Kirolous Guirguis

Mr. Rogers 5
November 2, 2015
Domestic Drone Usage

Domestic Drone Use is now popular more than ever. A great interest has sparked
throughout modern society in those machines especially because of their many beneficial uses.
Drones are capable of performing tasks such as in search-and-rescue missions, scientific
research, mapping, recording, transporting, and much more. However with great power comes
great responsibility! Due to the drones sophisticated and advanced technological capabilities
many started to question whether their privacy and public safety is in danger especially because
many of these drones are deployed without proper restrictions and regulations. Most Drones are
also equipped with facial recognition software, infrared technology, and speakers capable of
monitoring personal conversations which could easily gather very personal information and data
from various people without their knowledge. My bill if becomes a law will help enable society
to still benefit from this great technological advancement, yet will create enough restrictions and
regulations to ensure public safety as well as privacy.
The topic of Domestic Drone Use is very important because the FAA predicts that
30,000 drones will be deployed by 2020 (Medill National Security Zone). This shows the great
interest people have in these machines. However a journalist by the name of Wells C. Bennett
stated in his article published online that These days individuals, private universities and
companies can and do fly surveillance-capable aircraft, both with and without the specific

blessing that the FAA requires (Bennett). With the rising demand for these unmanned aircrafts
many different questions and concerns arise as well. Questions concerning ones privacy and
safety issues arise. The digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation warns that drones
raise significant issues for privacy and civil liberties since they are capable of "highly advanced
surveillance. What my bill will provide for the public will be regulations and restrictions on
drones to guarantee no one feels insecure in public places and even in their own private homes.
While military drone usage abroad has been opposed by various groups, it is not as
popular within the country like that of commercial drones. There was an interview conducted by
a journalist by the name of Evan Selinger recently, he spoke with Mr. Kagg who recently
coauthored a book called "Drone Warfare". He is very important because of his insight towards
this issue. Here is what Kaag believes "Kaag: Most of us have internalized some version of the
Fourth Amendment that prohibits the government from conducting searches of citizens without
probable cause and requires a court to issue a warrant prior to a search commencing. The abuse
of domestic drone surveillance would violate this amendment, and so Americans are quick to get
their hackles up. Using drones in targeted killings abroad is different. Theres a sense again, an
accurate one that the laws of war are different than the domestic laws that govern a nation. That
said, we should worry about Americans not caring about the targeted killing program. Lethal
drone strikes are described as precise and clean much cleaner than traditional forms of
warfare. The public can use this reassurance to assuage its moral concerns and direct its attention
to more immediate, if not more morally pressing, issues at home. If you have to decide between
confronting injustice in your backyard and addressing injustices half a world away, the backyard,
for better or for worse, gets cleaned up first. In this case, I think its for the worse." (John
Kaag). There is another way of looking at the commercial and widespread use of drones. That is

if the number of drones deployed keep increasing like they are... Seeing drones in the air will be
part of normal life. This poses a great threat to public safety because this will make this nation
more vulnerable to terrorist attacks using drones. Like the car bomb, the drone bomb could
become a cheap, ubiquitous and anonymous way to deliver explosives. The machines can hop
over fences, bypass checkpoints and move too fast for a security team to react to. What if the
target is a congressman, general or a president? (John Kaag). This interview was much longer
than this; however I chose to put quite a large portion of it because this shows how drones in
public place could pose a threat to public safety. The more the drones, and the less regulations
and restrictions with them, the bigger the chances other nations would give the U.S.A. a taste of
our own medicine.
Drones if turned into a weapon could change our lives. In a book I recently read called
The future of violence: robots and germs, hackers and drones: confronting a new age of threat
written by Benjamin Wittes and Gabriella Blum had this quote in it The ability to inflict pain
and suffering on large groups of people is no longer limited to the nation-state. It then expanded
and talked about the different machinery used, including drones to harm others. While some look
at commercial drones as something that is harmless and innocent. Others who mean harm could
use it as a harmful weapon. Even if the drone was not equipped with bombs, there are other ways
they could harm. For example in a soccer game between the two countries of Serbia and Albania
who have political tensions, the Albanian prime ministers brother controlled a drone and
attached a flag with greater Albania which is a sign that Serbia is basically Albania. This
caused the whole stadium to get into a brawl fight. My bill will ensure that the drones used will
change the world for the better.

My bill covers all kinds, types, shapes, sizes, and even weights of drones. Some might
claim that all these limitations are outrages and those small drones would not be harmful in any
way. Similarly In a recent article at Motherboard on the Congressional hearing, Carl Franzen
argues that small size of these drones makes it unlikely that these machines will be used to inflict
serious damage (Domestic Drone Threats). However what Franzen and many others dont know
is that terrorist attacks and public threats can occur with almost any type of drone. That is why
there are many limitations. Recently a small drone that landed in the front yard of the white
house caused a great public threat because its owner lost control of the aircraft; such an innocent
mistake caused so much threat. Additionally, The point of origin for much of the concern
around the use of small drones as weapons was an incident in Germany in 2013 when, as a
prank, a member of the Pirate Party flew a Parrot quadcopter drone toward Angela Merkel during
a campaign rally. The drone made it within a few feet of the Chancellor before police forced the
operator to land the aircraft. It wasnt hard for members of law enforcement to imagine a
scenario in which, instead of as a prank, the drone had been used as a weapon (Gettinger). All
the regulations and limitations presented in my bill will eliminate any chance of public threat or
distress.
So in conclusion while drones do have some great advantages such as search-and-rescue
missions, scientific research, mapping, commercial use, for battle and more. However due to the
aforementioned reasons stated above almost anyone can just fly a drone with very minimal
regulations or guidelines. So new regulations are being created to ensure public safety. However
with the correct restrictions and regulation flying drones both for military and commercial use
could be done and safe.