Rand Paul and the Drones

Important Update!

On April 23, 2013, Rand Paul clarified his stance on the use of aerial drones against US citizens:

"I've never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on," Paul said. "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash. I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him." Foreign Policy

And how did that song go? Oh yeah: 

"And another one bites the dust! Yeah, another one bites the dust!"

On June 12, 2012 US Senator Rand Paul introduced a bill that would require law enforcement agencies to obtain warrants before they could legally dispatch a "drone" that could be used for surveillance.

Warrants for Drones

Good for him!

Unless you've been living in a cave for the past decade, you are familiar with how aerial drones are being used in Afghanistan, etc. to combat terrorism. Of course it is a great idea to enslave technology in the pursuit of saving the lives of our American military men and women. A week has not gone by in the last ten years where a new blurb about an aerial drone sending a terrorist or two to their eternal dirt-nap has not entered the Interwebz. And this is a good thing!

But should your local sheriff be allowed to dispatch a drone to "spy" on a suspected meth lab manager without the procurement of a warrant?

I don't think so.

Warrants are still required for wiretaps and for placing GPS gadgets on suspect's vehicles. And this is a good thing!

So, even though I have not been much of a fan of the libertarians Rand Paul or his father, Ron Paul, I have to agree with the Senator from Kentucky on this issue.

So...

"Hey there, Sheriff Brown! Want to send up an unmanned remote-controlled helicopter to investigate what Bubba and his buddies are doing out there in the woods?" 

"Get a warrant first!"