
US customs and border protection is flying a surveillance drone over Minneapolis - pera
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/5dzbe3/customs-and-border-protection-predator-drone-minneapolis-george-floyd
======
pm90
This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad
eventually, predictably find their way back domestically.

Despite that, its a dangerous thing to happen. I am aware of how unlikely it
is for the current US Government to use the drone offensively, but once you
have a massive fleet of drones flying over the US, patrolling "troubling"
neighborhoods constantly, the temptation to use those abilities rises
significantly.

I hope that Congress takes action to outlaw this practice, but I have little
faith it will happen. It seems like everyday the country is falling further
into the pit of becoming an authoritarian police state.

~~~
beambot
Where do you draw the distinction between a drone (presumably unarmed) vs a
police helicopter?

~~~
Alupis
I think we first need to determine what is upsetting about this, specifically.

Is it that they are flying a UAV that was originally designed for military
use?

Or is it that they are flying a UAV period?

What if it was a new UAV, designed just for law enforcement? No problems then?

Presumably this UAV has no weapons on it, so I'm unsure what the problem could
be unless we just flat oppose former military equipment being used?

It's safer and cheaper to fly a UAV than a manned vehicled - helicopters crash
routinely and need multiple crews to keep them on station for extended
duration. If it was a decommissioned military UAV that's being repurposed -
then the tax payer has been saved a great deal of money as well.

So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?

~~~
Barrin92
>So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?

The ongoing militarization of state level police forces without the democratic
consent of the governed for a start?

~~~
Alupis
> democratic consent of the governed

Just playing devil's advocate - but this is democratically consented to.

Your elected politicians have specifically allowed the sale or transfer of
retired military equipment to state and local police forces, for multiple
reasons but the least-of-which was cost savings vs. scrapping all the prepaid
equipment.

Similar, but admittedly not quite the same, to the sale of demilitarized
Humvees, tanks and fighter jets to civilians. Or NASA owning and operating
former US Navy F/A-18's, B-52's and more... war machines now repurposed for
peaceful training and aeronautical research.

~~~
Barrin92
Yeah in the same sense of how we all democratically opted in to mass
surveillance or encryption breaking. Let's be honest the people who are at the
receiving end of this technology haven't been democratically decided anything
in a long time. What this actually is, is what Sheldon Wolin called inverted
totalitarianism and when it comes to these police measures that's not even an
exaggeration.

Just as a random question, how many people do you think know that these guys
([https://longreads.com/2019/06/21/nothing-kept-me-up-at-
night...](https://longreads.com/2019/06/21/nothing-kept-me-up-at-night-the-
way-the-gorgon-stare-did/)) are flying above American cities

~~~
Alupis
The solution is to vote-out the out-of-touch career politicians then, no?

I have a suspicion, being a Senator for 40 years sort of removes you from the
concerns of everyday Americans.

These are the same Senators (and Representatives) that vote for these
measures. They'll never be the target of these surveillance schemes... and
when they are, they throw a huge fit[1] because they're supposedly above all
of it. They're the same people who ban guns from the public, but own operate
and illegally traffic them themselves[2].

They're the same ones that don't have to be strip searched every time they
fly, but I digress...

[1] [https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/13/pelosi-
alle...](https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/13/pelosi-alleged-cia-
spying-on-senate-committee-appalling/)

[2] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-
mix/wp/2016/02/2...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-
mix/wp/2016/02/25/ex-calif-state-sen-leeland-yee-gun-control-champion-heading-
to-prison-for-weapons-trafficking/)

~~~
rayiner
It’s not clear to me that the Senators voting for this aren’t similarly
situated to “everyday Americans.” Remember when armed civilians stormed the
Michigan Capitol and nothing happened? They aren’t politically connected, etc.
Maybe the folks who keep electing these senators correctly perceive that the
power of the state won’t be used against them, so long as they belong to the
majority.

------
joshmn
Native Minnesotan here — living in Minneapolis — that has lived on both
coasts:

With all that's happening the last few days, please don't generally associate
Minnesotans with the violent riots that have captured the attention of
everyone. The peacefulness of the protests and gatherings has been
overshadowed by the violence. There are countless examples of Minnesotans
standing up to those who choose to loot and destroy the innocent. Those images
are being overlooked.

What happened is awful. These violent riots, and the violent images aren't
reflective of Minnesotans at large. The violence doesn't reflect how genuinely
upset people in Minnesota feel about what happened and greater the movement at
large. There will always be edge-cases as there is with any situation in any
context. But for everyone that I've known, for everyone I've met and
encountered with in Minnesota, when I look back at my time spent on either
coast I always have found the people in Minnesota to be most great.

I have friends and colleagues asking me "what's going on with everyone in
Minnesota?" and I have to explain to them that these images aren't
representative of the place I call home and my neighbors I call my friends.

There are businesses that didn't do anything wrong which have have been
effectively `rm -rf` because of a small group of bad actors. The Target on
Lake Street didn't do anything. Banadir Pharmacy didn't do anything. Seward
Pharmacy didn't do anything. The pawn shop didn't do anything. The WIC office
didn't do anything. The liquor stores didn't do anything. MoneyGram didn't do
anything. The tobacco store didn't do anything. Disrupting those businesses
and the livelihoods of their employees and owners doesn't prove a point.

But burning down the precinct? Yeah, I can get behind that.

