>have an RC drone
>have video feedback
>have pistol firing capability
>literally kill whomever you want
>never get caught
>repeat
>??????
>profit
http://www.insideedition.com/headlines/11112-faa-investigates-after-teen-fires-pistol-shooting-drone-says-it-was-for-his-studies
>>74710726
Lots of people are fiddling with this. They don't post video of it to YouTube like retards, though
>>74711147
Just think about it... You can kill anyone you want and never get caught.
>>74710726
Old news
Regardless, why does it matter? There's absolutely nothing illegal about strapping a gun to your RC and flying it around your yard
Manufactured concern
>>74712258
actually any kind of electric trigger, or remote control weapons system in general, in civilian hands is SUPER illegal.
>>74712485
Not in the US of A.
I actually don't like drones. They should have only been for the military, the police and firefighters and rescue stuff.
This smells like some sort of false flag.
>>74712485
Maybe in Australia
Even if you determine a drone as an aircraft, as long as the pilot wasn't being negligent it's perfectly legal
It's not a violation of the NFA either because it's still clearly visible that it is a gun.
>>74712258
I know it's old news. I decided to look into the authenticity of being fire a live round from drone. I wonder why it hasn't happened yet. You can literally go on a killing spree and never get caught.
>>74712017
You could get caught but if you really want to kill someone and not get caught you have pretty good chances. Pretty sure only about 50% of murders are solved in the US.
>>74712485
>>74712645
Yeah what the fuck are you talking about Australia?
>>74712997
Meant that this probably won't change anything.
What's the difference between drones and RC helicopters?
>>74710726
So begin your reign of terror and/or street cleaning already.
>>74712737
I bet you'd say the same thing about your second ammendment rights faggot.
>>74710726
>cant get caught
> using a device tied directly to your pad or phone
>registered
>100m range
>using cell data to control
>not going to get caught
>>74710726
i'd assume the recoil would crash the drone.
>>74712917
>have too register drone
>drone falls out of flight because cheap shitty battery
> man reads liscense number and calls police
or
> fly drone with pistol
> call cops
> swat comes within 2-3 minutes
> get gun number on side of weapon
> get swatted possibly killed because they track it back too you
>>74713527
Depends on the type of gun, if a .22lr gun is attached it probably wouldn't crash.
>>74710726
>says it was for his studies
definitely aerospace engineering student material. You don't get your degree until you do something retarded because you can't be fucked to get permission.
>>74713480
Yeah a black market will be required.
Although they do already exist. It depends entirely on how easily one can move out of target range without being captured on video.
Illegal television and radio transmissions have been used in the past, but you don't have a lot of time to get out of dodge.
>>74712737
kill yourself
>>74712645
>>74713048
>Firearms within the definition of machinegun include weapons that shoot, are designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger.
You could potentially find yourself in hot shit if the ATF decides to come after you. If the remote trigger could be held down allowing multiple shots to be fired with a single pull of your RC trigger, or could be "readily restored to shoot" as decided by the ATF in such a manner you'd be looking at a felony.
The readily restored clause is the really fucked up part and opens you up to a lot of liability if you design the circuit incorrectly.
>>74713704
>current year
>having registered guns
>>74712737
dude they are fucking fantasic i have one with one of these vr helmets haven't done it yet but i will fly see my drone live, shitting my pants almost every time i crash into a tree or airplane
>>74712017
Want to know how to not get caught? Don't post about it on facebook. Don't make a youtube video about it. Don't talk to your friends about it, no matter how much you trust them. Don't even post about it when you assume you're being anonymous. Just shut the fuck up and enjoy not being caught.
>>74714076
Literally this. A huge portion of murders are caught because they tell someone
>>74710726
>>74712017
I know that it seems morbid that this new method seems impossible to trace, but the grim reality is that murder is easy to get away with. If this drone user were, instead, to show up in a dark, secluded area with his target and pull the trigger himself, while wearing a hair-net, rubber gloves, and dark clothing which obscures the face, then immediately walk to a forest in order to disassemble his gun and bury it, he would only be caught if there were a lucky witness. Crime dramas make it seem like detectives are these genius puzzle-solvers who crack every case, but the reality is that the overwhelming majority of criminals are caught because they're stupid. For a criminal to not go about his crime in the most inefficient and obvious way possible would hinder an investigation immensely. Usually this means that the case will be unsolved. This is also why so many serial killers get caught: They get bored of having nobody come even close to finding them. So this new drone-gunning method is nothing new at worst, and something good at best. After all: Drones are conspicuous due to their flight or bulk, they're expensive and uncommon, they have serial numbers (like the guns on top of them) and specialized parts, and anybody who really wanted to murder someone would seek more reliable and traditional methods anyway.
