Drones in the USA and across the World - Research Paper Example

Drones in USA and Across the World Technology is fast catching up with the aviation industry. Drones are unmannedaircrafts that are remote controlled by a pilot on the ground. The use of drones has mainly been focused on research as well as specific missions especially for counterterrorism activities. However, the case is slowly changing with the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) working towards their commercialization. Drones have been used in America mainly for surveillance purposes. The laws regarding their use have been recently enacted but there is many more that are in the pipeline to development. 2013 witnessed passing of 130 bills and resolutions by 43 states in America that focused on addressing the issues surrounding the use of drones. The federal government through FAA also regulates the use of drones. The use of drones in the United States though being legal has several regulations that should be met. A bill passed by Congress in February 2012 gave FAA the mandate to regulate their use. In other parts of the world, especially in Japan, drones have been used for a number of purposes. The use of drones has greatly gained popularity in United States of America in the last three years. The law enforcement has been greatly boosted by this new development. However, their use should be within the confines of the constitution. Amendment four and five provides some of the guidelines that should be considered especially on matter relating to individual privacy and the due process of the law. The popularity in the manufacture and testing of drones attracted the Congress to develop regulations towards the realization of safe use of drones. Through the FAA Reauthorization Act, FAA was mandated to developing regulations that would facilitate the testing, and the licensing of commercial drones. The enactment of the bill was flawed on the basis that it could give the law enforcement teams the leeway to conduct security surveillance, which would interfere with individual privacy (Waterman 1). Despite the timing of this regulation, the use of drones has been used in other regions especially by the military for anti-terrorism operations. In countries such as Afghanistan, their use has been predominant. The use of drones especially for commercial purposes has been underutilized in the United States as compared to other countries that have advanced in technology. By 17 March 2014, the use of drones in the United States for commercial purposes has been very limited. Actually, only one company was given the go ahead by the FAA to use them for commercial purposes. An oil company was granted the license to fly its oil products across the Arctic Ocean. However, it was not easy for the company to get the permit; it took the intervention of the Congress. FAA has said that it would like to set the frameworks that would ensure that there is effectiveness in sharing of the sky with manned aircrafts. Despite their intention to have effectiveness in the running of the drones, aviation technology is catching up with the agency, in other parts of the world, their use in agriculture, film industry, for emergency services is getting to be noticed (Lowy 1). For example in Australia, cricket matches are covered by use of drones, United Arab Emirates is working on a project of delivering government documents using drones, there is increased use by energy companies and real estate agents in UK. The United States Supreme had to deal with cases involving the use of drones. In a case in which Nasser Al-Awlaki had sued the government for the death of his son and others on grounds of terrorism, the court dismissed the suit on grounds that it had no jurisdiction to interfere with an executive policy that was granted by the Congress. Nasser had sued government administrators in person. He argued that the due process was breached as well as the constitutional provision for unlawful seizures and search was not adhered to. A drone that struck Yemen in 2011 killed the four Al Qaeda affiliates. After cross-examination, the judge found out that the due process and procedural claim by al-Awlaki was valid. Based on the Bivens vs Unknown Narcotics Agents established that it was illogical for the father sues federal officials in a civil court on basis of a decision made. The preceding judge, Collyer observed that the judiciary had limited role in making a decision based on an issue that involved foreign relations, warmaking, and national security due to its delicate nature (Peralta 1). The legality of the use of commercial drones in the US is unquestionable. In a case presented by FAA accusing Raphael Pirker of flying commercial drones, the court established that commercial drones are legal. The judge observed that the federal agency did not have concrete legal framework on flying of commercial drones. The case presented by FAA was dismissed. However, the agency has continued to uphold that it is illegal for any Company to fly commercial drones (Koebler 1). FAA had issued a policy notice in 2007 against flying of commercial drones but the policy was not legally binding in any way. The judge presiding over Pirker’s case made a ruling that there was no federal acquisition regulation rule that could restrict model aircraft operations. This ruling has far-reaching implications on the side of not only FAA but also other policy makers including the Senate. There is therefore, the need for stringent measures to be defined through well-developed policies that will ensure that drones become beneficial to the country. There is the need to develop laws that will govern the use of drones in the US. Since the use of drones started becoming