The new “Black helicopters”?

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Bodhi
A:  http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrits  

B:  You can not prove that Iraq did not have WMD's.    So who is the hypocrite?

Cause not being able to prove a negative really makes a point well. Erm. Yeah.

You're the one exemplifying the right side's version of fear and paranoia in a thread where other's mock the left side's penchant for such. That didn't answer your question of who's being the "hypocrite" (aka hypocrit) quite the way you wanted it to but I'm pretty sure you didn't understand that.

[Dago]

Originally posted by lazs2
I wouldn't get too upset about it's capabilities... they can't even catch guys burying IED's in Iraq with em.

lazs

I have seen some interesting videos of guys planting IEDs all of a sudden being sent to find out if there really are 72 virgins waiting.  And helicopters were involved.

[Rich46yo]

Originally posted by crockett
If it's used like a normal police helicopter is used, then I see no big deal with them really. However if they start using them for general surveillance then I do see a problem with it.

                       Like what kind of general surveillance?

                      Why would the Police "generally surveill" you?

                     The idea no doubt is to look hard at drug ops on the street level. And to surveill big hitters in the drug world and maybe terrorism. Nobody is going to use them to watch honest working people. We already use cameras to catch drug dealers. We use them all the time.

                   They setup a certain way and they move a certain way. We can spot drug corners a mile away but the problem is getting up on them. Boy I wish we had some of these helicopters. We could shoot video of streets sales and then move in having both ends of the evidence tied up. Video is powerful evidence. When you can show a jury a kid going back to the same crack in the wall 15 times in an hour, show them 15 times him handing off packets to another kid, who in turns hands them off to passing cars. Its powerful evidence in court.

[Reschke]

Powerful evidence that doesn't accomplish anything at all. I abhor drug dealers and their existence in our world is part of the problem with our society....BUT stopping the corner kid by putting him in jail doesn't accomplish anything.

IF you could stop him with a bullet and then continue to do the same thing to the 4-5 more that would take his place then you could begin to eat away at the underlings that push the product out the door. BUT you still have to get to the root of the cause and that is the actual dealers and most of the time those aren't even the guys behind the wall handing out the material.

The way of the vigilante would work and plain old Islamic justice would eliminate the problem in some ways.

Originally posted by Rich46yo
Like what kind of general surveillance?

                      Why would the Police "generally surveill" you?

                     The idea no doubt is to look hard at drug ops on the street level. And to surveill big hitters in the drug world and maybe terrorism. Nobody is going to use them to watch honest working people. We already use cameras to catch drug dealers. We use them all the time.

                   They setup a certain way and they move a certain way. We can spot drug corners a mile away but the problem is getting up on them. Boy I wish we had some of these helicopters. We could shoot video of streets sales and then move in having both ends of the evidence tied up. Video is powerful evidence. When you can show a jury a kid going back to the same crack in the wall 15 times in an hour, show them 15 times him handing off packets to another kid, who in turns hands them off to passing cars. Its powerful evidence in court.

[Rich46yo]

Originally posted by Reschke
Powerful evidence that doesn't accomplish anything at all. I abhor drug dealers and their existence in our world is part of the problem with our society....BUT stopping the corner kid by putting him in jail doesn't accomplish anything.

IF you could stop him with a bullet and then continue to do the same thing to the 4-5 more that would take his place then you could begin to eat away at the underlings that push the product out the door. BUT you still have to get to the root of the cause and that is the actual dealers and most of the time those aren't even the guys behind the wall handing out the material.

The way of the vigilante would work and plain old Islamic justice would eliminate the problem in some ways.

                    As long as it wasnt your kid right? Should we shoot the rich white kids coming uptown to buy in the back of the head too? Or are they different?

                  Police priority should always be on both street sales and high end work. You have to shut down the street cause thats where most of your bodies are piling up. Not just that but somtimes your pinching young kids that can still be talked to.

                Thanks but I lived under Islamic justic for 18 mos and anyone trying to impose it here would get a gunfight on their hands. And quickly!

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by Arlo
Cause not being able to prove a negative really makes a point well. Erm. Yeah.

You're the one exemplifying the right side's version of fear and paranoia in a thread where other's mock the left side's penchant for such. That didn't answer your question of who's being the "hypocrite" (aka hypocrit) quite the way you wanted it to but I'm pretty sure you didn't understand that.

