Skynet
07-17-2015, 11:06 AM
#1
Administrator
Thread Starter
Skynet
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-facebookvideo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqHrTtvFFIs
Terrifying video shows home-made drone 'made by a teenager' equipped with a HANDGUN opening fire in the woods
Footage has emerged of a seemingly lethal home-made drone opening fire in the woods.
The demonstration video, apparently made by a teenager in Connecticut, shows a robotic device with four rotor engines firing four shots in succession.
Each time the handgun is fired, the drone is knocked back some distance, but remains stable enough to discharge a bullet once every three seconds.
The 14-second clip appears to be the work of Austin Haughwout, an 18-year-old from Clinton, Connecticut, who runs the YouTube account to which the video was posted last week.
He entitled the video 'Flying Gun', and wrote the following description underneath: 'Homemade multirotor with a semiautomatic handgun mounted on it.
'Note: The length from the muzzle to the rear of the frame is over 26".'
Both handguns and this type of drone device are widely available in the United States. The drone appears to have been equipped with a mechanism to pull the trigger on command.
Footage of gun-bearing drones has posted online as early as 2012, when an unnamed enthusiast attached a machine-gun to a much more advanced drone than the one seen in the latest clip.
According to the Federal Aviation Authority, current rules already prohibit prevent any weapons being attached to any kind of aircraft.
In 2013, the Washington Times reported that an FAA officials told industry leaders: 'We currently have rules in the books that deal with releasing anything from an aircraft, period.
'Those rules are in place and that would prohibit weapons from being installed on a civil aircraft.'
He was apparently referring to part of the FAA code labelled 'dropping objects'.
The agency can impose large fines for breaking the rules.
- Footage uploaded online shows drone hovering with semiautomatic pistol
- Robot can fire at least a shot every three seconds while staying stable
- Thought to be the work of Austin Haughwout, 18, from Clinton, Connecticut
- FAA officials have said in the past that any armed drone are illegal
Footage has emerged of a seemingly lethal home-made drone opening fire in the woods.
The demonstration video, apparently made by a teenager in Connecticut, shows a robotic device with four rotor engines firing four shots in succession.
Each time the handgun is fired, the drone is knocked back some distance, but remains stable enough to discharge a bullet once every three seconds.
The 14-second clip appears to be the work of Austin Haughwout, an 18-year-old from Clinton, Connecticut, who runs the YouTube account to which the video was posted last week.
He entitled the video 'Flying Gun', and wrote the following description underneath: 'Homemade multirotor with a semiautomatic handgun mounted on it.
'Note: The length from the muzzle to the rear of the frame is over 26".'
Both handguns and this type of drone device are widely available in the United States. The drone appears to have been equipped with a mechanism to pull the trigger on command.
Footage of gun-bearing drones has posted online as early as 2012, when an unnamed enthusiast attached a machine-gun to a much more advanced drone than the one seen in the latest clip.
According to the Federal Aviation Authority, current rules already prohibit prevent any weapons being attached to any kind of aircraft.
In 2013, the Washington Times reported that an FAA officials told industry leaders: 'We currently have rules in the books that deal with releasing anything from an aircraft, period.
'Those rules are in place and that would prohibit weapons from being installed on a civil aircraft.'
He was apparently referring to part of the FAA code labelled 'dropping objects'.
The agency can impose large fines for breaking the rules.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqHrTtvFFIs
07-17-2015, 10:01 PM
#2
Super Moderator
The people who insisted on the second Amendment to the Constitution would have approved, even if the nannystatists don't. "Every terrible implement of the soldier" should (IMO) include everything up to crew-served heavy machine guns. It should be a no-brainer this should be allowed in the USA. Trying to convince the fascisti of this truth would be an expensive loss in court.
"OMG YOU COULD HURT SOMEONE WITH THAT!" si, and how many people are hurt by cars every year? Or by doctors?
"OMG YOU COULD HURT SOMEONE WITH THAT!" si, and how many people are hurt by cars every year? Or by doctors?