Get Ready for Drones Equipped with Tear Gas

Bill allows police to arm drones with non-lethal weapons.


The good news is that the North Dakota legislature passed a bill this week requiring police to get a search warrant before they use a drone; The bad news is that drones could shoot rubber bullets, pepper spray, or even tear gas. From The Daily Beast:

Even "less than lethal" weapons can kill though. At least 39 people have been killed by police Tasers in 2015 so far, according to The Guardian. Bean bags, rubber bullets, and flying tear gas canisters have also maimed, if not killed, in the U.S. and abroad.

Becker said he worried about police firing on criminal suspects remotely, not unlike U.S. Air Force pilots who bomb the so-called Islamic State, widely known as ISIS, from more than 5,000 miles away.

Drawing up strict rules for use of any kind of police technology gives officers guidance as to how far they can go. Back in 2013, Trevor Timm, formerly of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Reason TV that it's very hard to draw those lines, though, because cops want to maintain their discretion. Once police have a certain power, they are never happy about relinquishing it.

"Police always seem to want to push the boundaries as far as the law will take them and sometimes over those boundaries," said Timm.

Timm pointed to law enforcement and cell phone data as an example. Back in 2012, The New York Times reported that law enforcement agencies made 1.3 million demands in 2011 of phone companies for subscriber data. Because there weren't strict privacy guidelines in place when mobile phones first entered the marketplace, it became easy for law enforcement to gather people's information without search warrants. For more watch, "Cops with Drones: Alameda Co., CA Weighs Technology vs. Privacy."

NEXT: Maryland Man Fined $50 for Picking Berries in Park

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. AnnonBot 2 Upgrade of Doom

    1. We’re all going to be working at home, on the computer, for Google…or else.

      1. For $7569.42 a month with this one weird compliance tip

  2. Ahh.. Blue Thunder.. a far-fetched and rather paranoid movie from he 80’s about the problems that would eventually result when the police were allowed to indulge their sweet-tooth for high tech power and control.. The sky’s the limit for the enforcers of the states will..

    1. Blue Thunder vs Air Wolf?

      State control vs free market security solution?

        1. +1 Jan Michael Vincent

          1. R.I.P., the late, great Ernest Borgnine.

    2. If you think the sky’s the limit, let me explain to you where satellites reside.

          1. Boom. Thread winner.

      1. In geosynchronous orbit?

        1. I like it when you talk dirty…

    3. Blue Thunder? Nah. Copseye


  3. The bad news is that drones could shoot rubber bullets, pepper spray, or even tear gas.

    How could this possibly go wrong.

  4. I’m going to equip a drone with a 3D printer and it’s going to drop liberators all over the place. ESCALATION.

    1. Great, now you’ve gone and lit the Preet Bharara signal.

  5. about the only upside is that Officer Drone can’t use the pantshitting himself in fear for his life excuse for his panic fire. or do the RC helicopters get funerals with honors and a paid day off too?

    1. Hey, he came right at the camera and I feared for my life. You weren’t there, you’re not qualified to judge. The drone’s got an 8 *megapixel* camera man, that shit is like real life.

      1. You think jury intimidation is bad now, wait until the courtroom is filled with a bunch of drones just hovering there.

        1. Eh, the whole courtroom will be nothing but drones except for the defendant and his lone attorney.

          Judge, jury, spectators, all watching remotely.

          Unless its a cop in the hot box – then he’ll get to watch from home also.

        2. At least there’ll be a nice breeze in the courtroom.

          1. +1 Matthew Harrison Brady

  6. get ready for drones armed with tear gas that get commandeered because the police force is too incompetent to encrypt their wireless transmitters.

    1. And/or drones that have their surreptitious video of the hot chick nude sunbathing in her ‘private’ back yard posted on Youtube.

      1. They may post it on Bluejizz first.

        1. What is Bluejizz? My friend wants to know…

          1. It’s Youjizz without the cooperation.

          2. You have to sign up by faxing in a request on a law enforcement agency letterhead.

    2. get ready for drones armed with tear gas that get commandeered because the police force is too incompetent to encrypt their wireless transmitters.

      You make it sound like this is a problem.

    3. Seems like a good time to restart efforts on that DIY EMP cannon…

  7. This is great news for our bullies, I mean boys in blue! Now they will be able to drone incorrect addresses and badly burn toddlers from the comfort of their own homes. Every cop-sucker’s primary (and only) concern — the officers got home safely — will be fulfilled simply because they need not leave home in the first place.

  8. Let the Strong Winds of Drone Strikes sweep across this Great Land!

  9. You can’t give toys to children and expect them to not find excuses to use them.

    1. Instead of sitting around on Saturday playing video games with their buds, the cops will play terrorize the citizens with drones. It will be a hoot!

      1. “While the investigation is ongoing, you’re on paid administrative leave, but we will have to confiscate the batteries from your transmitter. Oh, and you have to pinky swear that you won’t buy more at 7-11.”


  10. Speaking of police with lethal weapons.

    ‘Things went awry’: Suspect and bystander shot in Mount Vernon during undercover gun-buying operation involving the NYPD


    “Things went awry. Shots were fired”

    1. “Hey, Mount Vernon, we are going to send up a few jumpy undercover slobs to conduct a gun buying operation, just so you know.”


      1. When I saw Mount Vernon, I thought of Virginia and this former VA governor’s response to NYPD gun stings. Then I read the article and saw it was about Mount Vernon, NY. A little different.

      2. “It’ll be okay though, they trained on the border with the DOJ!”

