Drones quickly became the United States’ worst kept secret in 2011. From killing Anwar al-Awlaki to crashing in Iran, the use of drones has gotten more attention this past year than ever before. The use of drones in the U.S. itself, however, has received considerably less coverage. This year will prove to be a coming out party for the domestic drone. If used responsibly while remaining fully aware of potential dangers, drones could revolutionize law enforcement in the United States.
In June 2011, a sheriff in North Dakota was searching for six missing cows that were stolen. Three armed men chased the sheriff off the farm and called for the usual reinforcements in the case of an armed standoff. The difference in this situation was that a Customs and Border Patrol Predator B drone was called away from the Canadian border and aided law enforcement in arresting the three suspects.
According to the Los Angeles Times, this was the first known arrest of U.S. citizens using Predator drones on our soil. No shots were fired, a cache of weapons and the missing cows were found, and three alleged members of the Sovereign Citizens Movement were arrested. The drones at the border are primarily used for tracking illegal activity, but the 2005 bill that authorized these drones allowed them to work within “interior law enforcement support.” That small loophole may open up a can of worms as law enforcement eyes the benefits of having unmanned vehicles carry out dangerous surveillance tasks.
Drones will take significant danger away from law enforcement officials who put their lives at risk every day. Last year, a helicopter had to make an emergency landing during surveillance in Los Angeles when it was shot at. Perhaps the greatest benefit of drones in the eye of law enforcement officials is the cost benefit. Drones themselves are much cheaper than helicopters or other aircraft — and they cost much less to operate per hour than do other aircraft. Unmanned aircraft will make certain activities easier, safer, more efficient, and more cost effective. At a time when many states are saddled with enormous debt, it is clear this will be a big selling point.
This demand will likely lead the Federal Aviation Administration to review requests for unmanned vehicles for law enforcement purposes in 2012. Civil liberties experts have brought their concerns over privacy to the forefront of this debate. Although law enforcement reassures the public that these will be used where there is an ongoing police scene (Miami-Dade police have had two aircraft for seven months that they have yet to use), citizens are concerned they will be used to pry into their everyday lives.
Drones will get their first big time test monitoring crowds at the London Olympics this summer. In a city already laden with cameras, the police are looking for more “eyes in the sky.” Any police force that wishes to use these drones will have to cooperate with Civilian Aviation Authority, but the Metropolitan police have been reluctant to comment on the use of these drones.
It is clear that drones are useful for surveillance and law enforcement while creating significant concerns over privacy rights. However, we should look to the future, at how these vehicles may be used as their technology increases. A Wired article draws attention to the technological leaps that are possible when this technology is deployed for everyday use. Although it sounds like something from a Batman movie, these drones could be equipped with LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device) known colloquially as a sound cannon. Unmanned vehicles could also be equipped with a “light based personnel immobilization device,” a strobe-like light used to disorient fleeing criminals and stop them in their tracks. It is even suggested that non-lethal rounds, or Tasers, could be mounted to these smaller drones to track down dangerous criminals.
In the face of ongoing protests throughout the world that shook many dictatorships in 2011, this technology will be more sought after than ever. Sound cannons used to dispel protesters could be flown in from a remote location, avoiding any clashes with the police or army. Drones are likely to be a fixture of our future in society; a tool that has to be used with caution and care no matter how impressive these advancements may be.
Photo Credit: drsmith7383
The Discussion
Bad bad bad,,, I have seen many innocent photographs misconstrued this would be no different......... bad looking innocent picture along with the patriot act could mean disaster. Unless there is a search warrant attached to this puppy then absolutely not.
It will be interesting to see if legislation for the protection of privacy can keep pace with the willingness of the government to incorporate drones and similar technological advances into it's arsenal of law enforcement tactics. Hopefully we will not face Orwell's 1984 passively.
As long as the privacy of law abiding citizens is protected; I don't believe the right to privacy extends to investigating potential crime, drones have potential to aid law enforcement in all areas. Another use, search for missing persons in remote areas or victims of natural or man-made disasters. There use will be controversial until their value is proven and privacy concerns are shown to be minimized.
This is the military industrial complex trying to carve a niche in the civilian sector. The fact is these wars are ending, and companies that currently enjoy absurdly lucrative gov't contracts are attempting to stay in business.
The returning troops, especially infantrymen, have few applications for their finely honed warfighting skills. Civil service exams favor vets, and many become police. Thus creating a civilian market for military tech.
4 Replies
3 Replies
2 Replies
Does the combination of the Patriot Act, NDAA, and homeland use of these drones conjure up any nightmares for anyone? It seems so.
With that said, these drones just make plain sense as they are cheaper and safer than the alternatives. Any new techonology can and will be used for good and bad, but the advantages outweigh that. Since I have nothing to hide, I would be ok with the use of the drones for manhunts and ongoing activity. However, seeing them hover 24/7 would be another issue and entirely too 1984 for me.
I have no fear of technology, but of unrestrained authority.
The danger of drones against US citizens is precisely what makes them so attractive. They are cheap and have long linger times.This precludes protection of citizens against unreasonable search and monitoring. I don't want my local police department to know my business even if what I'm doing isn't illegal. Some people are natural voyeurs and I don't want them in my business.High cost helos & requiring people to get away from a desk protects rights
In contrast to Sal, I believe there are potential horrible consequences of drone use without oversight and accountability. Arming drones should never be considered or allowed on US soil against a civilian population. Already police have demonstrated over use of lethal force in a 'first strike' mentality not in defense. To look upon the street is to see an appearance of military rule in the guise of police protection subliminally encouraging violence towards the population with over whelming force.
Technology can peer through walls. Surveillance without judicial writ or oversight of governmental abuse continues us towards a Orwellian 1984 future.
Balance through oversight and accountability of action can occur and be to societies benefit.
8 Replies
6 Replies
5 Replies
I'm not going to lie, the headline is a bit misleading. Personally, I think any measure used to heighten security would only be a plus. However, I want to see the effectiveness of using these drones. Do these devices actually decrease the crime rate? A lot of the advantages have been discussed, not so much as the disadvantages. My primary concern is the matter of privacy. I feel a little apprehensive not knowing what goes on in the aircrafts, it's not like you can just walk into one like a police station. And I may be just a little bit paranoid saying this, but when you have a giant aircraft hovering over your head as with any gov't surveillance, I feel like it is only natural to be concerned.
Excellent assessment of what is sure to be a difficult issue. I have been ruminating (thinking is too strong a word) about drones for a year or so and have collected a number of articles about them.
To me, the lesser issue is geography. It is easy to feel differently about drones used "over there" than "here at home." Not least because the "here at home" question raises big brother concerns.
But the geography question should really be subsumed into what I believe really troubles people. Drones are too good at what they do so there is no fair fight.
Only a simple mention of the whole "civil liberties" issue? That's unfortunate. Drones have the power to monitor entire towns at a time without being detected. They are a constitutional nightmare with severe implications for a government that is often on the wrong side of the facts.
Ms. Postel- Very good essay. As you say, if the drones are used for legitimate legal purposes and not for "spying" on citizens, our law enforcement agencies will benefit greatly and our citizens will be safer.
I think the whole civil liberties issue is blown out of proportion. I have no problems with drones flying over my head looking for bad guys. The vast majority of Americans have nothing to hide and if the drones make us safer, why not? The CL fanatics have created a straw man threat to personal freedom that too many of have swallowed hook, line and sinker.
Thanks for writing this essay.
7 Replies
4 Replies
3 Replies
1 Replies