Zander S.

Ackerman
Humanities II Hayes
10/11/2015
An Essay on Domestic Drones
There was a time, long ago, when somebody in the Department of Defense decided it
would be a good idea to strap missiles to a massive remote control aircraft. The drone had
officially been born. Discussed since the beginning of science fiction, weaponized flying robots
have garnered huge amounts of interest from the general public and the U.S government,
especially as the technologies required for their existence are constantly improved. Every year,
new and novel features are included on military models, making them more autonomous and
increasing their functionality. And as the flight of the military drone marches on, the public
sector, and indeed the public in general, has warmed up to the uses of drones; albeit ones without
tank missiles. From reporting news to delivering tacos, startups, individuals, and massive
companies have been trying to use drones to make their jobs easier or to provide their company
with a cool factor to increase sales. Even if it is a bit more expensive, it seems people like the
idea of being able to call a drone to drop a taco on their current position to show off to their
friends. A startup company, TacoCopter, delivers tacos with drones: a service which made
headlines on Wired.com and in the Huffington post. (Bonnington, Gilbert) People clamored to be
put on the taco mailing list to try out the service, but the fledgling company ran into some legal
troubles with the Federal Aviation Administration, as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are prohibited
from being used for commercial purposes. Why? The FAA simply doesnt know what to do with
drones. The FAA mandated that it have drone regulation finished by September 30th, 2015, but
blew past the deadline with a smattering of half backed guidelines and conflicting rulings. The
FAA cant seem to figure out how to deal with the privacy and safety issues concerning drones
on both sides of the issue. (Cushing, FAA)
According to the ACLU, an everything goes approach to drone regulation would result
in huge violations of privacy rights. And the ACLU has reason to be concerned; properly
equipped and deployed, a coordinated fleet of drones would be able to track and keep tabs on
large portions of the population. How that differs from the current ubiquitous use of security and
traffic cameras is not mentioned, but drones do allow a much higher level of surveillance in areas
typically not known for being surveyed, such as rural and suburban communities. The ACLU is
also concerned about the use of drones by law enforcement, and mentions concerns about drones
wielding lethal and non-lethal weapons and being used to collect information on suspected
criminals or random citizens without warrants.
On the flip side, surveillance drones would certainly make life easier for law enforcement
as they would be able to track criminals without having to dedicate a helicopter or other heavy
duty equipment to the task. Monitoring of police and suspect activities would cut down on grey
area when it comes to police misbehavior and provide law enforcement with another tool to
protect the innocent. One major court decision (Cushing, Judge) ruled against evidence provided
by near constant monitoring of a suspect, but drones certainly wouldnt be constantly tailing
suspects. More likely drones would act more as a dash cam like tool, or a way for police to scout
an area for suspicious activity, rather than a way to perpetually monitor people. Putting nonlethal
weapons on drones, such as Tasers, would make it easier and safer for police to apprehend
violent or fleeing suspects.

Zander S. Ackerman
Humanities II Hayes
10/11/2015
In commercial applications, some of the same issues apply. How much data should
companies be able to obtain on people using drones? What are the safety requirements for a
drone to be put in use? Who is responsible for accidents with autonomous drones, the
programmer, the owner, or the manufacturer? Does one need a license to own and operate a
drone? With stories in the news about people crashing drones into the white house lawn, a line
needs to be drawn between the personal freedoms of drone users and the privacy and safety
rights of individuals. But where should that line be drawn?
It is of utmost importance to prevent stunting growth in the fledgling drone industry that
would be caused by overregulation. Creating too many barriers to own and fly drones defeats the
point of their inherent accessibility; they are a useful tool in part because they are relatively
simple to use. However, privacy rights do need some protection as there is a large portion of the
population who doesnt want their neighbors to be able to surveil them from the sky. Taking both
of these into account is difficult, and requires all citizens to agree to follow the rules, lest the
whole system breaks down.
Ideally citizens would decide to what level they, and their property, can be observed. The
level of observation could be determined by how long the observation takes place and how
detailed that observation is. There would be certain minimums, so that drone users can still
exercise their rights to use their technology. Each person would basically have their own
privacy settings for their life. Each drone user or company that uses drones, would have a
license to use drones for a specific purpose, and would have different rights to the data they
collect. An artist using drones would own the art created from data obtained, but would have to
cite and give credit to the person she got the data from, for example. Companies utilizing data for
commercial purposes would have to purchase data off of the citizen in order to use it. If a police
precinct was using a drone equipped with any type of weapon, they would have to own a license
to use it, much like people have to obtain a license to carry a concealed weapon. Everybody
owns the data collected on them, and gain more control over the use of that data depending on
how detailed the data is, and what category the data falls under. Perhaps image data might be
treated differently than location data. This way, everyone is responsible for their own data. If
someone wants to use a drone, they have to either curtail how much data they obtain, or gain
permission from and compensate the person who is being surveyed.
This gives some serious flexibility to all sorts of groups, without violating privacy rights.
Police would still be able to obtain information to satisfy their needs, and citizens wouldnt have
to put up with 24 hour surveillance if they didnt want to. Police would be able to use their Taser
drones, but only when they have been licensed to do so have proper training, just like for their
side arms. Taco delivery systems could proceed unimpeded, while companies aggressively
collecting detailed data would have to get permission from the people they are surveying and
compensate them accordingly. It strikes a fair balance between two extremes, one of no privacy,
and one of total privacy. It gives the power to the people, while providing and enforcing the rules
of engagement, as government should. It forces both parties to give up their right to observe each
other to make sure all feel safe. This is what government is designed to do: arbitrate between two
opposing positions by redistributing power to the government and handing out permissions to
both groups so that as many people are happy as possible. Without regulation of drones, there

Zander S. Ackerman
Humanities II Hayes
10/11/2015
exists a state of tension between those who wish to observe, and those who wish to be left alone.
Both groups have benefits and drawbacks to provide to society. Both deserve protections of their
rights. A plan such as this does just that.

Works Cited

Zander S. Ackerman
Humanities II Hayes
10/11/2015
Bonnington, C. (n.d.). Tacocopter: The Coolest Airborne Taco Delivery System Thats
Completely Fake. Retrieved October 11, 2015.
Cushing, T. (n.d.). FAA Blows Past Mandated Deadline For Drone Regulation Rules | Techdirt.
Retrieved October 11, 2015.
Cushing, T. (n.d.). Judge Throws Out Evidence Obtained By Six Weeks Of Warrantless
Surveillance Footage | Techdirt. Retrieved October 11, 2015
Domestic Drones. (n.d.). Retrieved October 11, 2015, from https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacytechnology/surveillance-technologies/domestic-drones
Gilbert, J. (n.d.). Tacocopter Aims To Deliver Tacos Using Unmanned Drone Helicopters.
Retrieved October 11, 2015.
Masnick, M. (n.d.). Why You Can't Have A Tacocopter Drone Deliver You A Taco For Lunch
Today | Techdirt. Retrieved October 11, 2015.
Ward, B. (2015, June 22). Commercial drones in the U.S.: Privacy, ethics, economics - and
journalism - Journalist's Resource. Retrieved October 11, 2015.