all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 58 points 1 year ago (2 children)

“This is a chilling statement,” he told Mother Jones. “Even if it were a joke, it was clearly designed to make the public afraid to exercise its First Amendment rights to protest and to hold government officials, including LAPD officers, accountable for their actions.”

Fuck this timeline. Resist. They don't have enough people to get to us all unless we are compliant.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They don’t have enough people to get to us all unless we are compliant.

    This is incorrect. They absolutely have enough people to monitor the feeds for detected people and collect people up individually after the fact, which is exactly what the speakers/statements are alluding to.

    This is why "AI" bullshit is bullshit. This is why cameras on literally every traffic light is bad. This is what a lot of people have been screaming since 9/11. With the TSA and other organizations collecting information all willy nilly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    The helicopter itself made these threats?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Don't know, but it's very easily done via LRAD. which the LAPD is known to have a "unknown quantity" of.

    Note it's secondary usage as a "sonic weapon". [Self defense tips] (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3sqIvak-4Ek)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago

    "So right off the bat I just wanted to say that if for some reason you think I shouldn't be helping protestors protect themselves from non-lethal weapons, I don't fucking care."

    Gotta love this for guy saying exactly what he means.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago

    It can get cold if you're protesting at night, so don't forget to keep warm by wearing a face covering 😊

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Out of sheer curiosity, what kinds of rounds could feasibly take down a helicopter? Is .50 cal the minimum?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Nah, just about any rifle round can. It's a matter of hitting it somewhere important though. Most people can't hit anything at any meaningful distance. So now you're going to shoot into the air, miss the helicopter and take out someone a couple miles away as collateral.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    A few cheap laser pointers from Walmart or the discount store and that thing will either be landing immediately, leaving the AO, or crashing violently.

    But, you know, you should never do this. Or whatever I'm supposed to say here to prevent the secret police from kicking my door in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Not necessarily. If they start taking any small arms fire I expect they'll leave. 5.56 could crack the windscreen or injure the occupants. A bigger round would be more effective if you actually want to hit the engine or transmission and actually take it down, yes. You could probably do it with anything .300 or larger (7.62 NATO, etc.) if you hit it just right or multiple times. Or yeah go for something big like .50 BMG and hit it once somewhere in the meaty bits. But rifles in .50 are often bigger and more awkward to move around.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I was a juror on a trial where a camera was used to record a purported crime from a helicopter. The camera quality was no joke, I could make out the individual buttons on the guy’s shirt. I don’t doubt they could ID people from the chopper.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago
    [–] 1 point 1 year ago*
    135 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    14 comments in c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world view that post