UK surveillance “worse than 1984,” says new UN privacy chief

World needs a "Geneva convention" for the Internet to safeguard personal data.


Read the whole story

 

[jimbo49]

for someone in his position to recognise and openly speak out about the way UK citizens are surveilled shows just how bad it is! the UK is by far the worst country of the so-called 'Free World' and must be on par with places like China. remember, the UK government has continuously decried China and other countries, other governments, for the lack of privacy, freedom and freedom of speech in those countries. how can it possibly do that now, when it has been recognised as being worse than those others? and the truth of it is that this has come about just to replace what was/still is going on in the USA. they have had to stop some surveillance and drastically tone down other forms and, as is usual, the stupid sods in charge in the UK just fall in with what is wanted but not available in the USA. talk about stupid! does the UK really think that being a member of the EU whilst jumping into bed with the USA is not going to go 'unpunished'? does it also think that should anything happen with the EU, the USA is going to come galloping over the hill to rescue it? i'd guess 'think again' would be pretty close! and how long before the threat of expulsion from the EU becomes a threat? being in two clubs but only pass information in one direction is not a good move! but while all this is going on, the UK is being turned more and quicker into a Police State!!

 

[maehara]

today there are many parts of the English countryside where there are more cameras than George Orwell could ever have imagined.

Recently had family visiting us from South Africa. Their first comment on crossing the border from the Irish Republic into the UK: "So many cameras!!" Have to say I hadn't noticed them so much myself, because most of them aren't exactly obvious. (Speed cameras need to be easy to see; others - assuming they're ostensibly for traffic monitoring - not so much.) Bit of an eye-opener.

 

[maehara]

JimmyTheBlue[/url]":2b6zxu0v]Nor does the UK use techniques akin to the Great Firewall of China to block its citizens from accessing alternative truths to those published in the UK media.

Give them time, they're working on it.

 

[well is it.]

████ ████████ █ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ██ ████ ████.

 

[soulsabr]

maehara[/url]":1db5h50p]

JimmyTheBlue[/url]":1db5h50p]Nor does the UK use techniques akin to the Great Firewall of China to block its citizens from accessing alternative truths to those published in the UK media.

Give them time, they're working on it.

Oh, come on now. Everybody know that it "can't happen here*". I wonder where else it can't happen.

*here - where you currently are

 

[Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer]

In 1984, even the places where there were no telescreens had been bugged to enable the Thought Police to collect a fairly thorough documentation of Winston and Julia's affair. At least the visible cameras seem a little more...honest?

Though, if you have your cellphone with you, and it's turned on and connected to a cell site, you're basically carrying your own bug with you, should anyone want to listen in.

 

[soulsabr]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":36404s4u]

jimbo49[/url]":36404s4u]for someone in his position to recognise and openly speak out about the way UK citizens are surveilled shows just how bad it is! the UK is by far the worst country of the so-called 'Free World' and must be on par with places like China. remember, the UK government has continuously decried China and other countries, other governments, for the lack of privacy, freedom and freedom of speech in those countries. how can it possibly do that now, when it has been recognised as being worse than those others? and the truth of it is that this has come about just to replace what was/still is going on in the USA. they have had to stop some surveillance and drastically tone down other forms and, as is usual, the stupid sods in charge in the UK just fall in with what is wanted but not available in the USA. talk about stupid! does the UK really think that being a member of the EU whilst jumping into bed with the USA is not going to go 'unpunished'? does it also think that should anything happen with the EU, the USA is going to come galloping over the hill to rescue it? i'd guess 'think again' would be pretty close! and how long before the threat of expulsion from the EU becomes a threat? being in two clubs but only pass information in one direction is not a good move! but while all this is going on, the UK is being turned more and quicker into a Police State!!

...calm yourself. The UK and US are bad, but they're not complete outliers. Many other Western "democracies" are similar, unfortunately.

(And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

You didn't seriously just post "relax, we're not as bad as 'they' are" did you? Slightly better than horrid is still fucking horrid. You know that; right?

