-34 votes


Update: Paul's response.

I didn't believe it either...













Thanks all! Remain vigilant for Liberty.

Comment viewing options

deacon's picture

grow a brain?

seriously? if he said what he did,then he did say it an armed drone taking out one who has not been tried in court,but i guess he/she got their just desserts the AMERICAN WAY of justice,just like them newspaper delivery women who got their truck shot up in cal?
yeah they had a truck sorta the same color as the dude they were searching for(theres your american justice system at work
and then tell me to have faith !! in what exactly? a politician?
another politician who stated armed drones,yeah i have faith
i have faith them drones will be used without a court order
all one needs is to declare eminent threat,and the const and the bill of rights is out the window (as if it does any good now)
people of all walks of life use words,some more effectively than others
words have meanings and they get used to mean and convey the intent of the one who spoke them
politicians use them and then twist there meanings into what they really mean
and as crooked as our court system is the drone use wouldn't matter if it was legal justified or even warranted
i can see robosigning judges and magistrates just rubber stamping their use,as they will not get charged if it went wrong
nothing happens to cops now who shoot innocent bystanders,except for paid leave
they are immune to the very laws they say they uphold
some of you need to look at the bigger picture,and also look at what has been done by the law enforcers
what happens when another shoots a cop,or their family?
here is a scenario that played out,they blamed another cop,he was guilty in their eyes of crimes he never went to court over,this rogue cop ended up getting burnt to a crisp,yeah there's that american form of justice at work in all its glory
guilty until proven guilty
i am glad you decided to answer instead of just down voting a question

setting your expectations to high,can cause depressiuon

If he is able to get into office and get his dad in there

If he is able to get Ron Paul in a position of power in the U.S government, oh the things that could be done. Lets not give up on Rand. Remember he must play the game of corruption to get into power like everyone else. Don't be so naive that we can win against the corporations and government pawns without getting our hands dirty.

Rand endorses

Rand endorses Mitt and now drones!I'm done with this political hack traitor!

I think he simply misspoke

I think he misspoke. No one is so stupid as to intentionally flip flop on something like this. It would be like Barak Obama saying tomorrow that the government is too involved in healthcare markets, even though EVERYONE knows about obamacare.

I agree, WHAT was he

I agree, WHAT was he thinking??


Rands facebook page

Rands facebook page is being trashed today!

I've seen worse. It's not

I've seen worse. It's not that bad.

The right is trying to make Rand Paul look bad

The Drudge Report is one of them. All they are trying to do is make Rand Paul not have any one follow him. As soon as it gets close to the election, the right will make it look like he is a kook. They don't like the fact that he is against giving money to Israel and the fact that he is the son of Ron Paul.

Rand is in a Jam

Don't even put rand paul articles on this site anymore!He's a POS!



He was just trying to make a point

He's saying that if a person is an imminent threat going around killing people then it's ok. I think he was just unclear, he probably meant that the guy with a gun coming out of a liquor store killed the clerk or whatever.

What Rand said was NOT ok was to surveil just anyone. He really is on our side on this one. Not sure why people go to such lengths to nitpick what he says just because he doesn't use the exact words as Ron.

I am Ron Paul


His example sucked.

I agree with Rand. If you're

I agree with Rand. If you're swinging a gun around in the act of comitting a crime, you're warned to drop the weapon if possible, I don't care if a sharpshooter, a drone gun, or a police officer takes you out. If my personal property is searched without a warrant with any kind of electronic device and I am charged with a crime, all that evidence is invalid and will be thrown out in court.

What are the odds a drone will get to the liquor store before the armed robber is taken out by a cop? Having to use a drone in this case is a stretch.

According to your logic

it would be ok to drop an A-Bomb, ICBM, or other high explosive yield weapon? You did not say that but if excessive force is not relevant then that is the logical conclusion of your position.

Using force comes with a responsibility and if you do not want that responsibility then ...

The people who are

The people who are collaterally damaged in that situation can sue the cops for poor judgment and excessive use of force.

So the point that it is ok

to use excessive force without fear of criminal wrong doing and just the mere possibility of a civil sanction covered by government insurance and pawned back off onto tax payers is utterly conceded?

I sure hope....

he made sort of slip here.


That's pretty harsh to say the least. A drone strike (OR A COP for that matter)to kill a suspected robber, Death penalty for a suspected person of robbing someone or store of $50.00, without due process. A drone can't or isn't about to ask a suspect to STOP, DROP YOUR WEAPON, you're under arrest. The drone will just execute him, by remote, controlled by some stooge who is who knows where.

