And those drones will be controlled by ChatGPT/Grok.
Just wait until the school nerd learns to hack them and sends them after the school bully quarterback.
That’s the most American “solution” to the most American of problems.
Everything but regulate guns
Uh, FUCK THAT? Maybe?
I’m sure the dead kids with asthma will be grateful
So they just need to wear non-vented goggles and a filtered mask. Now they have easy targets who are blinded by the pepper spray to which they are immune.
Or they could just shoot the drone.
Why? It’s incapacitated the potential targets. Let the drone shoot, the shooter need not worry if they are immune to it’s effects.
Little Billy took a wrong turn, though. He slipped on the spray that settled on the ground. The ambient spray in the air has drifted into his eyes. Now he can’t see, doesn’t know which way to crawl. His panic and pain will be short lived, as the shooter no longer needs to aim, as his target is unable to flee.
Cool, so some fucker from thousands of miles away can control a drone with “less” lethal rounds and explosions. What could possibly go wrong!?
And also it normalizes seeing drones on school property.
I’ve said it a thousand times now. Someone is going to 3d print a fully functional drone with low tracibility, slap explosives on it and use it to do a Boston Bombing/Columbine style terrorist attack.
What the hell are they gonna do then? This worlds fucked.
Just like fighting gym leader Brock with Charmander.
They’re not that easy to hit. I once invited someone to try hitting my camera drone with a 9mm and they couldn’t, despite all bluster and claims otherwise. it might have been easier inside a building.
But, any rounds expended toward the drone are rounds not sent to children/staff. And an FPV drone to the face even without pepper spray can mess up someone’s aim.
- The point is that the terrifying systemic problem of school shooters should be tackled at its root causes, not merely suppressing symptoms. It’s beyond absurd that schools in the US have become institutions of normalized violence.
- Going to another room and closing the door renders any drone “not very effective…” School shooters have nothing left to lose. These drones are an extremely expensive yet stupid way of defusing such people. From the article:
The drones can remain airborne for about eight minutes on a single battery charge
I know the US is plagued by obesity, but I’m pretty sure the average shooter can outrun a drone for more than 8 minutes inside a building. What a bad joke. This is simply about signing contract deals for weapons manufacturers because everything about this screams poor taste.
However, not everyone is convinced the drones are the right approach.That includes Tony Montalto, whose 14-year-old daughter Gina Montalto was among the 17 people killed in the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in Parkland, Florida. He told WPTV: “These drones aren’t patrolling – they just pop up when needed. So that’s part of the problem. We need to focus on the prevention piece rather than the reaction piece.”
“Its not perfect, therefore no effort should be expended toward any possible harm reduction”
“Its not perfect, therefore no effort should be expended toward any possible harm reduction”
Non sequitur fallacy and then some. Not only didn’t I say “it’s not perfect”, I said it’s completely stupid such as what’s depicted in the illustration above. I also didn’t say “no effort should be expended”, in fact, my first sentence proves the contrary: most efforts should be concentrated on the root causes. And the last sentence quotes the article, symptomatic measures should be prevention, e.g., patrol. Money towards these drones can be spent far more wisely.
Wait until you find out drones are used for patrols too.
Wait until you find out drones are used for patrols too.
Outside this makes total sense. Inside, not at all. And I say this as a quadcopter pilot myself.
This isn’t a case of perfect being the enemy of good. This is a case of the drones simply not being a good response.
Maybe it’s just my inner gamer talking, but isn’t the kid doing the school shooting just going to shoot down the drone for bonus points?
Evidently the idea is waves of drones to keep him busy till the cops get there
The drones can remain airborne for about eight minutes on a single battery charge
- Hear drone
- Hide for 8 minutes
- Drone evaded
It’s a pepper spray drone, delaying them from killing people is the point in the first place.
-
School during a lockdown is a perfect place for a high-speed wheeled vehicle.
-
Anything but regulate guns
-
Why not a flash bang? No really, what’s the risk?
-
Wouldn’t this be a police tool?
Flashbangs don’t work like they do in games.
Pretty sure if I time it right I can get a jump boost.
-
I predict the first kid to get pepper-sprayed will be Black.
I bet it’s gonna be Tolkien Black.
Not even Polymarket is taking those bets
Aren’t most shooters actually white? That was my impression.
Now I am going to Google this. Hello rabbit hole!