 

[theSeb]

JimmyTheBlue[/url]":3d0e56w1]Whilst the UK uses interception techniques to capture significant information from its citizens, there is no evidence to show that it has used such information to block people from exercising their rights to free speech. In fact it appears to me based on things I see on various posting sites that the exercise of free speech to insult and verbally abuse individuals is growing rather than diminishing. Nor does the UK use techniques akin to the Great Firewall of China to block its citizens from accessing alternative truths to those published in the UK media. Therefore I think your position is not really valid.

What is clear is that the growth of Government access to personal information is growing and a lot of that growth is being driven by the push to have commercial companies do the collection and processing of that data, something that I am not aware that the US has even done. At the same time the UK Govt refused to prosecute companies who abuse their dominance and control of data to implement tools that allow the aggregation of personal data and allow it to be used for marketing purposes (e.g. BT a couple of years back).

As to your comments re: the EU these sound like the rantings of the UKIP supporter.

As someone living in the UK, I can confirm that this post is a good summation.

 

[AxMi-24]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":20ijepog]

jimbo49[/url]":20ijepog]for someone in his position to recognise and openly speak out about the way UK citizens are surveilled shows just how bad it is! the UK is by far the worst country of the so-called 'Free World' and must be on par with places like China. remember, the UK government has continuously decried China and other countries, other governments, for the lack of privacy, freedom and freedom of speech in those countries. how can it possibly do that now, when it has been recognised as being worse than those others? and the truth of it is that this has come about just to replace what was/still is going on in the USA. they have had to stop some surveillance and drastically tone down other forms and, as is usual, the stupid sods in charge in the UK just fall in with what is wanted but not available in the USA. talk about stupid! does the UK really think that being a member of the EU whilst jumping into bed with the USA is not going to go 'unpunished'? does it also think that should anything happen with the EU, the USA is going to come galloping over the hill to rescue it? i'd guess 'think again' would be pretty close! and how long before the threat of expulsion from the EU becomes a threat? being in two clubs but only pass information in one direction is not a good move! but while all this is going on, the UK is being turned more and quicker into a Police State!!

...calm yourself. The UK and US are bad, but they're not complete outliers. Many other Western "democracies" are similar, unfortunately.

(And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

I would not be so sure about that. UK has no constitution protecting the citizens and amount of cameras is staggering. At the same time there seems to be no control what so ever over GCHQ and MI5/6/whatever, to the point where it seems that they are actually telling the government what they want. Not that current UK government seems very concerned with democracy and privacy to begin with (same goes for Merkel here so yea EU might actually be in front of US when it comes to spying on its own citizens).

 

[Rand]

Back in the 80s they called the Soviet Union the "evil empire." Nowadays, it sounds more like it is because they were jealous of Soviet surveillance capabilities rather than opposed to it.

 

[Moonrunner]

The Soviet surveillance society was a great boogie-man that we used to get our people behind the Cold War. Well.... I'm sure Stalin must be creaming his pants non-stop in his grave at the very thought of the level of surveillance that regular people are under in the "free" world. While the UK is definitely the worst of the repressive bunch, that doesn't mean that we can start patting ourselves on the backs in North America.

 

[skicow]

JimmyTheBlue[/url]":2pi38s8t]Whilst the UK uses interception techniques to capture significant information from its citizens, there is no evidence to show that it has used such information to block people from exercising their rights to free speech. In fact it appears to me based on things I see on various posting sites that the exercise of free speech to insult and verbally abuse individuals is growing rather than diminishing.

Really?

Freedom of speech in the UK is getting watered down more each day.

 

[effgee]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":2ez6rchd]... (And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

Heh, whatever gets you to sleep at night. While it's certainly not all roses over here, I suggest the next time you walk down any main street in any town in the UK you open your eyes and actually do look around you. Then do that in any similar size town in the US. Notice the difference? Yes, a fraction of the 'public' surveillance cameras. But of course, CCTV sounds so much more pleasant and civilized - and that's what it's all about in Britain, after all. And let's not even begin to talk about the so-called 'anti-terror legislation'. Last time I checked the US wasn't (yet) detaining journalists or they family members/friends at airports under bogus pretenses.