~~~
daeken
> With all that's happening the last few days, please don't associate
> Minnesotans with the riots that have captured the attention of everyone.

I understand what you're going for, but this is a bad approach. People aren't
rioting because they want to destroy things, they're rioting because they
don't feel like they're being heard. What you're saying here reads as "don't
listen to them, they don't represent us" which is ... exactly the point.

We need to collectively shut the hell up for 5 minutes and just _listen_.
Maybe if we actually did that, these riots wouldn't be happening.

~~~
chasd00
people do, indeed, riot and destroy things to steal and loot. That's the
point. Notice it's not the police station being burned down.

~~~
49531
Well, also the fact that a police station is filled with armed police might
also be a reason.

~~~
nickff
So the rioters are hurting their fellow innocents because it's easy and less
risky than going after the guilty? You're probably right, but it's not a
flattering view of the rioters.

~~~
testbot123
> hurting their fellow innocents

Are you talking about property damage, or actual violence like police killing
unarmed black folks?

~~~
nickff
I am talking about the potential for injury (as always exists with fires,
looting, and the like, here exemplified by the wheelchair-bound woman sprayed
with a fire extinguisher), as well as the property damage, which often causes
stress and emotional injury.

It's also easy to forget that the people most harmed by looting are usually
members of the (original) victims' own communities.

~~~
freeone3000
Maybe if she didn't want to be sprayed with a fire extinguisher she shouldn't
have stabbed shoplifters with a knife.

------
dpflan
FTA: "Unarmed Predator drones were first used within the United States in
2012, when the Department of Homeland Security flew one over the property of a
cattle farmer named Rodney Brossart to surveil him, and to help end a 16-hour
standoff between him and another rancher over a stolen-cattle dispute. The use
was highly controversial at the time; since then, CBP has used drones hundreds
of times, and has not kept very good records about their use."

That strikes me as a highly unexpected and odd situation to be the catalyst
for "OK'ing" use within US.

~~~
billme
False; Katrina & US border patrol was what officially sparked the call to
(publicly) use drones in the US.

CBP has used drones with FAA approval within the US since 2006; which does not
included any use prior to 2006 which remains classified.

SOURCE:
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115491642950528436](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115491642950528436)

~~~
A4ET8a8uTh0
Odd question. The thing that I find odd about it is the jurisdiction of US
border patrol here. Why would the government call them as opposed to, say,
national guard? I am curious.

~~~
PeterisP
Probably because US border patrol has aerial surveillance vehicles and lots of
experience in their use, and the national guard likely does not

~~~
billme
They both have experience, US National Guard would require DoD approval to fly
domestic missions.

------
petee
The tracking website has some great info, like this RC-26B with electronic
surveillance hardware headed for Louisville:

[https://tar1090.adsbexchange.com/?icao=adfd7f](https://tar1090.adsbexchange.com/?icao=adfd7f)

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/eigjb/3460872978](https://www.flickr.com/photos/eigjb/3460872978)

And this is the track of the drone over Minneapolis, which seemed to veer off
around the time the story came out:

[https://tar1090.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ae4bd7](https://tar1090.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ae4bd7)

~~~
ideals
Perhaps you or someone else knows, but I frequent the
[https://tar1090.adsbexchange.com](https://tar1090.adsbexchange.com) website
often and I see unusual tail numbers listed and I can't figure out why they
are listed as such. They may not even be military aircraft but just small
aircraft.

The tail number in this example below is _AE0B60 and registration is n/a

Here's an example screenshot of what I mean
[https://imgur.com/a/A1p4N2c](https://imgur.com/a/A1p4N2c)

Does anyone what this is, or why they don't have 'normal' registration info on
adsb?

~~~
jjwiseman
That's an ICAO/hex code. The transponder ping always includes that
information, and then tar1090 tries to look it up in a database for other
information, like the registration. If it can't find it in the database, then
it just displays the code.

Codes that begin with AE are military aircraft, which don't appear in any
official (e.g. FAA) database. Enthusiasts have built somewhat ad hoc databases
that include many, but not all of the military ICAOs.

