Best
65 Comments
Post
  • #17
    !
    It's sweet watching liberals complain about the civil liberties they are losing, knowing all the while they voted for the very people that are stealing their liberties. Canada doesn't have drones. Liberals are in for a rude awakening.
  • #19
    !
    For the record, Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of NYC, is an independent AFTER being elected mayor twice as.... wait for it....
    A REPUBLICAN!
    So who really are those that are taking awayliberties? You never rresponded to an earlier post on another thread, under whose watch did patriot act get passed?
  • #34
    !
    @WilliamWallace Interesting, my neighbor told me that a 3rd vote was a vote for Romney. My vote was counted as intended. It was meant as a political statement as the candidate I voted for had no chance of winning. I did not vote for Obama, because of his refusal to use the power of his office to enforce civil rights protections. I did not vote for Romney, because anyone that believes that a corporation is a person needs to be on anti psychotics.
  • #35
    !
    @lawnmowrman That was some political statement you made. I bet Obama has reconsidered his position since he did not get your vote. All you did was waste your time when you placed that ballot. Go ahead and keep up the fight.
  • R Load more replies

  • #6
    !
    funniest part is he will pay a heavy fine or do some jail time for a 120 year old antique revolver... New York gun laws suck.
  • #5
    !
    And people wonder why we have a deficit in every city, county, state and federal govt.? Seriously. Drones at more than 600 million dollars each to catch speeders? Is that really cost effective? Drones to replace helicopters in police chases? Let's get real here people. Even if you have no problem with a police state in America there is no way on earth to justify the cost of drones for domestic use.
  • #39
    !
    Not all drones are Global Hawks,(US$218 million) meant to replace U-2 spy planes. There is also "the AeroVironment RQ-11 Raven, which is currently in use by the US military. The Raven is basically just a glorified RC airplane, with a sophisticated landing system that allows it to be recovered by a soldier without great pilot skills (which is one reason they cost around $35,000 each)."

    Drones like the Raven are more likely the type that will be used by law enforcement agencies. Not only are they cheaper than manned helicopters, they are smaller and harder to detect.
  • #48
    !
    @jessejaymes I am not familiar enough with the cost of law enforcement to take that bet. I can surf and find that the price of a 2012 Chevrolet Caprice Police car is $31,495, which is almost as much as the military drone that I mentioned. How much it costs to operate and maintain either vehicle I do not know. I see that the suggested purchase price of an R44 Raven II - Police Helicopter is $696,000, though.
  • #49
    !
    @Dan_Tien Dan you and I agree on many things. But there is no situation in which I will agree with further intrusion on the citizens by law enforcement. We simply cannot afford financially, a further "tool' to subvert our rights.
  • #50
    !
    @jessejaymes I don't agree with it either, I'm just resigned to it. My rule of thumb is that any time that I leave my house (whether I deserve it or not) I stand a good chance of being recorded in some fashion or other, especially when entering any sort of store or business. Even the internet keeps track of our activities so that ads can be tailored for us. I went through a period when I sought to minimize or eliminate my electronic signature, but then I heard that Osama bin Laden was located partly because his compound was TOO quiet. Apparently, trying to avoid surveillance is itself considered suspicious behavior.
  • R Load more replies

  • #1
    !
    If he wants to make posters he has that right, but does he have the right to make them appear to be created and distributed by the NYPD? I don't think so. Also, the age of a firearm is irrelevant as long as it is still capable of firing bullets. He may even have tried to provoke an arrest just so that he could gain notoriety and credibility.
  • #3
    !
    Are remotely controlled surveillance drones really that much scarier than manned helicopters, DEA snooping airplanes, GPS tracking devices or CCTV cameras already in use? Like them or not, drones will be coming to sky near you. I would not like to see Hellfire missile equipped Predator drones flying over our friendly skies though.
  • #32
    !
    As I have indicated elsewhere, in New York City, a basic decision has been made to spend public money hunting down, arresting, and prosecuting, under whatever legal pretext is necessary, the purveyors of satire that is not "just for fun," is not "clear" and “humorous” enough, and is in some way offensive or embarrassing to influential members of the community. This is why the author of "Gmail confessions" in which a well-known New York University department chairman appeared to be accusing himself of plagiarism has been convicted of forgery, identity theft, and criminal impersonation, and sentenced to spend 6 months at Rikers Island. For further information on this NYU case (in which some of the characters involved seem to have emerged from a Phillip Roth novel), see:

