Read the following article:
http://www.khou.com/story/news/local/2015/04/16/eye-in-the-sky-local-constables-using-drones-to-fight-crime/25902677/
Answer the following questions relating to the article:
1. In what city does this story take place?
2. Why would the ACLU get involved with this case?
3. Explain what "indiscriminate mass surveillance" is.
4. To what current law enforcement practice does Rosen compare the drone usage? Do you agree? Why or why not?
5. Can this technology be used without a search warrant? Explain whether you agree or disagree with this policy.
Jon Owens
ReplyDelete1.This takes place in Harris County, Texas.
2. They would get involved because they want to be sure that these drones do not violate anyones privacy rights.
3. Indiscriminate mass surveillance is when the government is able to peep through every ones emails and tap phone lines and other private messages.
4. He compares it to helicopters. I dont agree because that the drone can get up close and personal to some ones house without stepping on their property.
5. Yes they can search without a warrant. I disagree with this policy because who's to say what is suspicious or not? Why should any one spy on anyone just because they think somethings going on. It could be as simple as a misunderstanding and then some innocent minority is thrown in jail.
Anna Williams
ReplyDelete1. The story takes place in Harris.
2. They got involved because the drone does not need to track every move everyone makes.
3. Indiscriminate mass surveillance is when they do not have a reason to look for evidence but rather just look whenever they want.
4. they compare the drone to helicopters because they operate the same way, but they cannot fly over 400 feet without a FAA license.
5. Yes, it can be used without a search warrant. I feel if they have suspicion of an incident then they should be able to use to drones in order to help get a search warrant.
Anna Williams
ReplyDelete1. The story takes place in Harris.
2. They got involved because the drone does not need to track every move everyone makes.
3. Indiscriminate mass surveillance is when they do not have a reason to look for evidence but rather just look whenever they want.
4. they compare the drone to helicopters because they operate the same way, but they cannot fly over 400 feet without a FAA license.
5. Yes, it can be used without a search warrant. I feel if they have suspicion of an incident then they should be able to use to drones in order to help get a search warrant.
Kalee Jones...
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2. People thin this will invade their personal lives, but the ACLU explains its purpose.
3.This means it will not spy on certain races or genders , it will only be used for appropriate cases.
4. SWAT. Yes i do agree because its very secretive, and during emergency break ins, this drone can quickly get in and out with tons of information.
5. No. I think it is acceptable because they aren't just going to send a drone to watch you if you're not a suspect. If you are a suspect, they will come watch for you.
Jordan Twilley
ReplyDelete1. The story takes place within Harris County.
2. The ACLU does not want a surveillanced society.
3. Surveillance done with a majority of people, or publicly, without judgment,
4. Rosen compares drone usage to fighting crime. I do not agree. Although I do not break the law constantly, I believe it is a violation of our privacy,
5. I believe there should be a search warrant used because it does invade our privacy. We already have government watching what we do or do not do on our phones, internet, etc. If drones were to come into effect our every move could be dteremined differently as we wanted it to be. Privacy is something everyone should have,
1. This article takes place in Harris County.
ReplyDelete2. The drones may invade privacy and make the world conform into a "surveillance society".
3. Indiscriminate mass surveillance means that the drone surveillance will be large scale and will affect everyone.
4. He compares the drone usage to helicopters, although I disagree because drones are different because they are much quieter.
5. I agree that the drones should be used without a search warrant because I think it would be critical in finding evidence before making a claim on a case. This will prevent any false accusations because all of the proof of crime or potential wrongdoings will be caught before it gets out of hand. I think it will make the world safer, if the power is not abused.
Jaida Minor
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2. They get involved because the drone might invade too much privacy.
3. That the drones will only be used for evidence and nothing else
4. Environmental investigation; Yes I agree cause it could help with a lot of crimes that is happening today! Along with the killing of unarmed men, escaping inmates, and etc.
5. This will be good for investigation but however, I do feel as if it is invading someone's privacy especially if these people are innocent.
Lizzie Walker
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2. They are concerned with people's privacy and not becoming a "surveillance society".
