The Constitution supports Drones and so do I.Submitted by snakepit22 on Mon, 02/04/2013 - 19:06
The issue of the United States’ use of drones typically draws and immediate and intense negative response from individuals in the liberty movement, and rightfully so. However, just as bad people and bad policy can give an unfair negative reputation to things like “assault” rifles, the technology behind drones and the potential positive benefit they provide has also taken an unfair negative turn.
As scary as drone technology can be, and the more I learn, the scarier it seems, it still doesn’t seem to be any different than any other technology which can be used by our military to be more deadly. The key element of drone warfare has been that it has allowed our President to commit acts of war without having to risk American casualties, which has unfortunately convinced him to commit those acts without a declaration of war. In addition, drones can fly at altitudes which keep them out of the site of civilians on the ground, so our military can carry out strikes virtually undetected. This appears to have emboldened our military leaders to the point that they are committing acts which they may have previously thought to be politically dangerous.
As bad as this seems, it isn’t much different from the change in warfare which occurred with the development of ICBM’s (Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles). The President was able to order bombing strikes into countries without having to make political moves to allow an actual military presence in that country. Or, consider the development of stealth fighters and bombers which has given the President the opportunity to bypass Congress and the media and commit acts of war with a higher level of deniability.
As with many examples in our military history, drone technology has simply provided the military with a more efficient way to do what the military does. The real problem isn’t the drone, or the technology. The problem is simply that the same people who employ this technology illegally, are the same people who employed ICBM’s and Stealth’s illegally. The morality of the drone issue is no different than the morality of owning an AR-15. The devices are beautiful and a monument to the progress of mankind. The way our government has used them however, is something vastly less glamorous.
Having said that, the question then becomes, “How do we prevent the misuse of such technology”? The beauty of drones as compared to other instruments of government tomfoolery, is that drone technology is relatively cheap. It is accessible to the point that the private citizen has a very realistic chance of steering the market towards benefiting private home security instead of government war mongering. The undeniable truth of technology is that whether it is the government or the mob or your next door neighbor, someone is going to find an illegal use for nearly every new technology that arises. Our job as liberty loving citizens is not to repress the development and use of these technologies, rather it is to work within the parameters of a free market in order to use these technologies to enhance freedom and personal liberty.
As the police begin using tiny 4 inch drones to peak into a house to see the position of a hostage taker, some burglar will use the same technology to scout out a potential target. As the military develops drones with the ability to strike deep in enemy territory or defend our homeland from potential threats, some politician will decide to use that technology in monitoring civilian populations here at home, with complete disregard for our basic Constitutional rights.
As these advances take place, we can either sing the song of the left, who tend to feel that government regulation solves all issues, or we can think like free market capitalists. We can think like people who don’t fear technology. Instead, we embrace its ability to enhance our freedom. Whether it is a policeman, or a burglar, or a policeman/burglar who uses a tiny drone to invade my house, my job isn’t to rally for legislation against the existence of the drone, rather, my job is to see how I can legally, morally, and effectively use that drone technology to defend my home. If an AR-15 is good enough to protect my family, then so is a tiny helicopter.
Does this mean tiny micro-machine warfare outside my house between my ‘bots and their ‘bots? I don’t know. As with most developments in the free market, it is the innovators who see the future, and the public who votes on the outcome with their spending dollars. I don’t know what the future will look like, but what I do know is that in a world where the police and the mob will both have tiny drones small enough to evade me, and lethal enough to kill me, I’d feel much safer knowing that my Second Amendment Right extends to my ability to own my own personal defense drones.