technology. do i want drones flying over getting involved in normal crime sequences? no. but i could imagine a time where a policeman is being shot at in his car and they have the ability to push a button in the car and a small robotic weapon is able to elevate and shoot back at a criminal. so what you call a drone doesn t have to be from 50,000 feet. it could be simply in the neighborhood and part of a car. sean: it could be a helicopter, for example, right? well, in the heated pursuit of someone who is shooting at the police or shooting at civilians, it doesn t matter what kind of technology it is, but it does matter whether or not there is a heated pursuit and whether or not there is an engagement of a gun fight and whether they re a threat to the policeman. that s what the doctrine is. the thing is i m against targeted killings by drones, but also against targeted killing by sniper, by spear, by knife, by club. the technology isn t so important. what i was arguing at the filibu
do i want drones flying over getting involved in normal crime sequences? no. but i could imagine a time where a policeman is being shot at in his car and they have the ability to push a button in the car and a small robotic weapon is able to elevate and shoot back at a criminal. so what you call a drone doesn t have to be from 50,000 feet. it could be simply in the neighborhood and part of a car. sean: it could be a helicopter, for example, right? well, in the heated pursuit of someone who is shooting at the police or shooting at civilians, it doesn t matter what kind of technology it is, but it does matter whether or not there is a heated pursuit and whether or not there is an engagement of a gun fight and whether they re a threat to the policeman. that s what the doctrine is. the thing is i m against targeted killings by drones, but also against targeted killing by sniper, by spear, by knife, by club. the technology isn t so important. what i was arguing at the filibuster was tar