Remote Control Hovering Craft-Public Safety Issue

6/23/14

Remote Control Hovering Craft-

This latest segment of 60 Minutes, "Drones Over America" was a survey of this burgeoning technology, beginning with it's functional usages for visual evaluation of everything from farm land to disaster areas, some as small as hummingbirds to the most common portable four rotor models.  It closed with an interview with Senator Diane Feinstein discussing why this technology must be regulated to prevent abuses of privacy among other dangers.

The 60 Minutes episode, in my opinion, was subtly biased by cheer leading this technology, discounting the negative potential, the most common being loss of privacy.  It ignored one major issue, which is that while these devices are now being used by the FBI to a limited degree, they could also be used in the pursuance of criminal activities; this could be from casing property associated with burglary, to direct use by terrorists.  I am familiar with the aborted attack described in this N.Y. Times story as my own research led to the correction at the end of the article.

While terrorism and assigning limits that protect airplane space is an issue for the FAA to deal with in its regulations that are in development, the everyday less tragic issues of these devices, now available at the price of a toy (see link to personal experience below), specifically breach of privacy is worthy of discussion.  An analogue to this as a city issue is something called "airsoft" repeating rifles,  mostly used by teens or in more elaborate war game settings.  One problem is the name, which implies that the projectiles are harmless, which they are not if hit in the face.

This is an example of how different regulations are appropriate for different communities.  There is no county or state law against the use of these implements (whether seen as guns or toys)  However Encinitas Code 9.30.010 specifically makes discharge of such air guns an infraction.  I referred to this code when children in my area, many without eye protection were firing thousand of rounds of these hard plastic pellets.  All it took was one visit from a deputy who explained the law, for them to decide to  engage in another sport--and have a lifetime story to tell of their outlaw adventure!

While the uses of toy drones with video capabilities would mostly be harmless fun,  these are unlike other legal encroachment of privacy- refuting the evaluation of the professor in the 60 minutes segment.  They actually allow the user far more capacity than the use of high powered binoculars to reach vantage points never evaluated by regulation or common law.  When we choose where we shall live, privacy is an asset that enhances value- more important for some than others.   We do not allow a stranger to put a ladder on our yard and climb to the top to get a good picture,  yet these devices allow this to be achieved by remote control with no prohibition under current law.

I would suggest addressing this is appropriate for this level of government, and specifically that this expanded Traffic and Public Safety commission should act as an initial hearing venue to gauge the local public's views.  Other municipalities have done this, and passed restrictive laws with exceptions for any superseding federal law.

I have included this survey for feedback,  there is an option to provide name and email, but it's not required.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.

--------------
Addenda:

My own short video of my interaction at the San Diego County fair at a booth that demonstrates what could be the most common use of these low end versions of this technology.

LA Times article that describes how this technology can hinder as well as aid law enforcement.