Running head: SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

Surveillance Drones: Are They Out to Get You?

Colton Gardner
Portland State University

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

1

The nature of American security is changing. Cameras are being hidden in every
nook and cranny imaginable, watching and recording the mundane minutiae and private
practices of everyday life right along with the crime and subversive activity they are
made to detect. Blue skies are no longer a warm and inviting sign of good weather but a
leering omen foretelling the presence of silent, predatory drones designed to monitor
whole cities and large urban areas at once. But as threats to domestic security have
become increasingly more complex and technologically advanced, the American security
system has evolved and adapted in response. (Boyle, 2013)
One way in which the United States government has reacted to the everchanging security landscape is with the production and use of unmanned aerial vehicles
(also known as UAVs or simply drones) in surveillance operations over domestic soil.
(Thompson, 2013) These vehicles, which vary in size, shape and capability, may
represent a good answer to many of the threats facing American security. However, their
use in domestic airspace raises a number of ethical and legal questions. This paper will
examine how the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in a domestic setting presents an unjust
violation of Americans privacy and civil liberties. Furthermore, this paper will explore
some of the benefits associated with drone use as well as how this issue relates to the
topic of globalization.

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

2

Before I dive into some of the background behind U.S. drone use and how it can
be a useful asset, I will briefly reflect on how I went about gathering information about
this topic.While I began the research process with a broad lens on domestic surveillance
in general, my interest in drone-based surveillance was piqued when I came across a
newspaper article about the FBI confessing to the use of UAVs in operations against U.S.
citizens. (Roberts, 2013) Researching drone use in the United States was a somewhat
challenging prospect given just how new this issue is. It seems that experts in the field
havent been able to develop a very large volume of commentary in academic journals
quite yet. Without access to many relevant academic journal articles, I turned to
information that is freely provided by government services like the Congressional
Research Service as well as commentary regarding specific court cases that involved
drones. I found a sizable chunk of evidence arguing against the use of drones by
exploring these resources.

Among the positives involved with drone-based intelligence gathering are its
effectiveness and cost efficiency relative to manned aerial surveillance and other more
conventional methods. Unmanned aerial vehicles are significantly less expensive to
produce, maintain, and operate when compared to manned aircraft. They require less raw
material to make, less fuel to fly and less training and effort to pilot. Additionally. drones

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

3

are even capable of flying automatically through predetermined patrol routes detecting
any moving objects along the way. Furthermore, the technological advancements present
in the United States drone production have helped drone-based surveillance operations to
far exceed the capabilities of many traditional surveillance methods. This is evidenced
by the development of the Autonomous Real-Time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance
Imaging System (or ARGUS-IS) for use with existing drone platforms such as the
Predator or Reaper. The ARGUS imaging system
is currently the worlds highest resolution camera1.8 billion pixels. The sensor
consists of 368 five-megapixel cellphone cameras weaved into a mosaic, much
like an insects compound eye. ARGUS melds together video from each
individual chip to create a persistent, tremendously detailed video stream. About
one million terabytes of video data is archived per day. (Talai, 2014, p. 745)
This new development in surveillance puts previous Predator drone imaging systems to
shame. These older systems were hampered by their lack of detail and inability to
continuously home in on and track individual moving objects without losing view of the
wider environment. Comparatively, the ARGUS
generates a detailed map (imagine a more detailed Google map), but the map is
moving, interactive, and in real time.The operating technician can zoom in to any
object on the map in a pop-up window, while maintaining the wider context. The

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

4

processor automatically tracks all moving objects and up to sixty-five independent

surveillance windows can be opened at once. The operator can see objects as small
as six inches from the groundanything from birds to the clothes a person is
wearing. (Talai, 2014, p.746)
This technology allows for law enforcement and security agencies to monitor and
address possible threats to national security with unprecedented speed and efficiency. As
drone-based surveillance continues to rack up advantages over other methods of
intelligence gathering, the United States government has come to embrace the use of
drones in American airspace to some degree. In fact, Congress has stipulated that drones
become a widespread fixture in domestic airspace by September 30, 2015. (Talai, 2014,
p. 729) Furthermore, the Federal Aerospace Administration estimates that by the end of
the decade, upwards of 30,000 unmanned aerial vehicles could be operating in national
airspace to serve a variety of purposes.
Globalizing processes play a significant role in the development and use of UAV
technology both in the United States and abroad. Richard J. Aldrich posits that
We might think about the impact of globalisation upon intelligence in at least three
ways. Firstly, in terms of targets, globalisation has created a borderless world in
which states move clumsily but where their many illicit opponents move elegantly.
(2009, p.890)

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

5

Here, Aldrich references novel threats to security that globalization has spawned in
recent years such as stateless insurgent groups and international acts of terror. He also
acknowledges that the nation-states which aim to combat these threats are encumbered
with bureaucracy and borderlines and struggle to keep up with illicit organizations that
operate transnationally. Consequently, as the United States seeks to monitor and address
these challenging new adversaries, new intelligence-gathering technologies and practices
such as drone-based surveillance are adopted to do so.
While the positives of utilizing drones in national surveillance operations are
clearly evident through their highly advanced technological capabilities as well as their
economical manner of production, many opinions (including my own) would contend
that as the manufacturing and use of unmanned aerial vehicles continues to expand,
United States drone surveillance poses an increasingly unreasonable threat to the privacy
and civil rights of individuals in a domestic setting and should be curtailed through
legislative action to protect these rights. (Roberts, 2013) Although this issue of domestic
drone use fits within the larger problem of the United States government using electronic
surveillance technology to spy on its own citizens and the ethical and legal ramifications
therein, the speed with which unmanned aerial vehicles are being developed and
integrated into modern society necessitates special attentions so as to ensure the privacy
rights of American citizens in the years to come.

