Reardon 1

Annotated Bibliography

Should domestic surveillance drones be permanently banned in America?

Jacob Reardon Professor Malcolm Campbell English 1103 March 12, 2013

Reardon 2

Annotated Bibliography Crump, Catherine and Jay Stanley. Why Americans Are Saying No to Domestic Drones. Slate.com. 11 Feb. 2013. Web. 9 Mar. 2013. In this article authors Crump and Stanley propose various reasons why domestic surveillance should be permanently banned in the United States. They start out by establishing the dangers in use of drones to patrol airspace and track criminals. These drones are unmanned and can be controlled by someone sitting in a room from miles away. The authors also state that the admission of drones to be deployed over the U.S would be a huge infringement on our right to privacy. A person could potentially be charged with a crime they were committing in their own back yard. Many states have put a short term ban on domestic drones because of their potential hazards but none have banned them completely. I have found the information in this article to be very credible and useful. It was presented very clear and I had no problems finding the purpose for the article. Both authors are highly regarded attorneys of the ACLU and have extensive backgrounds in privacy protection. I researched all of the statewide bans of drones they mentioned and all were correct. There was a lot of information I found that I will use on my project and use to dig deeper into my issue.

Calo, Ryan. "Bad laws would hurt good drones - CNN.com." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2013. <http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/opinion/calo-drones>. This article relates reasons why drones shouldnt be banned across the U.S. Many people automatically assumed the worst when word of deploying domestic drones got out. Most people suspect that if there are drones in the air they are constantly being watched, but that doesnt seem

Reardon 3

to be the case here. The purposes for these drones include mainly law enforcement, firefighting, border patrol, disaster relief, and search and rescue (Calo). The author also raises a valid point when he states that there is no such thing as privacy in a public area and these drones are very similar to google earth or street view. He also states that there is also little expectation of privacy in illegal possessions or activities. For example; it isnt illegal for a dog to sniff your bag and alert an authority of illegal contraband. Meaning if you arent committing any crimes then you have nothing to worry about. The drones have multiple uses and they all arent harmful. The author is worried that people will jump to conclusions about drones too quick and deny them before there is even a chance for debate. If there is a nationwide ban of domestic drones law enforcement and other governmental agencies could be severely limited with response time to critical situations. Calo makes many valid points throughout this article and seems to make the deployment of drones not as bad as many make it out to be. Ryan Calo is a law professor at the University Of Washington School Of Law and publishes widely for many journals. The information Calo writes about in his article is completely valid but I dont think I will be using it for my project.

Calo, Ryan "The Drone as Privacy Catalyst - Stanford Law Review." Stanford Law Review. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2013. <http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/drone-privacy-catalyst>.

This article basically summarizes that with the existing privacy laws that are in place and the advancements in technology there is nothing we can do about the deployment of domestic drones. The question isnt whether or not drones will be allowed it is just a question of time. Calo goes on to say that the deployment of drones will redefine privacy as a whole. The privacy laws that are set in place right now are already filled with loopholes. These drones will have little to do with online networking and will generally be focusing on visual targets. Calo also gives

Reardon 4

information on the FAA and their regulations towards drones. Ryan Calo provides a large amount of verifiable evidence in his articles. Many scholars have reviewed his articles and accredited him to be a reliable source of information. I will be using a lot of information from this article in my project.

Electronic Frontier Foundation. Eff.org. EFF. N.D. Web. 9 Mar. 2013 The Electronic Frontier Foundation has information on anything to do with citizens privacy rights. There are various articles that explain what your rights are as a citizen and how to protect them. This EFF has many posted articles about domestic drones and their uses. There are many articles published that explain the fear Americans have about the deployment of drones that have the potential to watch over their every footstep. The EFF posts articles on potential plans our government and other agencies are developing to mobilize drones and what they will be used for. This foundation is very reliable and publishes very often. There are new articles posted on their website every day regarding privacy and how to retain it. I have researched many statements made in the articles on the EFF website and all claims seem to be reliable. This website will be very useful to me for my project. I would recommend this site to anyone who wants to know more about their privacy rights and how they can protect them. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is also very well-known and established association.