Committee approves drone recommendations

HARTFORD, Conn. – A legislative committee backed recommendations Thursday to limit how law enforcement authorities can use unmanned aerial drones for surveillance.

The Program Review and Investigations Committee reviewed a report by its staff on regulating drone aircraft. The state does not have the authority to regulate most commercial unmanned aircraft. That responsibility falls to the Federal Aviation Authority, which is expected to release draft regulations sometime next year.

However, the state can regulate government-owned drones. The issue came up during the 2014 legislative session when the Connecticut American Civil Liberties Union advocated for an unsuccessful bill that would have created a new class of crimes for privacy violations involving drones and would have required police to obtain a search warrant before using drones to collect information.

See the complete story at CT News Junkie.



Oldtimer December 13, 2014 at 12:00 pm

Let’s see now. They want law enforcement to get a warrant before using unmanned drones, with very limited flight time, for surveillance, but a security camera mounted high on a light pole doesn’t need a warrant.? The problem then seems to be the efficiency of the technology, not the legal rights of the people being watched.? A flight over an area of interest in a manned aircraft is not a problem. ? The local TV stations have unfettered access to look anywhere they want, but law enforcement needs to go before a judge and apply for a search warrant, making probable cause a crime is being committed, or evidence is being stored before a judge will issue a warrant.?

What jail house lawyer sat in his cell and thought up this brilliant proposal, and how much time is he serving because some law enforcement agency got pictures of him committing a crime.? How did this prisoner get his idea back to the ACLU.?

If this isn’t the stupidest bill ever proposed, it comes close.

Oldtimer December 13, 2014 at 12:06 pm

If they proposed, for safety reasons, some kind of licensing for operators of drones, that might make sense, but requiring search warrants for law enforcement to fly over some area of interest when real estate agents or anybody else needs no license is clearly written by somebody who opposes using the best available technology to solve crime.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>