Pot, kettle, black (hole), indeed.


Edit Oh, and I'm just dying to learn which 'Western democracies' have similar surveillance as the UK and the US. Please do tell, by all means!

 

[andrewb610]

effgee[/url]":1mj0ai08]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":1mj0ai08]... (And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

Heh, whatever gets you to sleep at night. While it's certainly not all roses over here, I suggest the next time you walk down any main street in any town in the UK you open your eyes and actually do look around you. Then do that in any similar size town in the US. Notice the difference? Yes, a fraction of the 'public' surveillance cameras. But of course, CCTV sounds so much more pleasant and civilized - and that's what it's all about in Britain, after all. And let's not even begin to talk about the so-called 'anti-terror legislation'. Last time I checked the US wasn't (yet) detaining journalists or they family members/friends at airports under bogus pretenses.

Pot, kettle, black (hole), indeed.


Edit Oh, and I'm just dying to learn which 'Western democracies' have similar surveillance as the UK and the US. Please do tell, by all means!

About your last part I beg to differ

 

[jappleng]

New Industry: Thought Lawyers

Basically a lawyer that advises you on what to think and what not to think.

 

[effgee]

andrewb610[/url]":277zlc5q]

effgee[/url]":277zlc5q]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":277zlc5q]... (And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

Heh, whatever gets you to sleep at night. While it's certainly not all roses over here, I suggest the next time you walk down any main street in any town in the UK you open your eyes and actually do look around you. Then do that in any similar size town in the US. Notice the difference? Yes, a fraction of the 'public' surveillance cameras. But of course, CCTV sounds so much more pleasant and civilized - and that's what it's all about in Britain, after all. And let's not even begin to talk about the so-called 'anti-terror legislation'. Last time I checked the US wasn't (yet) detaining journalists or they family members/friends at airports under bogus pretenses.

Pot, kettle, black (hole), indeed.


Edit Oh, and I'm just dying to learn which 'Western democracies' have similar surveillance as the UK and the US. Please do tell, by all means!

About your last part I beg to differ

Man, how could I forget about her?? I stand corrected, way corrected, on that one - thanks!

 

[Biceps]

Every page you visit on the Internet is used to create your personal thought profile. This profile is available to any government in the 5 Eyes group. The information you see on Facebook is driven by customized algorithms that report home how long you spend looking at any part of a webpage, what you type, who your friends and family are, and what your and their political motivations may be.

'C' is for Cookie, and cookies let them see.

Anyone who thinks this is not a problem does not understand the scope of the information being collected and how effectively that information can be used to control groups and individuals.

 

[AndreaFaulds]

soulsabr[/url]":2oi53bq9]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":2oi53bq9]

jimbo49[/url]":2oi53bq9]for someone in his position to recognise and openly speak out about the way UK citizens are surveilled shows just how bad it is! the UK is by far the worst country of the so-called 'Free World' and must be on par with places like China. remember, the UK government has continuously decried China and other countries, other governments, for the lack of privacy, freedom and freedom of speech in those countries. how can it possibly do that now, when it has been recognised as being worse than those others? and the truth of it is that this has come about just to replace what was/still is going on in the USA. they have had to stop some surveillance and drastically tone down other forms and, as is usual, the stupid sods in charge in the UK just fall in with what is wanted but not available in the USA. talk about stupid! does the UK really think that being a member of the EU whilst jumping into bed with the USA is not going to go 'unpunished'? does it also think that should anything happen with the EU, the USA is going to come galloping over the hill to rescue it? i'd guess 'think again' would be pretty close! and how long before the threat of expulsion from the EU becomes a threat? being in two clubs but only pass information in one direction is not a good move! but while all this is going on, the UK is being turned more and quicker into a Police State!!

...calm yourself. The UK and US are bad, but they're not complete outliers. Many other Western "democracies" are similar, unfortunately.

