Krauthammer predicts: 1st man to use 2nd Amendment weapon to bring down drone will be folk hero

The federal government today gave the go-ahead to drone technology for the purpose of flying over American skies to aid law enforcement. Krauthammer responds by going hard-left and arguing that drones are for purposes of war, not to be used on the domestic population. He says the founders had real problems with the military being used on the American population and that this essentially would violate that principle.

He goes as far to say that the “first guy who uses a Second Amendment weapon to bring a drone down that’s been hovering over his house is gonna be a folk hero in this country.”

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • BSScoop

    If I can just convince my wife to buy that Barrett .50 cal….Good times.

    Don’t Fly Over Me

    • Love it!!!

      • B-Funk

        I second that! Target practice!

  • Krauthammer is right on about this. I’ve been reading about this for months, and while I hardly EVER agree with the American Communist Lovers Union, I do agree with them on this. It is NOT right. All I can think of is how much more outrage would this have by now if it’d been done by Bush?

  • John_Frank

    Krauthammer did not go “hard left.” It is called the Bill of Rights, our Charter of Liberties for a reason.

    • It’s called a hard left attack on America and an attack on the American people who need protection for violent terrorists and illegal immigrants and other criminals.

      • John_Frank

        Oh please. The use of military drones against civilians. Unacceptable.

      • nehemiahreturns

        Problem is, the criminals, those who do not respect the rule of law and the Constitution, are in control in Washington DC.

        • W.

          “Problem is, the criminals, those who do not respect the rule of law and the Constitution, are in control in Washington DC.”

          And in control of Wall Street and the FED.

          And they do not respect the American people or fear GOD.

        • Then let’s send the drones to Washington. Maybe they will spot some illegals(BO’s grandma, BO’s uncle, BO…) LOL

      • 12grace

        Unfortunately, the hard left you are referring to is the “obama commie machine”.

        In my haste, I accidentally clicked that I liked your statement when in reality I find it scary.

        They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

        -Benjamin Franklin

        The UN is working in unison with our gov’t to take away our guns

        while the gov’t is going to bring drones on our soil

        and the gov’t has taken coordinate information of our homes via GPS system during the 2012 census

        after obama covertly signed an Executive Order that gives him the right to arrest and hold indefinitely any America that the gov’t thinks is some kind of threat w/out due process and w/out being heard by a judge and jury.

        and obama calls anyone that disagrees with him “Domestic terrorist” yet we are forbidden to call radical Islam, terrorists.

        obama said he would side with Islam in a crisis situation ( I am paraphrasing this statement)

        Allen West says that their are about 90 communist ( see progressive aka communist) politicians in Washington

        while obama has been bringing in Russian and foreign troops on our soil

        and obama is the president of the UN

        while more hires have secured jobs in FEMA concentration camps around America

        ever read the book “The Rage of Obama”?

        ever read reports about obama mental state?

        see any possible connections?

    • Guys, I think the hard left comment was sarcasm; at least I would hope so. The hard left is where the government uses military force on it’s citizens.

  • NJK

    This is very sick. No! The next thing you know they’ll be loading weapons onto them and killing Americans, like they’re doing in Pakistan. A free country doesn’t have drones flying around in its skies. Good God, I can’t take anymore of this. This has to be stopped.

    • Hey NJK, I was reading through some of Scoop’s archives, and came upon a link you posted in a comment a few months ago about the Athens War? That was GREAT! I’ve never heard of that before, and is an incredible part of American history and a love for freedom. A bit late, but thanks so much!!

      For those who missed it before when NJK posted it,

      • sDee

        While the Athens war was a story of armed citizens standing up against corrupt politicians, I recently read the flip-side history story of the Wilmington Insurrection. A legitimate, lawful government ousted in an armed massacre by the losing political party.

        At the turn of the century white and black Republicans had successfully built a thriving political, artisan and economic community in Wilmington, NC. The Democrats ousted them in a bloody coup and took over the entire city government.

