From: Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
Subject: Re: UK Nanny State. Making Britain safe from freedom, on ban at a time
Full headers:
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.unit0.net!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:08:03 -0600
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 14:08:03 -0800
From: Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Hogwasher/5.17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <0001HW.1FCCC44301480B9C70000CE6E2CF@news.giganews.com>
Subject: Re: UK Nanny State. Making Britain safe from freedom, on ban at a time
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital
References: <c8bdd3a6-f005-4a9b-afe1-af5cda451693@googlegroups.com> <f81l3fF5tlfU1@mid.individual.net> <b7785217-d83a-46d2-a0a9-f0e789c28862@googlegroups.com>
Lines: 34
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-JaM0GYDJIWxqWJD2ws6Yxs11fQewQ5vUttes7jmAs/mifzPDb/5y5JWpWzdYKRgRzSBTUs1EJ8TpIkZ!Hb2G9C6oKmD0htYsv6U+4kuxdBgszjYO97fbYGtMr2P1K7SZqlC8MuO070/BQgA3DWCvd9MRmhl8!9NXX9+mHfxg=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2546
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3646115111
X-Received-Bytes: 2789
Print Article
Forward Article
On Nov 27, 2017, RichA wrote
(in article<b7785217-d83a-46d2-a0a9-f0e789c28862@googlegroups.com>):

> On Monday, 27 November 2017 00:11:19 UTC-5, android wrote:
> > On 2017-11-27 00:15, RichA wrote:
> > > Sure, it's ok to blanket a country with 500,000 CCTV cameras, ensuring no
> > > one will ever have any kind of privacy again except locked in their
> > > bedrooms with no windows, but fly a drone above 400ft? BAN IT!!
> > >
> > > http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42126150
> > They better have their devices turned off and left in another room too.
> > Anyways, they have chosen to go their own way now outside the union...
> > But you being one of HM subjects do have a vested interest, of course! :-))
> >
> > Privately flied drones are both invasion of privacy and safety, no doubt...
>
> Progress entails risk. The "not in my backyard" types should be relegated to
> Luddism they deserve, they should go live in caves somewhere.
>
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/2794527040/proposed-uk-bill-will-let-p...
> cers-ground-and-seize-drones

....and then we have this:

<http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Drone-pilot-arrested-for-drop...
leaflets-over-12385138.php>

<http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/16/firefighters-say-drones-inter...
with-their-work-one-pilot-arrested>
-- 

Regards,
Savageduck