance there is essentially no difference between a large, noticeable parked van and a small, silent quad-rotor drone equipped with IR and sound detection?

Without diving into analysis of the rest of your posts I'll simply say that you would be a great White House spokesperson.

trinydex

06-20-13, 20:43

well I was expecting you to also take into consideration the capabilities already mentioned. fixed wing aircraft watching from afar and helicopters watching from afar are silent to a residence or a vehicle as long as they are far enough.

the same trade craft applies. high walls outdoors, underground, gates, fences, houses, living in the middle of nowhereland, warehouses are still the effective traditional barriers to surveillance. drones change nothing.

Safetyhit

06-20-13, 21:04

The same trade craft applies. high walls outdoors, underground, gates, fences, houses, living in the middle of nowhereland, warehouses are still the effective traditional barriers to surveillance. Drones change nothing.

Actually in regard to your specific noted safeguards small, silent and well equipped drones would mean everything. This as in one could be innocuously hovering just outside your place of residence while peering in your window now by today's technological standards.

Next we'll hear of a new model that can softly land on one's roof or about how your nearest municipality has a acquired two dozen of the little crime fighting gems because they've become so darn inexpensive.

Artos

06-20-13, 21:19

Were these the guys over head?

TXDPS Ranger Reconnaissance Team:
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a144/AKS-74/texasdpshelo1_zps3c96e719.jpg (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/AKS-74/media/texasdpshelo1_zps3c96e719.jpg.html)

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a144/AKS-74/texas_dps_swat-174_phatch_zpscebaf1e3.jpg (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/AKS-74/media/texas_dps_swat-174_phatch_zpscebaf1e3.jpg.html)

Negative....unmarked white belly and blue whirlybird amigo.

trinydex

06-20-13, 21:32

Actually in regard to your specific noted safeguards small, silent and well equipped drones would mean everything. This as in one could be innocuously hovering just outside your place of residence while peering in your window now by today's technological standards.

Next we'll hear of a new model that can softly land on one's roof or about how your nearest municipality has a acquired two dozen of the little crime fighting gems because they've become so darn inexpensive.

a police officer allowed to be right outside your window peering in? is he allowed to be on your roof silently or otherwise? if not then anything acquired through said means is inadmissable against you.

brushy bill

06-20-13, 22:40

a police officer allowed to be right outside your window peering in? is he allowed to be on your roof silently or otherwise? if not then anything acquired through said means is inadmissable against you.

Allowed or not, it is happening apparently.

Peshawar

06-20-13, 23:17

My buddies and I have seen Predator drones in what appears to be training sorties when we go shooting out in the desert. It's pretty weird to see them flying around.

trinydex

06-21-13, 15:38

Allowed or not, it is happening apparently.

if you see a cop outside your window peering you can call the cops on that cop for trespassing and being a peeping tom creeper.

if a cop is on your roof? you can call the cops on him for being a trespasser and a creepy prowler.

cops are not immune to the law. acquiring evidence of a crime cannot be itself a crime if said evidence is to ever be used in a court of law.

Irish

07-17-13, 19:39

Drone crashes and explodes in Florida. (http://rt.com/usa/air-force-drone-crash-221/) Luckily no one was killed, this time.

A United States military drone presumed to be a QF-4 crashed, exploded and sent up a large black cloud of smoke Wednesday morning at Tyndall Air Force Base.

Local news outlets from the Florida panhandle region reported Wednesday morning that an unmanned aerial vehicle crashed on the drone runway at Tyndall AFB during take-off at 8:20 a.m. EST that morning.

Eyewitnesses told WJHG News that the drone “came in hard and fast” before it crashed.

According to the network, Tyndall officials said the drone was carrying a small self-destruct charge and “had to be destroyed for safety considerations during its return to base following a routine operation.”

Following the accident, the UAV reportedly went up in flames and started a ground fire, prompting authorities to close nearby Highway 98. They’ve reported no injuries.

QuietShootr

07-17-13, 19:48

http://rt.com/usa/fbi-director-mueller-drones-947/

We all knew it was happening. Now, I will say that if the FBI obtains a warrant to use a drone for a specific case then I don't have a problem with it. Mr. Mueller's response indicates that there are no rules and so why should we trust them?

In light of all the other scandals, particularly the NSA leak, I am inclined to err on the side of not trusting them.

Going to post without reading here, then go back and read the thread to see how close I hit it.