(And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

You didn't seriously just post "relax, we're not as bad as 'they' are" did you? Slightly better than horrid is still fucking horrid. You know that; right?

I'm not relaxed and I don't want anyone to be. The UK is awful (and actively getting worse).

I simply dispute the ridiculous notion that we're the worst in the free world, or even if we are, that we're some exceptionally bad case. The UK is not the sole member of the AUSCANNZUKUS alliance, for example.

I'd like to pretend that if the UK disappears tomorrow these problems are gone, but they're present in many other places, unfortunately.

 

[Joel_B]

AndreaFaulds[/url]":3njuszcl]

jimbo49[/url]":3njuszcl]for someone in his position to recognise and openly speak out about the way UK citizens are surveilled shows just how bad it is! the UK is by far the worst country of the so-called 'Free World' and must be on par with places like China. remember, the UK government has continuously decried China and other countries, other governments, for the lack of privacy, freedom and freedom of speech in those countries. how can it possibly do that now, when it has been recognised as being worse than those others? and the truth of it is that this has come about just to replace what was/still is going on in the USA. they have had to stop some surveillance and drastically tone down other forms and, as is usual, the stupid sods in charge in the UK just fall in with what is wanted but not available in the USA. talk about stupid! does the UK really think that being a member of the EU whilst jumping into bed with the USA is not going to go 'unpunished'? does it also think that should anything happen with the EU, the USA is going to come galloping over the hill to rescue it? i'd guess 'think again' would be pretty close! and how long before the threat of expulsion from the EU becomes a threat? being in two clubs but only pass information in one direction is not a good move! but while all this is going on, the UK is being turned more and quicker into a Police State!!

...calm yourself. The UK and US are bad, but they're not complete outliers. Many other Western "democracies" are similar, unfortunately.

(And certainly, the UK isn't the worst country in the free world. The US is probably more deserving of that... for now.)

I would not be so sure about that. UK has no constitution protecting the citizens and amount of cameras is staggering. At the same time there seems to be no control what so ever over GCHQ and MI5/6/whatever, to the point where it seems that they are actually telling the government what they want. Not that current UK government seems very concerned with democracy and privacy to begin with (same goes for Merkel here so yea EU might actually be in front of US when it comes to spying on its own citizens).

You can pretty much guarantee that the moment something interesting happens you will find those cameras are either not turned on, the video recorded has been lost or that the operator can't be found.

 

[Biceps]

psd[/url]":3u489mnm]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

The USA and its allies have been using algorithms to 'guess' who might be a terrorist and then blow those (anonymous) people up. That's how we ended up detonating a grandmother in front of her small grandchildren. Google it. This shit has been officially dangerous for a very long time.

 

[Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer]

Biceps[/url]":1zxaqrcj]

psd[/url]":1zxaqrcj]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

The USA and its allies have been using algorithms to 'guess' who might be a terrorist and then blow those (anonymous) people up. That's how we ended up detonating a grandmother in front of her small grandchildren. Google it. This shit has been officially dangerous for a very long time.

Whatever you're going for is completely buried on Google under dozens of links about a guy blowing up his grandmother's car and one thing about an e-cig and an oxygen tank. :/ Which is probably just how "they" like it...

 

[Biceps]

Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer[/url]":339xaiwz]

Biceps[/url]":339xaiwz]

psd[/url]":339xaiwz]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

The USA and its allies have been using algorithms to 'guess' who might be a terrorist and then blow those (anonymous) people up. That's how we ended up detonating a grandmother in front of her small grandchildren. Google it. This shit has been officially dangerous for a very long time.

Whatever you're going for is completely buried on Google under dozens of links about a guy blowing up his grandmother's car and one thing about an e-cig and an oxygen tank. :/ Which is probably just how "they" like it...

Here is one story. Not seeing the info on algorithm-driven strikes, but this was pretty clearly how she was chosen. Gotta get to work but will update later today.

