When the communists were a threat in the 1950s and 1960s, the American people made their own preparations for safety and survival. Americans knew their government could not save them from every contingency, so a number of them took matters into their own hands. Many of them built fallout shelters in their backyards.
It seems the best that our government could do for us in the event of a nuclear attack was to suggest that we “duck and cover.” That meant hiding under your school desk when the bomb dropped. Some protection. Here’s the video from 1951 explaining what would happen if a nuclear weapon was detonated:
But what happens when your own government is the threat? There’s no place to hide. Armed resistance would be futile. The goal is to stop the tyranny before it’s too late.
Driving back from Pennsylvania two weeks ago, while entering Virginia on I-77, I noticed a sign that declared that radar devices are illegal. There are all types of constitutional issues with this type of technological prohibition. If it’s OK to prohibit one type of technology that’s a threat to the State, what’s going to happen with more intrusive technologies like drones that are being proposed for our protection? Consider the following from Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS):
“With respect to Science and Technology, that directorate, we do have a funded project, I think it’s in California, looking at drones that could be utilized to give us situational awareness in a large public safety [matter] or disaster, such as a forest fire, and how they could give us better information.”
The projected number is 30,000 drones — so far — for “public safety.”
If you want to see the horror of planned government salvation, read Robert Sheckley’s 1955 short story Watchbird where winged metal protectors patrol the skies looking for the warning signs of violence and swoop in to stop a potential murder before it can happen. Sounds great until the Watchbirds view every act of violence as a violation of its programmed directive, including farmers who could not cut hay or harvest grain to feed their cattle, because such acts were deemed to be a form of “murder.”
Wouldn’t it be great if some group of techno-Geeks developed “drone-jamming technology to prevent unmanned aircraft from carrying out terrorist attacks on American soil”? If our government can use drones against us, what makes us think that our foreign enemies aren’t capable of reprogramming drones and turning them against us? And if our government starts turning drones against us, we’ll be ready.
- Robert Sheckley, “Watchbird,” Untouched by Human Hands (London: Michael Joseph, 1955), 116–146. [↩]