Drones or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are often synonymous to the remote controlled jet-like machines currently used by the military to conduct reconnaissance and stealth operations in major conflicts around the globe. Millions of dollars have been spent to produce these state-of-the-art machines in order to improve military operations in uncharted terrain. In recent years, manufacturers have managed to replicate the technology used by these million dollar machines and miniaturize them for commercial use. Many consumers use these drones for leisure or photography, but there are also groups using these drones for questionable activities like stalking, spying and even for crimes. Although it is beneficial for personal or commercial use, drone use should remain regulated in order to sustain the need of the people for privacy under the Fourth Amendment.
In a military and political aspect, drones have long been a part of US’ military scheme since the end of the First World War. Blom (2010) cited that the concept of using machinery that would reduce the risk of deaths on stealth missions and a wireless information transmitter became prominent after the casualties of the previous war. The Army had committed $125,000 for development and research, creating a vehicle similar to a jet but unmanned and can be piloted remotely. The first drone the country has created was known as the Hewitt-Sperry Automatic Airplane, which became the foundation for the country’s future drone samples. In its earliest prototypes, drones were used for reconnaissance missions before they became multi-functional and also conducted stealth attacks. The US government approved these drones given the fact these UAVs can be deployed at any given instance without the necessity of continuous maintenance and operations. Currently, the US military utilizes these drones in the fight against terrorism in the Middle East and funds are continuously maintained to ensure that these drones are updated regularly .
In a domestic level, drone use as been quite prominent after the order of the Congress to integrate UAVs into the country. According to Thompson II (2013), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is tasked to monitor these drones and has been ordered by the Congress (under the Modernization and Reform Act of 2012) to create a plan to integrate civil used UAVs in the national airspace. The federal, state and local governments have been using these drones for law enforcement. The Department of Homeland Security, for example, uses drones to scout vulnerable areas where illegal border crossings are being done. Aside from the government, the schools and small cities have been granted FAA Certificates of Authorization to use drones for commercial use. As most of today’s drones are equipped with high-powered cameras, license plate readers and laser, even regular enthusiasts and citizens are interested in owning these drones .
However, there is a growing concern from various groups in the country with regards to the availability of these drones to the public. Supporters argue that these drones can be used in various applications such as in photography, farming and even crime fighting. In photography, Warren (2014) helps photographers and even filmmakers take very risky scenes or shots that may take time and money to replicate or do. Normally, this is a big problem for action films as helicopters would have to be hired to capture the scene. In other cases, film crews would have to do risky moves or go close to the scene which can be very dangerous. For one scene alone, filmmakers would have to pay up to $10,000 per day to get these shots done but in comparison, one camera drone can do everything for only $25,000 for all similar shots continuously. Aside from photography and filmmaking, drones can also be used to help farmers monitor their fields as they can now span up to 10,000 acres with varying terrain. On normal circumstances, farmers would take hours to monitor each section of the land and take them a while before they can spot problems. Some wealthy farmers would even have to purchase photographs from satellites to assess the extent of their fields, but some do not use it for its cost and lack of detail. Drones replaces this need for satellites and reduces monitoring time for farmers, reducing the costs and environmental risks because of uncertain treatments or concerns . Law enforcement is also made easier with drone use considering the advantages it could bring to the police. Sengupta (2013) reported that drones can record video images, create heat maps, surveillance and aid in recovery efforts. Law enforcement agencies have cited that these drones are cost-effective as it can help in locating bombs, locating casualties and even determine weather and wildlife conditions .
On the other hand, opposition to drone use in the country raise that allowing these drones to be flown by anyone would be a violation to one’s right to privacy, sense of safety and the lack of clear protocols on casual drone use. Thompson (2014) indicated that these drones violates civilian privacy as these drones can be flown in the sky over a specific territory without consent or official warrant. These drones may take private moments – whether photo or video) – and for some, it may be published online for viewing. There is also a fear of many that these drones can be used to threaten a person’s safety as these UAVs can be strapped with anything that can go “boom” and “bang.” Further concerns to safety entail the possible use of these drones for stalking or blackmailing given the information these drones could possess and record . Zaniewski (2013) also reported that while the FAA currently has protocols for monitoring these drones, as well as create permits for authorization, it is still a question for many as to what are the limitations of using these drones on a private or commercial level. Some states also argued that the federal government fails to give clear provisions and guidelines as to how these drones can be monitored and regulated. Others cited that the lack of information on drone provisions also disables law enforcement units in legalizing their use of drones throughout the country.
Much like their constituents who argue against the benefits and disadvantages of drone use, even the US government is divided as to how to see drone use in the country. Experts, such as Molko (2013), indicated that the use of drones can be questionable as seen in the Fourth Amendment. Under this amendment:
‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no Warrants, shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.’
Although this main amendment does not ban all types of searches, the Fourth Amendment does emphasize the necessity that such “searches” or “seizures” should be within “probable cause.” The Amendment ensures that a person’s privacy is safeguarded under this provision against arbitrary and evasive acts by the Government. However, for years, this particular goal of the Amendment has shifted due to technological advancements and the interpretations of the Amendment. Given this difference in interpretations and the continuous improvements of technology, it is difficult to determine whether or not the Fourth Amendment is still applicable to the use of drones or any similar devices that has the capacity to pinpoint a target even in a remote location. Nonetheless, it is agreed that there is a necessity to ensure that drone use is still regulated in order to protect privacy even with the issues under the Fourth Amendment .