    2. The officer handed Smothers the $2,400 he had brought to buy two semi-automatic handguns

      a third man, Alvin Smothers, 37, approached the vehicle and threatened the officer,

      Of course he did. He needed to resort to robbery to afford to buy a pistol for 12-freaking-hundred dollars.

      Personally, if I was going to buy two pistols and couldn’t do so legally where I lived, for much less than $2400 I’d drive look up gun sales on Facebook in some place like Texas or Arizona and drive there. Say $300 to drive there and back and less than $6-900 for two decent pistols.

      1. NYPD took on the Smothers Brothers? Sock it to me.

        1. +1 tippy tricycle

  11. This surely is something new to be worried about, some monstrous thing with no discernable human intelligence indiscriminately dispersing pepper spray and rubber bullets and tasers. Can it be equipped to dispense chokeholds and headstomps while squawking “Stop resisting!” and “Stop going for my gun!”, too? Or do we still need the lower primates for that function?

    1. A waistband furtive movement sensor is in the beta test stage of development.

  12. Any well financed anarchists willing to offer a bounty on police drones? How much do you think refurbished police drones would go for on ebay? Or amazon delivery drones?

  13. Great, now technically challenged cops armed only with high school diplomas and drones will be able to start sending drones to the wrong address.

    Call to work on Monday morning: Sorry, I can’t come in today, I was having a barbecue in my back yard and got tear gassed and hit with rubber bullets, I’m in the hospital.

    1. “In the course of conducting a drug investigation spying on nubile, teenage girls getting undressed, we accidentally discharged some tear gas and rubber bullets on civilian Hyperion in his backyard. He is currently being charged with interfering with official police business.”

      1. And having an illegal cookout without the proper permits and required training.

        1. -1 wedding party

        2. Those tomato plants look awfully like weed.

      2. “tear gas and rubber bullets were discharged in the vicinity of,” you mean.

  14. Obviously such drone will have to get really close to be able to disperse tear gas with any sort of accuracy. That leaves them vulnerable to being knocked out of the sky by having stuff thrown at them. The obvious solution of course is to affix a badge to them, thus conferring peace officer status. So anyone who throws shit at them can be charged with assaulting a police officer, and anyone trying to flee the tear gas can be charged with resisting arrest. Police K9s are considered police officers, so why not a drone?

    1. This. No doubt defending yourself against one of these will get you locked up for assaulting an officer. And they’ll shoot all of your pets first before going for you.

      1. And they’ll shoot all of your pets first before going for you.

        Of course, they’ll have machines for that, too.

    2. Police K9s are considered police officers, so why not a drone?

      “The drone alerted to possible drugs and detected a furtive movement. Fortunately, the suspect was neutralized without damage to the drone, who is affectionately known as ‘Buster’.”

      1. I’m picturing them being dressed up like military aircraft, with little people silhouettes painted on the fuselage for the number of perps they’re smoked.

        1. WHEN they put guns on these things, the puppycide is gonna be brutal.

  15. Anyone want to make a prediction for when the first cop is accused of being a peeping tom by drone?

    1. If you have a nice body, you shouldn’t be ashamed.

    2. How else are they supposed to know that she wasn’t smuggling drugs? Good video, IMO.

      1. I swear, the drone thought she looked eighteen, Your Honor.

    3. They’ll just expand their definition of “good shoot”.

  16. I’m more concerned with any idiot being able to “print” guns at home. Now that would be lethal.

    1. Good point. The only people allowed to have guns should be the Pennsylvania State Troopers. I am on board.

    2. People doing things…at home! Proggie-Jesus, save us!

    3. Given that people have always been able to make their own guns with shop equipment, pretty much all that will change is the amounts of sparks and metal needed to make home-built firearms.

      Progressives really know very little about the world around them, don’t they?

      1. Progressives really know very little about the world around them, don’t they?

        GUN. SCARY. BAD.

        That about sums it up.

      2. Some people never took shop in high school.

      3. You can have my CNC vertical mill when you pry it from my cold, dead hands…

    4. FEDGOV is “missing” several thousand of their guns,some being full-auto machine guns. that does not include US military arms losses. Then state and local law enforcement have guns stolen from their vehicles frequently. Former Orlando POLICE CHIEF Val Demings had her service handgun stolen from her unmarked SUV in 2009,and years later,it still hasn’t been recovered. OPD has “lost” 2 AR-15 kits,and had 2 machine guns stolen from vehicles.
      Post-9-11,several armed Federal employees have LEFT their loaded handguns on commercial air flights and deplaned,the guns being discovered by other passengers. One guy in Alabama stole rifles (real assault rifles,select-fire) and grenades from Anniston Army Depot.
      guns will ALWAYS be available to those who really want them.

      1. Some cops in Lake County Indiana got busted a few years back for selling guns on the black market, one of which (I believe) was used in a murder in Arizona. That’s how the cops got busted. Your tax dollars at work.

  17. Paul,

    This is a good article, but–really– no one here cares that much about the burgeoning of SkyNet or that very soon cyborgs shall drive tanks over piles of human skulls.

    It’s really more about how we treat billionaires from whom all good things spring and how we can defeat the odious plans of public employees’ unions from which all evil seeps. So maybe you should strive to be more topical.

    1. more like, Tupla-cal, am I right?

      1. He’s nothing like Tulpa. They’re both completely different kinds of idiots.

    2. no one here cares that much about the burgeoning of SkyNet or that very soon cyborgs shall drive tanks over piles of human skulls.

      And yet you post that right below over a dozen posts bemoaning that very thing.