I could care less about the police having drones.  To me, it just means less noise than a Bell 206 flapping away at night.  Please point out where I said differently.

I just asked you to prove that Iraq did not have WMD's.  

You were mistaken in your attempt to correct spelling, and you supply no proof other than the typical left wing WMD rant.  

I think the hypocrite is fairly obvious.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Bodhi
I just asked you to prove that Iraq did not have WMD's.  

You were mistaken in your attempt to correct spelling, and you supply no proof other than the typical left wing WMD rant.  

I think the hypocrite is fairly obvious.

Here, maybe this will somehow provide a clue.

I think you had a nuke in your basement last week but now it's in Syria. Prove me wrong (because, obviously, I'm not equipped to prove myself right).

And yeah, my bad, hypocrite. (http://www.websters-dictionary-online.org/definition/hypocrit - bad Arlo! -hangs head in spelling bee shame-especially since it was my bringing it up). However .... I'm still quite certain you have issues with the proper way to apply it. A double standard is no standard at all, eh?

Something is fairly obvious. Many thanks, sport.

[Gunslinger]

I'm with the crowd that says what's the difference?  Seriously, all you are doing is taking the man out of the cockpit and putting him in an office somewhere.  

Air Support has proven invaluable in many police chases.  Think of all those high speed chases where the ground units backed off to give the criminals some room so they hopfully don't drive through someone's living room.  The air unit stays on them and the pursuit never stops.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Gunslinger
I'm with the crowd that says what's the difference?  Seriously, all you are doing is taking the man out of the cockpit and putting him in an office somewhere.  

Air Support has proven invaluable in many police chases.  Think of all those high speed chases where the ground units backed off to give the criminals some room so they hopfully don't drive through someone's living room.  The air unit stays on them and the pursuit never stops.

As to the meat of the topic, gotta say I concur.

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by Arlo
Here, maybe this will somehow provide a clue.

I think you had a nuke in your basement last week but now it's in Syria. Prove me wrong (because, obviously, I'm not equipped to prove myself right).

And yeah, my bad, hypocrite. (http://www.websters-dictionary-online.org/definition/hypocrit - bad Arlo! -hangs head in spelling bee shame-especially since it was my bringing it up). However .... I'm still quite certain you have issues with the proper way to apply it. A double standard is no standard at all, eh?

Something is fairly obvious. Many thanks, sport.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrite  
Apparently there are multiple entrances on the word.  

You obviously think you are far superior to everyone else here.  Keep up that broken record WMD left wing rant though.  It definitely makes you seem far more  intelligent than the rest of us.  

Cyas around hypocrite.

[crockett]

Originally posted by Rich46yo
Like what kind of general surveillance?

                      Why would the Police "generally surveill" you?

                     The idea no doubt is to look hard at drug ops on the street level. And to surveill big hitters in the drug world and maybe terrorism. Nobody is going to use them to watch honest working people. We already use cameras to catch drug dealers. We use them all the time.

                   They setup a certain way and they move a certain way. We can spot drug corners a mile away but the problem is getting up on them. Boy I wish we had some of these helicopters. We could shoot video of streets sales and then move in having both ends of the evidence tied up. Video is powerful evidence. When you can show a jury a kid going back to the same crack in the wall 15 times in an hour, show them 15 times him handing off packets to another kid, who in turns hands them off to passing cars. Its powerful evidence in court.

What I'm saying, is if it's used like a normal police helicopter is used then it's no big deal IMO. Meaning if it's used in assistance to the police on the street, such as air surveillance of a chase or help locating a suspect.

However if it's used to spy in peoples backyards or on their private property. Well then I do see a problem with it. However sad to say they can likely legally get away with it.

In other words if they use them to "spy" on normal people not suspected of a crime, well I do see a problem with that. I'm sure they will end up used in "drug areas" at first then they will start showing up more often in other places.

Just like everything else.

[AKIron]

I don't like red light cameras either, too much room for abuse. Get the cops out of the donut shops and let 'em earn their pay.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Bodhi

Cyas around hypocrite.

Regularly, hypocrit.

[Gunslinger]

Crockett,

some of these drones come equiped with special sensors that can detect meth labs and grow houses.  Do you consider that an invasion of privacy?

[john9001]

i consider that restraint of trade.