Koebler (2013) reported that even the Congress and the Senate are struggling to determine as to how to resolve the issues with drone use in the country especially the privacy concerns. In the Senate, the Judiciary Committee had tried to discuss what drone use would be like in the future but only caused more questions for the lawmakers as at least 70,000 jobs would be affected should drone use be banned from the country. According to Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California), using drones to create new jobs is a seductive idea but there is still a question as to what purpose these drones can be used. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) also noted its benefits, but the privacy issue is still a major concern which may affect how these drones are to be seen by the public in the long run. In the Congress, several lawmakers have already begun introducing legislation that would limit the use of drones, especially in the police to ensure that the Fourth Amendment is still sustained. Democratic Representative Ed Markey of Massachusetts indicated in his bill that a warrant must be served first before drones can be used .
Recently, however, several court decisions have indicated that drone use is indeed legal until such time policies would be placed against it. In one example according to RT (2014), the FAA had tried to file a suit against 29 year old Raphael Pirker who used a remote aircraft to film his commercial at the University of Virginia. Pirker is not the only one the FAA tried to target and when asked for his appeal, Pirker’s attorney argued that there is no law stressing that drone use is illegal or has provisions stated under the law. In the decision of Judge Patrick Geraghty of the National Transportation Safety Board, he stressed that the FAA has not enforced or issued a regulatory rule on model aircrafts or specific drone types. Judge Geraghty waved the $10,000 fine and the FAA has filed for a repeal to the decision. Experts, such as law Professor Ryan Calo of the University of Washington, stated that if the FAA wished to regulate these aircrafts, it should work quickly to update its policies and finally settle the issue on drone use .
With the issue on the legality of drone use still contested by both Houses of Congress and the public, it is reported by Farmer, Kardish, Wogan, Maciag, and Holeywell (2014) that the FAA has released earlier this year a road map of its plans to enable widespread use of drones throughout the country for commercial or private use by 2015. Many had already began working on policies to counteract the privacy issue of the plan such as Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Montana, Oregon and Tennessee . Considering this notion, lawmakers should indeed copy the example of the six states that have passed laws on drone use to give emphasis as to what they can actually do and what limits these drones could be used. The lack of clear policy and the interpretations of the Fourth Amendment only disables law enforcers and even the FAA itself to determine as to where users have stepped the boundaries of legal use of drones. There is also the possibility that these drones are not just used for official operations or in one specific duty, but also for other illegal acts that may threaten the public’s safety in the process. It is also prudent that lawmakers and involved authorities – like the FAA – discuss if it is time to revise provisions under the US Constitution to keep up with the changing technological advancements. Without a clear policy or interpretation of the law, it is difficult to say if drones should be permitted in domestic use even if it is beneficial for the public.
The presence of drones showcases just how much technology has changed throughout the years and how influential their presence are in the modern times. Despite its original purpose directed to the military, drones present both benefit and disadvantage should it be used for commercial or private use. On the one hand, it is a benefit that must be utilized as it would help civilians take excellent shots or video scenes, as well as aid in time-consuming activities like farming. There is also the fact it could help law enforcement with its capacity to conduct surveillance on any given situation, all in a fraction of its normal costs. On the other hand, there is still the fact these drones can be used to violate one’s privacy and sense of security as these drones can be flown without consent or warning. Further adding to the issue with drones is the fact there are still no clear provisions and policies that would protect the people from these drones. With the government set on using these technological breakthroughs, it is necessary that the government enacts the required policies needed to ensure these drones would not be used outside the boundaries of where it should be used. Unless this is done and established, people would still be apprehensive over the use of this innovations provided that these drones can be flown at any given moment and target an unsuspecting citizen in the process.
Bibliography
Blom, John David. Unmanned Aerial Systems: A Historical Perspective. Fort Leavenworth: CSI Press , 2010.
Farmer, Liz, et al. "The Top 10 Legislative Issues to Watch in 2014." January 2014. Governing. http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-2014-legislative-issues-to-watch.html. 29 November 2014.
Koebler, Jason. "Senate weighs benefits, privacy concerns of domestic drones." 20 March 2013. US News. Web. 29 November 2014. <http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/20/senate-weighs-benefits-privacy-concerns-of-domestic-drones>.
Molko, Robert. "The Drones Are Coming! Will the Fourth Amendment Stop Their Treat to our Privacy?" Brooklyn Law Reviewq 78.4 (2013): 1281-1333. Print.
RT. "Judge's decision ensures personal drones remain legal in US, for now." 7 March 2014. RT. Web. 30 November 2014. <http://rt.com/usa/judge-personal-drones-legal-us-310/>.
Sengupta, Somini. "Rise of Drones in U.S. Drives Efforts to Limit Police Use." 15 February 2013. The New York Times. Web. 29 November 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/16/technology/rise-of-drones-in-us-spurs-efforts-to-limit-uses.html?pagewanted=all>.
Thompson II, Richard. Drones in Domestic Surveillance Operations: Fourth Amendment Implications and Legislative Responses. Report. Washington, D.C.: US Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, 2013. Print.
Thompson, Will. "Drone technology generates significant legal buzz." Grand Rapids Business Journal (2014): 11. Print.
Warren, Stephanie. "Drones Take Off." Science World 1 September 2014: 14-17. Print.
Zaniewski, Ann. "As drone use grows, so do privacy, safety concerns." 7 March 2013. USA Today. Web. 29 November 2014. <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/07/drone-use-raises-privacy-safety-concerns/1969653/>.