      1. Does not compute. Does not compute.

        Bleep bloop.

        *AmSock’s head explodes*

      OR WHAT?
      GO AWAY
      FUCK YOU

      Fuck you, asshole.

      1. They can program them to say, “I know now why you cry. But it’s something I can never do.”

        Because that shit would be HILARIOUS when it’s hovering over some scumbag protestor into whose eyeballs it’s just emptied its pepper-spray payload.

  18. Law enforcement wasn’t the only one who disapproved of the legislation. A representative from the North Dakota Department of Commerce, the vice president of an economic development group, the founder of a drone company, and the director of the University of North Dakota’s drone major program all testified against the bill.

    Um… a drone major? What in the fuck does one learn in a “drone” major?

    1. Maybe they misspelled “drum”

    2. Same sort of shit that you learn when getting a degree in ‘Homeland Security’.

      How to suck on the government’s teat.

      1. You misspelled cock.

    3. It is a drone operation/maintenance course. How to fix and fly them. I actually know someone in the course. Before this change in the law he was hoping for a job with Border Patrol/ICE.
      As I understand it, most of the drone operators are not LE. This might change with the arming of drones. Not that civilian operators make it better from a privacy perspective.

      1. Law enforcement *are* civilian operators.

        1. You are correct Sir. Make that non LE operators.

  19. http://www.politico.com/story/…..ems-213156

    Rats are leaving the ship. Tell me again how it was going to be Jeb versus Hillary? Why were so many people on here convo vines this idiot even had. A chance.

    1. I admit I was afraid it was going to be between Jeb and Hillary, but that was before Trump

      1. Even without Trump, it was always obvious Jeb had no chance. After Romney, no way we’re republican voters going to go for the “he is a centrist and can win” candidate.

        1. That’s what superdelegates and convention rules are for. Bush can’t win the primary but he can claim the nomination as his “divine right” through the machinations of establishment hacks, billionaire backers and the family machine.

          1. can claim the nomination as his “divine right” through the machinations of establishment hacks, billionaire backers and the family machine.

            Wait, are you talking about Hillary or Jeb here?

            1. Precisely why even now, the Clinton/Bush Bash seems like the most likely outcome to me. We’ll see of course, but I don’t think either group is creative enough to break out of their respective ‘destinies’.

        2. After Romney, no way we’re republican voters going to go for the “he is a centrist and can win” candidate.

          John, if you’re going to drink this heavily this early in the day you’ve got to lay off the pills Agile gave you. When you sober up, come down off the roof and find your pants, you’re going to be embarrassed when you find out you’ve been posting crazy nonsense like this. After Bush I, the GOP voters went for Dole and after that Bush II and then McCain and after McCain they went for Romney – after enough times you catch him in the litter box, you just gotta face the fact that your dog likes the taste of cat shit.

          1. And everyone like you swore they were going to go for Jeb. How is that working out for you?

            And come and talk to me when you get off the crack and are willing to face the sad reality that the world doesn’t live up to your stereotypes.

            1. Okay, they only have lived up to his stereotypes since 1991. Broken clock much? Oh, and before you do your victory lap, McCain was in a worse place now than Jeb Bush is.

          2. Never mind sobering up; how about getting a macroscopic device to post thru? After seeing the autocorrect abortion that was “convo vines”, I’m imagining John posting via one of those handheld mechanical calculators where you’d swipe a stylus thru slots to add digits. Then again, hadn’t seen any entertaining John autocorrects in a while.

        3. So I guess the question is, does Hillary now go against a Republican who is truly unelectable?

    2. According to the article the rats claim to have just scampered across the hawser to Jeb!’s dreadnought of a PAC, Divine Right to Rise. While it’s good to see Jeb down he’s not out. Now’s the time for Republicans to dogpile on and put the boots to him.

      1. No, now is not that time because Trump. When Trump is down and broken, then it’s time hurt Jeb.

        1. Trump does well as long so Jeb is a threat. Vanquish Jeb and the “anybody but Jeb”-Trump supporters will start looking for a new candidate.

          1. I doubt that. They are in love with their version of Obama.

            1. The Donald just announced that he’s going to send Canuck assholes that meddle in US affairs to Siberia.

              Go Trump!

  20. Has anyone ever built some kind of counter-drone for taking down “peeping tom” drones that may come onto their property or perhaps government drones in a SHTF scenario?

    It could basically be another drone that would fling a net or a bolas that would tangle the propellers of the target drone.

    1. I’m going to say one word, just one word…Freakin Lasers!

      1. Yeah, buts its waaaay to dry out here for the sharks.

  21. When the technology allows for remote roadside cavity searches, I’ll be impressed. Until then, yawn.

    1. They are working on that.

      1. I’m trying to figure out how it could possibly be done. All I can come up with is 2-drone teams consisting a a speculum unit that comes in and “establishes a perimeter” (wink wink), at which point the probe unit is sent it.

        1. You have a future with DARPA Karl.

        2. I think I saw that in a Japanese pron flick once . . . .

          1. I think I saw that in a Japanese pron flick once . . . .

            When you watch Japanese porn, it becomes pretty evident that they, as a society, are simply batshit crazy. Germans, too. Can you imagine what our porn would be like if they’d won the war? It would be tentacles and poo, all the way down.

  22. So Flanagan is complaining that watermelons had been placed around the station in a racist attempt to …. I dunno. Reminds me of when I was in uni and I was working as an upholsterer. One day, I made a little gingerbread man out of brown naughahyde and dangled it from the sewing machine as a decoration for the next guy. The next guy was an exchange student from Cameroon and, well, let’s just say he didn’t accept my explanation.