------
cheschire
Am I correct in assuming this is actively recording footage that will be
processed later to identify the paths of criminals?

edit: Interesting, I left this post an hour ago and it was getting upvotes,
now it's negative with no negative responses. I wish the down arrow only
worked on posts you replied to first.

~~~
HarryHirsch
You are correct, and you should be more worried about pervasive surveillance
than about the government taking your guns.

~~~
aksss
I'm not sure why the concern has to be mutually exclusive. The magic of "and"
vs the tyranny of "or".

------
king_magic
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.

~~~
petee
Well this is what we get for not listening. If your family and friends were
being executed constantly you'd give up and rage too. Everyone has a breaking
point - republicans were about to riot over wearing a mask to protect their
families; these people are rioting over being murdered and ignored.

Disproportionate and inconsistent application are also a huge issue here -
where were the drones when domestic terrorists took over the statehouse? If
this technology is only going to be used against black people, then yes, it an
incredibly dangerous thing

~~~
ls612
If someone is unhappy about not being listened to and their response is to
burn down half a neighborhood in my city maybe there was a good reason we
weren’t listening to everything they had to say. They don’t seem interested in
reasoning, only in taking what they want by force.

The armed protesters in Michigan were being jackasses but afaik they didn’t
start looting or committing arson (or even hurt anyone for that matter). There
is no equivalence here, it’s just as much a bullshit “both sides” argument as
the one trump made three years ago.

~~~
PeterisP
Well, obviously that's not a reasonable _first_ reaction, but if all the
reasonable avenues of getting people's grievances addressed have not
succeeded, then it's kind of inevitable that it will escalate to unreasonable
responses.

------
projectileboy
It is always, always, always true that when something is sold as protecting
you it actually exists to control you.

------
gok
There's some insane shit happening in Minneapolis but using an unarmed drone
to get a better picture of an unfolding riot doesn't seem...that weird?

------
GekkePrutser
I really respect ADS-B exchange choosing to not block anything like the
commercial alternatives do. Those block anything military and many private
jets etc from their views. Basically anyone who asks is excluded from view.

Of course anyone with a $10 RTLSDR stick can see this info too but ADS-B
exchange make it much more accessible.

------
geggam
At what point does this violate the Possee Comitatus ?

From my perspective militarizing the police crossed the line some time ago

------
jefftk
"The drone flown over Minneapolis is an unarmed version of the aircraft."

------
zaroth
This is almost quaint compared to what Persistent Surveillance Systems is
doing over Baltimore right now.

[https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2020/04/30/aerial...](https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2020/04/30/aerial-
surveillance-planes-to-begin-flying-over.html)

------
sschueller
Can a TV news channel operate one as well?

~~~
kube-system
The requirements for broadcast news are usually satisfied by much cheaper
UAVs.

------
blackrock
Are they going to launch a hellfire missile on these innocent unarmed black
Americans too?

These people are poor, and are just afraid of getting killed and oppressed, by
the predatory capitalistic and systemically racist American system.

------
new_realist
Surveillance of the police by the public is good, police body cams are good,
but airborne public surveillance of everyone is bad? If so, why?

~~~
mywittyname
People shouldn't be surveilled by the government without probable cause.

~~~
vecter
I'm 100% in favor of the protestors' cause, but if you want probable cause,
burning down a police station, housing unit, and nearby businesses certainly
qualifies.

~~~
mywittyname
And what about all the other people caught in the dragnet? Most of whom
presumably did nothing. These people have no idea if they are also being
surveilled. I mean, who knows what else the government is doing "while they're
there."

There are smaller aerial drones that could be used, which would capture the
same _relevant_ footage, without the potentially miles-wide dragnet. That's my
main objection here: innocent people shouldn't have to give up their rights
because the government can justify it. A good justice system would do their
best get the minimum amount of information necessary, in order to protect the
innocent.

------
onetimemanytime
Searching for contraband and illegal aliens no doubt
[https://www.cbp.gov/about](https://www.cbp.gov/about)

------
condesising
I see that there’s a plausible connection, but the phrase “predator drone“ is
a bit of a loaded phrase. While Minneapolis is embroiled in riots, I think
this article may be Stokes paranoia a little bit.

~~~
chasd00
iirc it's the equally poorly named Reaper drone that is armed and the one to
be worried about. The predator drone is basically an R/C police helicopter.

However, people have been freaked out about aerial surveillance for decades.
It gets the clicks.

~~~
pluto9
The MQ-9 Reaper is a larger counterpart to the MQ-1 Predator. They are both
designed for military use, both capable of carrying weapons, and both
appropriately named given their original intended purpose.

They're also both airplanes. Neither of them resemble a helicopter in any way.