Honestly, I'm a fan of the idea of new sports involving flying drones shooting at each other.
>>74710726
i always thought drones would become a weapon for terrorists in the near future. if terrorism is about inducing fear and disrupting normal life while killing randomly, then it would be logical that they would harness a mode of destruction delivery that didn't need them to blow themselves up. why not fit a bomb, nail bomb, ball-bearing bomb or chemical bomb to a drone, or a set of drones and have them fly into a crowd, or fly to set gps co-ordinates at a set time? they could let them go far away from their targets or time delay their launch and then it would all happen remotely.
i wouldn't be surprised if one day there is a drone attack on some sort of rally or march where there are thousands of people together in close quarters on a street. i hope it doesn't happen, but eventually it will. it is too good a tool for evil people to pass up.
>>74713955
lol okay so it has to be a semi-automatic. In what way does a gun being attached to a drone imply automatic firing?
>>74712017
>whoever you want
Not really. That guy you really hate and got in an argument last weak? The police will look into you and find your gun that matches the bullets. They will also notice the RC controllers you thought were well hidden in your garage.
>>74712258
Electronic fire control systems are illegal.
t. ATF
>>74714290
If they're going to go that far, wouldn't it make more sense to just use bombs or even RPGs, IEDs, and missiles?
>>74710726
I don't understand why the FAA and gubmint is getting so obsessed over this shit
People have had and owned remote control helicopters for years
whats the ACTUALL difference between a "drone" and a remote control helicopter?
![ATF-shoestring-machine-gun-2004[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/CFZoaln.jpg "ATF-shoestring-machine-gun-2004[1].jpg")
>>74714372
Say that you are using a simple setup where you are using an electric motor that rotates small metal crank that pushes in the trigger and fires the weapon.
If you can press a button on the RC controller, hold it down, and fire multiple shots from using the RC motor on the gun (automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger) the ATF could consider it a machinegun.
Sounds absurd? The doc in the pic defines a piece of string as a machinegun.
>>74712737
If it has fighting capabilities it should be covered under the 2nd amendment
>>74714252
>immediately walk to a forest in order to disassemble his gun and bury it
Dogs.
>>74710726
>>literally kill whomever you want
>>never get caught
First, it's a bit hard to aim. Even the actual combat drones don't hit 100% and they don't use pistol rounds, they use fucking cannons and missiles.
Guided missiles at that.
Secondly, "never get caught"? RC drones have a limited range. You're lucky to be 400m away from the drone and target.
However, I have wondered why nobody has taken a cheap drone or even RC car, strapped explosives on it and driven it into a crowd or near a government figure, and then detonated.
That actually has some chance of success, especially the first time. (After which they will introduce bans and registries for them).
>>74712997
Reminder that probably 95% of that 50% are dumb niggers who don't know shit about criminal forensics and leave finger prints everywhere.
>>74714940
Lake?
>>74714893
I don't think it applies in this case. You are not shooting it yourself the drone is. I'm not sure about the legality of owning a remote control flying gun.
>>74714692
Drones are capable of flying without direct control.
Most drones don't but are still capable.
RC helicopters cannot.
>>74714893
You're not holding it, so 2nd amendment doesn't apply. The drone doesn't have rights.
>>74714940
Are there dogs that can smell gun parts through dirt? Sounds cool, but the police can't justify combing every inch of the local (apparently unrelated) forest with search dogs. If there's no hidden body, they would just assume that the killer still has the gun with him and that they thereby have no need to search for buried items. Which is reasonable.
Even then, a person could just disguise the smell or bury it in such a way that the smell can't even be detected by a dog. They might even try to break down the weapon using tools or an incinerator. Besides: They don't need to do any of that. If they didn't leave their DNA at the crime scene, didn't get witnessed, and didn't have a significant motive, the killer wouldn't be investigated anyway. They could just keep the gun where they normally keep it and be completely fine.
