

FBI uses drones inside U.S. for spying, director says - daegloe
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-fbi-mueller-20130620,0,5216531.story

======
beloch
The FBI currently uses Helicopters and people generally don't complain about
them violating their privacy. However, this may be because Helicopters are
rather hard to miss if one is parked over your back-yard. Drones can be much
smaller and quieter than any manned aircraft, and some even have the
capability of entering buildings. In the near future we can expect drones the
size of insects to enter use.

Suggestions:

1\. A drone presence should be legally treated the same way as the presence of
an FBI officer. Namely, to enter private premises they should require a
warrant.

2\. Legally require drones used in public spaces to be equipped with
lights/speakers to make their presence as detectable as a helicopter. I'd
rather not live in a society where insect-sized drones could be eavesdropping
on any conversation or watching everything you do without your knowledge.

~~~
callmeed
Regarding 1, how high, vertically, does my private premises extend?

Is it the 500' described here:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights)
?

~~~
asynchronous13
No. Air rights extend only as high as the land owner reasonably uses. A
landowner with a 3-story house has a rightful claim to higher airspace than a
neighbor with a single story house. The specific height has not been
determined in a courtroom, but it's likely to be a short distance (~10ft)
above any structures on the property.

~~~
callmeed
Ok, thanks for the clarification.

So, can a govt drone fly 100' over my house and photography me sunbathing nude
in my fenced backyard?

~~~
asynchronous13
In the U.S., the current legal precedent requires a warrant for aerial
surveillance, independent of height. The exception to that rule would be
during an active event -- like if a bank robber happened to be running through
your neighborhood trying to get away.

------
iguana
Drones, like guns and cars, are just tools, and themselves not inherently
evil.

I don't see a problem with the FBI using unmanned aerial vehicles for
surveillance, so long as they do it within the confines of the law (and not
some preposterous interpretation by a secret court). As long as a they have a
specific warrant, this is just a clever application of technology, and a far
cheaper alternative to a helicopter with crew.

We already have traffic cameras and satellites, you have no reasonable
expectation of privacy outdoors.

Also, it isn't like these devices are able to pilot themselves, they're just
remotely controlled aerial vehicles. What if the FBI put a video camera on a
weather balloon?

~~~
adamnemecek
Nuclear weapons, like guns and cars, are just tools, and themselves not
inherently evil. Ergo, there should be no restrictions on anything related to
nuclear weapons.

~~~
jlgreco
> _Nuclear weapons, like guns and cars, are just tools, and themselves not
> inherently evil._

True!

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaceful_nuclear_explosions#Sov...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaceful_nuclear_explosions#Soviet_Union:_Nuclear_Explosions_for_the_National_Economy)
/
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plowshare](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plowshare)

Beyond the obvious (digging big holes fast) there are proposals for using them
to extinguish particularly bad oil/gas fires (perhaps Centralia, Pennsylvania
could be a use case?), stimulating natural gas production (this one is likely
to be unpopular these days), and destroying large amounts of chemical weapons
(and while you're at it, a nuke ;)).

~~~
westward
Don't forget space travel! Both from within the gravity well and intra-solar.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propu...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29)

------
InternalRun
It is inevitable that they will use drones to spy on us. It is cheap and easy,
why send teams of people to track someone 24/7 when you can have a robot do it
for you. Unless new laws are brought in this will become regular practice. We
have all seen the drones DARPA are working on.

~~~
iguana
What makes you think we can legislate our way out of this?

~~~
InternalRun
I think it will take more than legislate alone but I think it would be a step
in the right direction. I just really want some transparency. Recording where
everyone is going and having a mass database of it and then PRISM collecting
all information about who you call and your online activities is a very
worrying idea and it is 70% implemented.

~~~
iguana
All it will do is make life difficult for autonomous vehicle startups, while
the incumbent drone manufacturers will continue to design, produce, and sell
drones to the FBI, for a massively lucrative markup.

Edit: just saw your edit. Technology essentially prevents physical anonymity,
and if it doesn't today, it will within the next decade for sure.

I agree that what we all need is transparency.

------
digz
As far as I can tell, Mueller didn't say the FBI uses drones to spy* on us.
There may be specific reasons why/where drones are useful... don't really
understand why this is news.

Law enforcement has been using airplanes and helicopters for decades for
various purposes. What is so odious about unmanned versions of the same thing?
As long as the missions are lawful, not sure why this is any different.

~~~
iguana
I suspect it will become different eventually, when drones are much, much
smaller, and weaponized. But the FBI isn't using those yet, so I agree, this
is just opportunistic reporting since everyone is talking about the
surveillance state. Demonstrates that journalists, for the most part, are
clueless and lazy.

------
francistw
Open question: is this what was chasing LA Times journalist Michael Hastings a
few nights ago? Sharyl Attkisson thought she was paranoid, until her employer
(CBS News) discovered her computers were indeed being hacked.

------
justinwr
Helicopters.

