Unidentified drones over NJ/NY/DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don't understand why we haven't shot one down. An F-22 got its first kill when it downed a Chinese balloon in US airspace. Why haven't they scrambled to shoot down one of these numerous drones, particularly when they are flying over the very bases where F-22s are based? The debris alone would be extremely useful to figure out what these things are and where they are coming from.

I am baffled by the Biden Administration's non-response. This isn't Bigfoot or the LochNess monster. People are seeing these things. There is lots of video. And they are flying over national security areas. The brazenness of these drones suggests it's not a US Skunk Works research and development project. The Biden response is mystifying.

What makes you think it isn’t our drones? Perhaps they’re testing new systems.

It doesn't make sense. If they were our drones they wouldn't be causing the entire state of NJ's government to demand a state of emergency.

[Anonymous]

Have a helicopter drop a net and capture one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don't understand why we haven't shot one down. An F-22 got its first kill when it downed a Chinese balloon in US airspace. Why haven't they scrambled to shoot down one of these numerous drones, particularly when they are flying over the very bases where F-22s are based? The debris alone would be extremely useful to figure out what these things are and where they are coming from.

I am baffled by the Biden Administration's non-response. This isn't Bigfoot or the LochNess monster. People are seeing these things. There is lots of video. And they are flying over national security areas. The brazenness of these drones suggests it's not a US Skunk Works research and development project. The Biden response is mystifying.

What makes you think it isn’t our drones? Perhaps they’re testing new systems.

It doesn't make sense. If they were our drones they wouldn't be causing the entire state of NJ's government to demand a state of emergency.

What makes you believe that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for the MAGA trolls. Why hasn't any of your 2nd Amendment militia used their gun rights to shoot some of them out of the sky? I mean this seriously.

y

I realize you’ve clearly never fired a gun in your life, and that’s what led you to ask such an embarrassingly stupid question and think you sounded witty while doing it, but I’ll humor you with an actual answer, so you won’t look like such an utter imbecile in the future:

Shooting at a moving target overhead is best accomplished with a shotgun, which fires a cloud of small metal pellets, and is effective at hitting objects with reasonable accuracy up to about 250 high and maybe 200 feet away. After that, the “cloud” of shot pellets dispersers too much and the pellets themselves start to lose velocity to the point where they don’t have enough speed to do damage.

A rifle, which fires a single bullet instead of a cloud of pellets, is more accurate for distances up to several hundred yards up/out, but the problem is, with a moving target, you will probably never be able to “lead” the target properly at an unknown range to hit it. And in the meantime, the bullet you fired at it and missed with IS going to come down somewhere, potentially damaging something or someone. And contrary to what you think, most gun owners are keenly aware of the dangers of firing a rifle bullet into the air at shallow angles, and wouldn’t shoot at something in the air with a rifle unless it was practically overhead and the shot was nearly vertical (because the bullet will reach zero velocity at apogee and then fall back down at about the terminal velocity of a hailstone). And that would be a pretty unlikely scenario.

A handgun would be totally useless due to lack of any accuracy at all, and the bullet losing energy very quickly after a few hundred yards.

Plus, these drones being sighted are enormous. They’re so large that a single hit by a rifle bullet or a dozen smaller shotgun pellets probably isn’t going to cause the type of damage that would bring it down immediately.





So that’s why gun owners aren’t shooting them down. Because they’re not nearly as stupid as you are.


Now go forth and be slightly better-informed and not looking like such an idiot.

Why are you such an a**? Do you think it makes you sound smart?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for the MAGA trolls. Why hasn't any of your 2nd Amendment militia used their gun rights to shoot some of them out of the sky? I mean this seriously.

y

I realize you’ve clearly never fired a gun in your life, and that’s what led you to ask such an embarrassingly stupid question and think you sounded witty while doing it, but I’ll humor you with an actual answer, so you won’t look like such an utter imbecile in the future:

Shooting at a moving target overhead is best accomplished with a shotgun, which fires a cloud of small metal pellets, and is effective at hitting objects with reasonable accuracy up to about 250 high and maybe 200 feet away. After that, the “cloud” of shot pellets dispersers too much and the pellets themselves start to lose velocity to the point where they don’t have enough speed to do damage.