3. It means thats everyone is being watched, whether they know it or not.
4. They compare it to a helicopter. I think it's kind of like it in that it can fly similarly to a helicopter. It doesn't go to the heights of a helicopter or is as big or loud as a helicopter.
5. It can be used without a search warrant and I agree with this if they have a reason to be using it. I don't think they should be able to just randomly fly them when they want, though.
Angel Wynn
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2. They are worried about privacy concerns.
3. "Indiscriminate mass surveillance" is when the government is tracking everybody's movements and invading privacy.
4. He compares it to a helicopter. Yes, I agree because it it basically the samething but the people are not technically there.
5. No, because there are still laws and these laws should be followed. Just because it is a drone it doesn't make it any different. These drones could possibly be a mode of invading somebody's privacy. There still should still be a search warrant even if a drone is to be used.
Angel Harris
ReplyDelete1. In what city does this story take place?
Harris County
2. Why would the ACLU get involved with this case?
Because of privacy matters.
3. Explain what "indiscriminate mass surveillance" is.
when the government is tracking everyone's movement
4. To what current law enforcement practice does Rosen compare the drone usage? Do you agree? Why or why not?
He compares the drone to a helicopter. Yes, I agree, the only difference is that they are not technically there but are watching from some other place.
5. Can this technology be used without a search warrant? Explain whether you agree or disagree with this policy.
No, it still needs to abide by the law. If they do not have a search warrant, then the drone should not search a place. I think this new "drone" is only good for jail and prison use only.
Sidnie O'Neal
ReplyDelete1. Houston
2. With the drones being able to legally fly and record everything for surveillance use in criminal cases comes privacy concerns.
3. random surveillance in large quantities.
4. Rosen compares drones to helicopters. I qualify with Rosen due to the fact that yes, they are both flying objects that record people and their actions, but drones seem to be more of a "constant" thing whereas helicopters only come out when people "feel" like flying the helicopter or when the helicopter is needed in order to look over shopping malls on black Friday, view wrecks or car chases, etc.
5. I think that drones should only be used like a helicopter. They should not have the ability to go into people's houses unless a search warrant was issued. Going into the privacy of one's home to search for anything that could be used in a legal case requires police officers to have a search warrant unless the owner willingly allows them to enter and search. Therefore if drones were to be like "flying policemen" and search the homes of possible suspects then they should have the same requirements as policemen.
Maya Turner
ReplyDelete1. This takes place in Harris County, Texas.
2. They would get involved because it involves getting into a civilian's privacy and it's moving toward a more surveillanced society.
3. Surveillance at all times,even when the person does not know, for everyone.
4. A helicopter, and I don't agree they're the same because helicopters are not ALWAYS in use. Drones would be in the air at all times.
5. Yes because I believe the drone will only be used outside so it won't be in the privacy of your own. So I believe it should be fine without a search warrant.
Carrie-Grace Gardino
ReplyDelete1. This story takes place in Harris County.
2. The ACLU would get involved with this case because it has the potential to be a case for invasion of privacy. Also, to make sure that no ones rights are violated with the use of this new technology.
3. This is a when a gadget or anything that the law enforcement uses to help gather information can intrude on someone's privacy. It can also be argued that they are obtaining information where cameras do not have the right to be.
4. He compares this drone usage to a helicopter. I do agree that it is very similar to a helicopter and would be useful for law enforcement and the society. I think that although this could be seen as an invasion of privacy, it could also be very useful to obtain footage of certain things that would not ordinarily been able to be seen.
5. I agree that this can be used without a search warrant. I think that this can be useful for law enforcement and the society to help make it a safer place. I think this allows law enforcement to obtain footage that would not ordinarily be seen. While some may argue that it is an invasion of privacy, I think that if they weren't doing anything wrong then they shouldn't have anything to hide or be worried.
Emylee
ReplyDelete1. Houston, Texas
2. To ensure privacy is kept among citizens and they are not being monitored
3. videos of a large group of people that doesn't target a specific race, religion or ethnicity.
