Flying Gun Drone - Topic

Member

Posts: 63,097

Joined: Jan 11 2005

Gold: 9,765.00

Warn: 60%

Jul 23 2015 07:01am

If he has the proper license to fire guns on his property then sure, but as soon as this device leaves his property, probably should go to jail for a long time.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jul 23 2015 07:02am

Voyaging

Member

Posts: 63,030

Joined: Jul 15 2005

Gold: 152.00

#12

Jul 23 2015 07:07am

I think we're going to need serious restrictions on drones, armed and otherwise, and it had better be soon.

We're probably only a few years away from being able to purchase a drone for $20 (edit: scratch that, there are already drones available for purchase in the $30 range), and they are going to be come more sophisticated, easier to fly, and more dangerous. This is compounded by their ability to remotely attack which makes it potentially far more difficult to track the culprit.

At the very least I'd suggest a complete civilian ban on armed drones.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Jul 23 2015 07:09am

Skinned

Member

Posts: 57,901

Joined: Dec 3 2008

Gold: 285.00

#13

Jul 23 2015 07:12am

I'm gonna take a note from Mitt Romney and say that drones are people too.

Goomshill

Member

Posts: 45,877

Joined: Jan 20 2010

Gold: 22,189.49

#14

Jul 23 2015 07:16am

If a law abiding and responsible homeowner needs a drone mounted handgun to protect his family - not just by actual physical intervention but by the dissuading effect on criminals - then who are you to take away our constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms? I mean, even the bogus arguments about crime and public safety (hint; when owning a gun is a crime, criminals are the only ones with guns, and they can stab you to death anyway), even this argument is thrown out the window because tell me, how much crime is being committed by drone mounted guns in america? NONE. You can't pretend you're making the nation safer when you not only restrict guns to criminals, but also specifically ban types of firearms that only responsible members of the public are wielding.

Valhalls_Sun

Member

Posts: 10,566

Joined: May 31 2013

Gold: 0.76

#15

Jul 23 2015 07:25am

Quote (thesnipa @ 23 Jul 2015 07:55)

Well its a new technology, so the # of historical cases is moot. If i made a new drug could i legitimize it by showing the lack of people that have OD'd on it? I get what you're saying with the accidents but its just different to me, for a couple reasons. First, accidents in your hands are somewhat understandable, you made a bad movement and it resulted in you with your own hands firing a bullet in the wrong direction. Now what happens if a propeller malfunctions while firing? you weren't directly in control so the accident is that much worse. Secondly, accidentally firing in the wrong direction can be illegal depending on the circumstances, you need to fire weapons in a safe place, which is controlled by you being grounded on your feet. Putting a gun in the air makes the chance of firing in the wrong direction more probable by opening many more lines of sight. Lastly im concerned by the remote nature of a gun on a drone, when a man pulls out a gun people see it, if he uses it incorrectly usually there is a person or a camera to point the cops in the right direction to get them, with a drone you could pull up, shoot someone, and then crash it and let the cops grab it while you sip your coffee. On top of that if it isnt made explicitly illegal manufacturers can make drones set up to instantly mount a gun to, which would make it far to available to those who would use them to kill people. My main question in my head as a gun rights activist is "if they are banned who suffers? who doesnt get to use this that otherwise would? what sporting activities are missed out on? are there any uses that are legit for this that will be prevented?", across the board i can see no harm. Banning armor piercing rounds is silly, banning weaponized drones isnt IMO.

As far as drawing crowds..I'm hoping anyone who plans to do fun shooting isn't going to be shooting near residential or urban areas? I really figured that was a given. I was already envisioning a new type of target competition naturally at private ranges in controlled situations, as all responsible shooting should be done.

Honestly in a killing situation if a person is willing to take the time to set up a drone "kill" they will also take the time to set up a seamless sniper kill, a .223 out of a even homemade noise suppressed barrel is virtually silent it takes less to blend in taking a sniper shot then it would setting up a drone kill.

