Rodney Brossart Susan Brossert: North Dakota Sheriff Sends Drone Over Property – Success! Stray Cows Found!

Apparently Rodney and Susan Brossert are armed, anti-government residents of North Dakota who refused to return cows that strayed onto their 3,000 acre refuge. The Sheriff sent an unmanned Air Force drone over their property to find the cows. The entire family was arrested and the straying cows found, valued at $6,000.  You have to wonder who owned those cows. If this story is accurate, no warrant was needed. No approval from Congress needed.

Rodney Brossart

 

The Daily Mail:

Meet the Brossarts, a North Dakota family deemed so dangerous that the local sheriff needed unleashed an unmanned Predator drone to help bring them in.

The Brossart’s alleged crime? They wouldn’t give back three cows and their calves that wandered onto their 3,000-acre farm this summer.

Susan Brossart

The Brossarts are, according to the UK’s Daily Mail, the first victims of U.S. drone surveillance over America’s private property, other than over border areas. The drone is owned by the U.S. Air Force, and it was summoned by the sheriff, who then could watch everything going on, on the Brossart property.

Using a handheld device that picked up the video camera footage from the spy plane, Sheriff Janke was able to watch the movements of everyone on the farm.
During an 16-hour standoff, the sheriff and his deputies waited until they could see the remaining Brossarts put down their weapons. Then, dressed in SWAT gear, they stormed the compound and arrested the three Brossart sons. No shots were fired.

Everyone on the farm was arrested, including the Brossart’s four adult children. Rodney and Susan have been on the wrong side of the law in North Dakota and are facing several felony charges.

…increasingly, the federal government and local police agencies are using those drones to spy criminal suspects in America with sophisticated high-resolution cameras, heat sensors and radar. All of it comes without a warrant.

Allowing local sheriffs and police chiefs access to spy planes happened without public discussion or the approval of Congress. And it has privacy advocates crying foul, saying the unregulated use of the drones is intrusive.

The U.S. Air Force is forbidden from sending drones over the property of a U.S. citizen, but…not a sheriff using an Air Force drone. Perhaps there is more to this story. Perhaps this is another Ruby Ridge. I don’t know, but I do know we have lost our right to privacy and property.

Posted by Maggie @ Maggie’s Notebook

  • We are now the enemy.

  • Ran

    YES, this is yet another abuse; a despicable abuse of power.

    Some cows strayed out of bounds!? SWAT teams?

  • And yet.. the Black Panthers can intimidate voters with immunity.. “Damn these White Crackers…” That’s probably the mantra in the justice’s high offices, and the White House..
    I agree with Carl, “We are now the enemy” by we, anyone who believes they have freedom from illegal invasion of their home and property. WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT FOR GOOD. My ancestors who fought in the Revolutionary War would be up in arms.. Well November 6th of 2012, will be a day we all need to show up at the poles, and intimidate this administration with our one loud voice.. YOUR FIRED!!!!

  • becky

    In appropriate comment deleted by blog owner.

  • Ron Veelik

    No Skinny-dipping any more ?

  • Kevin

    You waste any possible credibility over a legitimate privacy concern by posting half-truths and outright lies. The drone belonged to Border Security, *not* the USAF. The drone was called in after Randy’s family members chased off a deputy using rifles. If your property was being held illegally by your neighbor I bet you wouldn’t hesitate to call the police, especially if your neighbor tended to point a rifle at people they don’t like. Since you used quotes from the story, you obviously omitted the facts you didn’t like. There was a 16-hour standoff. With or without the drone, this was a local law enforcement operation that would have ended with the arrest of the family. I don’t condone using military technology for police work. In this case it was used to make sure the family was unarmed and that officers could make the arrests with far less chance of someone, including the family, getting killed.
    P.S. If you want to be credible, demonstrate basic vocabulary skills, as a commenter or as moderator. When in November 2012 you show up at the “poles”, make you sure you are “In appropriate” clothing as those geographic regions tend be rather chilly. 😀

    • Kevin, the information about the drone came directly from the Daily Mail. Note that I took great care to point out that the Brossart family, or at least Rodney and Susan have been on the wrong side of the law. There is no good reason, however, for the expense of drones over private property, unless it is a border situation. We don’t need drones used to make sure anyone is unarmed in the quest to rescue cows. Maybe there are situations when life is in jeopardy, but not to rescue cows.

  • Kevin

    @David Lemon: how did the Black Panthers come into the discussion? How did their voter intimidation escape all news coverage (or are you recalling an event 40+ years ago)? Did they require voter IDs?
    Oh yeah, you had to mention Black Panthers because you need to perpetuate the stereotype of the conservative as a race-baiter.

    • Kevin, If you don’t know how the Black Panthers came into the discussion, then you aren’t keeping up. You should know what how your government is handling voter intimidation, including in the courts. It was and is a very big issue. Thing is, very little was in the mainstream media but all over alternate sites. David Lemon brought it up as an example of government abuse.

      • Thank you Maggie. Now Kevin, pay attention.. This is the real world, not a liberal feeling world.