Thursday, February 11, 2016
Question of the Week No. 5
Congress mandated that the FAA by November of
2015 pass regulations integrating the use of drones into the U.S. airspace by
2015. The FAA failed to meet its
deadline and various states, including Utah, have enacted laws regulating the
use of drones. Should the FAA prohibit
the use of drones by law enforcement for surveillance purposes without first
obtaining a search warrant?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes, the FAA should prohibit the use of drones without obtaining a search warrant. The obvious answer is that this is one step closer to the 'big brother' future that we all know and fear. As we've discussed, we do not want to, nor should we fear living in a society where our every move could be watched and recorded. I think that the use of drones needs to be very transparent - what they are being used for, and when. Who has access to the drones, and what they record. Under what circumstances are drones allowed? We need specific answers to all of these questions.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the use of drones by law enforcement should be prohibited without a warrant. The problem I envision is less of a 'big brother' scenario, and more of one where particular overzealous departments take their new-found ariel capabilities too far. The sheriff/officer that we discussed in class that posted 'mugshots of the day,' for example, should not have a fleet of drones at his disposal. There is too much anonymity inherent to drones, which makes the potential for the abuse of their usage all too real.
ReplyDeleteAn in-person officer might be ostracized and/or filmed when misusing or abusing their power and position. Asking a drone for its badge number or putting a video of it spying on you on youtube might not be an as effective deterrent to abuse. As police officers hold a privileged position in our society, there must be sufficient mechanisms in place to ensure accountability. The widespread use of drones would decrease accountability, and thus should not be allowed without a warrant.
I agree with what has been said. Just like most of the technology we have been discussing, the potential for misuse with drone tech is very high. I think there needs to be a search warrant before their use and there needs to be specific guidelines as to who can use them, for what purpose, where, and who can use the data they collect. My reasoning behind this is very similar to Michaels, I don't like the "big brother" aspect and the fact that society could be constantly under surveillance. It would be like that prison design where the guards can look down and see the prisoners but the prisoners can't see the guards, so potentially they are always be watched and therefore have to behave. I wouldn't want our world to feel like that.
ReplyDeleteThe use of drones for surveillance purposes allows for greater intrusion upon our privacy that I don't think many people would feel comfortable with. I feel like with any searches, there needs to be a reasonable suspicion that something illegal/bad is going on and a warrant is needed based on a probable cause. Other houses/people might also be captured while trying to surveil the target.
ReplyDeleteThe United States also has one of the world's busiest airspaces in the world and I think stricter enforcements should also be put into place to ensure the safety of the planes as well.
There already are restrictions to prevent intrusion into other airspace. For hobby reasons at least, UAS aren't allowed to operate above 400 feet, about 100 feet below the existing minimum safe altitude stated by the FAA: https://www.faasafety.gov/files/gslac/courses/content/25/183/Altitude%20Charts.pdf and https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/. The FAA also is in progress creating rules to regulate commercial use of UAS past their existing Section 333 exemption process (which actually requires a full on pilot's license to get: https://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/333_faqs/#q12). In my opinion, the danger that commercial aircraft face from UAS devices is vastly overblown by a sensationalist media.
DeleteNo they shouldn't, they should only limit their use without a warrant. Assuming that the drones are only collecting information that is publicly visible, how is this different from a cop driving around (not that I'm saying cops are drones)? Would we want regulation on businesses using drones to get aggregate information on the globe. While some people think it is creepy, google earth and google street view are both incredibly fun and useful. Drones could bring this level of technology to the next level. Amazon is researching delivery of packages with drones. Should we really limit our potential for automation out of fear of 1984? Imagine if we could largely replace traffic cops and cops regulating other mild offenses with an automated system that could be uniformly fair. This has all the same problems as automated license plate readers and both should be regulated so that they are monitoring offenses, not tracking people who aren't publicly committing a crime.
ReplyDeleteThis is kind of a difficult decision for me, but I tend to agree with Sheyne, conditionally. I think that having autonomous vehicles tracking people's position isn't that big of a deal, especially since the same thing could be accomplished by following you in a police car. These devices right now have battery lives of under an hour, so it doesn't nearly have the potential for it to invade your privacy in the same way a GPS tracker does. Even if these vehicles were to follow you 24/7, most people don't realize how loud the average multirotor/RC plane is. The person being followed would probably notice almost immediately, unless the surveillance was taking place at a high altitude, which is pretty impractical for other reasons. I definitely wouldn't support their use for collecting bulk tracking data (which would be very difficult to do right now without having really good coverage or ALPR tech), but for me, having warrantless UAV surveillance doesn't seem to be that severe of an invasion of privacy.
ReplyDeleteI see Sheyne's point about progression with bringing technology up to speed with law enforcement but I fear the potential of misuse and agree more along the lines of Anne's sentiments. While the automated system Sheyne brings up seems like a good idea individual situations change so much that it may not be practical. I would trust a police officer long before I would trust a police drone. I am incredibly wary of surveillance and advancing the surveillance technology worries me so I think a search warrant is necessary and reasonable. The less accesses others have to our private spaces the better even if it is just on a theoretical level.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do think that drones have the potential to be advantageous in law enforcement, I do think that the FAA needs to put regulations on the use of information collected from drones. The point brought up that it isn't a big deal to have an autonomous vehicle tracking your position doesn't sit well with me. This is mostly because of the rapid improvement in technology that is bound to happen in regards to drones as more energy is put into making them more powerful. I also share Tara's fears of the potential of misuse of this information. Drones have the ability to collect vast amounts of potentially sensitive information, which should be protected by the potential FAA regulations. On our private properties, there is definitely an expectation of privacy and a search warrant should be issued for law enforcement to collect and use information that is collected through drones.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think the FAA should prohibit use of drones by law enforcement officers unless a search warrant has been issued. While there is the argument that caps are able to patrol the street, they are restricted to public areas – streets, sidewalks, etc. Drones, on the other hand, lack those restrictions. A drone can easily pass from public to private areas, and see private properties from public airspace. Overhead surveillance definitely calls to mind “big brother”, as it allows surveillance in a larger area without the need for large amounts of manpower, as well as the ability to record the surveillance built in. A last point is that people don’t expect to be watched from above, especially on private property. Being in a fenced backyard, one would expect privacy. However, drones could easily fly above said backyard, violating the first privacy tort, intrusion upon seclusion, easily. Because of the ease of violating privacy, drones should be regulated by the FAA and their use by law enforcement restricted to use with search warrants.
ReplyDelete