News

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 6177 08-03-2012 03:36 PM

A North Dakota court has preliminarily upheld the first-ever use of an unmanned drone to assist in the arrest of an American citizen.

A judge denied a request to dismiss charges Wednesday against Rodney Brossart, a man arrested last year after a 16-hour standoff with police at his Lakota, N.D., ranch. Brossart's lawyer argued that law enforcement's "warrantless use of [an] unmanned military-like surveillance aircraft" and "outrageous governmental conduct" warranted dismissal of the case, according to court documents obtained by U.S. News.

[Photo Gallery: The Expansion of the Drone]

District Judge Joel Medd wrote that "there was no improper use of an unmanned aerial vehicle" and that the drone "appears to have had no bearing on these charges being contested here," according to the documents.

Court records state that last June, six cows wandered onto Brossart's 3,000 acre farm, about 60 miles west of Grand Forks. 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," according to the court documents.

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.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012...an-citizen

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 112516 08-03-2012 03:41 PM

LoP Guest Wrote:

A North Dakota court has preliminarily upheld the first-ever use of an unmanned drone to assist in the arrest of an American citizen.

A judge denied a request to dismiss charges Wednesday against Rodney Brossart, a man arrested last year after a 16-hour standoff with police at his Lakota, N.D., ranch. Brossart's lawyer argued that law enforcement's "warrantless use of [an] unmanned military-like surveillance aircraft" and "outrageous governmental conduct" warranted dismissal of the case, according to court documents obtained by U.S. News.

[Photo Gallery: The Expansion of the Drone]

District Judge Joel Medd wrote that "there was no improper use of an unmanned aerial vehicle" and that the drone "appears to have had no bearing on these charges being contested here," according to the documents.

Court records state that last June, six cows wandered onto Brossart's 3,000 acre farm, about 60 miles west of Grand Forks. 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," according to the court documents.

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.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012...an-citizen

a free country....just imagine how native indians must have felt

**raisinbread**

I foresee a shitload more of this in the future. Coming soon to a neighborhood near YOU.

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 62850 08-03-2012 03:49 PM

raisinbread Wrote:

I foresee a shitload more of this in the future. Coming soon to a neighborhood near YOU.

I...doubt it. Why? Because they are too expensive to operate compared to traditional methods (at least the "fancy" ones). Kind of like the "monitoring speed from aircraft" lines they have on highways. They're not going to spend 20k for the plane maintenance to write you a 100 dollar ticket.

Though they might scale down the costs through using cheaper technology and then it's going to be a problem.

**raisinbread**

Gov. cares nothing of spending. They have them in the skies now. Soon we will be seeing these on the news everyday. "A drone strike stopped yet another terrorist before they could harm anyone. The hellfire missile cause minor collateral damage to the neighbors houses" and they have reported "It's nice to see we are safe because of them." Then a couple of years later after being fully integrated into society .The video was faked and witnesses were planted because the neighbors died in the explosion. Then more fake evidence using other fake videos too show how safe they are and how they have been a god send to the safety of the citizens.
This happens in other countries that the drones bomb, but I guess since this is America it won't happen here right?

**Flat**

The drone wasn't used in evidence gathering or anything. It was there to ensure police safety.

We could still see future judges ruling against drones. At least in the way that limits their ability to gather evidence used in trials.

This event doesn't seem to any sort of standing statute, or anything.

"District Judge Joel Medd wrote that "there was no improper use of an unmanned aerial vehicle" and that the drone "appears to have had no bearing on these charges being contested here," according to the documents."
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012...an-citizen

**Currahee**

So they put the drone in the air to make sure the guy wasn't armed.

Was the drone armed? Hiding

**STOPPITT**

**smerve**

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 107647 08-03-2012 07:54 PM

LoP Guest Wrote:

raisinbread Wrote:
I foresee a shitload more of this in the future. Coming soon to a neighborhood near YOU.

I...doubt it. Why? Because they are too expensive to operate compared to traditional methods (at least the "fancy" ones). Kind of like the "monitoring speed from aircraft" lines they have on highways. They're not going to spend 20k for the plane maintenance to write you a 100 dollar ticket.

Though they might scale down the costs through using cheaper technology and then it's going to be a problem.

**Caseman1967**

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzOV9VMnaDc
NDAA says the Gov can do what they want, when they want regarding your privacy. Does this fall under the unreasonable search part of the 4th?

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 97775 08-03-2012 09:46 PM

Hey, if thats how they wish to go, thats fine... But dont expect a safe society thats for damn sure.

**LoP Guest** lop guest User ID: 103796 08-03-2012 10:05 PM

raisinbread Wrote:

I foresee a shitload more of this in the future. Coming soon to a neighborhood near YOU.

Read the words of this military operator of these drones and just think, there's an entire generation who are already tuned into violent killing video games:

"In a profile piece in the New York Times on Monday, interviews with military operators of US drones operating in the skies over Afghanistan and Pakistan reveal a class of pilots who remotely control the targeted killings of human beings thousands of miles away.

“I see mothers with children, I see fathers with children, I see fathers with mothers, I see kids playing soccer,” says Colonel Brenton, one of the pilots profiled who works out of a dark control room in the suburbs of Syracuse, New York.

But, when it comes to engaging the target and after stipulating this means that the children and mothers away from the fire zone -- for example, "out at the market" -- he says: "I feel no emotional attachment to the enemy. I have a duty, and I execute the duty.”

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/07/30-0

**raisinbread**

LoP Guest Wrote:

raisinbread Wrote:
I foresee a shitload more of this in the future. Coming soon to a neighborhood near YOU.

Read the words of this military operator of these drones and just think, there's an entire generation who are already tuned into violent killing video games:

"In a profile piece in the New York Times on Monday, interviews with military operators of US drones operating in the skies over Afghanistan and Pakistan reveal a class of pilots who remotely control the targeted killings of human beings thousands of miles away.

“I see mothers with children, I see fathers with children, I see fathers with mothers, I see kids playing soccer,” says Colonel Brenton, one of the pilots profiled who works out of a dark control room in the suburbs of Syracuse, New York.

But, when it comes to engaging the target and after stipulating this means that the children and mothers away from the fire zone -- for example, "out at the market" -- he says: "I feel no emotional attachment to the enemy. I have a duty, and I execute the duty.”

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/07/30-0

That's not very comforting to know but not surprising.
I guess playing battlefield or modern warfare can now be used on an application, "Here check my stats."

**TurtleCreeWoman**

I'm from North Dakota. He lived on a huge place, might not of seen his neighbors cattle yet even. If police came out they should of told him to drive out and look and report it if he finds anything. If that got no timely results then go get a warrant.

Now I know they been getting hit with some crime out in the sticks. People stealing farm equipment that takes up more than a lane. Still folks get along more. Seams odd that someone would call the police instead of just going over to see if the neighbor would assist in looking. Never heard of police being control freaks anywhere with people much.

There might be more to this, maybe they turn up missing and had problems before. Maybe they checked there fence daily and felt it was foul play. still seams odd they did not handle it better.