[HTML1]
“Last June, six cows wandered onto [Rodney] Brossart’s 3,000 acre farm, about 60 miles west of Grand Forks,” usnews.com reports. “Brossart allegedly refused to return the cows, which led to a long, armed standoff with the Grand Forks police department. At some point during the standoff, Homeland Security, through an agreement with local police, offered up the use of an unmanned Predator drone, which ‘was used for surveillance.'” Brossart’s lawyer argued that his client’s case should be dropped given the “warrantless use of [an] unmanned military-like surveillance aircraft.” District Judge Joel Medd dismissed his objection as irrelevant and allowed Brossart’s prosecution for felony terrorizing (etc.) to proceed. You do know these drones can be/are armed, right?
District Judge Joel Medd dismissed his objection as irrelevant and allowed Brossart’s prosecution for felony terrorizing
So it is terrorism if you don’t return cows which wander on to your land now? And who needs warrants? It would just keep the judge from using his penis pump.
For more cynical coverage & commentary:
http://teapartyeconomist.com/2012/08/03/police-with-a-drone-dont-need-a-warrant-in-north-dakota/
so can helicopters. do you have a problem with unarmed helicopters operated by police? cars can be fitted with armaments too, should the police not be able to use unarmed motor vehicles? you’re argument is retarded.
Brossart faces felony terrorizing and theft of property charges…
So it is terrorism now if some cows wander on to your property?
Grand Forks SWAT team chief Bill Macki said in an interview that the drone was used to ensure Brossart and his family members, who were also charged, didn’t leave the farm and were unarmed during the arresting raid.
How does using a drone ensure that people don’t leave a fixed place, or are unarmed? I never knew they were tethered to suspects, or that they can see thru buildings.
“How does using a drone ensure that people don’t leave a fixed place, or are unarmed?”
They are called cameras. They take pictures, sometimes they take moving pictures. They didn’t duct tape an iPhone to the bottom of the drone. it has a whole suite of IR and Hi Def cameras attached to it.
A drone doesnt ensure they are anything, it merely allows them to observe. And if they were unarmed, then how were they a threat warranting use of drone?
This is a tough one for me but to me a drone you don’t know is there is more akin to a wiretap or search (which requires a court order) than a loud and obvious chopper.
The defense argument was specious, to say the least. As far as I can tell, the police committed no trespass and violated no right of privacy, so I don’t see a 4th Amendment issue. Assuming there was a 4th Amendment violation, that would lead to exclusion of evidence acquired through the use of the drone, but not an automatic dismissal.
I guess that defense counsel was trying to create a new “Drone Exception” to the law of common sense.
Do I know? Hell, my client makes them! You ought to see the hi-def video we can shoot, too!
More proof that beef prices are about to go sky high.
it can be armed, but was it.
GET TO THE CHOPPA!
If it bleeds, we can kill it.
Brossart’s a common criminal resisting arrest and putting others at risk. You anti-LEO, anti-government nutters might not like it, but they should have punched his ticket. The drone use was fine.
“Trust us, we know what’s best for you and yours”……..
Sheeple much???
Some well placed “AA” on his farm woulda went a long way to fixing the “eye” in the sky….
What is the deal with this website’s anti-government, anti-police crazy tinfoil hat posting lately? Did some menial government worker piss in your cheerio’s? The farmer was trying to rustle cattle, in Texas that is a 3rd degree felony. (Up to 10 years in jail, up to $10,000 fine) The Sheriff confronted the suspected cattle thief, and arrested the family patriarch and his daughter who attacked the cops. Then three guys pulled guns on the Sheriff and his deputies and refused to return the cows. They used the UAV to preform surveillance on the suspects and waited till they put down their weapons to SWAT the guys and capture the retards without killing them. This should be an IGOTD story, but you focus on the fact that they used an unarmed UAV to preform surveillance instead of a helicopter.
you’ve called it right irock. i came to this site about 6 weeks ago by accident. i was thinking it would be a site for intelligent talks about firearms. but this constant circle jerk about cops, soldiers and the government has got me wondering if this sitr is just an infowars wannabe. too bad really, but i’ll keep looking til i find a legit gun blog.
I’ve felt the same way on many occasions. TTAG has a considerable anti-government / anti – police bias. You would think, after reading most of the articles, that the police are nothing but incompetent boobs firing their weapons off in a negligent manner while abusing authority and spitting on the constitution. That certainly does happen, bits it’s damn disturbing to hear this bias when police do a good job. It makes gun owners look nuts.
irock, look closely and you’ll find the rejected LEO-application behind the most egregious nutters among the commenters.
I’ve thought that on a number of occasions.
All babbleing nonsense aside, the big issue here is the use of military aircraft to help enforce civilian law, in violation of Posse Comitatus. Just because the USAF handed the Predator over to DHS first, and I am sure got it back right after, doesn’t get around that law. If we now have DHS spending billions on unmanned drones as well, then we have a HUGE problem with our new KGB agency getting too big for it’s charter. Also, why are FEDERAL assets being called in on what is, at best, a local or State Police level crime? This is what happens when the definition of “terrorism” gets redefined for political purposes. This guy wasn’t a terrorist, he commited some BS little STATE felonies and got nailed for it.
v. 26, he got nailed without being nailed. everyone was still alive at the end of the event. left to their own assets maybe the locals would have had to go to plan b which could have, and i stress could have, led to a much grimmer outcome. maybe the sight of the drone is why the cow thieves put their weapons aside.
“the big issue here is the use of military aircraft to help enforce civilian law, in violation of Posse Comitatus.”
– To bad CBP falls under DHS which is not DoD, therefore it is not military.
Coasties also falls under DHS with CBP and they both issue M4’s (ZOMG MILITARY CARBINES)
to their agents. Are you going to claim Posse Comitatus for the gear they arm themselves with?
“Just because the USAF handed the Predator over to DHS first,
and I am sure got it back right after, doesn’t get around that law.”
– CBP has enough budget they don’t have to buy hand-me-downs, they can contract UAV’s to fit their needs
“If we now have DHS spending billions on unmanned drones as well,
then we have a HUGE problem with our new KGB agency getting too big for it’s charter.”
– So you’d rather them spend even more money to employ scores more agents to cover massive land areas when a UAV can loiter for extended periods and is only limited by it’s fuel capacity and the fatigue of it’s pilot, can monitor a larger area as well as provide eyes in the sky for ground agents and can operate at 100% efficiency night or day?
“Also, why are FEDERAL assets being called in on what is,
at best, a local or State Police level crime?”
– It’s called inter-agency co-operation, would you help your neighbor when they have a rat infestation?
“This is what happens when the definition of “terrorism” gets redefined for political purposes.”
– Definitely terrorism, good thing they sent the Marines in.
“This guy wasn’t a terrorist, he commited some BS little STATE felonies and got nailed for it.”
– Once again, good thing the Marines handled it.
Comments are closed.