shakedown.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A community for live music fans with roots in the jam scene. Shakedown Social is run by a team of volunteers (led by @clifff and @sethadam1) and funded by donations.

Administered by:

Server stats:

261
active users

#armeddrones

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

Not weaponized...yet!

#DHS Flew #PredatorDrones Over #LAProtests, Audio Shows

by Joseph Cox, Jun 10, 2025

"The Department of Homeland Security (#DHS) flew two high-powered Predator surveillance drones above the #AntiICEProtests in Los Angeles over the weekend, according to air traffic control (ATC) audio unearthed by an aviation tracking enthusiast then reviewed by #404Media and cross-referenced with flight data.

"The use of Predator drones highlights the extraordinary resources government agencies are putting behind surveilling and responding to the Los Angeles protests, which started after ICE agents raided a Home Depot on Friday. President Trump has since called up 4,000 members of the National Guard, and on Monday ordered more than 700 active duty Marines to the city too.

" 'TROY703, traffic 12 o'clock, 8 miles, opposite direction, another 'TROY' Q-9 at FL230,' one part of the ATC audio says. The official name of these types of #PredatorBDrones, made by a company called #GeneralAtomics, is the #MQ9 Reaper.

"On Monday #404Media reported that all sorts of agencies, from local, to state, to DHS, to the military flew aircraft over the Los Angeles protests. That included a DHS Black Hawk, a California Highway Patrol small aircraft, and two aircraft that took off from nearby March Air Reserve Base."

Read more:
404media.co/dhs-flew-predator-

Archived version:
archive.ph/lqELF

404 Media · DHS Flew Predator Drones Over LA Protests, Audio ShowsAir traffic control (ATC) audio unearthed by an aviation tracking enthusiast then reviewed by 404 Media shows two Predator drones leaving, and heading towards, Los Angeles.

Clackers and bolas could also be used in a similar way as nets.

Six ways to disable a #drone

by Hillary Schaub and Darrell M. West
March 16, 2016

"Civilian drone activity has increased exponentially as drones become more easily accessible and affordable. With more drones in the sky every day, there have been some creative and sometimes dangerous attempts to disable drones. The reasons for disabling a drone can vary from boredom and curiosity to privacy and safety concerns. To be clear, the Center for Technology Innovation does not condone or promote the act of harming drones."

Read more:
brookings.edu/articles/six-way

Archived version:
archive.ph/ZDTFN

Brookings · Six ways to disable a droneWith more drones in the sky every day, there have been some creative and dangerous attempts to disable drones. The reasons for disabling a drone can vary from boredom and curiosity to privacy and safety concerns.

#ArmedPoliceDrones Are Coming

Feb. 15, 2022 by Anthony Accurso (originally published in Reason . com)

"It’s not just hobbyists who are exploiting the near-endless potential of unmanned aerial vehicles (#UAVs or '#drones'). Law enforcement from all over the country—most especially federal agencies—are using, or making plans to use, drones to conduct #surveillance and #subdue suspects.

"Americans first became widely aware of drone use by the government in the form of #PredatorUAVs deployed for intelligence and offensive purposes, almost exclusively in the #MiddleEast against 'terrorists.'

"But drone technology has come a long way in the last two decades, with drones getting smaller and being able to carry more added weight than before.

"These advances have allowed them to become the perfect platform upon which law enforcement builds its surveillance programs. Drones can carry sensors for GPS, radar, lidar, range-finding, magnetic fields, chemical and biological sniffers, and, of course, increasingly high-resolution cameras. Federal agencies often attach cell-site simulators to drones—calling them 'dirtboxes' in this use case—to collect digital and cellular data from all unsuspecting citizens in a particular area, not just suspects.

"Further electronics and software innovations have made these sensors more efficient and capable than ever. #PredatorDrones operated by Customs and Border Protection (“#CBP”) are known to use a system called Vehicle and Dismount Exploitation Radar ('#VADER'). VADER implements synthetic aperture radar, a tech trick that uses an aircraft’s motion to minimize the size of the antenna needed to create a high-res map of an area. By comparing these maps moment-by-moment, it creates a 'real-time ground moving target indicator' through 'detecting Doppler shift that moving objects produce in radar return signals.' Like the apex predator in Jurassic Park, these Predators rely on movement to 'see.'

"A company called #PersistentSurveillanceSystems has been operating a similar program, under contract by the #Baltimore olice Department ('BPD'), that uses software to construct a real-time image from photos captured by aircraft-mounted cameras. BPD can then track the (outdoor) movement of every pedestrian or vehicle in a 32-square-mile area. This is ostensibly to track fleeing criminals or generate leads after a crime has occurred.