EDIT: Here is an article from Al Jazeera outlining the current state of affairs on drone targeting relying on algorithms, as well at the rationale behind it.

 

[isparavanje]

Biceps[/url]":cm0cravw]

Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer[/url]":cm0cravw]

Biceps[/url]":cm0cravw]

psd[/url]":cm0cravw]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

The USA and its allies have been using algorithms to 'guess' who might be a terrorist and then blow those (anonymous) people up. That's how we ended up detonating a grandmother in front of her small grandchildren. Google it. This shit has been officially dangerous for a very long time.

Whatever you're going for is completely buried on Google under dozens of links about a guy blowing up his grandmother's car and one thing about an e-cig and an oxygen tank. :/ Which is probably just how "they" like it...

Here is one story. Not seeing the info on algorithm-driven strikes, but this was pretty clearly how she was chosen. Gotta get to work but will update later today.

While that is wrong, it is also war. Don't conflate that into a discussion about citizens' rights, it doesn't belong here.

 

[Marc Aurel]

Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer[/url]":sws6yw2z]In 1984, even the places where there were no telescreens had been bugged to enable the Thought Police to collect a fairly thorough documentation of Winston and Julia's affair. At least the visible cameras seem a little more...honest?

Though, if you have your cellphone with you, and it's turned on and connected to a cell site, you're basically carrying your own bug with you, should anyone want to listen in.

I also doubt there are cameras all over the British countryside. They would be too expensive to maintain, for starters. So I really don't believe the surveillance is already worse than in 1984 even in that respect. Of course, in the world of the 1984 a Party member leaving the city without a good work-related reason would be an immediate thoughtcrime suspect, so it really isn't the same thing.

 

[snowman<ca>]

I am trying to remember when the last war was that it seemed like all sides actually followed the Geneva Convention.

 

[Soothsayer786]

Of course we all live in a surveillance state. Emails, cell phones, landlines, all of it is bugged. The only thing we have going for us is that they haven't figured out a way to fully utilize all of that data.

 

[Jason Honingford]

If loss of privacy is the thing you took away from 1984, I think you did not read the book. Asking governments to protect my data is like asking the scorpion not to sting me.

 

[JaneDoe]

"at least Winston [a character in Orwell's 1984] was able to go out in the countryside and go under a tree and expect there wouldn’t be any screen, as it was called."

As far as i remember Wilson expected some privacy in the woods, but even there were microphones hidden in the trees.

 

[pqr]

jimbo49[/url]":3q8e98ig]for someone in his position to recognise and openly speak out about the way UK citizens are surveilled shows just how bad it is! the UK is by far the worst country of the so-called 'Free World' and must be on par with places like China. remember, the UK government has continuously decried China and other countries, other governments, for the lack of privacy, freedom and freedom of speech in those countries. how can it possibly do that now, when it has been recognised as being worse than those others? and the truth of it is that this has come about just to replace what was/still is going on in the USA. they have had to stop some surveillance and drastically tone down other forms and, as is usual, the stupid sods in charge in the UK just fall in with what is wanted but not available in the USA. talk about stupid! does the UK really think that being a member of the EU whilst jumping into bed with the USA is not going to go 'unpunished'? does it also think that should anything happen with the EU, the USA is going to come galloping over the hill to rescue it? i'd guess 'think again' would be pretty close! and how long before the threat of expulsion from the EU becomes a threat? being in two clubs but only pass information in one direction is not a good move! but while all this is going on, the UK is being turned more and quicker into a Police State!!

Agree with much of what you say but I think geopolitically UK's role to hamper EU so that it can't really become functional single state that rivals US and in that regard it's doing its job sadly quite well :/ My $0.02.

 

[nimro]

psd[/url]":3ll4qj1s]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

Surveillance itself has consequences. Studies have shown that if a person knows they are being watched, they act differently.

If you live under permanent surveillance, you live under constant fear.

 

[hizonner]

You want a conspiracy theory?

