And, yes, they were considering it, but didn't do it. But in Washington, no bad idea ever goes unimplemented for long …
Reshared post from +Yonatan Zunger
I cannot even begin to describe what a terrible idea this is, and what an alarming idea this is. Even if this were "nonlethal" weaponry, you should consider that it's being fired from great altitude at people with no warning, much less attempt at legal process; that nonlethal weaponry doesn't mean "weaponry that won't seriously injure you;" that nonlethal weaponry doesn't even mean "weaponry that won't occasionally kill you;" (e.g.: watch what happens if a Taser reacts with a pacemaker) and that, even if it were reliably nonlethal, it turns out that leaving people unconscious and/or incapacitated in the middle of the open desert isn't a good idea, either.
Basically, the DHS is looking for the power to fire upon anyone who looks suspicious in certain areas, from a distance, and without warning. Which is to say, for a free-fire zone at the border.
Hey, I remember those! We used to have one in Berlin. Interestingly enough, it was operated by an organization whose name is a nearly perfect translation of "Department of Homeland Security" — the "Ministerium für Staatssicherheit."
I'm sorry, what the hell is our government building here?
via +Sean Bonner and +Wil Wheaton.
Customs & Border Protection Considered Weaponizing Drones
A Customs & Border Protection (CPB) report, released in response to EFF’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the agency, shows CBP has considered adding weapons to its domestic Predator drones.