4. Helicopters. No, I don't agree because helicopters aren't monitoring every move or anything like that, and they're way to far to see what everyone is doing, but the drones are closer and are almost like monitors for people.
5.I would say no, it couldn't be used without a search warrant, because it can show private information or situations which shouldn't be recorded in the first place and especially if the one on video doesn't know about it, then they should be informed about it before it is used against them.
Adrianna Boyd
ReplyDelete1. Houston
2. ACLU is an organization that defends the individual rights of every person. They are involved because they believe drones will bring us closer to a surveillance society and should only be used to collect evidence about a criminal's wrongdoing.
3. Monitoring of Internet/phone without evidence of wrongdoing.
4. Search warrants and looking for escaped inmates. I agree because it's bettering society and keeping people safe.
5. Yes; disagree because it's retrieving information without getting permission and seeing if its okay to search.
Will Larsen
ReplyDelete1. Houston Texas
2. Privacy concerns of people always under surveillance.
3. It is when someone is constantly spying on you for no apparent reason and it isalmost like someone is stalking you with the amount of info they share.
4. helicopter. No a helicopter does not constantly spy on you silently. You can here a helicopter and drones constantly record you.
5. Right now it can be. But I do not think it should be. People are being monitored over nothing and they are causing more trouble with spying then they are with just getting evidence when the FBI needs it.
1) Houston, Texas
ReplyDelete2) To make sure that the device could not be overpowering.
3) Watching over a large amount of people without discrimination
4) Helicopter. No it is capable of more than just a helicopter.
5) No. This is a type of spy, and that is only granted with a search warrant. It is an invasion of privacy without a good reason.
Nicholas Ratliff
ReplyDelete1) the story takes place in Huston Texas
2)the ACLU believes it is an invasion of privacy to use the drone.
3) It is the surveillance of large groups of random people without them knowing.
4)they compare it to using a helicopter, yes I think it is the same thing one is just a lot smaller.
5) no like any other search they need a warrant but I think the use of a drone can be very useful and should be used by law enforcement everywhere.
Amber C. Price
ReplyDelete1.The story takes place in Harris County.
2.The ACLU gets involved because they believe the drones will be invading people's right of privacy.
3. Indiscriminate mass surveillance is when a lot of people are being monitored at random times without knowing.
4. Rosen compares the drone usage to helicopters by using the same rules and also compared to the video in a police car that gets thrown away after 90 days if not in a investigation and i agree as long as the video gets put away and not out in the public invading people's privacy and only used to catch and solve crimes.
5.I think it could be used without a search warrant so people can be caught doing crime and help solve cases by catching them off guard but it would also invade people's privacy by recording people without their permission which will cause many uproars even if it will help the public with having less crime.
1. The story takes place in Harris county.
ReplyDelete2. Because because it is a Civil liberty to have freedom and they believe the drone may violate that right.
3. Where everyone is under surveillance regardless of if they are guilty or accused.
4.Helicopters. I think it is completely moral and almost like helicopters. It is less detectable, but helicopters also can not go into private places, just like this drone.
5. I believe it can be used publicly in any place as long as it does not violate the privacy of someone in their own home. Just like how recording of any public place is legal, but doing it without permission in a private place is not.
1. Harris County
ReplyDelete2. Because the case dealt with the privacy of the American public
3 . surveillance of everyone without a filter of what is necessary and what is not
4. He says they are the same as helicopters. I do not believe a it is the same as a helicopter because you can hear a helicopter, also a helicopter doesn't spy on you just because a police officer says it's ok.
5. I wholeheartedly disagree with this policy. The police do not have the right to spy on all of the American people. If they actually did there job and investigated like they should instead of using there methids intimidating people and violating human rights like the right to privacy which this case deals with, the drones would not even be necessary. We as citizens of the United States are continually violated by these acts of disconcern towards our privacy and allowing something like this to pass will only make us one step closer to having cameras in our own houses. Always being watched.
Caitlin Lavender
ReplyDelete1. the story takes place in Harris county.
2. Because its prohibited to use flying surveillance cameras to search crime scenes.
3. It's when the police take a mass inventory over a crime scene.
4. a helicopter. no because a helicopter has men looking down on crime scenes while the drones are more robots than anything else.