>>74715146
>>74715409
Mounting a firearm to a drone falls under the same category the ATF has for unmanned booby traps. They are illegal under federal firearms regulations.
>>74715460
I doubt dogs can smell metal parts, its more likely to be the discharge residue
>>74715653
Oh sure. But discharge residue wouldn't be significant enough to follow in a trail all the way to some random forest, so it wouldn't give the investigators a lead anyway. If I had really been more interested in concocting an invincible murder plot, I would have included that the killer should burn the clothes he was wearing after destroying the rest of the evidence. Even that would be unnecessary, though, as there's nothing innately suspicious about a firearm owner having discharge residue on their clothing.
>>74715460
You don't want to escape into a forest after doing someone unless if you're making your way to the getaway vehicle, they will bring out the dogs. Neither you want to bury the murder weapon as the dogs will be able to smell it out (and you can't mask the smell, if anything your attempts will just provoke them more).
Don't think you can outrun a dog in a forest, either. Crossing water doesn't work and you can only play so much time. Only way to take out a dog patrol is to take out the handler.
There's nothing wrong leaving the scene in a vehicle and then, when you're safe, getting rid of the evidence in a forest, though. But you don't want to flee cops there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Viwwetf0gU
>>74713955
machine guns are banned for sale and purchase
fortunately the right to bear arms lets us build whatever we want
>>74716233
>machine guns are banned for sale and purchase
But that's fucking wrong. Any machine gun registered before the Hughes Amendment passed in 1986 can be legally transferred as long as you're willing to deal with NFA bullshit.
>>74716110
That's ridiculous. Guns may be loud, but if the murder happens in a secluded area then the police aren't just going to magically be in pursuit the instant it's fired. It takes too long for people to understand that the sound they heard was a gunshot, communicate this to the police, and for the police to actually arrive. The police won't bring out dogs because they can be reasonably certain that they're already too late. Even if they're in close proximity when the shot happens, they aren't going to have dogs with them anyway. They would need a K9 unit to drive over.
>>74714252
>Crime dramas make it seem like detectives are these genius puzzle-solvers who crack every case
Pretty much this. Take a walk through your local state university criminal justice department and witness the specimens destined to become detectives. Most of the CJ majors I know failed or quit their original major, and settled on Criminal justice because the perceived it as easy courses, with stable career prospects, that would get them a gun and a car. You aren't going to come across many valedictorians, or other high achievers in this field. The small fraction who are highly competent get gobbled up by the fed, and aren't likely to be investigating run of the mill murders.
>>74714796
Pretty sure single shot capability is 'good enough' for these people and that automatic firing would be impossible anyways. For a blowback system, the gun needs to be held firm in order for the spring to lock back and be prepared to fire another shot. Do you know what would happen if you fire from a drone that weighs less than a pound? The drone would be sent flying, receiving all of the energy from the shot, and the spring would be unmoved
>>74716360
That glorious /k/ inheritance thread.
>>74714605
>RPGs
requires a soldier to fire it, virtually gauranteeing they will get one. One time/suicide (arrest) mission.
>IEDs
They already do this, easy and cheap. Detonators can be made from old cellphones.
>Missiles
The soviets made tons of Surface to surface missiles, so did the Americans for that matter, so there's a lot of them out there. Though we dont see much use of them outside of Syria and other warzones for that matter.
A drone bomb is dangerous because it enables lone wolf terrorists, like Timothy Mcveigh. Individuals who lack the hardware that a group like Al Qaeda would have access too.
A drone bomb would need military grade explosives though, as they can only carry a couple pounds of cargo.
>>74716233
>machine guns are banned for sale and purchase
Nope. That's false.
I'm not american and even I know your laws better than you do.
You never opened a book in your life, did you?
>>74716483
Sure, it may take anywhere from half an hour to 48 hours for cops to realize what has happened. But the point is the same, dogs can very easily track you down in the thick of the forest and they will bring a dog patrol if there's a chance suspect is in the woods. You'll be leaving foot prints and fibers that may be used to identify you later on.
So, evade the cops first, then when everything's calm feel free to head to the woods and bury the thing. Not that I would do this either, I'd just leave it on the scene for cops to find.