"While only sensors have been attached to domestic drones so far, the addition of weapons systems appears to be coming. In 2015, #NorthDakota passed a law allowing police to equip drones with #TearGas and #RubberBullets. Also, documents uncovered by the #ElectronicFrontierFoundation show the CBP has suggested adding 'non-lethal weapons designed to immobilize' people to their drones.

"Laws have always lagged behind the constant march of technology, but the rapid development of drones and drone-mounted surveillance systems is set to pilot America into an omnipresent surveillance state where any and all outdoor activity—and maybe indoor ones if we get wall or roof penetrating sensors—is persistently monitored by police."

criminallegalnews.org/news/202

#PredatorClassDrone #ArmedDrones #USPol #PoliceDrones
#DroneWeaponization
#MilitaryState #ACAB #USPol #GlobalPol #Orwell #NineteenEightyFour
#SilencingDissent #Autocracy #Fascism #surveillance #SurveillanceState #PoliceState #WeaponizedDrones

#ArmedDrones and Ethical Policing: Risk, Perception, and the Tele-Present Officer

Christian Enemark, June, 2021

"On 29 May 2020 a #PredatorClassDrone diverted south from its routine patrol of the US–Canadian border and then circled in the sky above the city of Minneapolis for around three hours. Public protests were under way there following the killing of George Floyd by local police officer Derek Chauvin four days previously. The remotely controlled aircraft, operated by US Customs and Border Protection (#CBP), carried no weapons, but it had a mounted camera for transmitting video footage of events on the ground. It was reportedly deployed to Minneapolis to 'aid in situational awareness' at the request of 'federal law enforcement partners.'

"Later, however, thirty-five members of Congress criticized this use of a military-grade drone to surveil protesters inside the United States, arguing that such surveillance could be unduly intimidating and could have an unwelcome 'chilling effect' on participation in public life.

"The deployment for a law enforcement purpose of such a large drone (capable of bearing heavy payloads and flying at high altitudes for long periods) was nevertheless exceptional. Usually, in the United States and elsewhere, a 'police drone' means a small, short-range, multirotor aircraft of the kind produced by civilian manufacturers and widely available commercially. But the use of these drones has generated concerns about the intrusiveness of police surveillance and its impact on individual privacy and freedoms, too. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, police agencies in several countries used drones equipped with cameras (and sometimes loudspeakers) to monitor and enforce public compliance with social distancing rules. Sometimes, this prompted accusations that aerial surveillance in locked-down societies was breaching people's privacy rights and exacerbating a 'police state' atmosphere. The intrusiveness and privacy implications of (unarmed) drone use is an important and well-canvassed ethical issue on its own. It arises in the context of numerous other technological developments with policing applications including, for example, closed-circuit television, long-range audio sensors, and online financial transaction monitoring.

"In this article, however, the focus of attention is the potential use by police of small drones equipped with weapons as well as cameras, and the concern for human rights extends to the right to life which underpins ethical principles restraining police use of force. During the last two decades, armed drones have been extensively deployed over foreign territories, mainly by the US government. Drone strikes involving guided missiles have been carried out as part of armed conflicts in, for example, Afghanistan and Iraq. In this war paradigm, principles of military ethics (which underpin international humanitarian law) are applicable and these traditionally afford a broad moral permission for killing. By contrast, in non-war situations, where state violence is instead wielded within the peacetime paradigm of law enforcement, a more stringent morality based on human rights is applicable. According to several analyses of foreign drone use, the intentionally lethal use of armed drones 'outside armed conflict' is likely to offend those rights, because the conventional restrictions on using force for law enforcement purposes are difficult to satisfy.

"In a domestic context, too, a drone-based targeted killing carried out by a government would likely be an abuse of human rights in the form of an extrajudicial execution. However, even if the violent use of a drone to perform a punitive law enforcement function is impermissible for this reason, it remains to be considered whether an armed drone could properly be used as part of a state's protective (policing) effort to enforce the law. When former US president Barack Obama insisted that none of his successors should 'deploy armed drones over U.S. soil,' he was probably envisaging large (Predator-sized) drones launching Hellfire missiles with deliberately deadly effect. This differs, though, from a scenario in which a police officer's intention is not (or not solely) to kill and where they are using a drone armed, for example, with weapons not designed to be lethal. In such circumstances, it is worth asking: how (if at all) might the use of an armed drone satisfy the ethical principles that guide police use of force? And when (if ever) might it be morally permissible for police to use an armed drone against a criminal suspect or to protect public safety?