apparent few years ago, there is an increased curiosity for their use for commercial purposes. The only hiccup to the realization of this objective is the pace at which FAA has been acting. A Senate panel was sensitized by experts on the need to develop laws that could govern the scope of utilization of the drones (Cratty 1). The Senate heard that there was issue relating to privacy that was required to be addressed through legislations. The clause on “unreasonable search’ was also identified as one of those that required repealing due to their context that could limit the scope of the drone use. Through the deliberations with the Senators, the experts also pointed out that FAA was so stringent in its operations hence it could delay the entire process of commercializing the use of drones. Many uses of drones were identified including the use in agriculture (Cratty 1). The panel of senators of Senators was made to understand that there was an immediate need to develop policies so that the country could benefit from the technology while at the same time promoting sustainability. While the federal government has been on the forefront in developing structures that regulate the use of drones, the state governments have also made a step in this regard. The state legislatures have been quite active in developing systems that provide guidelines on the use of drones. Approximately 130 bills and resolutions have found their way in the state legislatures in 2013 focusing on the issues of unmanned aircraft systems. This follows the rising need for the use of the drones in both law enforcement and commercial sectors. Below are some of the states that have developed bills that regulate the use of drones in their jurisdictions (National Conference of State Legislatures 1): Florida: The provisions of SB 92 define a drone and its use in the law enforcement. This law allows the use of drones by law enforcement teams but under specific requirements; when there is a terrorist threat, in case of emergencies. However, it is a requirement that a warrant has to be issued before the drone is allowed to fly. There is also a provision that any individual harmed through an inappropriate use of a drone should be able to place a claim before a civil court. North Dakota: The state has developed the SB 2018, which provides for the provision of $ 1 million grant from the state general fund in order to develop a FAA unmanned aircraft systems test site. This law is still under scrutiny and once passed it will ensure that $ 4 million is granted for the operationalization of the site. Tennessee: The Tennessee law SB 796 pays particular attention to the use of drones by law enforcement teams. Through this law, a warrant is required to fly a drone. In addition, only under circumstances to counter a high-risk terrorist attack or where there is the need for a swift action that could save a life is the use of drones allowed. The law also requires that violations are not admissible in state criminal prosecutions. It also provides an opportunity for any individual that is accidentally or otherwise harmed by a drone to present their case before a civil court. Virginia: This was the first state to develop laws to regulate the use of drones. HB 2012 and SB 1331 have various provisions that spell out the use of drones. The laws bars state agencies from the use of drones, this law sets a timeline of until 1st of July 2015. However, there are soft spots in the bill that provides that they may be used in case of Blue alerts, amber alerts, by higher educational institutions, search and rescue missions, and the National Guard. The department of Criminal Justice services of Virginia has also been tasked with the responsibility of developing a protocol for the use by law enforcers as well as doing research on the same. Texas: One of the recent enactments in the regulation against unmanned aircraft services is provided in HB 912 law of Texas State. The law stipulates 19 uses that are legally allowed for drones. On the other hand, it stipulates ways in which the drones should not be used. It is not allowed under this law to capture images or even distribute them. This law was repealed by the HCR 217 amendments, which changed the reporting mechanism that was provided in HB 912. Nevada: The state developed the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) program, which was to be supported by $4 million appropriated by the provisions of Nevada AB 507 law. The appropriation of this money is reliant on whether Nevada would be selected as a test site. Oregon: The law as per HB 2710 provides that the law enforcers can use the drones for security purposes as training, though a warrant is a must have. The law also defines a drone as well as stipulates that if it is owned by a public body, it has to be registered with the Oregon Department of Aviation (DOA). In addition, it sets out the penalties for mounting weapons in drones as well as any interference or access to public drones. The implementation of the provisions of this law is granted to DOA. DOA is required to submit reports to the legislative committee on the provisions of federal regulations affecting the use of drones. Illinois: In the course of the year 2013, the state developed two laws that regulate the use of drones; HB 1652 and SB 1587. HB 1652 provides that hunters and fishermen should not be interfered with by drone users. On the other hand, SB 1587 requires that a warrant should be issued to law enforcers using drones. In addition, it sets out situations in which drones should be used, which include, when pursuing a criminal, for counter-terrorism, or to prevent loss of a life. Unless the evidence gathered by a drone is important for criminal intelligence, it