If you want to make privacy ridiculous in the public mind, appoint a UN rapporteur who's tone deaf, and will look like a crank in the eyes of the public. The public knows it doesn't literally live in 1984, let alone anything worse. People in the UK know that they're not going to be dragged off and tortured for the slightest deviation. Not this decade, anyhow.

It helps if you can make the guy look weird and paranoid by playing up how he doesn't use Facebook or Twitter (I don't use them either... and I know how most people receive that).

With any luck, you'll get everybody to write off every real concern as some kind of insane phantasm.

 

[Biceps]

isparavanje[/url]":2e7w84bd]

Biceps[/url]":2e7w84bd]

Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer[/url]":2e7w84bd]

Biceps[/url]":2e7w84bd]

psd[/url]":2e7w84bd]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

The USA and its allies have been using algorithms to 'guess' who might be a terrorist and then blow those (anonymous) people up. That's how we ended up detonating a grandmother in front of her small grandchildren. Google it. This shit has been officially dangerous for a very long time.

Whatever you're going for is completely buried on Google under dozens of links about a guy blowing up his grandmother's car and one thing about an e-cig and an oxygen tank. :/ Which is probably just how "they" like it...

Here is one story. Not seeing the info on algorithm-driven strikes, but this was pretty clearly how she was chosen. Gotta get to work but will update later today.

While that is wrong, it is also war. Don't conflate that into a discussion about citizens' rights, it doesn't belong here.

The same tchnology is used stateside to find meth labs, etc. That is non-war domestic surveillance. It is persistent. Also, because this happened in an allied country, and no militants were present it was not, by the definition of the word - war. If you choose to accept the redefinition of war, which assumes perpetual global attacks against whoever we decide deserves the label 'enemy', then you are right. However, remember the 'enemy' is being selected by a computer.

 

[psd]

nimro[/url]":328trbv8]

psd[/url]":328trbv8]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

Surveillance itself has consequences. Studies have shown that if a person knows they are being watched, they act differently.

If you live under permanent surveillance, you live under constant fear.

Act differently like how, in a more social responsible manner? Fear of what, of absolutely nothing happening?

 

[psd]

Biceps[/url]":3lr03uxi]

isparavanje[/url]":3lr03uxi]

Biceps[/url]":3lr03uxi]

Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer[/url]":3lr03uxi]

Biceps[/url]":3lr03uxi]

psd[/url]":3lr03uxi]Complete HYPERBOLE! In 1984 the surveillance had deadly consequences; in today's UK, not so much. What made 1984 "scary" and wrong are the consequences not the surveillance per se.

The USA and its allies have been using algorithms to 'guess' who might be a terrorist and then blow those (anonymous) people up. That's how we ended up detonating a grandmother in front of her small grandchildren. Google it. This shit has been officially dangerous for a very long time.

Whatever you're going for is completely buried on Google under dozens of links about a guy blowing up his grandmother's car and one thing about an e-cig and an oxygen tank. :/ Which is probably just how "they" like it...

Here is one story. Not seeing the info on algorithm-driven strikes, but this was pretty clearly how she was chosen. Gotta get to work but will update later today.

While that is wrong, it is also war. Don't conflate that into a discussion about citizens' rights, it doesn't belong here.

The same tchnology is used stateside to find meth labs, etc. That is non-war domestic surveillance. It is persistent. Also, because this happened in an allied country, and no militants were present it was not, by the definition of the word - war. If you choose to accept the redefinition of war, which assumes perpetual global attacks against whoever we decide deserves the label 'enemy', then you are right. However, remember the 'enemy' is being selected by a computer.

I have not heard of meth labs being blown off by drones. Generally, they are not blown off because they contain valuable evidence needed for successful prosecution.

 

[dosperios]

In the United Kingdom, TV watches you!

 

[Biceps]

I have not heard of meth labs being blown off by drones. Generally, they are not blown off because they contain valuable evidence needed for successful prosecution.

You don't have to be so intentionally binary about it. Several people in the U.S., including infants, have been maimed and killed in drug raid performed on the wrong locations. Swat members have guns (and baby maiming flash bangs).