Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Family of anti-government separatists busted by cops using a Predator drone... after 'stealing six cows'
Meet the Brossarts, a North Dakota family deemed so dangerous that the local sheriff needed unleashed an unmanned Predator drone to help bring them in. The Brossart's alleged crime? They wouldn't give back three cows and their calves that wandered onto their 3,000-acre farm this summer. The same aerial vehicles used by the CIA to track down and assassinate terrorists and militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan are now being deployed by cops to spy on Americans in their own backyards. (www.dailymail.co.uk) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
It matters not how the Brossarts were observed, by drone, helicopter, telescope or whatever or just maybe a local witness. They knew the cattle was not theirs and they should've returned them even if they are anti-government radicals. But of course they have their dukes up 24/7 and hope for a confrontation with authorities.
This was a federally own piece of property, highly unlikely that some back woods police department would get authorization from the government for a drone to spy on the hillbillies stealing cows. Its illegal because the police department did not use their own resources but a multi million remotely piloted aircraft which is still illegal to operate over the United States.
It's not illegal whatsoever. The Supreme Court found many years ago that anything that is visible from the air, even if it is on your own private property, can be surveilled without a warrant since there cannot be an expectation of privacy outside of a building.
Again, they did not "spy" on the "hilbillies" for stealing the cows. They used the drone to observe them only after they were met with force while trying to serve a warrant. There is no legal difference between using the UAV and a helicopter, but there wouldn't be a story if they had used a helicopter.
Again, they did not "spy" on the "hilbillies" for stealing the cows. They used the drone to observe them only after they were met with force while trying to serve a warrant. There is no legal difference between using the UAV and a helicopter, but there wouldn't be a story if they had used a helicopter.
Yes there is a difference. A really big difference from a UAV and a helicopter, there wouldn't be a story if they used a helicopter because thats what they are supposed to use. Instead they sat on there lazy asses and used government resources to do there job, of course they were met with resistance. The cops just arrested two of the family members obviously they were within there rights to bare arms at there private residence or they would have been shot for posing a threat to police officers. A drone is a observation platform and was built as counter intel. If the other person does not know you are watching them it is considered spying.
I'll tell you what - you point a firearm in a law officer's face when they come to effect a warrant, and see how well you do.
Police and Sheriff Departments are also government resources. There may be a Memorandum of Agreement in place of which we are not aware. Again, legally, there is no difference since the request for surveillance came only after they were met with force while acting in the lawful capacity of their jobs. The family was well aware they were being watched, since they knew law enforcement officers had surrounded the property.
Also, this article came from the Daily Mail, which is well known among journalistic circles as a tabloid. I know their intent is to stir up trouble and debate, which is what they did.
Police and Sheriff Departments are also government resources. There may be a Memorandum of Agreement in place of which we are not aware. Again, legally, there is no difference since the request for surveillance came only after they were met with force while acting in the lawful capacity of their jobs. The family was well aware they were being watched, since they knew law enforcement officers had surrounded the property.
Also, this article came from the Daily Mail, which is well known among journalistic circles as a tabloid. I know their intent is to stir up trouble and debate, which is what they did.
Prob not well I would imagine, but what I was trying to say is that there is nothing wrong with having rifles o ut on your own private land. I get what your saying about this stuff. Its been a long day at the field and had to vent a little. Im sure this family is a waste to our country and deserved everything they got.
I wholeheartedly agree that responsible gun ownership is a fundamental right in this country. Venting after a long day is understood - I'm less than 6 hours into a 12-hour shift right now, and my temper can be real short at the end of my shift.
No hard feelings, no worries, good debate. :)
No hard feelings, no worries, good debate. :)
Im not saying what these people did was right but the cops are wrong in there approach to a simple arrest. Of course the air force would allow this, they are eager to get the public to feel good about a computer flying over there houses.