Edit: yep it is a white hobby.
(Btw I got the joke- just sayin)They’re saying this will backfire and will attack people who are not actual shooters
Yeah “backfire”
They are saying this is the intention.
I predict the first kid to get pepper-sprayed will be Black.
Didn’t you know that the only racist is the person who talks about it like that
/s
Anything but regulate guns, making mental health ressources more accessible or punish bullying.
This normalizes policing by machines, controlled by faceless people who will be shielded against consequences just like cops are shielded now. Drones don’t have a face, a name or an personell number. If something happens (and it will), you can’t even point your finger on the guilty party anymore. It also shields those controllers from any social backlash they would get if they would hurt someone in person.
Schools are the obvious places to test/enact these types of changes too.
Kids don’t know to speak out against remote policing via robotics, and normalising it now gets them used to it’s wider use in society later.
It’s much easier to raise a generation under a new set of standards, than it is to make an existing generation accept a new normal.
regulate guns
Yeahhhhh I’m not super stoked about the government regulating guns. Like I’m absolutely not a “guns in schools” kinda guy, but governments regulating guns just makes the proletariat and individual workers easier to oppress.
punish bullying
Bullying should absolutely not be tolerated but IMO the emphasis should be on restoration and justice instead of punishment IMO.
If something happens (and it will), you can’t even point your finger on the guilty party anymore.
Sure you can: whoever controlled the drone. If it’s autonomous, whoever owns the drone. If the operator or owner is being hidden, it is whoever or whatever system is enabling the hiding.
The US has guns and they’re being oppressed just fine.
To be fair, several people have tried to shoot Trump.
The people with the guns, in general, like what the government is doing.
Because there’s no political or popular will to do anything about it. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink; that doesn’t mean water is useless.
So then it’s not the guns that make resistance possible it’s popular will.
I mean obviously, but with popular will you’ll want everything to give your cause an edge—hence the guns. It’s possible to have popular will and still fail, so factors that give the rebellion (or just plain old resistance, see: Black Panthers) an edge are going to be necessary. In recent history, the Houthis definitely benefited from having guns when they rebelled against the then-government.
Seems to me that it does in fact mean that that excuse for gun proliferation is pretty useless.
Well that’s one hell of a non-sequitur. To make a sweeping generalization, it’s not the guns’ fault that Americans are cowards.
A majority of US gun owners like what the government is doing, how does that make them cowards?
I’m talking about Americans that don’t like what the government is doing (there’s a lot to criticise the American right for, but unwilling to act they are not). There’s plenty of gun ownership among American liberals.
There’s something very wrong with your water. It’s killing a lot of children.
So just like regular water then.
Yeah because the vast majority of the proletariat here are white people who tolerate capitalism because it uses white supremacy and its white privilege to buy their complicity. Same is true for various other bigotries. If we nipped that shit in the bud and developed class consciousness, a revolution would take like three seconds.
Like having a heavily armed populace is literally the only good thing about
What is that heavily armed populace doing? They’re not resisting a government that has entered the information warfare age, where every police station has SWAT gear and tanks and helicopters. The guns aren’t saving you from the government, they’re not saving me from the government, they’re not saving Cletus on 10 acre compound if Uncle Sam decides to pay a visit with flashbangs and riot gear.
All the guns are doing is terrifying minorities, who actually can be controlled by them.
Guess how I know.
They’re not resisting a government that has entered the information warfare age, where every police station has SWAT gear and tanks and helicopters.
Except heavily armed populaces have resisted SWAT gear and tanks and helicopters before, but also: Even just forcing escalation to such methods is a win for the rebels/resistance/etc. There’s a reason even oppressive governments don’t jump straight to tanks and helicopters when they have a revolution that hasn’t quite devolved into civil war. Besides, there’s no guarantee the people manning the tanks and helicopters are going to be willing to fire into crowds. In a revolutionary scenario the government’s grip on its armed forces tends to be shaky at best, and doing things like whipping out tanks to put down rebellion tends to alienate people who might’ve supported it otherwise. Hell, sometimes governments just give up instead of going through all this. Obviously armed revolution (which doesn’t necessarily mean civil war) isn’t foolproof, but the hurdle to winning isn’t as big as people around here seem to think, since the very fact that such a thing is happening means there’s a sympathetic cause that will make some fraction of the army/police/etc not want to fight.