        This has been whitewashed in history books as the “race riots” that led to Jim Crow Laws. But it was the democrats who fueled and fired the violent racism. This was but part of the long and ugly Democrat history of racism known as the Red Shirts.

        • Thank you sDee! I hadn’t heard of this one either. This is part of America that’s not so pleasant, but I aim to teach it to my son regardless. It needs to be known as much as the Athens war. I’ve got some reading to do. Thank you.

          • sDee

            you are welcome. Only in home school will the truth have a fighting chance.

    • We already have police on our streets. Are you scared the police will shoot you? Hey, I’ve got an idea: Obey the law!

      • sDee

        We are governed by a corrupt and lawless Federal government. There are those that understand that and are part of it, those that understand it and will fight it. Then there are those blissfully and foolishly ignorant of it.

      • Obey the law? Of course we do…. only wish the so called leaders in our government would. When you have treasonous at worse liars at best running the country, the less they have to do with watching their own citizens who voted them into office, the better off we’ll be.

      • Nukeman60

        European Jews in the 1930s and ’40s obeyed the law too. Do you want a repeat? It’s not always the safest thing to ‘just obey the law’ and let the govenment do what they want.


  • Nukeman60

    So they’re not so hot to putting these drones on the southern borders to stop infiltrating terrorists, but it’s a-ok in middle of America. Is this what they think ‘fly-over country’ means? I’m rigging my rocket now to take down all intruders. Too bad I live under a flight path to the local airport.

    Oh, well. Who needs UPS anyway.

    • lol. I live too close to the airport as well Nukefriend. More than UPS where I am.

      • Nukeman60

        You’ll have to go with ‘tin-foil’ shingles. I’m starting a business. Hopefully, I can get huge subsidies.

        • LOL! Will beaten sprite and beer cans work? We’ve got plenty of those. We usually turn them in for gas money, but aluminum shingles might be where it’s at! 😉

          • Nukeman60

            Heh, it’s a perfect circle. The higher the price of gas, the more beer consumed, the more money for gas. I wonder if I could submit that to the Dept of Energy? Beer drinking would have to necessarily skyrocket.

  • There’s no “Second Amendment right” to illegally attack government property.

    Krauthammer sounds like an Occupy Wall Streetist for his hateful anti law and order, anti police screed. Occupy Wall Street also wants there to be no laws, no laws against violence and property destruction, for example, and hates the police.

    All the times that Krauthammer said we need to get the border under control are now in question, as he doesn’t want us to use tools to stop illegal immigration.

    • Nukeman60

      …We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it… ‘

      • warpmine

        When the citizens have there heads shoved so far up Lenin’s and Obama’s but you simply have to swing harder to get that “tap” through.:~)

    • KenInMontana

      The legality of this use of drones depends greatly on who holds “title” to, and who is operating these drones. If it is the military in any guise, with a few very specific exceptions, it is a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

      • Ken, I am so glad you’re on here. I learn so much from your comments. Thank you.

        • KenInMontana

          Thank you and you’re welcome. 🙂

  • NoToTyrants

    I agree with Krauthamer on this one. Additionally, I am not too keen on surveillance cameras at traffic intersections. As long as they are only used for the purposes of catching traffic law violators, I am fine with it. However, once the statist camel has its’ nose under the tent, there is enormous latitude for abuse.

    • sDee

      Red light cameras are, in NC and most states, a private operation licensed to operate by municipalities. It is against state law to use traffic court to enforce them because there is no due process involving a police officer. That is why they do not put points on one’s driver license and why it is simple to void the fine and accusation with a letter.

      So who is on the other end of these drones and what law will be used to kill, arrest or convict the citizen in the crosshairs.

      Congress must be removed.

