DRONES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

[HairOfTheDog]

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department began using a drone in January. At the time, Sheriff Jim McDonnell said the $10,000 aircraft would be used only in limited circumstances to assist deputies with rescues, bomb scares, arson investigations and tactical situations.

Officials say it has been used only a handful of times.

In July, the Sheriff's Department's Civilian Oversight Commission voted 5-4 to ask McDonnell to ground the drone but he refused, calling it an important public safety tool. He previously had promised the aircraft wouldn't be used to spy on the public.

The LAPD had two drones that it acquired in 2014 but hadn't deployed in the face of vocal opposition by civilians citing privacy concerns and "mission creep" -- the old "slippery slope" objection.

[HairOfTheDog]

Earlier this week, LAPD received permission to fly drone aircraft under a one-year pilot program that limits their use to dangerous situations and natural disasters.The civilian Los Angeles Police Commission voted 3-1 to approve the test program.

The Metropolitan Division's SWAT team will be allowed to deploy drones in some instances but the devices won't be armed and specifically cannot be flown for purposes that violate the law or Constitution.

A high-ranking police officer must approve deployment on a case-by-case basis.

Deployment policy limits the use of the drones during the pilot program to "dangerous, high-risk tactical situations" or for providing observation during catastrophes.

Examples might include hunting for heavily armed suspects, hostage situations and search-and-rescue operations.

The limitations didn't mollify protesters who jeered as the commission took its vote and later gathered outside police headquarters, chanting "Drone-free LAPD! No drones L.A.!" Several were arrested after blocking traffic.



Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lapd-wins-o...-concerns/

[HairOfTheDog]

I understand the protesters' concerns, but fully support the use of drones.............. so long as they're used within constitutional parameters and according to standard police protocols in regards to warrants, probable cause, etc...

If drones can reduce LE injuries/deaths and help keep the public safer, the upside greatly exceeds the downside to me. I feel the same about mandatory use of body/dash cams for similar reasons.

[Duchess]

I have more of a problem with private citizens flying them over the property of other private citizens.

[SIXFOOTERsez]

I have more of a problem with private citizens flying them over the property of other private citizens.

Exactly, there are a lot more asshole punks out there that have these things than there are cops with the mindset to abuse the drone.
I have several, most with camera capability but would never consider spying on my neighbors. I would and have taken them up for a high level ride around the neighborhood. To my knowledge I have never "Invaded" anyone's space.
As to the police using them, I think its a fucking great idea, man hunts, hostage situations, riots, surveiling crowds without having to have officers in the crowd too heavy...Hundreds of applications.
Looks to me like the only people offering ANY kind of objection to the concept are those that are complete anti cop and are against the police having anything remotely effective as a tool

[HairOfTheDog]

Yeah, I agree that private citizens flying drones with cameras into other people's property would be annoying. I've never experienced it, but I know it happens and it would piss me off if some drone-owning numbskull was surveilling my backyard.

I don't think all the people protesting the use of drones by LE are doing so because they're anti-cop though. I think some of them are legitimately concerned that police could use them to get around probable cause and search warrant requirements; the same kinds of concerns a lot of US citizens expressed when they found out that the post-911 Patriot Act allowed the police and other governmental agencies to monitor their electronic communications in attempt to identify potential terrorists plotting in the United States.

Anyway, hopefully the use of drones by LE won't be abused. LE doesn't get to spy on people's private property or entire neighborhoods via drone footage and then use what they find to try to build a case against citizens. They would need to have probable cause if the drones are to be used in criminal investigations. That's my understanding anyway.

[HairOfTheDog]

The first case of a drone that I know about LE using was in the search for missing Hannah Graham in Virginia. The drone lent to LE by Virginia Tech allowed police to cover a lot of gnarly ground much more quickly and efficiently than sending in troops of police officers or community volunteers.

Sadly, Hannah's remains were found by human searchers a few weeks later. But, time was of the essence while she was missing and I think the drone probably helped eliminate the ground the drone had covered and minimize the risk of injuries to police and community searchers.

[Love Child]

I fucking hate drones, but I like the use of them for missing person searches.

[SIXFOOTERsez]

Drones are a Lot of fun to play with, as far as aerial photography they are amazing. Like most anything fun they can be abused, dirt bikes, speed boats, hot rods even bicycles can be used by an asshole to negatively affect folks around them.
Turn it up and enjoy
Here are a few videos that got me into it

[Carsman]

Drones used by Law Enforcement for dangerous surveillance missions so as to otherwise protect a "human helicopter pilot" is a good thing.

However, strict monitoring of the surveillance missions footage must /should be maintained, to ensure privacy of law abiding citizens. To thwart possible abuse by a few of "only human" LEO's.

[HairOfTheDog]

This news isn't specific to law enforcement using drones, but it's related and opens the door to more wide-scale use of drones by the government and businesses in the U.S.

Snip
President Donald Trump is launching a program to expand testing of drones to include flights over people, nighttime operations and flights out of sight of the operator, the White House said on Wednesday.

The pilot program aims to speed up the integration of unmanned aerial vehicles into the national airspace system and test drone detection and tracking while waiving some limits on their use.

States and local governments would be able to seek Federal Aviation Administration approval for testing and expanded use, but the White House stopped short of proposing new regulations that would allow broader nationwide use of drones or any timetable for new authority.

White House adviser Michael Kratsios told reporters Wednesday the "program will open the skies for delivery of life-saving medicines and commercial packages, inspections of critical infrastructure, support for emergency management operations."

Kratsios said the program will allow companies and governments to operate drones in ways that are currently restricted by the FAA "including beyond-visual-line-of-sight flights, nighttime operations, and flights over people."

Alphabet Inc and Amazon.com Inc are among a growing number of companies hoping to make package delivery by drones a reality.

In 2016, the Obama administration opened the skies to low-level small drones for education, research and routine commercial use, but left in place significant restrictions.

The FAA estimates by 2021 the fleet of small hobbyist drones will more than triple and commercial drones will grow tenfold to about 442,000.

Drone manufacturers have argued that the administration should move faster to approve broader commercial use of drones and noted that the Transportation Department does pre-approve self-driving vehicle technologies.

But security concerns remain.

full story: http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1CU2EA

[Duchess]

I have mixed feelings about drones. I stopped someone from shooting at one that was flying over the farm and I only did so because I had recently read about the father shooting one out of the sky that had been spying on his sunbathing daughter. He got into a great deal of trouble and it was very expensive defending himself. Bottom line, citizens don't own the air space over their property. There will always be people who take advantage of that, including the government.

[Carsman]

IMO: Drones are here, and here they will stay! As time goes by, more and more Drones will be used by citizens, companies, (Amazon now) and LE for now. LE use if well monitored can be useful.
They can be a good thing.

However, good things can go bad. When human's involved.
Remember the first cell phones, they were a good thing at the beginning.

Then "they" improved the cells to "Text", people now text each other instead of actually talking to each other.
Over time Texting turned bad, as texting and driving is a major problem. Drones can likely become a major problem as well.

Over time, when Drones are generally used by the thousands, translates to eventually hundreds of thousands of drones in the air at the same time, in the same airspace and will become hazardous.

Some leading to unlawful spying, annoying to people they fly over, but the major problem can/will be "mid-air" collisions, and debris falling down on people on the ground. And or falling on cars, (possibly causing cars accidents) and also on to peoples property, and or houses.

Strict Laws governing Drone use must be implemented to cover all user's. Otherwise it will be like closing the barn doors after all the horses got out, is tantamount to Texting and driving ban.
To many they still do it, even though they know it can kill them.
(or worse "others")

If LEO"s were the only Drone user's problem would b minimized.
But that's not the case.

[Maggot]

I wonder if "dogfights" will become a fad with these drones. I want a Sopwith Camel.

[Carsman]

I wonder if "dogfights" will become a fad with these drones. I want a Sopwith Camel.

It would be interesting to see which one would win.

[Carsman]

In the news today!
And so the dangerous side of Drones Saga begins!

The Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin warning Americans about the potential threat of terrorists using weaponized drones as possible means to attack commercial aircrafts in America. The updated bulletin also included warnings of chemical attacks.



(As mentioned previously, if only used by LE's, that would not be so much of a problem.)

[HairOfTheDog]

In the news today!
And so the dangerous side of Drones Saga begins!

The Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin warning Americans about the potential threat of terrorists using weaponized drones as possible means to attack commercial aircrafts in America. The updated bulletin also included warnings of chemical attacks.


(As mentioned previously, if only used by LE's, that would not be so much of a problem.)

Thanks for the info Cars. It's not hard to imagine some bad people attempting to do bad things with drones, if given the opportunity. It's good to read that the DHS appears to be thinking proactively about the potential and taking preventative action.

[Carsman]

In the news today!
And so the dangerous side of Drones Saga begins!

The Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin warning Americans about the potential threat of terrorists using weaponized drones as possible means to attack commercial aircrafts in America. The updated bulletin also included warnings of chemical attacks.
.


(As mentioned previously, if only used by LE's, that would not be so much of a problem.)

Thanks for the info Cars. It's not hard to imagine some bad people attempting to do bad things with drones, if given the opportunity. It's good to read that the DHS appears to be thinking proactively about the potential and taking preventative action.

Well DHS has good intentions, but taking preventative action will likely be next to impossible against (dangerous) drone users.

Since drone user's don't have to be registered, and or need to file "flight plans", tracking and or investigating the users (if they are law abiding or not) will not be viable.

I'm afraid it's going to take a horrific terrorist action using a drone before serious DHS crackdown actions will occur!

I know it's a pessimistic outlook, but unfortunately that's today's world we now live in.

[HairOfTheDog]

DHS is putting out warnings and working with other federal agencies to try to prevent drones attacking manned aircraft or people. That's good.

The FAA already has regulations which would essentially prevent attacks by drones if everyone followed the laws (which, of course, is never absolute). https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf

I don't think the biggest challenge when it comes to drones will be continued enforcement of existing laws and regulations. Instead, I think the biggest challenge is going to be lifting some of the current restrictions for business purposes while minimizing the increased public safety risk in so doing.

Commercial drone use could really help some businesses make more revenue and be more profitable. But, that would increase legal traffic in air space, thus potentially making it easier for a bad guy (with access to commercial drones) to inflict intentional damage in a variety of ways.

I'm glad the agencies are considering all the angles and potential dangers before a disaster happens instead of after.