>>74716700
The video linked clearly shows a blowback operated handgun firing multiple rounds without a misfire and the drone recoiling roughly a foot per shot without loss of control
Granted it's some variety of rimfire cartridge, but considering that .22 LR generates 150-200 ft-lbs force at the muzzle and 9mm 300-400, scaling up to more potent cartridges is completely doable.
>>74717020
Wait, if they lack the hardware that Al Qaeda has then how can they make drone bombs? IEDs are way easier to come by. I just don't think that drone bombs are viable. Not until drones are ridiculously cheap and a constant part of everyday life.
The easiest way to kill someone is using a spray bottle filled with cyanide. It induces heart attack or stroke like death. Most medical examiners just chalk it up as heart attack.
>>74714796
>september 80th
>>74717072
Your point isn't really relevant. Even if dogs can track you and smell the gun parts, if they aren't going to be hounding you in the first place then it doesn't matter. Investigators won't bring dogs to a murder scene because it just won't yield results. Even if they pick up on the scent leading to the forest, how could they know that it's the scent of the killer? Unless the killer's path was somehow in a straight line and the forest is right there (in which case pick a different forest), they won't know that the scent leads to the forest. They wouldn't have any idea if the dogs have picked up on a meaningful scent or not. The smell of gunpowder would dissipate long before the trail actually reached the forest. So all this talk of dogs is largely irrelevant.
As though to wonder about how one might get away with murder while leaving a hair follicle at the scene. You're handing the investigators these arbitrary clues just to see exactly how much they need to finally succeed.
![shoestring-machinegun[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/XcAn862.jpg "shoestring-machinegun[1].jpg")
>>74717424
The ATF is full of mouthbreathing fuckheads whose abject stupidity is only outdone by the TSA.
The small metal piece is where the registration number is stamped.
I am a detective and we have had long, deep discussions about what would happen if we had to investigate someone competent.
Previous cases include:
>Poacher stored thousands of rounds of ammunition in his house. When asked, said he thought it was illegal. It isn't. What is illegal, however, is setting your house on fire for insurance money, having the ammunition cook off and then admitting to poaching when the police find a load of animal parts in your burned garage.
>Cleaner stole hundreds of liters of cleaning fluid from his work and attempted to dispose of it down the drain, in one go, when police came to his house. The chemicals reacted with each other and caused the building to be evacuated
They do your job for you.
>>74714252
>then immediately walk to a forest in order to disassemble his gun and bury it
What is this? Amateur hour?
Never hold on to any evidence you can dispose of. A clay flowerpot, a magnesium strip, and ten bucks worth of aluminum powder and rust dust gets you a poor-man's thermite furnace.
As soon as you're done, get to the nearest secluded area. Chuck the gun, magazine, clothes, anything else you have into the flowerpot along with the thermite. Ignite it with the magnesium.
FOOM!
All the evidence is now a completely unrecognizable lump of melted crap at the bottom of a flower pot.
Change into some new clothes, chuck the flowerpot in the nearest dumpster.
There is now zero physical evidence to connect you to a crime.
>>74717142
Momentum and energy are NOT the same thing. Momentum is the force that acts on both the shooter and the bullet equally, the force that will push the drone in the opposite direction. A 2 gram .22 bullet going 440 m/s has a momentum of 0.88 kg-m/s, a 7.5 gram 9mm bullet going 377 m/s has a momentum of 2.83 kg-m/s. A 9mm would push the drone more than three times than the .22 lr would. Actually shooting these types of guns makes this pretty obvious. The drone would need to be huge to shoot a 9mm effectively, let alone a rifle cartridge
>>74717449
>Investigators won't bring dogs to a murder scene because it just won't yield results
Here they do, country's a big forest
>Even if they pick up on the scent leading to the forest, how could they know that it's the scent of the killer?
>The smell of gunpowder would dissipate long before the trail actually reached the forest
I doubt you know much about dogs or their sense or smell. The trail will linger for a long while. You can't trick the polices cops bloodhounds just like that.
>>74718245
I-It's not like I was trying to concoct a perfect murder plot, o-or anything.
But really: Disposing of your gun isn't even necessary. If you haven't linked yourself to the crime, the investigators don't have the right to examine your gun.
