GOP Tea Party Senator Rand Paul, who last month led a filibuster against the notion of using drones on American soil, suggested Monday night that we use drones on American soil.
In a weird moment of macho bravado, Paul told Fox the following:
I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him…
If there’s a killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I’m not against drones being used to search them out, heat-seeking devices being used, I’m all for law enforcement. I’m just not for surveillance when there’s not probable cause that there’s a crime being committed.
Okay then. I’m sure there’s nothing better we could be doing with a $12 million drone than risking it on catching a guy who stole fifty bucks.
Not to mention, America’s new policy on liquor store robberies is immediate execution of the suspect? Seriously? What if he didn’t even rob the store – what if the guy leaving is a hostage that escaped and ran out? Why not just nuke the place and let god sort them out, Rand? Someone clearly got an earful about his drone filibuster and is now trying to make amends with “the crazy.”