鈥淭HE first guy who uses a weapon to bring down a drone that鈥檚 hovering over his house is going to become a folk hero in this country.鈥� So said commentator Charles Krauthammer , after the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said that drones will soon be licensed for law enforcement and commercial surveillance work.
Krauthammer鈥檚 words seem to have captured the mood of a nation. Privacy fears are sparking a backlash against the use of drones in civilian airspace.
Seattle鈥檚 police force was forced to last month, following anger from residents. Meanwhile, Virginia has a two-year moratorium on the use of drones by police and at least 13 other states are now deliberating similar anti-drone legislation.
Advertisement
But some privacy advocates have gone beyond lobbying their local councillor. Online discussion groups have sprung up about what kind of drone countermeasures could prevent privacy invasion from the air. Their ideas range from the absurd 鈥� wearing or using stunt kites to tangle their rotors 鈥� to the more plausible 鈥� jamming or shooting the drones out of the sky.
The FAA鈥檚 announcement on 14 February that it is pressing ahead with the opening of six test centres for civilian drones will only have reinforced such sentiments. After Krauthammer鈥檚 comments, pro-gun shock jock Alex Jones on his website, , which shows him visiting a sprawling Texas ranch to with assault rifles.
Steve Hindi of Geneva, Illinois, who runs an animal rights charity, has first-hand experience of what happens when those being watched by a drone decide to do something about it. He uses eight-rotor drones, which cost about $8000 each, to expose a in which birds are ejected from a box on the ground and shot with a shotgun. 鈥淲e鈥檝e had drones shot down鈥� losing one permanently, and twice more they were hit but made it back,鈥� Hindi says. He flies his drones beyond shotgun range but says the shooters are switching to rifles to 鈥淢ister Krauthammer is completely wrong. The shooters are like the people who wanted to ban the internet in case people learned something,鈥� he says. 鈥淭hey are not folk heroes. They are cowards.鈥�
So what happens next? A shake-up of the law is needed, says , head of drone trade body Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, based in Paris, France. He says small drones, like the $300 , sold as a toy, could become a real neighbourhood nuisance, provoking risky shoot-downs. 鈥淏ig Texas landowners now talk of firing shoulder-fired rockets at drones,鈥� he says. 鈥淭hey are in cloud cuckoo land.鈥�
聯Big Texas landowners now talk of firing shoulder-fired rockets at drones. They are in cloud cuckoo land聰
In May, the European Commission鈥檚 Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems panel, on which van Blyenburgh sits, will investigate if the rules that govern radio-controlled model aircraft can be enforced on users of 鈥渢oy鈥� drones. This could go some way towards addressing the concerns of privacy advocates, van Blyenburgh believes. 鈥淢odel planes cannot take a camera anywhere near to a house or garden,鈥� he says. 鈥淚f they do, the operator can鈥檛 get public liability insurance. That could apply to these toys, too.鈥�
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淒rone backlash begins鈥�
