What Is Adequate Security Regulation

The purpose of this research paper is to show how unmanned aerial vehicles, better known as UAV’s or drones infringe on the Fourth Amendment and Due Process of the law.

Menacing spy craft... unmanned aerial vehicles... and missile laden predators. These are the images that come to mind when the word "drone" is spoken. Taken to new heights during the Global War on Terror, military drones have struck fear into the hearts of America's enemies. Now the U.S. government is starting to look inward toward its next target: the American people. Already starting along the US/Mexico border, big brother is indiscriminately watching whole neighborhoods via high tech zoom and heat imaging technology. There is even a debate in congress as to whether it is lawful for an American citizen to be killed by a missile firing drone. These actions and debates have caused legitimate concerns for the American people in regards to

I, Savannah Parmelee believe an individual's right to privacy should be protected if they do not violate the law to a certain degree therefore, I plan to seek out evidence during my research that supports this controlling idea. I am greatly concerned about this topic due to the people’s privacy not being fully protected for both terrorist and by the government.In the video “Impact of drones on privacy rights” on “CBS This Morning” claims that “Lakota, N.D., is the first known site where a drone was used domestically to help arrest a U.S. citizen.” What the quote is saying is that drones helped arrest a U.S. citizen. The incident in the video proves that drones can help see illegal activities happening and can try to stop

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.

"The thought of government drones buzzing overhead and constantly monitoring the activities of law –abiding citizens runs contrary to the notion of what it means to live in a free society" says senator Charles Grassley on a topic that is in very high controversy (Quattlebaum1).Having the sanctity of our own privacy in households and backyards is an entitlement that we all are gifted with, but many people are having that privacy tarnished with a new creation sweeping the country-Drones. Domestic use of drones is raising concerns about privacy and fourth amendment violations in many states and cities. Privacy is only one of the concerns of these drones.Many drones are found crashing into buildings and trees and are considered a huge safety hazard

Aside technological advances in terrorist attacks, local police departments have found new ways to help with security, but have hurt the people’s privacy. Drones, are the new tool in fighting crime in Los Angeles, California. The Drones or also known as “small Unarmed Ariel Systems” have flown one since the beginning of this year. (Mather, 2017) Many of the native Los Angeles residence have complained about having a drone recording over their homes. One lawyer states “The history of this department is of starting off with supposedly good intentions about the new toys that it gets… only to them get too tempted by what they can doo with those toys.” Yes, the technology is great it will help crime, and give street patrol units an “eagle eye” on the city that they love, and protect. On the other hand, there will always be the desire to use the technology to other advantages. Instead of building a tall fence from your curious neighbor to the right or left you will also need to block on top from the police.

Anyone watching television news broadcasts in 2015 could conclude that radio controlled miniature aircrafts called drones are increasingly becoming a danger to the public. Miniature aircraft Drones are becoming safety hazards due to flights taking place over citizen’s property (Schneir 1). Today hostile countries can attack in multiple ways by using drones. This can be due to fact the technology is advanced to the point that terrorists can use it to attack anyone. Some drones can use the technology to cause terrorist disasters while taking control over the locations such as sports stadiums or public gatherings (Schneir 2). Having plenty of money gives power to terrorist groups to have this modern technology on the tip of their fingers. Terrorist abuse of the powers of drones makes it scary for citizens to use them. Therefore there should be much stricter laws regulating civilian use of these drones. Unmanned drones should be regulated because they can be used in terrorist attacks, they can intrude on personal privacy, and they can endanger public and private aircrafts.

Several important ethical and moral concerns have come to the surface regarding drone technology and the issue is currently investigated and even debated in Congress. Until recently, when we hear the word drone, most of us automatically add the word “attack” on the end or think of something negative. That’s because mostly, drones are frequently used for surveillance, intelligence and, ultimately, offensive operations. Drones also known as ‘Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’, or UAV’s are mostly used in situations where manned flight is too difficult or dangerous, making them ideal for warfare. Increasingly, the United States has come to rely on the use of drones to counter the terrorist threats. Drones have arguably produced significant success in dealing with terrorists while limiting civilian casualties and protecting U.S. soldiers, but it has raised some serious ethical concerns. Drones are now going beyond conflict zones to the point that they will be landing on your doorstep in a few years’ time. Drones are also used extensively in scientific researches, for species surveys, terrain mapping, border patrolling, geophysics surveys and many more other applications that yet to develop. Drones increasing use in warfare and other areas raising alarming questions of drone’s ethical & moral implications and it’s environmental effects. And before it’s too late, human kind should address those questions and concerns to avoid any confusion of the future use of drones.

