Who is scared about this? Is this a second amendment right?

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/16/897633...guns-legal

(07-17-2015 12:21 AM)BEARCATDALE Wrote:  Who is scared about this? Is this a second amendment right?

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/16/897633...guns-legal

Nah. No problem at all. Why would I be scared? Of course it is a second amendment right. A gun is a gun. It doesn't matter if it is on a drone or on your person.

if I was a border rancher....

I'm pretty certain one understands what would follow....

....been trying to explain like so many others that tech advancement is a multi-edged sword....

this should surprise no one...

Inserts Skynet joke.

(07-17-2015 07:35 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Inserts Skynet joke.

he tried to stop it....then realized the futility coupled with hollywood's juliet...

I can see where in a hostage situation and quite motors used it could take out Bad Guys. Same with tracking down enemy snipers in a combat zone or just getting great shots off at the enemy.

It sure is part of my second amendment right to bare arms even with a drone. I have a drone that patrols my home with firearms and a laser. This drone is amateur hour.

(07-17-2015 07:39 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  I can see where in a hostage situation and quite motors used it could take out Bad Guys. Same with tracking down enemy snipers in a combat zone or just getting great shots off at the enemy.

or as a front line mechanism for border ranchers....

or some crazy fkr setting up outside a school, mall, church, etc....

commercial drones should be outlawed immediately.....and I mean now....

fk pizza and floral delivery....force them to use humans....

(07-17-2015 07:43 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  It sure is part of my second amendment right to bare arms even with a drone. I have a drone that patrols my home with firearms and a laser. This drone is amateur hour.

use your EMP.....it's all the latest rave....don't you have one?

edit: I've pre-ordered twenty just for the helluva it....and I bought the long-term warranty, service, and upgrade plan....

(07-17-2015 07:43 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  It sure is part of my second amendment right to bare arms even with a drone. I have a drone that patrols my home with firearms and a laser. This drone is amateur hour.

Exercising the right to bare arms with a drone:

I would actually buy this.

(07-17-2015 08:24 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I would actually buy this.

LOL, that's a good one.

I'm as pro 2nd amendment as anyone...but...once the weapon physically leaves my hand it leaps outside that paradigm. I have no problem with this being illegal.

It is pretty cool though.

It's still a person controlling the drone, correct? So that should still be legal, to be consistent.

pfft...

There are all sorts of laws about shooting from moving vehicles or mounting weapons on cars or planes... and 'remote' firing of weapons (like setting up a gun to be fired when someone opes a door or trips a wire) and I've never seen or heard of any serious issue with such regulation.


SO the left on the issue is merely making up a straw man and arguing with that.

It's not horrible technology and I could see its potential use in law enforcement (and we already have it in the military).

Under the second amendment, it should never be illegal to own a drone and own a gun... like it's not illegal to own a car and to own beer... but should we get to the point where we are combining their uses, we've abandoned most other laws anyway. The person using this to defend himself or his property doesn't care about the laws against doing so.

(07-17-2015 10:24 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  pfft...

There are all sorts of laws about shooting from moving vehicles or mounting weapons on cars or planes... and 'remote' firing of weapons (like setting up a gun to be fired when someone opes a door or trips a wire) and I've never seen or heard of any serious issue with such regulation.


SO the left on the issue is merely making up a straw man and arguing with that.

It's not horrible technology and I could see its potential use in law enforcement (and we already have it in the military).

Under the second amendment, it should never be illegal to own a drone and own a gun... but should we get to the point where we are combining their uses, we've abandoned most other laws anyway. The person using this to defend himself or his property doesn't care about the laws against doing so.

So some regulation is okay, just checking.

(07-17-2015 10:29 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  So some regulation is okay, just checking.

Of course. I don't recall the NRA or any other remotely popular 'gun' group arguing that people should be able to shoot guns anywhere at any time and by any means they want. Have you? Many gun owners are hunters and hunting is HIGHLY regulated with little complaint over most issues.

There's nothing about the right to keep and bear arms that allows you to shoot skeet in your apartment.

The problem with the way you've responded though is that you seem to be assuming that regulating how and when and where someone fires a gun (safe operation) is the same thing as denying ownership or operation... merely a 'gun regulation' and it isn't.

There are all sorts of things that you have an absolute right to (like free speech) but your ability to exercise that right is subject to regulation (you can't yell fire in a crowded theater or blast loud music at 2am). You can own a gun, but you can't fire it anywhere at any time for any reason. There are limitations/regulations that don't interfere with your fundamental right.

I do not think the 2nd Amendment would cover this.

You could fly this thing into Greece and literally take the country over in a minute or two.

(07-17-2015 11:20 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I do not think the 2nd Amendment would cover this.

In case you were responding to me, let me be more clear (and I agree with you)

My only comment about the second amendment was that NO rights are without any limitations whatsoever... even life and liberty.... but that doesn't mean that all limitations are 'equal' either.

The ability to follow due process and a trial and appeals to take away someone's right to life or liberty doesn't create the ability to do so without those actions.

In context, the ability to stop someone from remotely firing a weapon is not the same as stopping them from firing, or especially owning a weapon... which is the only where the second amendment comes in and implied by the 'so SOME regulation is okay?' as that is sometimes argued (not saying by anyone on here) that once you open that door, ANY regulation is possible/legal/allowed.