  • AustindPowers

    I’m not sure i agree with krauthammer at all… i mean drones used for surveillance doesn’t seem like a stretch at all… they already use helicopters to track car chases or suspects running on foot… and sometimes SWAT team members will have rifles in those helicopters… why does making an aircraft unmanned violate our founding principles? it just seems to me like we’d be adapting technology developed for war to use for domestic purposes. We have a long history of doing exactly that. You don’t think we should use robots we developed for dismantling IEDs to assist the bomb squads in police divisions? You don’t think SWAT teams should have body armor? You don’t think police should have guns for that matter? we’re not giving the police force tactical nuclear missiles, or bombers, or fighter jets, or tanks… I could see the objections if the drones were outfitted with missiles or machine guns… but they’re not.
    if privacy is the issue then why doesn’t krauthammer object to the elaborate camera systems he mentions? the idea that they’ll always be out there flying and spying on every move you make is ridiculous… why don’t they have police staking out everyone’s homes right now then? because they don’t have the man-power, and they won’t have the man-power to operate and coordinate millions of drones to watch every person for every minute of their day… or the fuel or money to keep all of those drones operating.

    • Nukeman60

      why don’t they have police staking out everyone’s homes right now then? because they don’t have the man-power‘ – ap

      That’s why they ask your neighbors to rat on you every chance they get.

      • AustindPowers

        …I’m honestly confused about your point here…

        • Nukeman60

          Okay, but then I’m not surprised considering your ridiculous first post.

          • AustindPowers

            well it sounds to me like you’re mad at your neighbors for “ratting you out” because you’re involved with some illegal activities… i mean i totally see your point. wouldn’t life be better if everyone just got away with cooking meth, drug trafficking, stealing, abuse, rape, murder…? if only it wasn’t for those pesky neighbors or those nosey police…

            who’s post was ridiculous again?

            • Nukeman60

              Your original post uses extremes to counter what may happen normally, slowly and over time. About the time you, as a law-abiding citizen, is woken in the middle of the night by charging swat teams claiming you’re a meth lab simply because your neighbor ‘had some suspicions’ about you arriving home late, you might wonder where your constitutional rights went. Don’t post here about your outrage, because you let it happen.

              You don’t have to be a criminal to want individual rights that are supposed to be guaranteed by the constitution. It’s people that became lazy and apathetic that allowed the Jews to be hauled away, all in the name of government control.

              • AustindPowers

                lol, you sound just like the other paranoid conspiracy nuts that troll this blog… none of you’re points have anything to do with drones, you’re worried about something that could already happen… what’s stopping you’re neighbors from telling the police that you’re cooking meth right now? it’s like i’m talking to a liberal here… shift the subject, ignore the facts… next is name-calling.

    • sDee

      So where would you draw the line?

      Terrorism serves to instill fear. Fear deep enough that bit by bit, we surrender our rights. That is the end game here. Don’t be fooled by the rationale.

      This is happening on many fronts. Cyber terrorism too. The design and strategy is underway to use it to censor and control the internet.

      • AustindPowers

        What right are we giving away by allowing police departments to use drones? Police already stalk people who they have reason to believe are involved in terrorist activities… They stalk people they believe are involved with drug activity… They follow people, they stake-out their homes and businesses, they get other people to wear wires, they do phone taps… how does allowing them to take aerial video and photographs easier and cheaper than with helicopters or satelite imaging change any of that?

  • I’m not sure a drone has ever been shot down? I just did a quick search, and I only see a report of Iran shooting down a drone by the military but US says they didn’t.

  • B-Funk

    This kind of nonesense will make Alex Jones worth listening to today!

  • DCGere

    Drones already flying in Seattle…saw one last weekend. Seattle Police was one of the agencies to get one (after a DOJ investigation in which they basically received a slap on the wrist).

    I don’t think I’d every attempt to shoot one though. No. 1 – I don’t want to go to jail and No. 2 – As high as the one I saw flying, I don’t think my weapon would take it down. I really hope people don’t do this – I don’t want bullets dropping randomly from the air.

  • Galatiansch2vs20

    Helicopters are sufficient for law enforcement. The federal government is supposed to defend our borders and defend against the country’s enemies.