    1. Mentally unstable paranoiac is mentally unstable and paranoid.

      1. Like I say below, before he went and killed those people, I can’t see how he was any crazier than someone like Tnisha Coats or anyone who writes for Jezebel.

        1. That’s damning by faint praise…or, in this case, is it praise by faint damning?

      2. I admitted that perhaps that could’ve been interpreted in the way he saw it. Thing was everybody hated this guy cuz he was nuts. I was the only guy that talked to him and took shit from my co workers for doing so. Sometimes, as you say HM, as nut is a nut.

      3. “Mentally unstable paranoiac is mentally unstable and paranoid.”

        You can’t call black people who see race everywhere crazy, HM, or Bo will assure you this is racist.

        Remember: Only white crazies are allowed to be criticized. If we treat black people equally and criticize them based on their actual, individual behavior, that’s clearly racist because one time slavery happened or something.

      4. A lady in Georgia sued a local government because she was on a bus going to some civil rights anniversary remembrance and she saw a white police officer eating a banana.

        A historical house museum planted small plots of traditional crops including a short row of cotton. Multiple people complained about the “racist plant.

        My favorite example remains the big controversy over TV weather reports of “black ice” forming on the roadways.

        All these examples well predate the current fashion of identifying micro-aggressions.

        1. Don’t forget those racist black holes

    2. I keep reading things about Flannigan and right up until he pulled the trigger he didn’t seem any more crazy than your typical media or campus SJW. In fact, he seemed a bit saner than most of them.

      How many people have to die before we get common sense gun control that keeps guns out of the hands of SJWs?

      1. Him killing his cats in the woods because his EEOC claim didn’t go the way he wanted was pretty insane.

        1. I hadn’t heard that. Yeah, that is pretty crazy. But his actual views were not any crazier than any of the rest of them.

        2. That was in preparation for his retaliatory shooting, I believe.

  23. How many people have to die before we get common sense gun control that keeps guns out of the hands of SJWs?

    I can’t imagine this ever being a widespread problem. After all, how many of these people would actually ever know how to operate a firearm? These are people who, if they found a gun on the floor, would pick up by the thumb and forefinger, like it was a dead bug.

    1. And then look down the barrel

      1. And then look down the barrel, shake it, and ask, “Is this thing loaded?”

        1. And then look down the barrel, shake it, and ask, “Is this thing loaded?”

          On my other computer – the one that’s crashed – I had a GIF that showed James May (Top Gear) doing this very thing with a shotgun, as Jeremy and Richard quickly step over to take it away from him.

          1. I saw a still of that with the caption “Why gun laws are so strict in the UK”

      2. “Is this thing on?” BLAM!

    2. most of the mass shooters were DemocRATs. ….aka SJWs.
      Senators Feinstein and Schumer are gun owners.despite being anti-gun.
      Steven Spielberg is a gun owner despite being anti-gun,he has possibly the largest private gun collection in the US.

      1. Well duh, he’s trying to get them off the streets by buying them all. Sheesh.

    3. “These are people who, if they found a gun on the floor, would pick up by the thumb and forefinger, like it was a dead bug.”


  24. not unlike U.S. Air Force pilots who bomb the so-called Islamic State, widely known as ISIS, from more than 5,000 miles away.

    He says that like there is some difference between doing it with a drone or doing it with a manned aircraft.

    1. Kinda like the difference between a live penis and a dildo I’m thinking.

      1. For the *pilot* maybe.

        Not so much for the people on the receiving end.

  25. Media Hackery 101: When progressives say something it is simply true, when conservatives say something it is said to be true.

    “In coverage of Roanoke killings, the right sees a racial media bias

    “”Whereas the media spent weeks after the murders in Charleston discussing Dylann Roof’s racism and even drummed up an entire tangent against the Confederate flag?because in one photo Roof was seen with one?the race war that Flanagan wanted is of less interest to some in the media,” wrote Breitbart’s Warner Todd Huston in an editorial. “CNN, for instance, wrote an entire report focused on Flanagan’s mental state but mentioned his comments about race only once in a 1,500 word story. A CBS report never mentioned the shooter’s racial comments at all.””

    Conservatives say something provably accurate, WaPo behaves as if it’s just those crazy right-wingers acting up again.

    1. There’s epic leftist projection in the most-liked comments. Did you know that conservatives and Republicans like to play the “victim card” and “imagine conspiracies”? And that the left-wing bias of the media is a “myth”?

      1. To be fair, they do.

        1. They do, it’s just that they’re not in this case. The point is that you can’t have this obvious double standard where a crazy racist white guy is used to castigate the entire south and talk about the evil racists all around us, while a crazy racist black guy murdering white people is completely glossed over as ‘mental illness.’

          Right-wingers engage in the same whinging victim game the leftists do, but in this case they are spot on.

          1. True that.

  26. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4Ct-GZgExQ

    Mom calls cop on her son because he won’t do homework. They put him in a squad car with handcuffs on and that’s not okay.

    1. will I believe what happens next?

      1. #4 will SHOCK you!

        1. They give him a McGruff sticker badge, ruffle his hair, and apologize for his mother?

          1. 12 reasons why your son won’t do homework.

    2. I read stories like this from time to time, parents asking police to help “scare their kids straight” over trivial shit like homework or messy rooms. I wonder, what would happen if one of these kids decided to put up an actual fight?

      Im just kidding, I don’t wonder.