Quote

My main question in my head as a gun rights activist is "if they are banned who suffers? who doesnt get to use this that otherwise would? what sporting activities are missed out on? are there any uses that are legit for this that will be prevented?", across the board i can see no harm. Banning armor piercing rounds is silly, banning weaponized drones isnt IMO.

[/QUOTE]

I can't believe these words. Does it matter who? just because you don't? is that a meter now? there goes the entire 2nd. amendment if we use that as a measure because little gossamer wings widow surely can't find fun in any firearms so just ban them all by crickety. :wacko:

and banning armor piercing shells is silly but drones isn't? Some wouldn't understand this reasoning.

Morphmcmanerson

Member

Posts: 19,898

Joined: May 10 2009

Gold: 1.50

#16

Jul 23 2015 07:30am

We're going to have to experience a mass killing or terrorist attack involving armed drones before legislation will be pushed through.

Goomshill

Member

Posts: 45,877

Joined: Jan 20 2010

Gold: 22,189.49

#17

Jul 23 2015 07:36am

Quote (Morphmcmanerson @ Jul 23 2015 07:30am)

We're going to have to experience a mass killing or terrorist attack involving armed drones before legislation will be pushed through.

Yes, its an open secret that the liberal media and democrat socialists jump for joy every time a mass murder is committed by a lone gunman, hell theres nothing greater for their party than some psycho gunning down a bunch of chilrden because they know they can exploit it and try to push kneejerk legislation via their demagoguery and incitation. I bet hilary clinton gets wet when she hears a school gets shot up. I guess on the bright side, the liberals are so cynically dancing on the graves of slaughtered americans that they don't actually want to pass any laws for fear it would do away with their hook to voters, they know its all just for show, get their base riled up so they can spend five dollars less on a mocha latte cappuccino and donate it to their democratic war coffers instead

itzpookiie

Member

Posts: 25,660

Joined: Mar 16 2008

Gold: 3.60

#18

Jul 23 2015 07:43am

guns have to be concealed carried with a chl here
you can only open carry long guns, but having it flying on a drone I don't think would be considered "carried"

I would figure something like this would automatically be illegal

thesnipa

Member

Posts: 90,652

Joined: Dec 31 2007

Gold: 2,489.69

#19

Jul 23 2015 07:54am

Quote (Valhalls_Sun @ Jul 23 2015 07:25am)

you're missing the point with the sniper analogy. When a sniper fires a bullet you can at the very least figure out which direction it came from. There isnt a cord connected to a drone that leads you to the perp. That is the issue. There is no culpability of a drone attack, its impossible to track anyone who doesnt want to be tracked, it may be hard to track a sniper but its not impossible.

Quote

I can't believe these words. Does it matter who? just because you don't? is that a meter now? there goes the entire 2nd. amendment if we use that as a measure because little gossamer wings widow surely can't find fun in any firearms so just ban them all by crickety. :wacko:

and banning armor piercing shells is silly but drones isn't? Some wouldn't understand this reasoning.

The point is that it matters to no one that i can think of, there arent active drone shooting leagues, drone hunting is illegal so it doesnt effect that, and there arent people in large numbers lookin for weaponized drones. Not only that but the argument is far from other gun rights issues, when someone fights for handgun rights it has a self defense aspect to it, drones arent going to be used defensively. When someone fights for AR clone hunting rifles there is a sporting aspect, drones arent used for hunting. I cant connect this weaponized drone to an legitimate sporting activity, and the creation of a new class of sporting activity seems inherently dangerous because it depends on the mechanics of a new technology that isnt fully flushed out.

as to the armor piercing bullet ban, its dumb because its impossible to ban all of them, any hunting round is inherently armor piercing, so classifying which you should and shouldnt ban is silly to me.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jul 23 2015 07:56am

Valhalls_Sun

Member

Posts: 10,566

Joined: May 31 2013

Gold: 0.76

#20

Jul 23 2015 07:57am

Quote (Goomshill @ 23 Jul 2015 08:36)

No offense but this paragraph was a bit like painting a gerbils feet with dayglow magenta paint, blowing crack smoke into his face and letting him run about, with the lights out and the black light on.

Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List