Military UAVs used over US on non-military missions

A report has been put together under FOIA that on 20 occasions between 2006 and 2015 the US military used UAVs for non-military missions over the US. Nine of those were granted. The missions included search and rescue, flood relief, and National Guard training.

One of the denied missions was from an unnamed mayor who wanted the Marines to use UAVs to find all the potholes in the city.

In 2006 the Pentagon established rules that all use of UAVs over the US on non military missions must be approved by either the Secretary for Defense or someone delegated by them, and the mission can't be to collect data on US citizens, unless allowed under the law and approved by the SecDef.


www.usatoday.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

nice to hear there is some sensible thinking behind the use. Hopefully it will be followed.

Gotta give the mayor credit for thinking out of the box though on the potholes.

a reply to: roadgravel

I laughed when I read that one. Great idea though, I agree.

a reply to: roadgravel

I was actually thinking that it should be cheaper for the dang Mayor to drive around himself than use one, wouldn't it? (I really don't know, just seems it would be expensive)

a reply to: chiefsmom

It would be. Good training for the Marines though, but yeah, driving around would be a lot cheaper.

Shortly before the inspector general report was completed a year ago, the Pentagon issued a new policy governing the use of spy drones. It requires the defense secretary to approve all domestic spy drone operations. It says that unless permitted by law and approved by the secretary, drones "may not conduct surveillance on U.S. persons." It also bans the use of armed drones over the United States for anything other than training and testing.

Does this paragraph bother anyone else? I don't speak "government", but isn't it basically saying 1 person is making the rules here? At least for the unarmed drones?
I don't know, I've read it like 10 times and it just seems weirdly written.

a reply to: chiefsmom

No. The mission has to:

1. Fall within already written US law.

The police can't call the military up and ask them to follow someone around for them because they think he kidnapped someone.

2. Must be approved by the Secretary of Defense.

SecDef will get the request, with all the appropriate documentation, after the unit determines it is legal, and will go through the JAG to determine the legal aspects of the request, and make sure the unit was correct, and then approve or deny the request.

a reply to: Zaphod58

A report has been put together under FOIA that on 20 occasions between 2006 and 2015 the US military used UAVs for non-military missions over the US.

20?!

You may owe me a laptop as I spewed Irish coffee all over my keyboard and monitor...

Great post BTW. "McPaper" jokes aside, USA Today is a much better source for "real" info than most people realize.

On a side note - how are you Zaph? Must be awkward at times separating the moderator hat from the poster/contributor hat. You seem to be handling it very well - kudos!

a reply to: Riffrafter

Nine of them were support of local authorities or National Guard, such as search and rescue. The rest were probably something similar.

I like it. It's a lot less idiotic than others, and usually less biased when it comes to stories like this.

Thanks. It has its days. Heh.

We all know how good the government is at following their own rules.
Next we'll find out the drones were armed while on the Dorner Manhunt.
I expect the worst from our government and they rarely, if ever, let me down.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Well those uses seem innocent enough. The article indicates that there was a protocol in place to make sure the use of military drones was legal and authorized at a very high level.

However, for civilian use, I doubt this will be necessary much longer. I believe that quite a few civilian agencies are getting their own drones now. As that usage increases there won't be a need for the US military, with its tight controls, to be involved.

I think that's the scary part. What happens when the local PD starts flying their drones around looking for wrong-doers? Such technology will make it a lot easier to catch all those evil jaywalkers and people peeing in their backyards.

-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

The biggest UAVs, such as the Predator, will go to government agencies such as Customs, and DHS. The PDs will have tactical UAVs, which is scary enough, but at least they, as of now, have access to larger platforms.