Well, except for the narc's spouse, children, and other immediate family members.

I don't wanna narc on 'em.

I wanna blow up their cars myself.

I guess sugar in the gas tank will have to do.

For now.

You just blew my mind without the benefit of psychoactive pharmaceuticals.

Children or off-leash dogs?

One man's "creepy" is another man's "convenient".

What you see as a bug, another user may see as a feature.

Here's a website that lists a whole bunch of websites and software that are truly free - free of charge AND free of privacy violations, including easy-to-use software to encrypt your online communications and social media platforms which do not sell your personal information.  There's even Google-Free complete replacements for the Android software on your smartphone:

http://prism-break.org/

Nobody forces anybody to use Google, or Facebook, or Instagram, etc, etc, etc.

A little from Column A and a little from Column B.

I dunno. Winnipeg has a reputation for being a pretty nasty town. Often ranks #1 in the country for murders, car theft, and/or other property crimes.

What's the level of classification that's right above "species"?

I've got one of those all to myself.

So different from the novel.

Yes, I too am much more pro-life, thanks to Kermit.

You people have been warned about perpetuating the Great Kool-Aid Blood Libel.

Since you clearly refuse to listen, I have released the hounds.

Well, heck, aliens and robots definitely have no rights in this scenario!

More thoughts:

1. Any RC aircraft that is "controlled by your iPhone" is limited by the iPhone's wifi transceiver.  How far can you get from your personal wifi router before losing the connection?  That's the range of this thing.
2. The AR Parrot is made of cheap styrofoam, and has the lightest electric motors available.  A light breeze will render it virtually inoperable.
3. I have a $100 camera that records video in "720p".  The picture quality is terrible, because it's compressed to within an inch of its life.  And that's a relatively large camcorder, not the tiny "camera on a chip" that's installed on the AR Parrot.

As such, the AR Parrot is not a "drone".  It is a toy, and an overpriced toy at that.  For $300, I'd want something with better range that wont be ruined the first time I crash it into a tree.

The minimum requirements of a real "surveillance drone" are a powerful controller-transceiver, a powerful camera with a good zoom lens, and at least a gas-powered engine. As such, it would be LOUD and EXPENSIVE.

A cheap pair of binoculars would be more effective for a peeping tom.

Here's a neat video of someone playing with their AR "drone".

Are y'all really telling me the people who made this video are criminals?

C'mon!

Better lock this guy up too. He's clearly a spy.

Now the Texas legislature has passed a bill that would ban the private use of drones to take photos of individuals or property "with the intent to conduct surveillance."

How the heck do they differentiate intent?

So, an art photographer can use a drone?  A newspaper photographer can use a drone?  A sports photographer can use a drone?  

I assume it's up to the police officer's judgement to determine the intent of the photographer?

Yeah, that law won't be abused.  You better believe it'll be interpreted in such a way to make it illegal to photograph a police encounter, because that would be "surveillance".

Look, there are already peeping tom laws on the books.  There is no need to create new laws just because peeping toms have a new tool.  

Multiplying the number of laws for every possible offense is straight out of the progressives' playbook.