A rifle, which fires a single bullet instead of a cloud of pellets, is more accurate for distances up to several hundred yards up/out, but the problem is, with a moving target, you will probably never be able to “lead” the target properly at an unknown range to hit it. And in the meantime, the bullet you fired at it and missed with IS going to come down somewhere, potentially damaging something or someone. And contrary to what you think, most gun owners are keenly aware of the dangers of firing a rifle bullet into the air at shallow angles, and wouldn’t shoot at something in the air with a rifle unless it was practically overhead and the shot was nearly vertical (because the bullet will reach zero velocity at apogee and then fall back down at about the terminal velocity of a hailstone). And that would be a pretty unlikely scenario.

A handgun would be totally useless due to lack of any accuracy at all, and the bullet losing energy very quickly after a few hundred yards.

Plus, these drones being sighted are enormous. They’re so large that a single hit by a rifle bullet or a dozen smaller shotgun pellets probably isn’t going to cause the type of damage that would bring it down immediately.





So that’s why gun owners aren’t shooting them down. Because they’re not nearly as stupid as you are.


Now go forth and be slightly better-informed and not looking like such an idiot.

Why are you such an a**? Do you think it makes you sound smart?

You, 17:31, owe us an apology for your gross stupidity.
— Different poster

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for the MAGA trolls. Why hasn't any of your 2nd Amendment militia used their gun rights to shoot some of them out of the sky? I mean this seriously.

y

I realize you’ve clearly never fired a gun in your life, and that’s what led you to ask such an embarrassingly stupid question and think you sounded witty while doing it, but I’ll humor you with an actual answer, so you won’t look like such an utter imbecile in the future:

Shooting at a moving target overhead is best accomplished with a shotgun, which fires a cloud of small metal pellets, and is effective at hitting objects with reasonable accuracy up to about 250 high and maybe 200 feet away. After that, the “cloud” of shot pellets dispersers too much and the pellets themselves start to lose velocity to the point where they don’t have enough speed to do damage.

A rifle, which fires a single bullet instead of a cloud of pellets, is more accurate for distances up to several hundred yards up/out, but the problem is, with a moving target, you will probably never be able to “lead” the target properly at an unknown range to hit it. And in the meantime, the bullet you fired at it and missed with IS going to come down somewhere, potentially damaging something or someone. And contrary to what you think, most gun owners are keenly aware of the dangers of firing a rifle bullet into the air at shallow angles, and wouldn’t shoot at something in the air with a rifle unless it was practically overhead and the shot was nearly vertical (because the bullet will reach zero velocity at apogee and then fall back down at about the terminal velocity of a hailstone). And that would be a pretty unlikely scenario.

A handgun would be totally useless due to lack of any accuracy at all, and the bullet losing energy very quickly after a few hundred yards.

Plus, these drones being sighted are enormous. They’re so large that a single hit by a rifle bullet or a dozen smaller shotgun pellets probably isn’t going to cause the type of damage that would bring it down immediately.





So that’s why gun owners aren’t shooting them down. Because they’re not nearly as stupid as you are.


Now go forth and be slightly better-informed and not looking like such an idiot.

Thank you for sharing your wisdom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question for the MAGA trolls. Why hasn't any of your 2nd Amendment militia used their gun rights to shoot some of them out of the sky? I mean this seriously.

y

I realize you’ve clearly never fired a gun in your life, and that’s what led you to ask such an embarrassingly stupid question and think you sounded witty while doing it, but I’ll humor you with an actual answer, so you won’t look like such an utter imbecile in the future:

Shooting at a moving target overhead is best accomplished with a shotgun, which fires a cloud of small metal pellets, and is effective at hitting objects with reasonable accuracy up to about 250 high and maybe 200 feet away. After that, the “cloud” of shot pellets dispersers too much and the pellets themselves start to lose velocity to the point where they don’t have enough speed to do damage.

