Spike Jones wrote:
>
> > Zero Powers wrote:
> > To the contrary it will help to assure that
> > > totalitarianism is never able to take hold.
> > Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
> > ...'power equivalent ubiquitous transparency' cannot possibly
> > exist, except as a propaganda piece used to dupe people into
> > surrendering their civil rights.
>
> Do we really have a civil right to privacy?
Our rights against search and seizure, self-incrimination, etc. are
based on it, and in any event, any rights not specifically enumerated
are retained by the people as per the 9th amendment.
> I know we have always
> assumed that we do, but suppose I have one of those cool airplane
> thingies with the 18 gram camera in it, 15 cm wingspan, 75 gram
> total. I fly it over your house and for some reason I like to gawk
> at you. Have I actually broken any laws?
Since aerial photography is a licensed activity regulated by the FAA,
they must recognise some limits, and the fact that its illegal to fly
any airplane in many areas less than a given altitude above the ground
indicates that there is some presumed minimum airspace that belongs to
the property owner. Observing with the naked eye is legal. Using tools
to spy on other people's property is not.
>
> Dont worry Mike, I dont want to spy on you. {8-] spike
I'm sure you don't, I have good anti-air defenses for flying things 15
cm in size. My 20 guage shotgun that is perfect for woodcock, with #9
shot, would take our your little spy plane at anything less than 50
yards, and with magnum loads I could make shots of around 75-100 yards
altitude. Anything higher and I'd have to bring out the goose gun.... 10
guage #6 magnum loads.... Happy flying....
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:06:41 MDT