We’ve come full circle today as Rand Paul makes everyone who ever stood with him look like a complete horse’s ass and a sucker.
In an interview with the Fox Business Network, Paul stated in very specific terms that he isn’t against the use of drones in situations where they wouldn’t be even remotely necessary.
“Here’s the distinction — I have never argued against any technology being used against having an imminent threat an act of crime going on,” Paul said. “If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him, but it’s different if they want to come fly over your hot tub, or your yard just because they want to do surveillance on everyone, and they want to watch your activities.”
Oh. Okay. It’s okay to use a drone to kill someone for robbing a liquor store, but not to spy on you while you’re in the hot tub.
Rand Paul: anti-drone civil liberties hero!
I doubt even the staunchest liberal security hawk would dream of suggesting that it would be acceptable to use a drone against someone for robbing a liquor store. Nor does using a drone to spy on someone in the hot tub sound like something that would ever actually happen.
Do you stand with Rand?