As a Person of the Gun, I’m sure you noticed that the Second Amendment has nothing to say about what type of arms Americans have a natural right to keep and bear. Why would it? 2A ensures liberty via the threat of mutually assured destruction. If the citizenry are outgunned by government troops, the Second Amendment would be toothless and, thus, pointless.
Try telling that to the forces of civilian disarmament: pearl-clutchers who get their knickers in a twist at the sight of a black, military-style rifle in the hands of Joe the Plumber or similar. Statists whose champions defend against a common sense interpretation of the Second Amendment by demanding “Where do you draw the line? Do Americans have the right to keep and bear RPGs? Backpack nukes?”
Setting aside the irony of gun control advocates relying on the slippery slope argument to bolster their anti-ballistic bombast, I draw the line at weapons of mass destruction. Any and all hand-held firearms? Bien sur! Tanks? Yes (it’s a gun on wheels)! RPG’s? I’m open to discussion. Missiles? Not so much. Nuclear weapons? No. ‘Nuff said?
Here’s some related news from defensetech.org:
By the end of 2017, the commandant of the Marine Corps wants every Marine grunt squad downrange to carry an unmanned aerial vehicle for reconnaissance and surveillance.
Gen. Robert Neller described to Marines a brave new world of high-end threats, new technologies and an increasingly complex operating environment as he unveiled the new Marine Corps Operating Concept here at the Modern Day Marine expo.
The document describes future fights in littoral mega-cities, a battle of electromagnetic signatures, and an operating environment in which drones and unmanned systems shoulder more of the load.
“As machines advance from performing repetitive tasks to dynamic workloads, it will free people to focus on the things they do uniquely or best,” the concept document states. “The challenge, as machines become more capable and autonomous, is how to put people and things together in the most effective pairings for the mission at hand.”
And to put teeth to the vision, Neller laid out a timeline to incorporate at least one technology.
“At the end of next year, my goal is that every deployed Marine infantry squad had got their own quadcopter,” he said. “They’re like 1,000 bucks.”
We’ll get to the price in a second. Meanwhile, I’d like to point out that your average American has a right to keep and fly drones. As our recent post They Shoot Drones Don’t They? pointed out, the legality of where and when WtP can do so is under judicial and regulatory review.
For now, Americans have virtually unlimited access to this technology, which, as you now know (if you didn’t before), has military applications. Good! As mentioned above, our liberty depends on our ability to fight the forces of evil (for lack of a more provocative term) on an equal footing.
There’s even better news — at least for those of us who consider gun control the well-lighted path to extinction.
The MIX-16 exercise also employed a small number of pocket-sized PD-100 drone systems, made by Proxdynamics. But while these systems are lightweight and easy to operate, they don’t meet the $1,000 price point that Neller mentioned. The systems cost $50-$60,000 apiece, with additional costs for accessories.
One future solution Neller proposed is 3-D printing, a new technology being aggressively explored by the Marine Corps logistics community.
“Maybe we can just buy the design [for a quadcopter] and print our own,” Neller said. “I’m not joking.”
See what I mean about cost? See what Gen. Neller means about stopping the signal? I mean, if the U.S. Defense Department can’t stop the Marines from underspending their budget, what hope do the feds have of stopping Americans from owning cheap, military-useful drones?
Don’t answer that. I’m having too nice a day . . .