Drone Usage And Law Enforcement

A career in front of the camera is the dream job for numerous Americas. Little do they know they may have already been on camera. Every day people in the United States of America are caught in the lens of law enforcement cameras. These cameras sound nefarious due to their constant watching of people. However, law enforcement cameras are anything but nefarious as their intent is to stop actions that may rightly be deemed nefarious. The cameras the law enforcement use may be on the street, a member of the law enforcement, a police car or a traffic light. With all the cameras, their purpose is for the good of the people and to enforce laws. However, there is controversy surrounding the usage of the law enforcement cameras due to how some people

Municipalities all across the United States are starting to use unmanned Arial drones to supplement their policing strategy such as in Arlington, Texas. The Supreme Court has ruled on the use of drones in the court case California V. Ciraolo, which determined that “an individual’s private property is not protected by the Fourth Amendment as long as an aircraft is in navigable airspace; in this case, the altitude was 1,000 feet. “The Fourth Amendment simply does not require the police traveling in the public airways at this altitude to obtain a warrant in order to observe what is visible to the naked eye,” the Court said.” (Bomboy, Constitution Daily 2017). This means that drone footage can be used by police without the need for a warrant. There is a time for everything in life, the questions before the New Orleans community is simple. If not now, when? If not us, who? The very definition of insanity is to do the same and expect a different result; as this paper has illustrated we have and are doing the same thing for a long time. Perhaps now, we can try something

When the topic of drones is brought up, some may think they are not among us and are objects of the future, while others may have one that they’ve built themselves and put to use already. Drones are being talked about more and more but not necessarily all for good reasons. The reading titled “From the Eyes of a Drone” by Tomas van Houtryve touches upon how drones affect surveillance, photography, and use for weapons. In a BBC article, “Drones: What Are They and How Do They Work?” the author goes into specific detail on how the United States is planning to use drones for the military. If regular drone use becomes a normality in society, it is true that amazing photography will be a positive outcome but what about privacy? Drones can aid the military as well, but if they are released for the general public to use on the daily things may get out of control. While drones can impact several aspects of life positively, they can create even more harm than one may think.

As seen in the news, unmanned military drones and manless operations have taken countless civilian lives as well as the reputation of the U.S as a moral police of the world. Military drone strikes target small groups of people while no American is on the ground for the attack. This yields careless killing especially in the “[a]ttempts to kill 41 men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people, as of 24 November” (The Guardian). In the status quo, an average American can go buy a sophisticated surveillance drone with no background check or FAA registration. The nightmare of constant surveillance is becoming a reality while a neighbor is legally allowed to snoop on others with a drone because the law cannot keep up with destructive innovation. IOT pushes the boundary when things like armed drones, extreme surveillance, and militarization of police come to the homefront. Three million people nationwide have pacemakers implanted while a little known fact is that pacemakers are a part of the internet of things. Pacemakers run on a cloud based system similar to an iphone with icloud. The open platform was never designed to prevent large scale hackings from unauthorized personnel. According to the FDA, “If exploited, this vulnerability could result in permanent impairment, a life-threatening injury, or death” (NY Post). The pacemaker is

The book even goes deep into the ethical dilemmas that the drone program introduces. This essay will go in-depth on all of these subjects, explaining the current and future ramifications that this program might introduce. In Chapter 3 of Drone Warfare, Kaag and Kreps voice their main political concerns on America’s policy on drone warfare. These concerns

Before exploring the ethical question behind whether or not engineers designing drones being used for the purpose of war is moral or immoral, the relevance and importance of this issue in today’s society must be discussed. The individual engineer that is responsible for signing off on the use of certain drones used in the military, such as the MQ-9 Reaper, has to decide whether or not what they are doing is right for themselves (The Guardian, print). When doctors and persons in the medical field conduct experimental tests on humans where the outcome is unknown, society becomes outraged. This is due to the fact that society believes persons in the medical field have a duty to the public to do well, and to protect society from harm. One could argue that the engineer creating the weaponized version of a drone further protects society and the technology is a means to the common good of homeland defense. Furthermore, this issue in terms of affecting the engineering profession as whole has sparked much debate among peers. Peers among the engineering profession see this technology in terms of a

Picture someone sitting inside their house by an opened window, enjoying their personal activities like reading a book or watching television; when all of a sudden, they hear the soft quiet buzzing noise outside the window. They look up to see what looks like a flying remote control toy weighing about fifty-five pounds or less, with four miniature flying helicopter propellers, along with a camera staring right back at them. Then the trail of concerns and questions begin: Who is watching? Is someone taking photographic footage? Why are they watching? Aren’t they trespassing? Can this flying technology cause physical harm? In today’s society, these remote controlled miniature flying pieces of technology are called domestic drones, also known as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV’s) (“Using Drones”). These domestic drones range in size, and have the ability to fly in all directions with a wide signal range. They also have the capabilities of flying almost anywhere that is open to air space, and can maintain a stable level flying position due to their evenly distributed symmetrical structure (McGlynn). This means that drones can hover in one place and capture high definition images. Domestic drones have the “ability to house high-powered cameras, infrared sensors, facial recognition technology, and license plate readers,” as well as the ability to make customized attachments like weapons, or storage compartments (Dolan; Goodman). The accessibility