      1. There was a woman who called the cops on her mentally ill son having a minor fit. It really wasn’t that big a deal, but when the cops arrived he was holding a screwdriver and lunged at them so they shot him to death.

        You’ve been warned, but the Youtube video is below.


        That’s why if it’s at all possible you deal with family shit yourself.

        1. Before clicking the link, I figured it was about Keith Vidal. I hadn’t seen this one. Lovely.

        2. “That’s why if it’s at all possible you deal with family shit yourself.”

          I think a lot of our stupid laws are in place because too many parents refuse to do that.

        3. Over a stupid screwdriver? Really? WTF?

      2. [Jots down note for Home Alone/Scared Straight mashup]

  27. The main thing about drones (or any unmanned technology) that should concern people is how they increase the propensity for confrontational engagement because they reduce the ‘risk’ of personal harm (to authorities) to zero.

    Meaning, they will be employed in a confrontational in situations that otherwise actual people would have engaged in a non-confrontational manner.

    Not because cops would have said, “well i didn’t wrestle the suspect to the ground because i didn’t want to get hurt”, but rather that in person-to-person engagements, people resort to a variety of diplomatic-coercive options before whipping out the pepper spray and the billy club.

    otherwise known as “human nature”. We just don’t leap to violence as the first option in every situation. Cops will say, “Let’s not do this the hard way” to get people to comply… and they do, because a modicum of ‘rationality’ prevails.

    Whereas with a device like this… that’s *all it has*. Violence, or nothing. In fact, its value requires using its capability as quickly as possible. Imagine the embarrassment if its hovering and someone smashes it with a bat? Some operator is going to get reprimanded. So it will “spray wildly” whenever employed, never mind the busload of nuns and schoolkids.

    1. So it will “spray wildly” whenever employed, never mind the busload of nuns and schoolkids.

      When cops miss and shoot innocent bystanders, their target is held responsible. This will be no different.

    2. I see your point, but doesn’t a drone also have intimidation as a non-violent aspect? In the same way a helicopter does. They both give the message: “You can’t hide from the eye in the sky.”

      1. no, because a human has a range of violent options that they can ‘escalate’ to. A cop can wrestle a perp to the ground, pepper spray them, baton them, taser them, or shoot them. The decision of how much force to apply depends entirely on instantaneous assessment of threat levels

        *(insert jokes about how shooting has become the ‘first resort’ here)

        Whereas these devices have only 1 (at best 2) possible options on how they serve their purpose. And as noted, they’re only effective when those options are deployed immediately, sans ‘warning’ or other de-escalating attempts.

    3. We just don’t leap to violence as the first option in every situation.

      9 dead bikers beg to differ.

      1. Biker-riots are clearly not ‘every situation’.

        Although I’m sure if they had them, the Waco cops would have unleashed pepper-spray bots on the entire crowd. Its actually a situation where tech might possibly have reduced the number of shootings.

    4. “in person-to-person engagements, people resort to a variety of diplomatic-coercive options before whipping out the pepper spray and the billy club.”

      This seems to be a challenge for the po-po. Indeed their feeling threatened and need to prove how manly they are work in the opposite direction, which is why I come to the opposite conclusion about the use of drones.

      1. That’s nice.

        1. Why so bitchy?

    5. only an idiot would think police will spray tear gas anywhere near a busload of nuns or schoolkids .Besides,why would those kids or nuns be around a riot where such tools would be employed?
      Your response is the typical “progressive” nonsense,irrational and not thought-out.

      1. Cops won’t discharge anything. “While the nuns and schoolkids were in the area, tear gas and rubber bullets were discharged from the drone. Frank Smith, the target of our investigation, has been charged with assault. Further investigation showed Mr. Smith had 0.2 grams of marijuana in his car.”

      2. the sound you just heard was colorful hyperbole going over your head.

        try going back and re-reading everything i said before that sentence.

  28. “Police always seem to want to push the boundaries as far as the law will take them and sometimes over those boundaries,” said Timm.

    When they face no consequences for their actions, then of course they’re going to go over the boundaries. Just watch. The cops will equip their drones with lethal weapons, use them to kill unarmed people who are not breaking any laws, and nothing else will happen.

    1. Boundaries with no consequences are just suggestions.

    1. I liked the first comment:

      “That’s something you don’t hear every day from Jewish transgenders.”

      Seriously guy, know that many?

      But I agree, Reason should do an interview. I love that she cites Chris Morris as a hero.

    2. I never thought Spiked! would become arguably better what Reason does than Reason.

      1. Spiked is probably a better libertarian outlet at this point than reason.


        I like them because if you look at their website they’re much more global in reach. The discuss issues all over the planet and also have better foreign policy coverage than Reason, although given Richman’s foreign policy posts that isn’t really difficult.

        1. Hasn’t their editor…. Brendan… something…. been featured here a few times?

          1. Yeah, O’Neill’s written some great articles on free speech for both National Review and Reason.

            1. I was just poking around their site. First problem I see is that they don’t have any proper “blog” format which allows browsing everything in a timeline….

              …second, their RSS feed only delivers headlines.

              And most of their content is longer-form book reviews, from what I can tell, rather than daily snark on everything.

              Basically, they make themselves hard-to-read, at least in the context of modern, snappy internet-journalism.

              1. Long-form book reviews are the only kind worth reading. I cannot stand the fact that “review” has come to mean “400 words about how I liked a movie”.