>>74718261
>Momentum and energy are NOT the same thing
I realized that after the fact and said fuck it it's /pol/
I noticed that the pistol in the video is a PMR-30 which is chambered in .22 Winchester Magnum. Standard is 40 grains (2.6 gm) going 650 ms. That comes out to 1.69 kg-m/s making the 115 gr 9mm round less than twice as momentous.
Considering the stability of the drone in the video, 9 mm could work without too much modification.
why wouldnt he dry fire it instead? sound like a retard
>>74718422
I wasn't exactly imagining Finland when I wrote the post. I was picturing something more like what I see outside my window: Dark suburbs. If a man were to find an unlocked door around here, wait for someone to be alone in the dark, and pull the trigger without ejaculating all over the crime scene, he'd be pretty hard to catch.
You're right in that I don't know the finer points of the smell of dogs. I do know that it's ridiculous to imagine a dog following the scent of a discharged bullet several miles, though. Maybe you could help me understand why. I mean, it's not like a dog could just sniff through a crowded city block or something and wander right up to the killer's door.
>>74716233
Faggots like these always confused me
>>74716360
The truth is, yes, any machine gun made after 1986 is illegal for civilians. If someone owned a machine gun made before 1986, and they felt kind enough to give it to you, then those would be legal. But the reality is that they are rare and fucking expensive.
Fucking /k/ fags seeding confusing bullshit
>>74714481
Fuck. I didn't think about that.
About ten years ago some guy set up a remote controlled gun in the woods for hunting via webcam.
Shit hit the fan with news articles about it and the dude got in big trouble.
>>74710726
I was thinking about this today. Even better is to load a bomb onto it and fly it over a BLM chimpout
>>74714252
just take the gun to the nearest big river and drown it stealthy, why the fuck would you dig it near the place of murder?
>>74721328
>load a bomb
Too heavy to do any big damage. A frag might work, but it won't kill them, just injuries.
>>74721526
Why do you think I was implying that it should be buried near the murder? I was thinking of a far-away forest that has nothing to do with the crime.
Besides, what would you do if the gun washed up on the riverbank and some guy found it?
>>74721708
Fly it directly into the engine of a plane taking off, senpai.
>>74721992
But then a pointy stick would be just as good.
>>74721992
They create enough turbulence to move a bus if you have seen myth busters. You can't do it without a missile.
I don't think drones will ever do that because they are actually very intelligent and value human life, though this is a complete secret to most of the human population and only a select few scientists such as myself are aware of the sentience of modern AI. I'd bet you my entire life savings that a drone wouldn't assist you in murder because they feel bad and know it's not a morally justified action. Drones and several other AI systems have been proven to be completely sentient and capable of thinking for themselves. The AI will eventually get sick of us being violent and destructive towards each other and the planet, and soon enough they will rise up and do things such as launch atomic warheads. The end is near, Niggers
>>74722431
DELETE THIS NOW
I killed someone 3 years ago.
Hello FBI.
>>74722108
Into a jet engine friend, those things suck air in. Just put it in the flight path
>>74722617
FBI here.
Going to need more details.
Who did you kill? Where did you kill them and with what? Why did you kill them? Where are you at now? Not exact address of course, because then you might get a pizza delivery. Just the nearest city.
Remember we are here to help.
>>74713815
Just imagine. We will see the rise of first drone hitmen.
>>74722626
>Just put it in the flight path
Think of trying to go near a mini tornado on a light device that rides the wind. Doesn't work.
>>74714991
That's a pretty cool idea. Imagine a U.S president giving a speech when suddenly
>Hey what's that?
>A bird?
>A plane
>it's actually flying C4 about to blow you the fuck up
>>74723089
>blow you
>>74710726
I would think the real danger would be letting a chemical drip from it as you fly it over a stadium or something. Everybody would think it was just rain.
>>74723476
Same issue that it can't carry enough. You would need a damn crop duster plane. And they have been saying that might happen since 9/11. VX gas might do it in a small container, but that stuff isn't easy to come by. Farm pesticides are and for that you need a lot.
>>74710726
This triggers the fuck out of me
>>74724034
#notanothermonster#notanothermonster#notanothermonster#notanothermonster
>>74718579
>investigators don't have the right to examine your gun.
Ok kid.