Individuals believe that those in law enforcement abuse technology in their line of work such as in the courtroom or when they are patrolling the streets, also many of these individuals have convinced themselves and others that the government has each person under constant surveillance, collecting the data and stockpiling this collected data over CCTV for other to see. This brings up two questions that will be answered in this paper. Are police and other members of law enforcement using this technology correctly? How is data collected and stored by different agencies? Police have technology in their possession that is used to keep us safer each and every day. Many people see this as a danger as it could give police too much power, but truthfully

Amie Stepanovich stands on the pro side. She appeals to ethos because she is an Associate Litigation Counsel from the Electronic Privacy Information Center, or E.P.I.C. for short, a group that is concerned primarily with privacy issues. As the Associate Litigation Counsel for the organization, she has a favoritism towards protecting individual privacy from electronic surveillance. Her opinion should be taken seriously because she has excessive knowledge of this topic. She talks about the latest advances in drone technologies and the current legal state of drone technologies. These examples, however, lack hard-hitting evidence to support them, which may be because she only had a few minutes to communicate her ideas. She, for example, states “drones may…

Throughout the course of the Randall County Sheriff’s Office Explorer Academy, we saw many different jobs that included technology to improve their quality of work. Every single job in the office used new technology introduced to them in the 21st century. In the crime scene unit, they use large computers and cameras to get very detailed information about blood splatter patterns, fibers from a suspect’s clothing left at a crime scene, and even taking photos of fingerprints and plugging them into computers that will automatically find points of reference for a match. Technology gives law enforcement the upper hand and gives a better edge into solving crimes.

Drones are sometimes thought of as robots. Flying machines in the air with no presence of life. With these thoughts out there the government needs to push a media awareness campaign to the public to educate. Most people think of robots as portrayed in the movies. The public needs to be aware these aircraft are not autonomous beings. In his book, Killer Robots: Legality and Ethicality of Autonomous Weapons, author Armin Krishnin suggests we prohibit “self-learning” to avoid a “Terminator scenario” (154). A media campaign may not only give a sense of knowledge to the general public, but it may also ease the fears of privacy concerns involved with their use. The media blitz has begun as stated in a Time.com

Today, the use of drones is getting a lot of attention, and it could be another variety of monitoring device for pipelines. From few years ago the use of the technology is no longer so expensive, and it can be used for an infinity of jobs. The benefits of its use to pipeline inspection are still not certain, but it was already used to monitor pipelines routes in Alaska in 2014, even not having commercial rules for this situation. The current laws only permits that federal agencies and universities can fly drones in the public airspace. First, the main goal for this equipment was to detect potential gas leaks by scanning the pipes and drilling sites with sensors that would identify the excess of gas and its escaping. However, the purpose of

Since the first successful flight in 1903 by the Orville brothers, there has been no stopping the production of the airplane; today reaching new heights even the original inventors probably couldn't imagine. But with each step towards better aircraft, specifically unmanned drones, it raises the question of when will the planes completely take over, and our feet on the ground leave enemy soil for good? The answer to this difficult question not only needs a technical standpoint, but a moral one as well. With unmanned aircraft controlling the skies, it will be difficult to determine who is at fault when innocent civilians die, those who were not threats to the nation's security die, and whole cities who get bombed either by accident or malfunction. While many scientists and scholars agree a lot of our current jobs done by humans will be replaced by robots in the near-distant future, piloting an armed

Drones have taken the interest of militaries and private companies across the world. The “global market for unmanned aerial vehicles is now $6 billion a year” and that “more than fifty countries moving to acquire drones” Charleston Gazette journalists wrote (Pg1). Most of these are military drones, for private companies and the military to use. Many would argue that offensive and defensive drone use should have many safeguards in place that are backed up by international law. This would be to keep militaries and private users from violating human rights agreements, and to help prevent breaches of privacy. While drone strikes eliminate american casualties, they “also help distance the public from what is going on” as journalist Juan Cole iterated (Pg1) .

There are now many skeptics that object to the practice of drone usage. A main idea here is that piloting a drone has no structure, as if it were you simply playing a video game. This view stems mostly from an unfamiliarity of video games. Piloting drones in relation to the experience of playing video games is however still a problem but not on the topic of desensitization but rather sensitization. Drones, much like video games, have become very submersive and can expose pilots to feelings and emotions that could be dangerous to their psyche.