Slashdot Mirror


FAA Grants Arlington Texas Police Department Permission To Fly UAVs

cylonlover writes with news that another police department has received authorization to start using drones for tasks like "...photographing crime scenes and searching for missing people." From the article: "The police department in Arlington can now use new tools in support of public safety over the Texas urban community — two small helicopter Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. The FAA has granted permission for the Arlington police to fly these unmanned aircraft under certain circumstances: they must fly under 400 feet, only in the daytime, be in sight of the operator and a safety observer, and be in contact with the control tower at the nearby Dallas-Fort Worth airport — one of the busiest in the country." They're using a Leptron Avenger, which "has been designed with military grade features" but don't worry, "police are quick to emphasize that the 4- to 5-foot-long aircraft aren’t the same as military drones."

6 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. I actually think this is a good thing... by Covalent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Originally there was some opposition to police car dashboard cameras. The thinking was that they would result in an invasion of privacy for average citizens. This has actually happened to a small extent, but I think the primary result has been an increased transparency of the police department. Procedures are better followed and cops who violate rules are more easily punished.

    So for all of the doom and gloom about a police state and the lack of privacy this technology will bring, I tend to think the opposite will happen - Police departments that use these UAVs for inappropriate purposes will be caught and publicly denounced. In the meantime, they might actually find missing people or spot criminals, which is definitely a public good.

    --
    Great warrior...hrmph! Wars not make one great.
    1. Re:I actually think this is a good thing... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Procedures are better followed and cops who violate rules are more easily punished.

      That's the funniest thing I've read all week.

      Cops still act like they can confiscate cameras and make you delete images, they still beat people for no good reason, and they do still do all of the shit they always did.

      Now they've learned to do it out of frame of the dashboard camera.

      In the meantime, they might actually find missing people or spot criminals, which is definitely a public good.

      Oh, won't someone think of the children? As long as someone is keeping the children safe, everything must be good, right?

      Sorry, but while it's possible to find one or more cases where this is of benefit, there are far more cases where it will be used to our detriment. Until they can make damned sure they won't abuse it, making excuses for a few cases where it will be helpful is just playing into their hands.

      Arbitrary search and seizure anywhere within 200 miles of a border might catch some bad people, but mostly it's just encroaching on rights and sucks.

      They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:I actually think this is a good thing... by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bit of a strawman there. GP wasn't claiming dashboard cams were a magical solution to 100% all police misconduct problems. They have though ensnared some cops behaving poorly, and have not created a police state by themselves. Were the dashboard cams not there, there would be a few more victims of cops being cops, a few more bad cops on the streets, and would still have as much of a police state as we have now. That was GP's point.

      I disagree with GP that drones are going to backfire much on cops though, at least without causing a tragedy. Even if a drone gets sucked into an engine and people die as a result, I'm sure the cops will get to keep their overpriced toys and we'll keep paying for it.

  2. Dammit Slashdot Editors!!!! by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 3, Informative

    R/C aircraft != UAV.

    See the 2nd link in the summary. The thing even has a RADIO!!!!!

    How many times does it have to be pointed out?????

  3. They won't hit the police budgets by MikeRT · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Because the police are the modern rendition of the standing army our founding fathers feared would oppress us. They'll cut the military in a heart beat because it's not useful to them; the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits them from using it in any "interesting" capacity on us. Amending the PCA would also cause a furor among the public and the military. All of that sort of beside the point because many cops today have the same weapons, training and equipment as infantrymen.

    Ironically, law enforcement, unlike military service, is precisely the sort of government function that needs to be heavily privatized. It used to be mostly private anyway. When your county hired a sheriff, they were literally just an armed citizen who carried a gun and badge that let the world know "I do full time, what any citizen can do when faced with a crime." Like a private citizen doing risky work, they had to be bonded and insured. Broke in the wrong house and did $10k of damage? Didn't come out of the treasury; it came out of your privately funded insurance and/or bond money.

    Our system is broken today because we moved away from the principle of least privilege. That used to be the operating assumption of law enforcement (if I don't know the law, I don't enforce it because getting it wrong means I'm a criminal). We went from a law enforcement system where each officer was a mostly unprivileged user to being damn near like root.

    1. Re:They won't hit the police budgets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, and privatized law enforcement worked out great. Remember the pinkertons? There's a word for privatizing law enforcement, that's fascism.