Last thing, what about collateral damage, innocent bystanders being maimed or killed, and property damage. I don't like this way of thinking one bit.


Should not be used on Americans. I really do not like Rand on this one. Should they be used for something? Maybe protecting our borders? I don't know. These drones are dangerous. These are like spaceships!

deacon's picture

rand says

the military are fighting for the const....and he believes them?
which const does rand think they are fighting for?
he says about a liquor store..he doesn't care if its a cop or a drone
so like i have said before..drones will be armed,and used against americans
rand knows them drones will be armed,i think they are already armed just waiting to be used on the population
what does rand think when giving the fed gov an inch? they always take that and the mile
we cannot according to the fed gov,record them..but they can record us
even without a court order...and seeing there are judges and magistrates on retainer for robo signing,this will appear to be legal for them,and still illegal for us

setting your expectations to high,can cause depressiuon

Criticism is too dogmatic

Rand didn't paint a great picture on this one, but this was not worthy of jumping ship.

1. Federal Gov't really shouldn't have say in affairs of local policing and Rand is suggesting that local jurisdictions have leeway when it comes to use of drones - fair point.

2. The question posed by Cavuto related to technology, so in context Rand was saying that it's not the technology which makes the difference, it's the method in which it's used - due process still intact.

3. Rand did not suggest taking human judgment out of the equation in the "liquor store" example (yes, it was a poor example) but stated the technology could be used for apprehension or killing the suspect if he/she poses a deadly threat.

I have to say that personally I don't agree with Rand and it's not the first time. However, this changes nothing about my personal view that he should be the next POTUS.

He'll have to articulate this example much much better in the future as it was too easily taken out of context to be a change of opinion from his March filibuster.

It's great that we're holding him accountable, but some of the comments and criticism of this live interview are bordering on cultish, which is where I have to draw my line.

Deadly threat to whom? The

Deadly threat to whom? The drone? its operator?
Drones don't apprehend.
Taking a human officer out of this situation maybe safer for the cop but not safer for freedom. If we let them remove the humanity from their enforcement we are doomed.

Drones cannot nullify or provide human judgement. Yet...

Is anyone thinking Terminator here yet?


IMO he was making a broader point about technology

The question from Cavuto was about the surveillance technology in Boston, so I really don't see how this is all just limited to drones.

Nor should it be.

Again, I'm not saying I agree, but Rand's comments were in response to how much technology is appropriate for law enforcement. It's debatable.

I think drones and other unmanned devices (red light cameras, photo radar, etc) should be off the table for local law enforcement, but I'm taking that up at the state level, not Federal.

It was a poor example by Rand and one he's going to have to clarify or admit he made a mistake.

I don't understand.

On point #2 you don't make sense. The whole point of drones is to be rid of due process. I mean, what are they going to do? Put someone on trial, convict them, give them death by drone, release them, and then randomly kill them with a drone?

again it wasn't articulated very well

There is still a human element to controlling a drone's activity, as far as I know. Warfare and law enforcement also have different rules, so you can't lump them together that way. A drone's mission in warfare is mainly killing, but there's no due process in that scenario and never will be.

I don't agree with local law enforcement using drone technology to track down suspects using surveillance or kill them with weaponry, but I don't believe that they're able to operate free from human judgment, especially in the example Rand gave.

It was a bad example and he's obviously going to have to clear up the confusion.

He meant that if a person is

He meant that if a person is an imminent threat -ie running around with a gun shooting people etc - then it's doesn't matter what or who takes that person out. Citizen, cop, drone....whatever.

A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.

Bootlick rand

I have no respect for rand paul.He's a bootlick republican playing the game with the big cheese in DC.Rands dad had balls but rands balls were clipped as soon as he got elected to the senate.

Over reacting

You guys are over reacting.

Watch the video and Rand is saying he is ok simply with using a drone just like police use helicopters today with FLIR cameras.

He is not suggesting missile armed drones.



Drones prove that cops are lazy and want to play video games with your lives.

Cops are being trained to be

Cops are being trained to be drones. We have gone from Andy Griffith to Robocop in less than half a century. This drone thing fits the mold. When we do have real cops we are seeing militarized mercenaries who police for dollars and power with an attitude of everyone is a danger. Instead of the reality still today that a 99.8% of the people are good folks. This behavior and callous attitude is creating domestic blow-back in attitude if not yet wide spread action between the people and those that should remember they are our servants, literally.


deacon's picture

so how then

would an unarmed drone kill the liquor store robber?
with FLIR?
he stated right out,they would be armed

setting your expectations to high,can cause depressiuon