5.no because it's an invasion of privacy.
Ashby Shelley
ReplyDelete1. The article takes place in Harris County
2. It is prohibited to use flying surveillance cameras to search crime scenes.
3. Police take an inventory of a crime scene.
4. I don't think it is the same as a helicopter because you can hear helicopters, and a helicopter does not spy on you.
5. I completely disagree. Police should not have any kind of right to spy on the American people. Some police officers would totally take advantage of it and take it way to far and it will cause a great ordeal. It is not right and it invades our privacy.
Drew Forrester
ReplyDelete1st period
1.) This story takes place in Harris County, Texas.
2.) The ACLU takes part in this case because the use of police drones to gain intel seems like it's pushing too close to us being a "surveillance society."
3.) "Indiscriminate mass surveillance" is the surveillance of the population without their consent.
4.) He compared it to a case in Montgomery where a drone crashed, but he says that the drones are programmed to return to where it was launched and that it's okay to use drones since their data is deleted 90 days after acquiring it. As long as the data is deleted within that time period, it seems like it's not a major breach of privacy.
5.) This technology shouldn't be used without a search warrant, but it can be. I disagree with this policy at least because it can be used in a creepy way of it is in the wrong hands.
Mi'Asia Barclay
ReplyDelete1. the story takes place in Harris county.
2.its prohibited to use flying surveillance cameras to search crime scenes.
3. Watching over a large amount of people without discrimination
4. Helicopter. No it is capable of more than just a helicopter.
5. I believe there should be a search warrant used because it does invade our privacy. The government already watch us as American Citizens and this would draw the line and maybe some people would sue the government.
Sarah Snyder
ReplyDelete1.Harris County
2. They got involved because it was invading peoples privacy.
3. When many people are being watched, that are innocent and are not aware.
4.He says that the helicopter is just like the drone. yes they are both watching people, but i think that drones invade more privacy.
5. Yes they can, and i think that is wrong. No one should be allowed to video tape you unless you are aware, unless it is a criminal.
Brittany Davidson 4/24/15
ReplyDelete1) This takes place in Harris county.
2) ACLU would get involved because they didn't want the drones to be violating someones privacy.
3) Indiscriminate mass surveillance is when the police is able to look beyond a crime scene. They are able to tap into someones else life like going through emails and tracking phones.
4) He compares it to a helicopter. No, because people need there own privacy and for this to go around peeping in on people it is not fair. I understand they are trying to make the America a safer place but this is a little too far.
5) Yes they can search without a warrant but it is still unfair for people to get spied on because the police are to lazy to do their job. Yes, sometimes police officers are not always as fast as the criminal but they just can't go around snooping on other people.
My Luu
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2 The ACLU is involved with this case because they believe that the drones should be prohibited unless it is use by police that believe they will collect evidence relating to a specific criminal situation or emergencies.
3. Indiscriminate mass surveillance is a like situation when a black person is accusing a white police for discriminate them. With the surveillance, the black person can't accuse the white police for being racist.
4. The $250,000 drone that crashed into the lake. No, because accidents are common.
5. I agree because I think that the police department should do anything they possible can for our society to have a safe environment. For example, wearing surveillance camera on their body is an acceptable act because nobody would end up accusing them for discrimination.
Melody Ashcraft
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2. To make sure they do not invade the personal space/rights that we Americans have
3. It's when a lot of people are being monitored even if they have not done anything suspicious
4. He compares it to a helicopter. I do not agree because due to the size of drones, they are able to get more up close and personal than a helicopter.
5. I do not believe it should be able to used without a search warrant because it is an invasion of privacy. We should not have to worry about the government tracking our every mood.
Micaela Tierce
ReplyDelete1. Harris County
2. It is prohibited to use flying camera devices in use of crime scenes.
3. It is when the police take a very large inventory over a crime scene
4. A helicopter. I do not think they are the same because a drone is made specifically for collecting data and taking detailed pictures of the target.
5. No, the police do not have the right to keep eyes on American people because it violates our rights to privacy