                1. Yep. Spiked is worthwhile if only for their book reviews.

                  1. I just read what seems like the most even-handed review of “Go Set a Watchman” there.

                2. I didn’t mean to suggest that their content wasn’t up to snuff…

                  … just that it wasn’t “Something new every hour” which encourages regular reference for updates, and develops the kind of steady-reader-audience that leads to a robust discussion-forum

                  1. They do delete comments, too. I mean, I would be constantly deleted! No, thank you.

        2. Also, I have to assume their comment section and website as a whole doesn’t feel like a trip to 1999. It MUST be better because it can’t not be.

          Same for the foreign policy talk. No Krayeski + No Richman = can’t not be better.

          What is the history of Spiked? Is it new and was always like this or is it a more established mag that evolved our way? I hope the latter. Would make up for losing Vice.

          1. Spiked is pretty new. They’ve only been around since like 2001, which I guess in Internet Years makes them about 3000 years old. Spiked also has a great book review and culture section.

            1. I would sat 2001 makes them pretty old. Were they always this libertarian or is it an evolution?

            2. has a great book review and culture section

              I just read this review of the Coates book. It was pretty good.

              Thanks for the site share.

        3. I love this line from Spiked’s article on FEMINISM AND THE TURN AGAINST ENLIGHTENMENT:

          This isn’t women vs men. It isn’t even feminists vs the authorities. No, the new feminism is simply the external expression of the internal corrosion of Western values, the acceptable face of what I think we should view as the unacceptable decommissioning of the ideas that created the modern, democratic world. And as such, it is bad for men and women.

  29. I looked over last night’s thread, and Jesus. What got up Tulpa’s ass? He’s always pathetic, but he usually manages to keep a better lid on his anger than that.

    1. Which thread? And does he still go by Tulpa?

      (I’ve been away for a while)

      1. The Rand Paul thread. It was as his Bo character this time.

          1. I’m not convinced.

            Mostly because I don’t care.

          2. What are Tulpa’s obsessions? That we’re not serious, that we fail to respect his genius properly, that we’re glib, that we’re a clique, and above all, that he’s a pariah here. Now, tell me, what are Bo’s obsessions?

            1. 1) Tulpa screwed up and ‘crossed the streams’, compromising his Bo sock.

              2) Last night’s thread pretty much sealed the deal. Bo was an echo of Tulpa.

              1. I bet he was shitfaced last night. He was really angry and all his normal attempts to restrain his true dick nature were absent.

                Tulpa’s not his “real” persona either. I guarantee you his claims of being a math PhD are a lie, like everything else he says. He’s too much of a loser and too unable to take responsibility for his own actions to ever do anything like earn a PhD.

                Maybe it’s better to call him “cunnivore”, since that was the earliest handle I know of him using here. Except that that’s a really pitifully stupid handle, and I

                And I can’t believe how much he’s still seething about my throwaway comment years ago about how he must be a virgin. Which can only mean that it must be true and he HATES that fact.

            2. I think your analysis has merit.

              But as has been said before… does it matter? its just as possible he’s just another major douche with a similar obsessive complex

              Filter and forget.

              1. I would like everyone to give my genius the proper respect as well.

              2. Oh, it doesn’t matter, not really. I just find him interesting in an appalling sort of way. I’m waiting for him to kill his cats, bury them in the woods, and then live-tweet his murder of a few commenters.

                1. I like the idea that there are fewer idiots than there appear to be, but the insanity of that one idiot is frightening.

                  1. I wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprised if he’s Kizone Kaprow/Mary too. We attract some real winners here.

                    1. I’ve known too many people in real life who were like Tulpa, Bo, Tony and Mary to believe that they’re just simply sock puppets.

                    2. Warty, if you think that one person is playing all those parts, then you’re giving way too much credit where none is due. Anyone smart enough to pretend to be all those dumb people would be too smart to actually do it. No, I believe they’re all different, but similarly stupid, people.

                    3. See, I’m not sure about that, because Tulpa’s insults are pathetic, but Bo’s insults cross over into a whole other dimension of pathetic.

                      Also, Bo just reminds me too much of a lonely, pathetic chip-on-his-shoulder university student to be a Poe. This is a guy who seems to think that people discussing their normal lives here is some great sin. Yes, why on earth would people with similar political beliefs and interests wish to bond? I mean, obviously what libertarians should be doing is collectively insulting everyone else and engaging in Republican witch-hunts. It’s like the guy is incapable of actually understanding normal social interaction, and then lectures everyone on how their interactions are awful. It’s a self-obsession and lack of self-awareness that’s just too familiar to me.

  30. The arm of the state at it again?

    REfOrMzzzz!!!!! We must rEfORM!!!!

    Reform: We’re keeping this shit no matter what you say, but since you caught us and we still need your votes, we’re gonna do bad stuff more secretly……and still extort your bitch ass too!

    1. Is there some translate feature that can make sense of this?

      1. Not too hard to understand. Folks call for reform all the time. How can you reform a violent coercive monopoly, or even expect it to protect anyone’s rights?

        The Private production of security and defense has and can be done more efficiently and effectively by free individuals.

        1. You can’t have free individuals without the state.

          And you obviously can reform. There this thing called ‘history’ and it’s clear from it that the state can be mellowed.

          1. You are somehow saying that socialism is magically effective and efficient when it comes to security and defense? And also that the state is necessary for people to be free? This is nonsense. You brought up the word history, but clearly ignored it.

            The existence of the state itself is antithetical to liberty. It requires violence in order to exist. That violates the NAP, and individuals couldn’t possibly be free when forced to work for the benefit of the state against their will.