Even departments and agencies who do not typically utilize drones are strongly influenced to have regulations for the use of drones among citizens. For example, Utah passed legislation that states that flying a drone within 250 feet of a wildfire is a class b misdemeanor, and Michigan passed legislation that states that prohibits registered sex offenders from using a UAV, or a drone, to follow or photograph a person whom they are not allowed to contact (Kenyon, 2017). Civilians can not only use drones, but they can easily abuse them. Matt Kenyon (2017) strongly believes that “good law enforcement drone policy can help guide your officers in handling disputes over drones… it can help your officers determine what

The primary contributor to the increased regulations regarding drone usage are due to the public abuse of photography equipped drones. Many drone users are disrespecting people's privacy by taking photos

Graham Kerrisk who was at home when a drone was filming him from his window and took his complaint about the drone invading privacy to police whom he thought would give him an answer into what he should do about the drone filming. Couple of problems in this case is when Mr. Kerrisk took his complaint to police he was disturbed at their reply of “not having a policy set up yet for the drones”. At the Commissioner’s office where they describe “they recently received their first complaint about a drone invading privacy and in a blog post mentioned “that while ubiquitous new technology raised an alarm, it is seen as no more of a threat to privacy than mobile phones or security cameras. Even though that there was not much done to solve Mr.Kerrisk’s matter apart from those who have been in the same situation as Kerrisk who went high and far to try and find a way to fight this invasion in case it came back, instead of leaving Kerrisk to wait for Aviation NZ to develop a code of ethics, the police /commission’s office could’ve issued a trespass warning to his neighbour who owns the drone and even though it may not solve Kerrisk’s case completely but at least the trespass notice keeps the neighbour aware for the next time if he tries to invade Kerrisk’s privacy without

On the other hand, its critics argue that drones violate human privacy. The opposers of drones fear that privacy will be nothing but just a word on dictionary when there are drones flown randomly around people's houses. They are concerned about security issue, no matter if someone is living on a 60th floor or first, it would be a big risk to keep windows open because anyone could be flying the drone around and spying. They compare it to living Maes life, being spied everytime, and someone else knows exactly what the person is doing. Showing her concerns, one of the opposers, California Senator Dianne Feinstein appealing to ethos stated, “I think the greatest threat to the privacy of Americans is the drone and the use of the drone, and the very

When new technology is becoming a threat to the president of the United States because of a silly user mistake it might be time to make some changes. That’s right some man flew into the grounds of the white house and caused a national security scare because he made a mistake while piloting his drone. You can tell from that short story that drones are getting a little out of hand and needs regulations. These powerful little machines are getting stronger, faster and, if in the wrong hands, more dangerous every day. Drones need federal regulations for people’s security, safety, and privacy which is protected by the fourth amendment of the United States constitution. So, what should we do?

The advanced technology comes with a hefty price tag that makes it difficult for smaller agencies to step into the drone world. The public is also fearful that the police will begin to use the UAV’s as weapons. In the Dallas Police shooting of 2016, officers used a land-based drone to carry an explosive charge and detonate near an active shooter. (Hennigan) This action sparked many debates about newly discovered ethical issues that surround drone use. UAV law and federal regulations are still in their infancy. The legal uses of drone technology are constantly under attack, and many see the use of a drone as an invasion of privacy. For example, there are organizations that are actively opposing the use of drones in Los Angeles. (Lopez) In 2011 a predator drone assisted in locating a suspect that subsequently led to an arrest. This became a focal point of the drone debate. Subsequently, anti-drone lobbyists began to petition lawmakers to crack down on the use of drones by police. (Koebler) In June 2012, Senator Rand Paul and Representative Austin Scott both introduced legislation that would require law enforcement to obtain a warrant before using a UAV to conduct surveillance of criminal

One disadvantage of drones is that they can be considered an invasion of privacy in the sense that they are constantly surveilling. Drones can carry high-power zoom lenses, night vision, and see-through imaging. Many people see drones flying over our homes as spying on us while we conduct our everyday lives. Rand Paul senator from Kentucky said, “When I have friends over for a barbecue, the government drone is not on the invitation list. I do not want a drone monitoring where I go, what I do and for how long I do whatever it is that I’m doing. I do not want a nanny state watching over my every move (Levs, 2013).” In June, at a Senate Judiciary Committee FBI oversight hearing, former FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III admitted that the FBI