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

6

There are a number of reasons to reign in the use of drones in surveillance

operations over U.S. soil with legislative countermeasures. One such reason is that
domestic drone surveillance is simply not subject to very many legal regulations at all.
(Etzioni, 2010) The limited nature of these legal provisions allow for government
agencies to unfairly leverage the power of drones against U.S. citizens. Additionally,
drone-based surveillance can present a clear violation of citizens personal privacy and
their right to fourth amendment protections against unwarranted search and seizure.
Drone use extends the discretionary power of law enforcement agencies to an
unreasonable degree. (Talai, 2014) This is evidenced by the legal case State v. Brossart.
In this case, a North Dakotan farmer named Rodney Brossart was arrested in 2011 with
the assistance of a Predator drone. This marks the first instance of an arrest that was aided
by the use of drone surveillance in America. In his analysis of this case, Andrew B. Talai
(2014) expresses his fear that by
providing law enforcement with a swift, efficient, invisible, and cheap way of
tracking the movements of virtually anyone and everyone they choose. Police,
through legislative encouragement and judicial acquiescence, now have power
unmatched in historyon the streets of this country: a form of paramilitarized
violence found in a rapidly expanding criminal justice-industrial complex, with

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

7

both ideological and material connections to the military industrial complex.

(p.740)
To make matters worse, law enforcement agencies prerogatives regarding drones are
exceptionally vague and largely undefined. In the case of State v. Brossart, rural police
tapped the Department of Homeland Security to make use of one of their border patrol
drones. The seemingly liberal access that law enforcement has to these drone-based
systems appears to leave a considerable margin for the abuse of discretionary power.
Michael J. Boyle states that The risk that drones will turn democracies into surveillance
states is well known (2013, p.27) and that
drones have the capacity to strengthen the surveillance capacity of. . .democracies.
. . with significant consequences for civil liberties. In the UK, BAE Systems is
adapting military-designed drones for a range of civilian policing tasks including
monitoring antisocial motorists, protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers.
(2013, p. 26)
The use of drone technology makes it incredibly easy for law enforcement to efficiently
monitor and police dissidents and subversive groups. In such an environment where this
occurs, the general populace is at the mercy of being targeted by law enforcement
controlled drones just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Thus, to preserve

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

8

the rights of citizens and protect against the impending threat of a surveillance state,
legislative action should be taken to curb the use of drones over American soil.
In addition, the legality of drone-based searches in light of fourth amendment
protections is largely ambiguous and entirely contingent on context. The fourth
amendment provides citizens with safeguards against unwarranted search and seizure by
government agents, but how this applies to surveillance conducted with advanced
technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles has remained to be seen. Based on
previous cases of government searches, drone-based surveillance may be judged as a
search based largely on its level of invasiveness. Considering the immense power of
many drones imaging systems currently, as well as any future developments in such
technology, its not that hard to see drone-based surveillance as being unnecessarily
invasive to the privacy of American citizens. In the end, it would come down to the
reviewing court to decide if any drone-based surveillance operation constitutes a search
and whether or not a warrant is required based on the level of suspicion held by the
agents of the search. (Thompson, 2013, p. 17) As long as domestic drone surveillance
resides in a constitutional gray area, the privacy rights of American citizens are unjustly
endangered by possible abuse and should be clearly preserved with legislative action.
In the past, Congress has been responsible for a number of regulations reigning in
the surveillance of citizens telecommunications, data usage and other private

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

9

information. Likewise, the legislative body has proposed a number of bills regarding the
use of drones domestically and their regulation. Among these proposals is the Preserving
Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2013, which would require any entity
acting under the authority of the federal government to obtain a warrant based upon
probable cause before conducting drone surveillance to investigate violations of criminal
law or regulations. (Thompson, 2013, 18) Additionally, there is the Preserving American
Privacy Act of 2013 and the Drone Aircraft Privacy and Transparency Act of 2013, which
would serve to protect the private information of American citizens and codify ethical
drone practices respectively.
Ultimately, as new and more dangerous threats to U.S. national security continue
to appear and drone tech continues to develop in response, it is always important to
recognize when liberties may be impinged upon and what unexpected consequences may
arise from the use of UAVs in domestic surveillance operations. Throughout the process
of researching and writing this paper, Ive become a little more cognizant of the
wonderful freedoms allowed by our nations constitution as well as its shortcomings.
Additionally, Ive also become a little bit angry with the way government intelligence
agencies think that they can get away with the transgressions theyve committed against
the American public.

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

10

Works Referenced

Aldrich, J.R. (2009 October) Beyond the vigilant state: globalisation and intelligence.
Review of International Studies, 5(34), 889-902.

Aldrich, J.R., Kasuku, J. (2012 September) Escaping from American intelligence: culture,
ethnocentrism and the Anglosphere, International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs
1944-), 88(5), 1009-1028.

Boyle, M. J. (2013 January) The costs and consequences of drone warfare.

International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), 89(1), 1-29

Bamford, J. (2015 February) The Black-and-White Security Question, Foreign Policy,

210, 70-75

Christy, A. (2013) THE ACLU'S HOLLOW FOIA VICTORY OVER DRONE STRIKES,
George Mason Law Review, 21(1), 1-15

SURVEILLANCE DRONES: ARE THEY OUT TO GET YOU?

11
Etzioni, A. (2010 June) DRONE ATTACKS: The 'Secret' Matrix, The World Today, 66(7),
11-14
Miller, G. (2012 May 18) Drone Wars, Science, 336(6083), 842-843

Roberts, D. (2013, June 19) FBI admits to using surveillance drones over US soil. The
Guardian. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com

Talai, A.B. (2014) Drones and Jones: The Fourth Amendment and Police Discretion in
the Digital Age. California Law Review. 102(3), 729-780