Milne 1

Jacob Milne
Irene J Peterson
English 1010
4 December 2015
Regulating Drones in the USA: The Controversy
Drone is a loose term used to define unmanned aircraft that can be controlled remotely.
The FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) would rather us define a hobby drone as a UAS (unmanned
aircraft system). This is due the massive amount of media coverage on the topic and the negative
connotation associated with the word drone used with weaponized military vehicles.
As the market for drones continues to flourish, the number of issues regarding public
policy and regulation also escalate. The usual user of a hobby drone is being portrayed as a
reckless and dangerous individual, capable of looking in to your windows, seeing your private
business and even listening in from miles away. The fear created from this potential threat is
great enough to cause a nationwide stir. Stories of drones in the US cause the public to scrutinize
their use, and to lobby for an attempt to regulate the airspace we had, until now, not even paid
any attention to.
The controversial issue contains roughly three perspectives on the regulation and legal
use of drones. The first is the idea that the use of drones should be roughly regulated and should
allow the commercial, and home user to fly without worry of fines or repercussion, yet
realistically be monitored and watched over for those who abuse the right to fly. This perspective
can be measured as the most pro-drone. Those that are part of this opinion generally fit in the
realm industries of agricultural technology, package delivery and photography.

Milne 2
In the middle of the argument, there are those who believe there can be no solid solution
to the problem, those in this view tend to focus on the consequential difficulty tied to finding
potentially harmful drone operators on the ground and executing laws on them, even if they were
made.
The third view discussed here will be fear. Fear of the potentially malicious factor around
drone use. Anyone can use them, and almost anyone can afford them. The most dangerous ideas
around drone use publicly is that the common man, has the ability to carry a weaponized
payload, or even, a firearm for long distances without the need to be in the same vicinity as the
device. Those who generally dont understand the capabilities of drones and overestimate the
impact that they have in their lives; and those who understand that in the right hands, a drone
could cause mass chaos and havoc, are a part of this view. These views and perspectives will
crash and collide even after the FAA establishes guidelines to enforce by law. Right now, the
whole of America is eyeing in on the decision that the FAA will make. What kind of regulation
is right for the use of drones in the USA?
According to Jacob Pramuk, in his article called Why Drone Regulation Is Such a Mess
Now, there is no easy way to regulate or even execute laws that could be made by the FAA.
Pramuk does well in fully describing, with well researched claims, why the FAA will have
trouble regulating the influx of drone use in the public and the great effects that the use of drones
will have on the commercial marketplace. His research lists industry leading companies that are
lobbying for use of the technology in their businesses. The author compares the benefits of use
with the already climbing number of close calls (CNBC) that have occurred around aircraft
and firefighting crews that could have led to massive damage to property and loss of life. A
conflict between regulative authorities exists right now between the FAA and the FCC (Federal

Milne 3
communications Commission). One being in charge of physical airspace and the other governing
radio transmissions and frequencies. Since drones physically occupy airspace and use radio
transmissions to do it, both administrations must agree. An interview conducted by Pramuk with
a government official brought to light the dangers of such a widely available device. If a drone
operated by a curious pilot makes its way in to the scene of a fire or catastrophic event where
service-men are operating, it immediately becomes an overhead hazard. This intrusion causes
jeopardy to the lives of people in need of rescue, and the firefighters that would save them. In
contrast to the darker side of drone use by the common people, the effects on our economy in
whole will be greatly influence by the flux of money spent towards this product. For example,
the economic effects are described by a study referencing an association called the Association
for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International. This entity is a very reliable source for relevant
information on the subject in question. The Association, quoted within an article written by John
Wisely stated that, Nationwide, the industry is expected to grow from about $2.2 billion in 2015
to more than $10 billion by 2025 including more than 100,000 jobs (Wisely). It essentially
means that there is no stopping this boom in economy, and that the rush to regulate is intensely
focused on the FAA to let this technology meet the forefront of growth (Wisely). More drones,
could lead to more problems.
In contrast to the problems caused to servicemen generally, described earlier, police
officers in Mississippi are waiting for the green light on their surveillance drone project. They
expect to use their equipment to scout out potentially heinous situations without risking human
life. This is what hopeful drone advocates are waiting for, the use of their favorite tech to protect
the innocent and the public.