    • DJLinME

      We are very quickly becoming the enemies!

  • Frankns

    Think about it … the government, in the hands of died in the wool marxists, authorizes the use of spy drones on its citizens. Come on folks … in no universe is this a good thing.

  • Galatiansch2vs20

    posted in wrong spot- deleted

  • JoelDick

    The K-Hammer strikes again!

  • nehemiahreturns

    This was meant for Frankns – You said it. Perhaps this would be okay if we had a government not hell-bent on striping away all the freedom we have left. If we had a government we could trust. That is not the case.

    • Frankns

      Precisely … instead it is coming from the government that gave us Fast and Furious … and the deaths of its own citizen to further a political cause. Think about it.

    • creeper00

      No, nehemiahreturns. It would NOT be okay with a different government. Never. Ever.

      I’m stunned at the number of people here who say “it would be okay with the right government.” Do you not understand that governments change? The rules put in place for an administration we trust could be corrupted by a not-so-trustworthy group. That’s what infuriated me about Bush the Younger. He opened the door for Barry’s excesses with his own cadre of czars. Now we pay the price.

      Trust the government? I don’t think so.

      • nehemiahreturns

        You are absolutely correct.

  • DCGere
    • PVG

      Thank you DCG!

    • Dang, most of these don’t surprise me, but Rubio voted for this?! THAT IS IT. I no longer trust him. It’s been eroding for a while but this seals it for me.

      • DCGere

        I know, it’s sad the number of RINOs that voted for this BS. I too was ticked off when I saw Rubio voted aye. The clowns in DC are completely out of control…

      • sDee

        I knew you’d come around! You are one smart ‘toon. 😉

      • Nukeman60

        Not to worry, he’s not a natural born citizen anyway.

        • That’s part of what has me worried- as dear leader’s election set a precident.

        • creeper00

          They’re working on that.

  • drphibes

    I have a quibble with his characterizing his own argument as “hard-left”. I think it’s a position that is related to big brother/privacy concerns. It cuts across right and left – people will have a problem with it for different reasons. It’s not as simple as saying that us right-wingers support everything our military does. This breaks new ground because it is generally creepy and unsettling – it is a combination of surveillance and weaponry.

  • Ken_H

    I can easily see some friends from back in WV, drunk as hell and trying to light one up. It is bs that they can do it here. CIA and NSA are not allowed to spy domestically. The law enforcement thing is just cover.

  • MaxineCA

    I think CK was incorrect. The average Joe Blow citizen doesn’t have the fire power to bring down a drone.

    This is a very, very slippery slope. I’m not against drones on all of our borders for national security, or using technology to help local law enforcement in a “specific case” (lost child, or Alz. elderly person that wandered off, hikers lost in the mountains, etc.). But they need to turn off their dang cameras until they get to the area they are assisting!

    • PVG

      I am against drones over this nation as long as BO is in the wh PERIOD!

      • MaxineCA

        BO abuses power, and is very dangerous. I want restrictions on civilian use, no matter WHO is president.

        • sDee

          Exactly. I can never understand why people think they can trust excessive unconstitutional poser when it is in the hands of a politicians wearing the same elephant suit or donkey suit as them.

      • creeper00

        I don’t care who is in the White House. This is the government spying on its citizens, pure and simple. You’re no safer when Reps do it than you are when Dems do and remember, the other party always eventually gets a shot at playing by the rules you set up.

        I’d shoot one of those suckers in a New York minute if I had the chance.

        Jefferson must be spinning in his grave.

    • 12grace

      We can’t trust them to use this technology to help us.

  • BMinPA

    So if a drone had a human pilot at the controls it would be OK?

    • sDee

      Of course. A state/local law enforcement officer with proper jurisdiction is an absolutely essential element of ensuring your Constitutional Rights.

      If you not know what your rights are and what protections have been built into our legal system, the Federal Government will surely remove them, and you deserve to lose them

      • BMinPA

        Drone does have a “state/local law enforcement officer with proper jurisdiction” at the helm. He just can’t fit inside the little bird. Now, what do I deserve to lose?

