Despite that, its a dangerous thing to happen. I am aware of how unlikely it is for the current US Government to use the drone offensively, but once you have a massive fleet of drones flying over the US, patrolling "troubling" neighborhoods constantly, the temptation to use those abilities rises significantly.
I hope that Congress takes action to outlaw this practice, but I have little faith it will happen. It seems like everyday the country is falling further into the pit of becoming an authoritarian police state.
Is it that they are flying a UAV that was originally designed for military use?
Or is it that they are flying a UAV period?
What if it was a new UAV, designed just for law enforcement? No problems then?
Presumably this UAV has no weapons on it, so I'm unsure what the problem could be unless we just flat oppose former military equipment being used?
It's safer and cheaper to fly a UAV than a manned vehicled - helicopters crash routinely and need multiple crews to keep them on station for extended duration. If it was a decommissioned military UAV that's being repurposed - then the tax payer has been saved a great deal of money as well.
So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?
> So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation?
What potential "mission-appropriate" use is a Customs and Border Protection drone performing 300 miles away from the border in a domestic unrest scenario?
We can't allow agencies to borrow equipment and specialists? They should all buy their own, at tax payer's expense?
Would you feel any different if this UAV had been bought by local law enforcement instead of borrowed? If so, why?