"The Department was to gain
community input when they were ready to proceed. To the best of my knowledge
that has not occurred as of yet." by Shawn Musgrave. October 1, 2015, edited by JPat Brown
Police in Los Angeles are playing
the long game when it comes to drones. More than a year after the Los Angeles
Police Department received two unmanned aerial vehicles, the units remain under
lock and key awaiting clear policies on how they’ll be used in operations.
As we reported last year, the LAPD scored two small hexacopter drones as part of a
deal with Seattle Police Department in June 2014. Seattle’s mayor ordered the
drones boxed up in February 2013 following public backlash over a shady acquisition process, but Seattle police were unable to get rid of them for more than a year. Seattle offered the drones for free
to interested law enforcement agencies, and LAPD gladly accepted.
This made the LAPD the largest
municipal police department in the country known to possess unmanned aerial
vehicles. The police department in Los Angeles is third in size to Chicago,
which said it has no drones,
and the NYPD, which has been less than willing to share info about its flirtations with unmanned technology.
The LAPD, meanwhile, has tread
carefully. In a June 2014 press release, the department made clear that the two Draganflyers would
not be used until the Board of Police Commissioners solicited public input and
completed a review regarding usage guidelines for the new equipment.
“The review would only consider
narrow and prescribed uses to prevent imminent bodily harm, for example, a
hostage situation or barricaded armed suspect,” the press release continued. In September 2014, the LAPD announced
that it had transferred possession of the two drones to the department’s
inspector general pending further review.
"These two vehicles will be
secured in my offices, and I will not release them to anyone, including the
LAPD, until and unless the Commission authorizes their release,” Inspector
General Alexander Bustamante stated. “In the meantime, these two [unmanned
aerial vehicles] will not be used or operated in any manner."
At the time, LAPD officials
anticipated that the department would have policies and protocols and protocols
drafted in approximately six months. A year later, it seems no progress has
been made toward deployment of these two drones.
Emails and meeting notes released by
LAPD allow insight into initial outreach that the police chief made to civil
liberties organizations.
In late
June 2014, Deputy Chief Michael Downing, who heads LAPD’s Counter-Terrorism
& Special Operations Bureau, called a meeting with a number of privacy
advocates and policy experts. Participants included representatives from the
ACLU of Southern California, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, and other
lawyers specializing in police surveillance and privacy.
Privacy
advocates pressed the LAPD to articulate clearly the specific purposes for
which drones would deployed, as well as protocols to protect civilians’
privacy. Per the notes, Elizabeth Joh of the UC Davis School of Law emphasized
the need for rigorous accountability mechanisms, and not only for present uses.
As potential uses expand, transparency provisions must keep pace, she told LAPD
officials.
Matt
Kellegrew of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee characterized the association
of drones with targeted assassinations overseas as “one of the biggest
obstacles regarding UAVs.”
Another
email shows that Deputy Chief Downing scheduled a subsequent meeting in
September 2014 to discuss the issue. Beyond that, it does not appear that
police in Los Angeles have made any moves toward deploying drones.
Granted,
California has been one of the testing grounds for legislation to rein in law
enforcement drones. In September 2014, a bill passed the state
legislature that would
have required police to get a warrant before using drones to collect images,
footage or data.
The
mayor of Los Angeles reportedly supported
the bill, but Governor
Jerry Brown vetoed the proposal, saying that the warrant requirement was poorly
crafted.
"There
are undoubtedly circumstances where a warrant is appropriate,” the governor
wrote in a statement justifying the veto. “The bill's
exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements
beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions
in the California Constitution."
A
similar bill was submitted this year to the California senate,
with exceptions to the warrant requirement for emergency circumstances and
written consent of the property holder.
In
October 2014, the LA city council voted for the LAPD and the city attorney to draft
guidelines for the operation of drones within city limits. But officials
indicate that such guidelines have not been completed, nor has there been
further progress on operation of the LAPD’s own drones.
“I
can tell you that nothing has come to the Commission from the Department
relative to the deployment of the UAVs,” says Richard Tefank, executive
director of LAPD’s Board of Police Commissioners. “The Department was to gain
community input when they were ready to proceed. To the best of my knowledge
that has not occurred as of yet.”
Peter
Bibring of the ACLU of Southern California said that he had heard “not a peep”
from LAPD on drafting a drone deployment policy since conversations last year.
A spokesperson for LAPD confirmed that “there are no updates regarding policy
on drones.”
Other
police departments across the country complain of being stymied by federal
rules on where their drones can fly, or barred from buying unmanned vehicles by municipal ordinance. The LAPD, on the other hand, having
already obtained two drones for nothing, has chosen not to enter the fray for now.
Comments
Dunwoody
GA Police Chief just bought a drone for $9,000. He also testified in favor of
“no-knock warrants”.
Norb
Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment