Drones: how much longer will it take...

Not an argument, just a quick scan of how this technology has become problematic.



It did.



Yeah, how'd you like to be in your back yard and one of those comes crashing down on you?

You missed the point. Obviously assault-styled weapons with high capacity magazines are, at this point, more dangerous than civilian drones. The similarity is the eagerness with which the manufacturers marketed both products to the general public under the assumption that they would, of course, never be used irresponsibly.

I'm done here.

Walkie talkies were also "marketed under the assumption they would never be used irresponsibly".

What is the difference between drones and walkie talkies?

you have to thro the walkie talkie to hit something or mess with air traffic.

Quite the contrary Farmerman. Walkie talkies are military devices that can absolutely interfere with air traffic.

Walkie talkies have also been used as IEDs to kill thousands.

Ill concede in the fashion youve brought up. Im not really sure what a walkie talkie even is. I use a cell phone whenever I make my IEDs.

Drones carry 2- way com as well as being fit with lasers (OUR LIDAR drone has anywhere from 1 to 120 separate pulsed laser beams). That baby could do a lot of damage to shut down Dulles before someone even got their phone lit or "walkie talkie" within range.

but I wasnt looking to start a "Big dick" contest.

You could strap a walkie talkie to a drone...

This whole thread is silly. The claim is that drones are weapons that should be treated the same way an assault weapon is.

My point is that drones are no more dangerous than any number of other technologies, including walkie talkies, which are marketed as toys and yet have military versions and are used to cause destruction by terrorists.

I would regulate your high powered laser, by the way. But that is another thread.

Its only silly to you. I get to work with Lidar on 3axes drones. Drones with specific ranges and potential interference are licensed. Fuckin with technology just for laughs isnt at all funny to me. e rquire licenseddrone handling (I dont recall what the titles are called) and the "drivers" are trained and keep logs just like any pilot that can PHYSICALLY interfere with aviation.
LIDAR has a much higher Wattage than thos little laser pointers that kids were shining at windscreens of jets at Philly AP and Denver a few yers ago. so lidar has its own certification and record keeping

I dont recall the license requirements for drone operators and at which elevation and above. we can operate up to 7500 ft above which are the global hawks and predator militarydrones. If we operate a Lifar using all 200 emitters, we have to inform and gather info for any urban areas. We dont EVER get involved in urban areas except for one or two "Archeological" surveys where we were looking for covered over reaction pits for platinum or chromite
We use these things in rock mechanics and ore banks (Quartz veins etc). It saves us much time and field operations payouts.

I have already said I think high powered lasers should be regulated.

Drones have nothing to do with it. I imagine your fancy LIDAR emitters would wreak havoc on air travel without a drone.

I imagine your emitters suck up a lot of power. How much do the batteries weigh?

The sale of assault weapons has been tightly regulated since the moment they were invented. I don't believe they have ever been marketed to the general public.

Submachineguns were marketed to the general public a long time ago, but they lack the range to count as assault weapons.

uh oh, we said NIAGARA FALLS to guess who.

The first submachine gun used in combat, the Bergmann MP 18, was used as an assault weapon. (Thus the names for units using it: "Sturmtruppe" [assault troop], the soldiers were called "Sturmsoldaten" [Stormtroopers], both term purely military without political connotations.)

That's not possible. Assault weapons have an effective combat range of 300 meters. The gun that you named is not chambered in a cartridge with the required range.

As said, it's the first assault weapon used in combat (1918). And I doubt that anyone around that time knew the definitions used today in the USA. (The effective range of 200 m wasn't bad at all.)

Since it is not an assault weapon, it cannot have been the first assault weapon used in combat.

They may not have known the definition of "assault weapon" back then, but we do know the definition of the term today.

That's why I'm always careful to identify them as "assault-styled" weapons.

"Assault-styled weapon" is just another term for "assault weapon."

Yes. Thanks guys for bringing up the subject of NFA weapons.

It prompted me to look into the current state of the genre, and I see there is a company offering conversion kits for Mac 10 and 11 submachine guns. I'd not have learned about these conversions (at least, not right now) if you guys had not started talking about NFA weapons. I'm always in a good mood when I read about new and better weapons, so you've put a smile on my face today. And my air conditioner just conked out in the middle of 90 degree weather, so I'd otherwise be pretty grumpy right now.

By "conversion" I don't mean converting a semi-auto into a full-auto. Rather I mean converting a useless full-auto into a useful full-auto.

The Mac 10 type submachine guns were always somewhat useless because they fired way too fast and the provisions for holding onto them and keeping them under control were substandard, but these conversion kits add better stocks, better grips, and slow the rate of fire, which results in a much more useful submachine gun.

Cobray rushed and managed to build and register some 20,000 Mac 11/9mm submachine guns in 1986 when the law was being passed to stop the registration of new machine guns. They've always been somewhat of a gimmick though because of the high rate of fire and difficulty controlling them. But these conversion kits allow these 20,000 submachine guns to now become useful weapons for the American people to defend their homes with.
This plus this equals this

The term "assault-styled" weapon is a way of differentiating civilian firearms with military features (often cosmetic) from actual military weapons. Ask a combat infantryman whether he'd prefer being issued an assault weapon or and assault-styled weapon and you'll see that the distinction is significant.

But this doesn't have anything to do with the misuse of drones and their potential for misuse by criminals or terrorists.