should be destroyed within 30 days. Another provision is that the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority should report the drones owned by law enforcement agencies in their website. Hawaii: The state of Hawaii passed the SB 1221 law that requires that an appropriation of $ 100,000 for two staff to be contracted through University of Hawaii for the creation of degree and training programs on advanced aviation. Idaho: Its unmanned aircraft SB 1134 law defines a drone and goes ahead to stipulate that a warrant is a mist for law enforcers to do aerial surveillance. The law also sets penalties on its use and the procedures that should be followed by private citizens that use them. Maryland: HB 100 provides for the appropriation of $ 500,000 for the development of a drone test site in the state. Montana: It has SB 196 law that provides limitations on the circumstances in which the use on drones may be used as evidence in any court of law. It also defines a drone and the circumstances under information gathered through its use can be used as evidence. The developed countries have slowly embraced the use of drones for various activities. The Japanese company, Yamaha Motor Company developed RMAX drones that have been in use for at least the last twenty years, they have been used in spraying of crops. They are quite affordable and can perform operations such as fertilizer application as well as application of pesticides. These are very beneficial since they reduce human exposure to chemicals while their efficiency is quite high. This technology has been bought in South Korea as well as in Australia. Farming has been made to be fully automated. Australia is another country that has embraced the use of drones, the cricket matches are televised using drones. Other companies such as Zookal, a company that rents out text book is Sydney is intending to start the use of drones in making deliveries. The Middle East has witnessed the use of drones for almost all the wrong reasons, war. American forces have employed the use of drones in Afghanistan, Iraq, and even Pakistan. However, the developing countries such as United Arab Emirates have embraced commercial use of drones. The government of UAE is planning to initiate the use of drones in delivering government documents such as identity cards, passports, driving licences, and permits. Europe is also not left behind in the implementation of the unmanned aviation technology. Energy companies in the UK have been using drones in the monitoring of undersides of oil platforms. In addition, they have been used in the UK by real estate agents to develop videos for different properties. Germany is also in the process of developing drones. Deutsche Post Mail DHL, an international logistics company based in Germany is in the process of developing a “Paketkopter”, this is a drone that is targeted to be used for delivery of small luggage that are urgently needed especially in places that are less accessible. North Korea and South Korea have been developing drones. Tension has arisen in South Korea have a series of drones were found having crashed in their territory believed to be from North Korea (Brown & Kim 1). Just like in some other parts of the world, the use of drones poses a serious threat to security especially when they are used to collect security information. There use requires stringent regulations, which are currently shaky in most parts of the world including in US. In conclusion, the use of drones presents one of the latest technologies in the aviation industry. United States has used drones massively outside its territory especially in the fight against terror. Their use within the country has become profound in the last three years. The Congress enacted a legislation to empower FAA is regulating the use of drones but the framework is still lacking. On the other hand, the states of America have developed various legislations to regulate use of drones. Finally, the developed world is embracing the use of drones at a past pace especially for commercial purposes. There is therefore a need to provide a legal framework to regulate the use of drones in the world. Works Cited Brown, Sophie and Kim, Stella. Are suspected North Korean drones a threat to South Korea? CNN. April, 9 2014. Web. April, 10 2014. http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/09/world/asia/korea-drones-military-threat/ Cratty, Carol. Drone use in US may require new laws, Senate panel told. CNN. March 21, 2014. Web. April 10, 2014. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/20/us/drones-domestic-use/ Koebler, Jason. Commercial Drones are completely legal, A Federal Judge rules. March 6, 2014. Web. April 10, 2014. http://motherboard.vice.com/read/commercial-drones-are-completely-legal-a-federal-judge-ruled Lowy, Joan. US lags as a commercial drones take off around globe. Huffington Post. March, 17 2014. Web. April, 10 2014. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/us-drones-_n_4978768.html National Conference of State Legislatures. 2013 Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Legislation. 2014. Web. April 10, 2014. http://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/unmanned-aerial-vehicles.aspx Peralta, Eyder. Federal judge dismisses suit challenging drone strikes that killed Americans. npr. April, 4 2014. Web. April 10, 2014. http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/04/04/299201799/federal-judge-dismisses-suit-challenging-drone-strikes-that-killed-americans Waterman, Shaun. Drones over US get OK by Congress. The Washington Times. February, 7 2014. Web. April, 10 2014. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/7/coming-to-a-sky-near-you/?page=all Read More