Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Monday October 15 2018, @01:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the drone-wars dept.

The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2018 regulates airline seat sizes and allows authorities to shoot down drones without obtaining a warrant:

Despite objection, Congress passes bill that lets U.S. authorities shoot down private

U.S. authorities will soon have the authority to shoot down private drones if they are considered a threat — a move decried by civil liberties and rights groups. [...] [Critics] say the new authority that gives the government the right to "disrupt," "exercise control," or "seize or otherwise confiscate" drones that's deemed a "credible threat" is dangerous and doesn't include enough safeguards.

Federal authorities would not need to first obtain a warrant, which rights groups say that authority could be easily abused, making it possible for Homeland Security and the Justice Department and its various law enforcement and immigration agencies to shoot down anyone's drone for any justifiable reason.

Also at CBS and Aero News Network.

See also: New FAA Rules for Drones Go Into Effect


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday October 15 2018, @03:10PM (2 children)

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 15 2018, @03:10PM (#749082) Journal

    FAA doesn't typically do any kind of police enforcement. For a while, Sky Marshals were FAA and did armed enforcement, but as of 1984 2001, they're part of the department of homeland security, and the FAA is an almost entirely bureaucratic organization managing flight plans, safety inspections, radar, ground control, and airplane standards. So we're basically talking about militarizing a civilian agency.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Monday October 15 2018, @03:38PM

    by Arik (4543) on Monday October 15 2018, @03:38PM (#749094) Journal
    "So we're basically talking about militarizing a civilian agency."

    I'm not convinced of that. What I'm seeing in the reporting might well be intended as a signal to do just that, but it also seems possible it's misdirected alarm. If there's nothing more than what's literally written, it's not much of an expansion. It says they're authorized to do something everyone is already authorized to do - to act when necessary.

    Will someone inevitably turn around and just decide that 'necessary' means whatever they want it to mean? Sure, just like in every other area. It'll probably wind up in the courts before anyone really knows what it means.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
  • (Score: 2) by driverless on Tuesday October 16 2018, @04:46AM

    by driverless (4770) on Tuesday October 16 2018, @04:46AM (#749404)

    What no-one seems to have mentioned so far is what happens when they actually shoot down the drone, or whatever. These things are typically flown over heavily-populated areas, and the "shoot it down" proposal would involve either filling the air with lots of lead, lots of small explosive projectiles, or one large explosive projectile. Over, say, a city.

    It's easy enough to say "you can shoot them down", but how you're going to shoot them down is another issue entirely.

    Having said that, if you can get drone hunting licenses, I'll be the first to the Flakvierling.