zlacker

>>pera+(OP)
I don't really see the issue here with a surveillance drone to help keep the peace. I don't really care if it's "military technology" or not. Look, what happened was absolutely awful. People have a right to protest - and should, but peacefully. Riots, looting, burning buildings? Sorry, that's going to far.

If the government starts firing rockets at people from that drone - well that's another story. But that is clearly not what is happening here.

>>king_m+Td
Predator drones can carry multiple air to ground missiles and guided bombs. This is the same model of drone which is used for drone strikes in the Middle East. There is no reasonable reason for a domestic civilian agency to own or use these drones over US soil vs models which are incapable of carrying armament.

>>kec+Nf
I'm aware of that, but it's extremely, extremely unlikely that this drone is carrying any sort of missiles. I can't prove that for certain, but let's be realistic here. The government could in theory drive a ballistic missile launcher hidden in an 18-wheeler into any major US city - should we not allow trucks on the road?

>>king_m+kg
> should we not allow trucks on the road?

Perhaps not ones designed for carrying ballistic missiles.

Though this still isn't a perfect comparison because it ignores the fact that drone usage can be targeted to individuals, which is a factor that makes it more dangerous in our context of homeland operations.