            If you wish to be a slave, do so on your own. Don’t try and hide behind the state and rally as it forces others into slavery because you are to weak to defend your own liberty.

            “You can’t have free individuals without the state.”
            And the slaver of the century award goes to you.

            1. That’s not socialism. You can’t have the conditions necessary for free markets to exist without a government monopoly on the retaliatory use of force because all force is a monopoly.

              1. Bullshit. Ancient Ireland and medieval Iceland did just that, with the absence of the state. No government should have a monopoly on anything.

                State ownership of the means of production, even defense is socialism (which has many faces).

                1. Those are your anarcho-utopias? Thanks I’ll take Renaissance Venice or even the Hanseatic League over those barely civilized backwaters. Minarchism wins again.

          2. You can’t have free individuals with the state. Anarchism hasn’t been tried very often when it was it showed promise. San Francisco was in a state of de facto if not official anarchy. Society did not collapse. Anarchists had control of parts of Spain during the Spanish Civil War and things were going well until the anarchists were caught between the fascists and the communists.

            1. Thats very nice for you. When did you start confusing libertarians with anarchists?

              1. Um, maybe you should read libertarian anarchy by Gerard Casey.

              2. In response to Gilmore, not all libertarians are minarchists. Was Rothbard not a libertarian? Or was he no true libertarian because he was an anarchocapitalist? I used to be a more “normal” libertarian but eventually I no longer saw the necessity of a state, every service the state provides can be accomplished through voluntary association without the use of coercion. I could accept a minarchist compromise but I feel that the complete removal of government is the ideal we should strive towards.

            2. The places you cite were very transiently in a state of ‘anarchy’. If you want to know what anarchy really looks like, take a look at ’90s era Somalia.

              1. OMG!! Somalia!!!

                Lol, that is the same argument liberals use when trying to attack freedom. Somalia was worse off with a government. The condition of Somalia and similar places are not a condition of freedom, but of violent government.

                Areas where government really plays no part function fine. Watches, shoes, computers, jewelry, clothing. When was the last crisis, and how long did it last? And if you wish to go way back, privateers. The USS Constitution was grossly over budget, whereas the privateers didn’t face such cost overruns. And, they were more effective than any government naval ship from any country.

                1. “Somalia was worse off with a government. ”

                  Somalia’s socialist government =/= all government. Do you feel any shame making this specious arguments?

                  Also, Somaliland has a pretty minimal government and is doing better than the rest of Somalia, which has been doing better ever since it got a government.

                  “Areas where government really plays no part function fine. Watches, shoes, computers, jewelry, clothing. ”

                  Government creates the peaceful environment for those things to work.

                  1. Gov’t does not create a peaceful environment, as it’s very existence is though violence. Security and defense can be handled better and more efficiently by the market.

                    A person such as yourself that never served, and was never involved in procurement, or any other operations really has no clue. Maybe that’s why you’re stuck on military socialism.

                    The conditions in Somalia are because of government. The whole of Africa is a great example of the failure that is government, and outside involvement to keep the people down and strengthen the dictators and despots.

            3. Anarchy is sort of like big government. Under both, the most powerful and the lucky ones who don’t draw much attention will do ok. Everyone else, pretty much is under a constant threat of attack.

              1. Anarchy is nothing like big government. Aggressions against liberty can be dealt with immediately. Why do you think lobster fisherman aren’t constantly at war? It’s easier to respect the property of others. If you war with others, it is costly, those involved loose, and the others wind up fishing while the douchebags warring one another wind up broke and dead.

                1. If you war with others, it is costly, those involved loose, and the others wind up fishing while the douchebags warring one another wind up broke and dead.

                  Actually, if one plunders and rapes (in the Roman sense) it’s quite possible to make a profit. Doubly so, if one is willing to enslave your former opponents and sell them. This ‘warfare isn’t profitable’ nonsense is not supported by history. Do you think your beloved Icelanders didn’t use raiding as a means of income?

                  The day you have a state of anarchy is the day an Iskandar or Temujin or Caesar takes advantage of the situation and assumes control.

                  1. Yes, as happened in Spain. We may never achieve anarchy but I feel we should work towards that goal even if it is ultimately unattainable. You may feel government is necessary but I’m sure you recognize its evil nature.

                    1. Is your objection to anarchy that the thinking is fundamentally flawed or that anarchy is too weak to survive? Or both?

                    2. Mostly column A, a tad of column B. The thinking is flawed in the sense that it’s a broadly applied system that ignores the ambitions and diversity of individuals themselves. There certainly are some people willing to operate on a live and let live basis, but there’s plenty more who have either the ambition for power or a willingness to submit for the promise of an easy life. As Caesar himself said: “I’d rather be First Man of a Gaulish village than Second Man in Rome.” There will always be charismatic, ambitious individuals who wish to rule (and are capable of convincing people to submit to them and help them expand their influence) and there will always be people willing to be ruled. Of course, these ambitious individuals don’t disappear in a statist system, but there is at least potential and opportunity to limit them through legal, social, and cultural institutions, whereas the conqueror of an anarchist system can only be stopped by violence. Anarchy lays the framework for some asshole to impose himself through ‘might is right’, the very thing it rejects.

                      Outside of small voluntary groups (where I think anarchism has much more potential, say groups of one hundred to a thousand) it’s limited by human nature.