  • sDee

    We live in a police state. Terrorism is the excuse, not the end game.

  • MaxineCA

    Mark Levin had a great rant in his second hour on this. I’m listening to it right now on-line. He’s also talking about Mexico, security, etc. Hopefully Scoop will post it.

  • ApplePie101

    A drone crashing into your next door neighbor’s pool isn’t going to make you the hero of the neighborhood, though. Maybe interfere with signals instead? Americans are an ingenious bunch. I’m sure we’ll think of something.

  • 12grace


    U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

    The UN is planning on taking our guns away with the support of the obama commies and the American people are possibly going to be hunted by drones? So we will be defenseless.

    • DCGere

      “Resist State demands to veto the treaty” (paraphrasing).

      I thought Skippy was all for state rights, he is the first gay president after all.

      Scary indeed…

  • NYGino

    “I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.”

    • kong1967

      Cool!! I am doing a study about the changes in effectiveness of CB radios with the increased CO2 output in the atmosphere. The truckers are a massive part of our national security and I need $2 …(cough)…billion to conduct the research.

      Trust me, I’m good for it.

      • NYGino

        And how are you going to spread that 2 bil around? Might make a difference.

        • kong1967

          If you approve the deal I will put a cool $2 mil into your bank account. That’s how we politicians do it.

          • NYGino

            Not directly, not directly. That’s what unions are for.

            • kong1967

              Oh, I’m a freshman. I’m still learning. 🙂

  • NYGino

    The TSA perverts are trying to get this technology to watch the nude action in private pools.

    • Ew! Lord if one of those things tries that here, it’d crash on it’s own lol!

  • libertyandtyranny


  • Patriot077

    You’re in good company ABC. Mark Levin is dead set against it too. I don’t trust any bureaucrat to have this power … thermal imaging capability is not the least of it. Really scarey to think about possible abuses.

    I’d feel the same way no matter who sat in the oval office.

    Also disgusting to see that only 4 Repubs voted against this travesty. DeMint, Lee, Risch & Paul

    • kong1967

      Police already use thermal imaging from the air to find criminals hiding in the bushes. I don’t have a problem with it if it’s used for what they say it will be….to help the police. The problem is that they won’t be owned or operated by the local police so there’s too much potential for big brother to use it to spy on us instead of helping the police.

      • creeper00

        kong, you do understand, don’t you, that the police are also a governmental agency?

        • kong1967

          Alright, Creeper, just how stupid do you think I am? How would you like it if I asked you “Creeper, you do understand that your mother is a female?”. No, Creeper, I did not realize the police were part of government.

          Yes, they are part of government but they are not the IRS, the politicians or any other oversight or intrusional arm that wants to control us. The police have families like you and I, view the world much like you and I, and all they are interested in is catching criminals. Real criminals, not political enemies. Yes, they can be controlled by politicians but they can do that now. What makes you think a drone will make any difference? Do they not have helicopters they can use for basically the same purpose. Police are not bad people.

          I apologize for the angry response, but give me a little credit. I’m not a 3rd grader for crying out loud.

        • kong1967

          I stepped away for a minute and took a breather. I’m sure you didn’t mean to come off as a condescending jerk. I’m all better now, lol. Sorry.

  • TLaMana

    I agree, it smacks of Big Brother intruding into your life.

  • kong1967

    Surely they won’t be weaponized. They will just be like helicopters in police chases and such…and investigation methods. As long as they aren’t weaponized I don’t have a problem with them. The police can sit outside your house as long as they want or watch you from down the street. They can do it in a helicopter, too. This will just be unmanned and will be faster.

    I’d imagine if you shoot one of these down you will be sent to prison for terrorism or something. It would be the same as shooting at a police car or a police helicopter….only more expensive as far as equipment goes.

    Edit: this opinion only holds true if they will be used to help the police. If the government uses them to spy on us it’s a completely different story.

