The Use Of Surveillance Drones For Law Enforcement
In modern times, the trend of using drones in the law enforcement sector is becoming more of a necessity. In fact, drones have been used in public security for a variety of purposes. These include border patrols at national borders, counter terrorism, and disaster relief. Drones are also being used in law enforcement for surveillance purposes to locate criminals who are on the run. These drones are equipped with cameras that can take photos or video footage which are then analyzed by law enforcement agencies. For instance, the FBI uses drones in its counter-terrorism operations to monitor potential threats to national security when they’re beyond their line of sight.
Another emerging use of drones is to carry contraband into prisons. Drone smuggling operations have been noted in Argentina, Bulgaria, Canada, France, Lithuania, and England. However, despite the frequency at which drones are being used to smuggle illegal goods into prisons they are not frequently detected or intercepted by prison authorities. It is therefore important for policy makers to address this emerging risk to prisons and perhaps consider regulating the use of drones.
It is crucial for policy-makers to develop a regulatory framework that dictates how drone technologies can be used in relation to security concerns such as prison smuggling. In Europe, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has proposed guidelines for drone operators which include having a license to fly a drone, having insurance coverage for damages caused by the drone, and that drones shouldn’t be flown over crowds unless they are being used during an emergency. Furthermore, EASA guidelines also state that drone operators should never carry passengers on their drones, nor should they be used for delivering packages—such as contraband or drugs.
Read more as we’re going to talk about the use of surveillance drones for law enforcement in today’s article.
How Police Surveillance Drones Look Like
Cop drones are small, unarmed, unmanned aircraft that carry cameras (cameras) for law enforcement purposes. In the United States, drones now fly over many major metropolitan areas as well as rural villages and hamlets. In 2017, an estimated 110 police forces – municipal and county law enforcement agencies – employed the use of this aircraft in their law enforcement operations. The majority of these drones are under five pounds in weight and usually serve to monitor high-crime neighborhoods, conduct searches for missing persons, and assist SWAT teams with surveillance. However, a number of law enforcement agencies have demonstrated a willingness to purchase drones capable of lethal strikes.
In Los Angeles County alone last year, police officials bought at least five unmanned aircraft from the aerospace company Century Surveillance Group, which was the first drone manufacturer to win approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. In addition, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department recently bought another drone model capable of streaming live video directly to deputies on patrol. It can also carry weapons that were banned for large police aircraft.
And in terms of the price, the cost of these drones varies, but the average price is around $40,000. According to a recent study by Bard College, small police drones can be equipped with mobile phone surveillance, thermal imaging cameras and facial recognition devices. In addition, the drones allow law enforcement to track and arrest people remotely in crowded areas such as protests.
Some Legal Implications On The Use Of Drones
This question is a matter of debate. Many people believe that police drones are perfectly legal as they help fight crime. Others, however, feel that the use of police drones violates citizen’s rights because their privacy may be invaded. This question is difficult to answer as different people have different opinions about it.
Regardless, there is a clear need for police drones. Police drones can assist police in situations such as hostage negotiations and when an armed suspect is refusing to exit a building. This allows police officers to focus their efforts on other problems if they are unable to personally be at the scene. For example, in San Bernardino, California after a shooter killed 14 people and injured an additional 21 (CNN Wire Staff, 2016) it took police over 3 hours to find the two shooters who were eventually killed during their shootout with police. This incident could have been resolved much faster if drones were used to track and locate the shooters. Another example is when a man in California fired over 50 rounds at police officers and refused to exit his apartment (Kim, 2017).
In practice, however, the line between searching illegally and collecting information legally is unclear. Although a warrant is needed to gather any data from a police drone it can be argued that information gathered from a drone without a warrant would still be admissible in court because it has been argued that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in certain settings (e.g., the sky).
Further, if drones are used to search for additional suspects but no information is gathered because there was no one present at the scene it can be argued that gathering any data would violate their privacy since they were not under investigation and the drone was merely searching for someone who potentially could have been there. Regardless of the legalities, most people will feel that what police drones do is inappropriate if they are used to invade someone’s privacy.
Another downside to police drones for surveillance and security is that it could create tensions between the police and civilians. People may feel increasingly threatened by police if their actions are not always visible, which could lead to miscommunication between both parties. Despite these potential problems, drones will continue to be used by police officers at scenes such as hostage negotiations and when an armed suspect is refusing to exit a building. This is because the benefits of using police drones outweigh the potential issues; for example, it can save lives and reduce officer response times. Police drones may also collect information about civilians without a warrant but it will be up to the court to decide if this information is admissible. Despite some of these issues people will continue to feel uneasy about the use of surveillance drones for law enforcement because they do violate one’s right to privacy in some ways and police officers’ need for an accurate visual representation of a situation can outweigh any negative feelings that civilians may develop towards them.
AirborneDrones.co offers a wide-variety of long range drones for all industries. Check out their website today.