"This article explores such questions by first describing the utility of drone technology for police purposes and then outlining the ethical principles that traditionally guide and restrain police use of force. These principles inform the subsequent discussion of ethical challenges an officer is likely to face when remotely controlling an armed, camera-equipped drone. Drone use promises to reduce police exposure to danger, and this seems likely sometimes to yield the benefit of reduced risk of harm (caused by fearful officers) to criminal suspects and innocent bystanders. Weighing against this benefit, however, is the increased risk to the latter associated with any perception problems experienced by distanced police officers, as well as the risk that police remoteness might make public cooperation with policing efforts more difficult to achieve. At the time of writing, there have been no reports of armed drones being violently deployed by police anywhere in the world. Even so, as the next section shows, the requisite technology already exists, and some corporations, legislators, and non-government organizations have begun to anticipate the advent of police drone weaponization."

Read more:
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/

PubMed Central (PMC)Armed Drones and Ethical Policing: Risk, Perception, and the Tele-Present OfficerEthical analysis of armed drones has to date focused heavily on their use in foreign wars or counterterrorism operations, but it is important also to consider the potential use of armed drones in domestic law enforcement. Governments around the ...

If you think #ACAB now, wait'll the #KillerRobot police drones come out. Time to work on our portable EMP device skills [jammers won't work on autonomous drones] -- link in thread...

I don't believe this bill passed, but that's not to say a similar bill won't go through in the future...

#Connecticut may approve the use of lethally armed drones for police departments

The original bill wasn't supposed to allow this.

Chris Tognotti
Posted on Apr 2, 2017, Updated on May 24, 2021

"Lawmakers in the state of Connecticut have approved a bill through the judiciary committee which would allow police departments to use lethally-armed drones, capable of firing bullets from mid-air. It’s hugely controversial, and it could pave the way for Connecticut to become the first state to make use of live-ammunition armed police drones. The bill still awaits votes in the state’s House and Senate, where it will be met with further scrutiny.

The use of drones by police departments is already allowed in Connecticut, but equipping them with lethal weapons would be setting a striking new precedent. Weaponized drones are currently in use by police departments in North Dakota, but not with lethal armaments—the #NorthDakota law only allows for 'less than lethal' arms like rubber bullets, stun grenades, and tasers (although such things can sometimes cause fatal or grievous injuries).

"The Connecticut bill is actually designed to prohibit the use of guns attached to drones, but it was amended in committee to exempt police departments, thus tacitly enabling their use by law enforcement. In other words, a bill that was initially intended to prevent drones from being equipped with guns may now function as a backdoor for the police to do just that.

"Conversely, as CBS News reports, representatives of both the NAACP and ACLU have voiced dire concern about the potential abuses of armed drones. Scot X. Esdaile of the NAACP’s Connecticut chapter cited 'huge concerns that they would use this new technology to abuse our communities,' while the executive director of the Connecticut ACLU, David McGuire, said, 'We would be setting a dangerous precedent. It is really concerning and outrageous that that’s being considered in our state legislature. Lethal force raises this to a level of real heightened concern.'"

Full article:
dailydot.com/debug/connecticut

The Daily Dot · Connecticut lawmakers are considering potentially deadly additions to police dronesThe original bill wasn't supposed to allow this.

2018: A Global Arms Race for Killer Robots Is Transforming the Battlefield

"The meeting comes at a critical juncture. In July [2018], Kalashnikov, the main defense contractor of the Russian government, announced it was developing a weapon that uses neural networks to make 'shoot-no shoot' decisions. In January 2017, the U.S. Department of Defense released a video showing an autonomous drone swarm of 103 individual robots successfully flying over California. Nobody was in control of the drones; their flight paths were choreographed in real-time by an advanced algorithm. The drones “are a collective organism, sharing one distributed brain for decision-making and adapting to each other like swarms in nature,” a spokesman said. The drones in the video were not weaponized — but the technology to do so is rapidly evolving.

"[April 2018] also marks five years since the launch of the International Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, which called for 'urgent action to preemptively ban the lethal robot weapons that would be able to select and attack targets without any human intervention.' The 2013 launch letter — signed by a Nobel Peace Laureate and the directors of several NGOs — noted that they could be deployed within the next 20 years and would 'give machines the power to decide who lives or dies on the battlefield.'"

Read more:
time.com/5230567/killer-robots

Time · A Global Arms Race for Killer Robots Is Transforming the BattlefieldBy Billy Perrigo