Skip to main content

Time for anti-drone legislation in Delaware

You won't actually find any current Delaware legislators following through on this idea because ... neither the Democrats nor the Republicans actually give a rat's ass about drones in our skies.

But they are coming.

The US Department of Agriculture already has a certificate of authorization to fly drones, and it is in the midst of working with the Delaware Department of Agriculture to develop a program to use unmanned aerial vehicles for a variety of crop and wildlife related uses.  As you will see from the link, local aviators have already raised safety concerns about this.

That's not so much what worries me, though.  It is the response of the Delaware State Police to a FOIA request about drone usage from two months ago that is giving me prickles on the back of my neck:

Here's why:

1.  This is the letterhead on which the request was returned:

Note that the letter did not say that the Department of Safety and Homeland Security does not use or possess drones, just that the Division of State Police doesn't.  This answers the question actually posed by the requestor, but does so in a way that leaves open the question about whether the larger organization may have some records.

2.  The response says that the DSP "does not own, use, or deploy" drones, but it does not discuss whether or not there are future plans to do so.  Again:  not asked, so not answered.

Many states are currently considering anti-drone legislation, or at least legislation that closely regulates the use of such unmanned aerial vehicles.

Delaware needs to do so as well--but, of course, you won't see that happening.

Comments

DPayne said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
DPayne said…
UAVs (Drones) have many safe, practical and profitable uses. The media has attacked these things like they are the plague without knowing anything about them or even trying to understand them. Yes there is potential for abuse and misuse as there is with anything that you can buy, own, drink, eat, drive or fly. But we do not need a host of new laws to govern (ban & restrict) UAVs. New commercial UAVs have flight limits built in to protect full scale aircraft. The camera's that come with these are wide angle, almost fisheye lenses so at an altitude of 60 or 70 feet you cannot identify the people below it, so that kills the privacy issue. Can you invade someone's privacy with one? Yes, from a distance of 10 to 15 feet from your target you can get a good picture. But without spending $30,000.00 for a flying super camera you are not going to do it from any distance that people won't see it. We already have laws and regulations in place that can deal with any misuse so don't get your panties in a wad over drones. Before you condemn them, get to know them, know what they are capable of what the dangers really are and what good they can do. Don't take the word of someone who has never seen one other than on youtube and don't spread hype and lies just to put your name to a column. The US is years behind every other foreign country in the world as far as the use of UAVs for both private and professional purposes. The reason for this is the news media has to hype it up for the mere sake or ratings and the government has to over investigate and over regulate as they do everything else. Bottom line is, don't knock something you don't know anything about.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?