                    3. Valid points. It’s true that anarchy needs a population that understands the philosophy and desires anarchy. San Francisco in the 1850’s had a population more libertarian than Americans are today. Could anarchy work with larger populations? Maybe. I think the size of organized groups within the larger population would be self limiting in size. Statist societies are also susceptible to the rise of authoritarianism. The social and cultural institutions that would thwart the rise of a dictator could still exist in an anarchist society. Our own constitution has proven inadequate to hold governmental bloat in check. Mao, Pol Pot, Franco, et al rose to power through statism. A conventional libertopia could resist authoritarianism but this would require an educated population that desired a libertarian state. I guess any libertarian society whether minarchist or anarchist needs first a culture that desires and promotes liberty. I’m at work now so any further posting on my part may be sporadic, even if you’re still awake to read this. I’ve enjoyed the discussion.

                  2. Yup, but when they take your beloved policies of the state, that is expansion, currency debachery, and so on, it all comes crashing down. But thanks for explaining how violent the state is, and how governments have had a far worse history of violence than any free society.

                    1. You suggested that in your magical society aggression is unlikely and unprofitable. I have shown that is not the case. Yes Vampire, it’s entirely fair to compare real world states to your idealized, imaginary utopia. Pity you can’t tell the rape victims and slaves of your Icelanders that their pain is nothing to that of what the state would have brought them.

                    2. Indeed. Anarchism is another form of collectivism. It requires a New Anarchist Man just as much as the USSR required a New Soviet Man. Also, government is necessary for the environment. Banning leaded fuel and CFCs was a government triumph.

                    3. Cyto, anarchocommunism may be collectivist and it’s not something I ascribe to but at least it’s voluntary collectivism rather than being enforced at gunpoint. New Anarchist Man? Perhaps but the same could be said of any version of libertopia. Anarchocapitalism certainly isn’t collectivist. A powerful state is no garuntee of environmental protection, as we see in China. State power doesn’t work on behalf of the individual. Multiple competing consumer safety organizations might do a better job as watchdog. You could argue that these organizations might be paid off but their reputations would be the foundation of their future success. This is also why I say multiple competitive organizations. To the best of my knowledge Underwriters Laboratory has never sold out.

                    4. Never said aggression is unlikely. Stop being deceitful. The point you are ignoring is that governments have a horrible history of violence and aggression….which you keep blabbing on about, but are ignoring they are the most violent and the greatest danger to liberty.

                      Magical society? Sorry, ancient Ireland wasn’t magical. transactions that take place outside of government are real too. And private industry is far more efficient, and far less violent.

                      Again, the privateers were more efficient and effective than any gov’t ship. They were built more efficiently too. The cost overruns that riddled the USS Constitution (but not the privately built privateers) still happens till this day. It is not a coincidence.

                    5. “expansion, currency debachery, and so on”

                      Not happening in Singapore or Hong Kong.

    1. “”Self-defense is an affirmative defense but people have a duty to retreat when they’re outside the home,”

      Fuck you asshole.

    2. Well, unless your a cop. Then you get to go home safe, collect high fives from your tribesmen, and take a nice paid vacation.

    3. “Tart was released from prison in May 2014 after serving nine years for two armed robberies–”

      This is why the homeowner won’t be convicted.

      1. His dad’s a deputy sheriff. It’ll get dismissed.

        1. I sure hope so. I wouldn’t have gone after them like that once they were out of my home, but if I’m on that jury, there’s no way he gets convicted.

    4. It will be interesting to see if he is convicted. It will also be interesting to see if the father’s charges stand. One hour is pretty ridiculous. Does that mean the dead body was laying out for an hour?

      1. Also, 2pm is an odd time to be robbing a house. I would imagine the kid was a drug dealer.

        Akron police said that Glover and Tart walked into the home about 2 p.m. and tried to rob Hillis and two others inside the home.

        Hillis grabbed a gun and the duo ran.

        1. Yeah, that’s odd. Who walks into a house at 2 pm to rob people? Maybe to burglarize the place if nobody’s home, but that kind of home invasion sounds like somebody trying to be Omar, only without the shotgun.

        2. No, not at all. Professional burglars (as in, not junkies or kids) tend to go into houses when the family is at work.

  31. Sculptures of ancient monkeys

    The Neanderthal broad is pretty cute.

    1. Though I think the artist fucked up by giving any of them white skin. If I remember right, that mutation occurred only something like 5000 years ago.

      1. I don’t see the inclusion of any LGBT Neanderthal’s either.

      2. “the artist fucked up by giving any of them white skin”

        typical cuckservative

      3. Though I think the artist fucked up by giving any of them white skin. If I remember right, that mutation occurred only something like 5000 years ago.

        Given that white skin was an adaptation to compensate for less sun exposure, it’s possible that the Neanderthals at least developed the trait independently. Definitely a mistake for the rest of them, though…

        1. A 2007 genetic study that found they may have had red hair and light skin:


    2. And she’d probably have believed your pick-up story of you being an astronaut.

  32. OT: Can bitches be scraping their plates into the trash before putting them in the sink?


  33. Something better than tear gas for the rioters; a product called “Skunk”,a really,really vile liquid that can be sprayed on rioters,it takes many weeks for it to wear off,and is nasty enough to make a person gag or vomit. Then the rioters can be easily identified and arrested. it’s non-toxic,harmless.

    1. So spray it on people who might not be rioters but who you want cause to arrest or just screw up their lives for a few weeks?

      Cops must love this stuff.

      1. The chemical composition of “skunk” is FYTW

    2. “..,harmless.”?


  34. Nice work, North Dakota. Directly follow up a big getting it right with a huge getting it wrong. *facepalm*

  35. *facepalm**facepalm**facepalm**facepalm* arrrrghhh!
    I’ve had enough for the day.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.