Drone-Limiting Bill Overwhelmingly Approved by California Assembly
The California Assembly voted this week to place restrictions on the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), or drones. The bill, AB-1327, passed on Wednesday with overwhelming bipartisan support. The state's official legislative website reports that the bill passed 63-6. It will now move on to a state senate for consideration.
Authored by assemblymen Jeff Gorell (R-Camarillo), Steven Bradford (D-Gardena) and Bill Quirk (D-Hayward), AB-1327 would require police to obtain a warrant based on probable cause before operating a drone or contracting others to do so. Though, it does make an exception for unwarranted use for "emergency situations if there is an imminent threat to life" and the inspection of state parks. The bill would also require that any footage or data be destroyed within six months of collection, as well as prohibit drones from being weaponized.
Gorell rejected the idea of a moratorium on UAVs like the one in Virginia. He clarified to the Los Angeles Times, "I don't think that's the right answer here. The right answer, frankly, is for us to embrace the new technology because it is the future." Additionally, he told Reuters that he believes that California stands to benefit from the development of commercial drone use.
Nevertheless, Gorell, a former Navy Reserve commander, is knowledgeable and cautious about their capabilities, such as thermal imaging. As the Electronic Frontier Foundation has previously warned, this technology provides law enforcement with a means to conduct unwarranted searches of homes.
The Tenth Amendment Center's Michael Maharrey explains the significance of state-based limitations on drones:
We know that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is using grant money to get drones in the hands of local law enforcement… DHS and other federal agencies will never need to fly a single drone if they can just get all the states doing it for them. Once they're in the air, they'll simply point to information-sharing provisions of the PATRIOT Act or other federal acts and have a network of spies everywhere… By passing state laws to restrict drone use, we can stop this nightmare before it ever takes off.
California isn't the only state crafting legislation to limit the use of drones. Iowa, Indiana, Georgia, and Wisconsin are among states currently considering drone-related legislation. In 2013, 13 states adopted new laws about drones.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Man, the terrorists keep winning.
The state’s official legislative website reports that the bill passed 63-6.
One of the ‘noes’ was from Tim Donnelly, who’s been touted to me by some YAL friends of mine as the best liberty-candidate in the forlorn GOP field for governor.
So much for that.
I haven’t read any of the linked stories, so I’m not clear on the full terms and conditions. Depending on the full wording of the law, I might have voted no.
There’s a burgeoning industry of high-quality radio-controlled aircraft which could be used by individuals for purposes of cinematography.
Is this really about weddings being bombed in Pakistan, or is this a spasm by local jurisdictions to show they’re not happy with what’s going on with foreign policy?
From this article, it sounds like this bill is focused on use of drones by law enforcement. I don’t know if other sections restricted private use.
best liberty-candidate in the forlorn GOP field for governor.
So tallest midget?
How does this bill affect the use of taco-drones, which could have weaponized flavor?!
Is it just me or is this underwhelming.
Though, it does make an exception for unwarranted use for “emergency situations if there is an imminent threat to life”…
You know what’s an imminent threat to life? Drugs.
Smacks of “compelling government interest”.
Not much help to liberty then, as the fat blue wall has demonstrated that everyone and everything everywhere is an imminent threat to the lives of our cravenly LEOs.
I dunno dude the whole thing sounds kinda scary to me dude.
http://www.AnonStuffz.tk
soo..
I am thinking Amazon will not be delivering any books via drone in California anytime soon.