    http://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

    It should, incidentally, be observed that the criminalizing of satire in NYC is taking place without even a murmur of protest from civil rights organizations. So I believe it can safely be said that these satirical subversives do not have the right to do what they are doing.
  • #38
    !
    @Quixote
    You are correct, basically departments such as the police, and certian politicians don't like being embarrassed and satire is effective in doing this. These type have arrest have been going on nearly a decade...
  • #58
    !
    well i guess, public property paid for by the public. is not as public, as it used to be. and you do not really think, that any one would credit, the nypd for that? what kind of a moron,would not know the difference? and according to law, an old time black power weapon is not considered as a deadly weapon any more. and you do not need, a permit to own one. it does not, even have to be registered. and their is no waiting period, for purchasing a black powder weapon.
  • #59
    !
    @1adam2 "Public" property used and maintained by government agencies is not available for the use of private individuals unless specifically stated as such. The locks placed on the display cases in which the bogus posters were installed is clear evidence that they were not intended for unauthorized art projects. The artist who installed the phony posters apparently had a counterfeit key that allowed him to open the cases. It seems that some "morons" did believe that they were distributed by the NYPD in those locked, official display cases.:

    (A 30-year-old Chelsea man, who asked not to be identified, said,“It looks real, there are NYPD posters in the subway that look just like them.”)- NY Post.

    I saw no stories describing the .22 caliber revolver in the man's possession as a black powder weapon. Where did you come by that information? According to www.troopers.ny.gov/FAQs/Firearms/Permits.cfm black powder weapons can only be possessed without a permit In NYC as long as you have no caps and powder in your possession and never intend to shoot them.
  • R Load more replies

  • #25
    !
    But so should any citizen be allowed to, to watch the police.

    This man had a piston under his pillow in the privacy of his home and that should not be against the law, even in NYC.
  • #23
    !
    "56 counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument," grand larceny possession of stolen property ...

    What forged instrument? What stolen property? Way to keep it vague, Politix.
  • #11
    !
    The NYPD really has nothing better to investigate? The D.A. has nothing better to prosecute? 56 counts of grand larceny. Unreal.
    Why not charge him with domestic terrorism and send him to Gitmo without a trial!
  • #33
    !
    As I have indicated elsewhere, in New York City, a basic decision has been made to spend public money hunting down, arresting, and prosecuting, under whatever legal pretext is necessary, the purveyors of satire that is not "just for fun," is not "clear" and “humorous” enough, and is in some way offensive or embarrassing to influential members of the community. This is why the author of "Gmail confessions" in which a well-known New York University department chairman appeared to be accusing himself of plagiarism has been convicted of forgery, identity theft, and criminal impersonation, and sentenced to spend 6 months at Rikers Island. For further information on this NYU case (in which some of the characters involved seem to have emerged from a Phillip Roth novel), see:

    http://raphaelgolbtrial.wordpress.com/

    It should, incidentally, be observed that the criminalizing of satire in NYC is taking place without even a murmur of protest from civil rights organizations. So I believe it can safely be said that these satirical subversives do not have the right to do what they are doing.
  • #10
    !
    this is what New York does to you to make an example so nobody else steps out of line... that is really how it happens to.
    hopefully this will get enough Publicity and the guy will get a decent lawyer... I think the posters are hilarious... but the New York machine will try to hammer this guy into the earth.
  • #13
    !
    @MBernard Oh, I think not - just because someone may be watching doesn't mean a reduction in legal choices we can make. The camera in the ATM doesn't make me choose to withdraw $20 instead of $40, the the red light cams at the intersection don't increase the likelihood of me coming to a complete stop, the surveillance at 7-11 won't make me buy 2 Slurpees instead of 3...
  • #15
    !
    @DARSB man come on, no privacy. You don't need a warrant to have access to sensitive intel anymore man, it's all right here in the open being picked up by drones. I wonder if they are admissible in the court of law.
  • #16
    !
    @Libertyiskey While conservatives like Fred Thompson will tell you there is no "right to privacy" in the constitution, the courts have pretty well established there is, but under specific conditions. The principle seems to be whether there's a reasonable expectation of privacy. If you're outdoors in a public place, where a drone or other camera may see you, that's OK, which is why it's cool to video cops. If you're in your bedroom in private then the expectation of privacy does exist and you're right to resist encroachments to it - which is the sane argument against intrusive social conservative causes like anti-sodomy laws, elective abortions, and sale of pornography.
  • R Load more replies

  • #65
    !
    WTF... this wasn't civil disobedance, this is a struggling artist who took a chance by using city owned property to "start a conversation" get real, what he did was in no way magnamenous,what he did was "try to get publicity for his name"! Imdoubt if people could find him to interview,
    the NYPD had to look too far to find him. I don't know about gun laws in NY, but in VA you don't HAVE to register your hand guns but mine are because I don't have anything to hide. If your state gun laws are different, work to change them or leave the state if you feel you must have a gun! What is wrong with that?
  • #56
    !
    They trumped up every charge they could think of against this man. It's time to start thinking. We have all ready slipped over that slippery slope we have heard so much about. This fear of retaliation by the government has paralyzed us all in to compliance. The only thing government truly fears is loss of power. Even questioning it's authority is seen as a potential threat that must be dealt with as harshly as possible. We do have one power left we can wield against it the jury system. We do not have to rubber stamp every case they bring to court. Jury nullification is a right of the people to place a check on government power. They may and almost always do instruct you have no right to consider the validity of the law their prosecuting a person for just if that person broke it. But you do have the right to judge if the law to be legal or not and vote not guilty if you find the law to be against your understanding of the Constitution. The very first supreme court upheld this right and was giving during jury instructions. But seeing this as a threat to power government in modern times has hid the fact and lie's about our ability to do so.
  • #43
    !
    It is obviously satirical. He should take it to court. There is precedent on his side. The Supreme Court has ruled before against false advertisement claims when the nature of the presentation meant any reasonable person would realize it was satirical or non-literal. The California Cows are Happy Cows commercial was sued and won on those grounds. Likewise if it's obviously satirical (given that if they were really doing that we would know about it, the media would have a field day) the argument can be made that this should be protected speech as any reasonable person would realize the purpose of the ad.

    To the question, the police have no business sending out drones to watch random, presumptively law-abiding people go about their personal business. Maybe we could use this technology, but to direct it to follow someone and have the recordings be deemed valid in a court of law there should have to have been a warrant.
  • #40
    !
    Interesting. Wasn't the title of this article originally "Street Artist Protesting Orwellian State Arrested by Orwellian State"? Did you get chastised by Big Brother?
  • #30
    !
    like the picture on that monitor that is one way to stop those from doing that.

    do to crime our cops look more like military already,need to declare all gang members as terrorists and deal with then so they can never do a crime again. some parts of l.a. they may need drones with bombs with the whole area gangs for generations.
  • #22
    !
    I don't recall anyone having a problem with drones, fighter planes, warships in the harbor and soldiers patroling lower manhattan a few hours after the Towers fell...

    And this guy wasn't trying to be inciteful? Hope he enjoys his stay in Rykers.
  • #21
    !
    Yes cops should be able to use drones for public safety and law enforcement, with the same rules as applied to surveillance cameras, stakeouts, helicopters, privacy, search & seizure, and all the other rules they must follow.

    Oh, plus whatever rules FAA adds on top of those.
  • R Load more comments...
Post