A rifle, which fires a single bullet instead of a cloud of pellets, is more accurate for distances up to several hundred yards up/out, but the problem is, with a moving target, you will probably never be able to “lead” the target properly at an unknown range to hit it. And in the meantime, the bullet you fired at it and missed with IS going to come down somewhere, potentially damaging something or someone. And contrary to what you think, most gun owners are keenly aware of the dangers of firing a rifle bullet into the air at shallow angles, and wouldn’t shoot at something in the air with a rifle unless it was practically overhead and the shot was nearly vertical (because the bullet will reach zero velocity at apogee and then fall back down at about the terminal velocity of a hailstone). And that would be a pretty unlikely scenario.

A handgun would be totally useless due to lack of any accuracy at all, and the bullet losing energy very quickly after a few hundred yards.

Plus, these drones being sighted are enormous. They’re so large that a single hit by a rifle bullet or a dozen smaller shotgun pellets probably isn’t going to cause the type of damage that would bring it down immediately.





So that’s why gun owners aren’t shooting them down. Because they’re not nearly as stupid as you are.


Now go forth and be slightly better-informed and not looking like such an idiot.

Why are you such an a**? Do you think it makes you sound smart?

You, 17:31, owe us an apology for your gross stupidity.
— Different poster

LOL. Yeah sure. As if the MAGA militia knows that.

[Anonymous]

NY, NJ and DC.

This seems like training for the new Pearl Harbor/9/11 to drag Trump into war.

Am I wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don't understand why we haven't shot one down. An F-22 got its first kill when it downed a Chinese balloon in US airspace. Why haven't they scrambled to shoot down one of these numerous drones, particularly when they are flying over the very bases where F-22s are based? The debris alone would be extremely useful to figure out what these things are and where they are coming from.

I am baffled by the Biden Administration's non-response. This isn't Bigfoot or the LochNess monster. People are seeing these things. There is lots of video. And they are flying over national security areas. The brazenness of these drones suggests it's not a US Skunk Works research and development project. The Biden response is mystifying.

Oh honey. Our own government/deep state is the one sanctioning those. They are doing a dress rehearsal before the false flag event.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don't understand why we haven't shot one down. An F-22 got its first kill when it downed a Chinese balloon in US airspace. Why haven't they scrambled to shoot down one of these numerous drones, particularly when they are flying over the very bases where F-22s are based? The debris alone would be extremely useful to figure out what these things are and where they are coming from.

I am baffled by the Biden Administration's non-response. This isn't Bigfoot or the LochNess monster. People are seeing these things. There is lots of video. And they are flying over national security areas. The brazenness of these drones suggests it's not a US Skunk Works research and development project. The Biden response is mystifying.

Oh honey. Our own government/deep state is the one sanctioning those. They are doing a dress rehearsal before the false flag event.

Which will be what exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don't understand why we haven't shot one down. An F-22 got its first kill when it downed a Chinese balloon in US airspace. Why haven't they scrambled to shoot down one of these numerous drones, particularly when they are flying over the very bases where F-22s are based? The debris alone would be extremely useful to figure out what these things are and where they are coming from.

I am baffled by the Biden Administration's non-response. This isn't Bigfoot or the LochNess monster. People are seeing these things. There is lots of video. And they are flying over national security areas. The brazenness of these drones suggests it's not a US Skunk Works research and development project. The Biden response is mystifying.

What makes you think it isn’t our drones? Perhaps they’re testing new systems.

Definitely either government or military. Kirby should just be honest for once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NY, NJ and DC.

This seems like training for the new Pearl Harbor/9/11 to drag Trump into war.

Am I wrong?

Evil depopulation agenda

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:January 20th can’t come soon enough.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:January 20th can’t come soon enough.

Agreed. I’m really looking forward to Trump and his nutjob crew’s disaster. It’s going to be entertaining watching the trumpers eat each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I genuinely don't understand why we haven't shot one down. An F-22 got its first kill when it downed a Chinese balloon in US airspace. Why haven't they scrambled to shoot down one of these numerous drones, particularly when they are flying over the very bases where F-22s are based? The debris alone would be extremely useful to figure out what these things are and where they are coming from.

I am baffled by the Biden Administration's non-response. This isn't Bigfoot or the LochNess monster. People are seeing these things. There is lots of video. And they are flying over national security areas. The brazenness of these drones suggests it's not a US Skunk Works research and development project. The Biden response is mystifying.

What makes you think it isn’t our drones? Perhaps they’re testing new systems.

to track people down?