Milne 4
Drone technology involves more than just those working to keep us safe, it effects the
lives of everyone. Privacy is a very controversial topic that invades the media relentlessly. Many
people hate the idea that big brother can, and will, watch their every move. Josh Dzieza, a
writer for Newsweek Magazine opens us up to an ancient lore that demonstrates the inherited
fear we have as a culture of a potential takeover. You can even go back to the Jewish story of
the golem for an example of a superhuman robot, built to defend the Prague ghetto that runs
amok (Dzieza). This kind of lore is matched with evidence spotted in popular media culture that
idealistically excites the public with terror. Dzieza points out the psychological effects of even
using the word drone. It has negative connotation in the eyes of the public already.
The title of an article headlining on one of the countrys top online news outlets outlines
the horror story that is churning in the public mind right now. In the article accompanied with
Alex Lockies research, An 18-year-old Mounted a Gun to a Drone and Fired Shots in the
Middle of the Woods, is a very straight to the point and objective view on a controversial 15
second video hosted on YouTube. This article is only a summation of the video with coverage
provided by the FAA. When interviewed by Lockie, Jim Peters, an FAA spokesman, said, "The
FAA will investigate the operation of an unmanned aircraft system in a Connecticut park to
determine if any Federal Aviation Regulations were violated (Lockie)." The short video featured
a small homemade quadcopter. A quadcopter is an aerial device that has four separate propellers
that provide a vertical lift. This type of drone is the most popular among enthusiasts. The device
had a handgun rigged to the center of the frame. During the course of the video the firearm was
fired remotely three times. The implications of such a feat led people to tie together their already
negative thoughts on drones with weaponized military drones. The regular hobbyist user, and the
potential business user are at risk for poor representation.

Milne 5
In Illegal Flights Persist Despite National Park Drone Ban, Page Blankenbuehler points
out the frustration in executing regulation in national parks. In Grand Teton, there have been 11
reports of drones flying within park boundaries, so far (up from six last year), and rangers have
issued four citations (Blankenbuehler). The rise of drone use contrasted with the difficulty in
finding perpetrators, is causing a colossal paradox in authority. The sheer amount of abusers is
escalating and the amount of citations is rising. The article states that a ban against the use of
drones inside of the park boundaries was instated in 2014. Content within the article also
validates the potentially detrimental effect that drone use can have on the public. National parks
temporarily banned drones in June 2014, when park officials began to worry that the devices
could crash into sensitive landmarks, disturb wildlife, and present safety risks and general
disturbance to visitors (Blankenbuehler). In this example, the use of drones can disturb sensitive
areas. The view expressed by authorities in the park is one of frustration. The difficulty is that
those accused, would be difficult to find since modern technology now is easily capable of
allowing the drones pilot to be miles away. This is another reason why many with an
understanding of the tech would fear for their privacy. If a drone cant be regulated well at a
national park, how could it possibly be regulated anywhere else? Authorities in Grand Teton are
of the opinion that there is really nothing that can be done, even if regulation was in place.
In conclusion, the way drones are used by the public, affects the privacy and safety of all
in the U.S. These now readily available devices can be used to spy on, stalk, and potentially kill
people. In contrast, they may boom the economy for good and allow for application in protecting
our country. What kind of common regulations, if there are any, should be enforced? Many side
with those that believe nothing can really be done. Perhaps this technology is uncontrollable.
Some feel hopeful that there can be a common regulation that works for all. Maybe there is hope

Milne 6
for this technology still. People also find that the hazards of drone use outweigh their benefits. It
could be that we are causing more mayhem than order. Whatever the perspective, the FAA will
determine the fate of this technological revolution, and ultimately, the safety of the American
people.

Milne 7
Works Cited
Pramuk, Jacob. "Why It's Hard for DC to Make Rules for Drones." Www.CNBC.com. CNBC
News, 2 Sept. 2015. Web. 21 Nov. 2015. <http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/why-its-sohard-for-dc-to-make-rules-for-drones.html>.

Blankenbuehler, Paige. "Illegal Flights Persist despite National Park Drone Ban." Hcn.org.
High Country News, 16 July 2015. Web. 08 Nov. 2015.
<http://www.hcn.org/articles/illegal-flights- persist-despite-national-park-drone-ban>.

Dzieza, Josh. "Why Drones Make Us Nervous." The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, 17
May 2013. Web. 08 Nov. 2015. <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/17/
why-drones-make-us-nervous.html>.

Lockie, Alex. "An 18-year-old Mounted a Gun to a Drone and Fired Shots in the Middle of the
Woods." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 22 July 2015. Web. 08 Nov. 2015.
http://www.businessinsider.com/an-18-year-old-mounted-a-gun-to-a-drone-and-firedshots-in-the-middle-of-the-woods-2015-7.

Pramuk, Jacob. "Why It's Hard for DC to Make Rules for Drones." Www.CNBC.com. CNBC
News, 2 Sept. 2015. Web. 21 Nov. 2015. <http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/why-its-sohard-for-dc-to-make-rules-for-drones.html>.

Milne 8
Wisely, John. "Drone Sales Rising and so Is the Controversy." Www.freep.com. Detroit Free
Press, 23 Nov. 2014. Web. 08 Nov. 2015. <http://www.freep.com/story/news/ local/
michigan/2014/11/23/drone-boom-fuels-controversy/19409069/>.