1) several guys will express concern about this development
2) several cops will ridicule the guys from group 1), using the words/phrases (please choose any or all of the following)
a) paranoid b)tinfoil c)Alex Jones d)racist e)survivalist f) If you aren't doing anything wrong, why do you care if they track you
3) several more guys will point out that this point of view is ****ed up
4) cops will get huffy and start reporting posts.

Stand by for the edit:

ETA: Goddamn, I'm brilliant.

Cagemonkey

07-17-13, 20:43

Cagemonkey

07-17-13, 20:48

Any of you guys growing up in the 80's remember this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd3lDhyM21M Where getting pretty close.

Moose-Knuckle

07-17-13, 20:56

Any of you guys growing up in the 80's remember this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd3lDhyM21M Where getting pretty close.

Oh I remember it but always preferred this instead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBd6ighzqYA

SeriousStudent

07-17-13, 21:01

Going to post without reading here, then go back and read the thread to see how close I hit it.

1) several guys will express concern about this development
2) several cops will ridicule the guys from group 1), using the words/phrases (please choose any or all of the following)
a) paranoid b)tinfoil c)Alex Jones d)racist e)survivalist f) If you aren't doing anything wrong, why do you care if they track you
3) several more guys will point out that this point of view is ****ed up
4) cops will get huffy and start reporting posts.

Stand by for the edit:

ETA: Goddamn, I'm brilliant.

Post without reading??

Guess what? I'm not a cop, nor a survivalist, but a mod who thinks you are getting really, really close to baiting and instigating.

That's a hint to watch what you are posting before you get frequent flyer points towards a vacation.

And that's the last hint you get. Welcome to the radar screen.

Mjolnir

07-17-13, 22:01

One just "fell" in Florida today closing the highway it nosedived onto.

I've not bothered to find out who was flying it.

Check online for details.

-------------------------------------
"One cannot awaken a man who pretends to be asleep."

Honu

07-17-13, 22:46

I am fine with drones watching borders for illegals and trafficking
even OK if they want to use them to catch speeders relaying to a normal officer to pull folks over they fly planes to do this ? seems cheaper to fly a drone as long as its %100 traffic control use and following bad guys if need be vs a helicopter etc..

I am not for them seeing anything or recording anything over my private property !!!! or other things that they seem to be doing with them ? like following up on ranchers etc..

we had the infamous black out helicopters come check us out one time :)
off roading and all of a sudden here comes these helicopters and WOW no marking none no numbers nothing pure black ! checked us out with a couple fly overs
turns out though we came up to the backside of hawthorne ammo dump :)
for these kinda things I think drones would be cheaper than sending up helicopters

decodeddiesel

07-18-13, 01:46

Haha, just saw a news story about a town here in Colorado that may offer bounty to anyone who shoots down a Federal drone and brings them the wreckage. :lol:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/drone-hunting-colorado-172357477.html

usmcvet

07-18-13, 10:43

I don't see the difference between drones for "surveillance" and helicopters except that drones don't wake you up at night.

Now "armed" drones, like "armed" helicopters would be a very different discussion.

I agree. It's much smaller scale than what's already out there. When I read this I first thought of the movie Act of Valor when reading this thread. The little drone the team deployed was pretty cool. I could see their use being very helpful in many situations. Hell Goggle and Amazon know waaay too much about many of us already.

montanadave

07-31-13, 08:57

Here's a YouTube clip I ran across which demonstrates formation flying of a group of quadrotors. I know less than nothing about this kind of technology, but the military and surveillance capabilities seem rather daunting to a bumpkin like myself.

When Skynet goes live, I'm afraid we're in for a real rodeo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2la4pIyXOEQ

TAZ

07-31-13, 15:31

I don't see the difference between drones for "surveillance" and helicopters except that drones don't wake you up at night.

Now "armed" drones, like "armed" helicopters would be a very different discussion.

Yes, but helicopters are noisy and expensive. Makes them self limiting in a way. No city or county is going to run mass surveillance using a helicopter (s). Just not financially feasible at this time. Those toys are used for specific applications.

Cheap remote operated vehicles can be used en masse in a far more cost effective manner.

While I accept (not like or condone) the fact that once I step out of my home and off my property I am being watched by big brother under the guise of having no expectation of privacy in public spaces, I do have an expectation of privacy on my property which is fenced by a privacy fence. I'd prefer to keep some of my doings private.

Are we going to get to the point that if we want privacy we will have to have a covered back yard? Or is that going to be illegal cause we are obviously trying to hide something.