November 16, 2011
Drones in the Force

Lighter and cheaper than a helicopter and equipped with high tech features, these vehicles are increasingly on the want list of law enforcement officials. Though none of these drones are yet in active duty, police and sheriff’s departments – more than 300 according to the Federal Aviation Administration – are adding them to their cache of public safety tools.
Using grant money from the Department of Homeland Security, officials in Montgomery County, Texas, recently purchased a $300,000 remotely piloted helicopter known as aShadowHawk. With built-in video and still cameras and infrared and nightvision sensors, the unmanned aerial vehicle, or UAV, is anticipated to greatly improve the sheriff’s department’s ability to fight crime and ensure public safety. “It’s so simple in its design and the objectives, you just wonder why anyone would choose not to have it,” Montgomery County Chief Deputy Randy McDaniel recently told KPRC.
Residents in the cities that have been testing these UAVs have voiced concerns about invasion of privacy and the worry that a robot could be flying over their heads at any moment, watching them. Montgomery County officials counter that UAV’s would only be used in specific instances. Read more.

Drones in the Force

Lighter and cheaper than a helicopter and equipped with high tech features, these vehicles are increasingly on the want list of law enforcement officials. Though none of these drones are yet in active duty, police and sheriff’s departments – more than 300 according to the Federal Aviation Administration – are adding them to their cache of public safety tools.

Using grant money from the Department of Homeland Security, officials in Montgomery County, Texas, recently purchased a $300,000 remotely piloted helicopter known as aShadowHawk. With built-in video and still cameras and infrared and nightvision sensors, the unmanned aerial vehicle, or UAV, is anticipated to greatly improve the sheriff’s department’s ability to fight crime and ensure public safety. “It’s so simple in its design and the objectives, you just wonder why anyone would choose not to have it,” Montgomery County Chief Deputy Randy McDaniel recently told KPRC.

Residents in the cities that have been testing these UAVs have voiced concerns about invasion of privacy and the worry that a robot could be flying over their heads at any moment, watching them. Montgomery County officials counter that UAV’s would only be used in specific instances. Read more.

11:10am
  
Filed under: national technology politics 
  1. mil-spec reblogged this from otakugangsta
  2. kinghellkiller reblogged this from otakugangsta
  3. mindsize reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    Damnit Montgomery County
  4. otakugangsta reblogged this from theatlantic
  5. defnewsdump reblogged this from theatlantic
  6. cityaslab reblogged this from theatlantic
  7. starmichael reblogged this from theatlantic
  8. acmesalesrep reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    Isn’t “used only in specific instances” law-enforcement-speak for “used whenever we feel like it, whether we have legal...
  9. absurdlakefront said: "Used only in specific instances" is one of the most abused and false phrases that emerges from nearly every law enforcement press release.
  10. attacktics reblogged this from michigrim
  11. georgefant reblogged this from theatlantic
  12. michigrim reblogged this from theatlantic
  13. theatlantic posted this