Homeland Security is ordering-up drones designed for war to be used for surveillance of U.S. citizens, even though we know that our wars are over, according to this administration? The specs call for the ability to see if a person has a weapon and specs that once a person is identified with a weapon, that person can be tracked – like…to your home. Nothing new other than the drones are now to be used to “see” and “track” you and I. So if you legally carry a weapon, daytime or nighttime, leave your cell phone at home. Remember Rodney Brossart and his family? Six cows belonging to a neighbor wandered onto his land. He fed them and wouldn’t give them back until the neighbor reimbursed him. In come the drones, and the police, sheriffs and SWAT team. An armed standoff ensued. When the drone detected the family was no longer armed, they stormed the Brossart property. He and four of his children and his wife were charged. Read that story here. An update on their story below.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has customized its Predator drones, originally built for overseas military operations, to carry out at-home surveillance tasks that have civil libertarians worried: identifying civilians carrying guns and tracking their cell phones, government documents show.
The documents provide more details about the surveillance capabilities of the department’s unmanned Predator B drones, which are primarily used to patrol the United States’ northern and southern borders but have been pressed into service on behalf of a growing number of law enforcement agencies including the FBI, the Secret Service, the Texas Rangers, and local police.
Homeland Security’s specifications for its drones, built by San Diego-based General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, say they “shall be capable of identifying a standing human being at night as likely armed or not,” meaning carrying a shotgun or rifle. They also specify “signals interception” technology that can capture communications in the frequency ranges used by mobile phones, and “direction finding” technology that can identify the locations of mobile devices or two-way radios. Source: CNS News
The North Dakota family reached a plea deal in January 2013 to keep them out of prison:
The Lakota, N.D., farmer involved in a months-long stand-off with law enforcement in 2011 has struck a plea deal that would keep him and four of his children from serving any time behind bars or having a felony on their record…
Three Brossart sons are accused of pointing rifles at deputies and a daughter is accused of assaulting a deputy.
The felony charges the five had faced each carries a maximum prison sentence of five years…
The case garnered international attention because Janke used a drone, proffered by federal agents, to surveil Brossart’s sons before arresting them the day after Brossart was arrested.
It reportedly was the first, or one of the first, cases of a government drone being used to arrest an American citizen…
According to court records, Brossart agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of criminal mischief for damaging a sheriff’s vehicle during his arrest June 23, 2011.
It’s an Alford plea, in which he doesn’t admit wrongdoing, but that there is enough evidence for a jury to convict him.
He will pay restitution of $1,021 for the damage, plus $300 in fines and fees, and serve a year of unsupervised probation.
In exchange, Welte agreed to recommend that imposition of a jail sentence of up to one year be deferred for one year, then dropped.
Welte also agreed to dismiss felony charges against Brossart of terrorizing and theft, and misdemeanor charges of violating state law on stray animals and resisting arrest.
Susan Brossart, Rodney’s wife was charged with lying to law enforcement officers about how many weapons they had on the property. Without new laws or registration, the government believes they have the right to know and a woman’s life was turned upside down because she believed she sould not be forced to give out that information. The case now awaits a State District Judge’s approval of the plea bargain.
I find no reports saying that the Brossart weapons were illegally owned. The owner of the cows could have filed a lawsuit, but that would have cost them money, so instead, the drones were called in, and you and I paid for it.
The Brossarts weren’t “good” neighbors. They are often described as “anti-Government” and while you can’t lawfully eject a person squatting on/in your property without going through the courts and spending your life savings – no drones required – if you want a neighbor to repay you for feeding cows (or maybe a dog or kitten or sheep or goat) you didn’t coerce onto your property, and the neighbor is not so neighborly either, the Government will send in the drone, mark your location and your weapon, and fix it for everyone except the person who fed your animals. It could have been so simple, just pay the darn bill.
But no…now history was made with the Brossarts and when the drone showed that the family was unarmed, his nightmare began. Don’t bother to stop by and tell me how unfriendly the Brossarts were, or how dangerous they were. In this instance, a SWAT team attempted to enter property to get the cows back, not to arrest the Brossarts on anti-Government charges, or for harming another human. The Brossarts should not have met them with guns, and had the SWAT team not taken an extreme position, they wouldn’t have. You and I have no sovereignty.