Subject: Re: UK Nanny State. Making Britain safe from freedom, on ban at atime
On 2017-11-27 23:08, Savageduck wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2017, RichA wrote
> (in article<email@example.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!!
>>> 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.
> ...and then we have this:
Ain't that violating some amendment???
So the flying of drones conflicted with saving children from buildings
on fire? Drones are soo coool...