    • kong – These aircraft are deployed and operated by the military. They’re flow by military pilots remotely.
      The problems include, but not limited to:
      – Once you submit to military drones doing surveillance for some seemingly “good” reasons (e.g. law-enforcement), we’ve lost control of what else they’ll be used for.
      – There will be no accountability or transparency of what, when and for what purposes they’re used.
      – Every bit of information of that’s captured with them will be label “Classified” for homeland security reasons.
      – B.O. has shown he’s more than willing to use these raining down hell-fire on anyone he’s deemed a threat overseas, even U.S. citizens. As bad as the things such citizens are accused of shouldn’t that still be proven in a court of law?
      – Normal civilian law enforcement personnel and technology are fully capable of doing what’s allowed under the Constitution to be done.

      • kong1967

        Well, what you said would fall under what I said is government controlled, which I don’t support. The story I saw said they will be owned by police.

        The government cannot use military force inside the borders without martial law, so I wouldn’t worry about them being used to blow people up in the states without a trial. Is it something to keep an eye on? You bet your arse. A dictator such as Obama will abuse the laws any way he sees fit.

  • If the drones are used by Homeland Securtiy to patrol the borders, I see no violation of constitutional protections here; the persons illegally crossing the border are, for the most part, not U.S. Citizens. IF on the other hand, they are used by the U.S. military to patrol American cities we have problems. However, any such use will probably be conducted by local law enforcement officials. In which case it is the electronic equivalent a cop walking the beat in his neighborhood.

  • ApplePie101

    This is one more proof that those in government are far more afraid of the internal threat (us) than of any foreign enemy. We have the power to take them out, and we’ll do it in November.

  • Sandra123456

    What if the use of drones had started when George W. Bush was in office? The screams of protests from the left would be deafening.

    I can’t see any good domestic use for drones. They are good to kill people with. Should not be flying in the USA.

  • Krauthammer responds by going hard-left …. this is NOT going hard left. Since when is minding the Constitution HARD LEFT. This from the Right Scoop? Perhaps the author of this article should go so far as to educate themsleves with the Federalist and anti-Federalist papers before they try to paint constitutional adherance as HARD LEFT OR HARD RIGHT.

    Folk hero and I would even venture to say that person would be nominated as President, perhaps by both parties.

    • creeper00

      I would point out that it was Krauthammer himself who described his position as “hard-left”.

  • FutureOnePercent

    There are already laws that allow limited drone usage within the US.

    One recent example was when the Global Hawk was deployed during the California wildfires to use thermal imaging to locate hot spots for firefighters to know where to concentrate their efforts.

    I think uses like this are great, but to expand the role of drones into our everyday lives is a HUGE problem.

    I don’t even like red light cameras because it’s just another way for the government to try to get money. They don’t really give a damn about safety, they just want a new way to pry $400 from your pocket.

    So the drone issue. Don’t tell me it’s about safety, cause I don’t believe you.

    What they say: “Well, with all the budget cuts, this is a great way for us to save money”

    What I heard: “It’s really expensive for us to spy on you 24/7 and we’d like to make sure we can afford to watch you.”

    My last point is that we have NO idea what kind of capabilities these drones have. With thermal imaging I’m sure they could probably see us in our own homes… Unlawful search anyone?


    • DJLinME


  • Notice Charles was careful to repeat that he’s not encouraging anyone to do this…. No doubt he had in mind what the feds did sending S Srvc agents to visit “Uncle Ted” recently.
    I don’t think any civilian cartridge (not even .50 BMG) would come close to the altitude these things fly. “I’d never encourage anyone try…” either. “Folk heroes” generally don’t live to be very old.
    Charles is right though. These are instruments of the military and shouldn’t be deployed in our country. They should be banned from use here.

    • physicsnut

      “Arms” would certainly include Stinger missiles, not that I know anyone who can afford one. Thanks to Mark Levin for saying flat out that these drones should not be watching us.