

San Diego Refuses To Answer FOIA Requests About Drones - mtgx
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121119/13591421096/san-diego-refuses-to-answer-foia-requests-about-drones-because-there-is-very-little-public-benefit.shtml

======
morisy
Original story: [https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2012/nov/15/san-
diego...](https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2012/nov/15/san-diego-county-
sheriff-refuses-release-drone-doc/)

Full FOIA Request: [https://www.muckrock.com/foi/san-diego-county-55/san-
diego-c...](https://www.muckrock.com/foi/san-diego-county-55/san-diego-county-
police-department-drone-documents-1487/)

------
kordless
Alameda county is considering purchasing one as well:
[http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Alameda-County-sheriff-
se...](http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Alameda-County-sheriff-seeks-drone-
to-fight-crime-3965122.php)

Drones don't appear to be covered by the public domain airspace laws in the
US: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights>

Airspace under 500' AGL is traditionally considered to be under control of the
landowner - unless they are near an airport and the airport needs right of way
for passengers. While the FAA technically controls ALL airspace, they can only
use it for right of way purposes when dealing with passengers. It doesn't
appear to be valid for unmanned aircraft.

The FAA has a few things to say about drones here:
<http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=68004>. There doesn't appear to be a
specific drone law in place by the FCC, only waivers to allow flying the
drones by an agency.

That poses the question whether we are within our property rights to shoot
down any drone flying around inside it? Given the FAA is limiting these drones
to operate below 400' AGL, they would appear to be a fair target.

~~~
AngryParsley
I realize there are other ways to disable or destroy a drone and that you're
curious about the legalities. But if you did literally shoot a drone, you'd
probably go to jail. If you miss you'll send a bullet miles away, endangering
others. If you hit the drone, you'll rain shrapnel on the anyone below. Even
then, I doubt a hit would disappate the bullet's kinetic energy safely.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
A bullet expends its kinetic energy via air friction. Unless it richochets off
the drone, it'll fall harmlessly some miles away.

~~~
asynchronous13
Harmlessly? I know this is off topic, but....

A close friend of mine was killed by a stray bullet this year at a 4th of July
celebration. She was in a crowd of thousands of people gathered to watch some
local fireworks. The shooter was miles away and probably has no idea that they
murdered someone.

[http://statenews.com/index.php/article/2012/07/student_shot_...](http://statenews.com/index.php/article/2012/07/student_shot_at_fireworks_show_died_next_morning)

~~~
JoeAltmaier
I'm so sorry for your loss.

------
mvanveen
FWIW, I saw a drone hovering above the 5 freeway back in September right after
the border patrol crossing. I think it was in the strip between Camp Pendleton
and Oceanside.

It looked about the size of a microwave or a toaster oven, had at least 4
blades, and seemed to have a ridiculously good, likely six-axis attitude
control and was simply hovering over the 5 doing god-knows-what.

Definitely a strange welcome to San Diego after being gone for 5 years.

~~~
mvgoogler
That sounds like it would have been within R-2503A, which is the restricted
airspace over and around Camp Pendleton. The Marines operate UAVs so it could
have been part of a military exercise.

~~~
mvanveen
Thank you so much for this info! So, if I understand you correctly, the
airspace above the freeway is still restricted even though the Highway is
public land? Is this accurate?

I agree that it's entirely feasible that this was a military exercise.

What seemed particularly strange about it from my POV was that the drone was
hovering directly above passing traffic. As I mentioned, it had extremely good
attitude control and was just lingering directly above the flow of traffic
with what looked like cameras.

I can't personally understand why a "military exercise" requires hovering over
civilians for extended periods of time, but I'm sure there could be extremely
reasonable explanations. I'd still like the benefit of at least being offered
one though.

------
rthomas6
Is it just me or does this not seem like a big deal? Yes, they didn't comply
with the law, but they appear to have done it out of laziness rather than
trying to hide something. After reading the full FOIA request linked in
morisy's comment, it seems to me that they were responsive to the request, but
not the the extent that Muckrock wanted. They didn't want to go dredge up the
footage video that the drone sales team gave them. They probably didn't really
know where it was. But they did say that they didn't purchase any drones, and
acknowledged a sales inquiry.

------
asynchronous13
Unless there's missing information, this sounds like a non-story. It seems
like the San Diego PD looked at a quote that was sent to a different police
department and never bought anything. They didn't respond to the FOIA request
because they hadn't bought anything. Am I missing something?

~~~
morisy
We asked them for any documents related to drone purchasing plans, drone
guidance, internal reports on usage, etc. That they decided not to go through
with a purchase is irrelevant in this case: They flatly stated they had
nothing, which was, at best, inaccurate.

Public records laws are of little use if the government can lie or mislead
without oversight or repercussion.

Hope that makes sense!

------
SoftwareMaven
Find some info about your own jurisdiction(s) and pass it on to Muckrock to
(hopefully) find out what they plan to do wrt drones:
[https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2012/jul/03/drone-
wat...](https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2012/jul/03/drone-watch-help-
eff-and-muckrock-uncover-planned-/#file)

------
georgeorwell
Note to people in positions of authority: people have to actively want to use
technology that lets you surveil them for it to work.

Note to entrepreneurs: build such technology and you'll get rich.

Note to people not in positions of authority: don't be so naive.

