Unmanned aerial systems: Consideration of the use of force for law enforcement applications

Abstract The contemplation of opening United States airspace to unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has raised no shortage of questions about their appropriate use. Many have raised concerns about their interaction with other aircraft and safety or that they may be used to conduct covert and potentially persistent surveillance on members of the public. UAV use in warfighting has demonstrated drones' technical capability for tactical use. The use of armed UAVs in United States territory has, in spite of this, received minimal consideration and a general government response that this would not be allowed to occur. This paper suggests that the use of armed UAVs by civilian authorities is appropriate and even desirable in certain circumstances. It considers rules of use for armed UAVs in the context of law enforcement and also discusses the additional considerations applicable to the use of autonomously controlled UAVs.

[1]  Geoffrey P. Alpert,et al.  A Management Tool for Evaluating Police Use of Force: An Application of the Force Factor , 2003 .

[2]  Karen Panetta,et al.  Facial recognition using human visual system algorithms for robotic and UAV platforms , 2013, 2013 IEEE Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA).

[3]  Susan Leigh Anderson,et al.  Asimov’s “three laws of robotics” and machine metaethics , 2008, AI & SOCIETY.

[4]  Chris Schlag,et al.  The New Privacy Battle: How the Expanding Use of Drones Continues to Erode Our Concept of Privacy and Privacy Rights , 2013 .

[5]  Armand Issam Awad An Analysis of the Risk from UAS Missions in the National Airspace , 2013 .

[6]  Justin Ready,et al.  The TASER as a Less Lethal Force Alternative , 2007 .

[7]  Geoffrey Christopher Rapp Unmanned Aerial Exposure: Civil Liability Concerns Arising from Domestic Law Enforcement Employment of Unmanned Aerial Systems , 2012 .

[8]  Kenneth Anderson The Case for Drones , 2013 .

[9]  R. John Hansman,et al.  An Integrated Approach to Evaluating Risk Mitigation Measures for UAV Operational Concepts in the NAS , 2005 .

[10]  Ronald Marsh,et al.  Wildlife@Home: Combining Crowd Sourcing and Volunteer Computing to Analyze Avian Nesting Video , 2013, 2013 IEEE 9th International Conference on e-Science.

[11]  Geoffrey P. Alpert,et al.  How Reasonable Is the Reasonable Man?: Police and Excessive Force , 1994 .

[12]  M. White,et al.  Controlling Police Decisions to Use Deadly Force: Reexamining the Importance of Administrative Policy , 2001 .

[13]  Chris Jenks,et al.  Law from Above: Unmanned Aerial Systems, Use of Force, and the Law of Armed Conflict , 2010 .

[14]  Molly McNab,et al.  Clarifying the Law Relating to Unmanned Drones and the Use of Force: The Relationships between Human Rights, Self-Defense, Armed Conflict, and International Humanitarian Law , 2011 .

[15]  Nicholas P. Lovrich,et al.  Conducted Energy Device Use in Municipal Policing: Results of a National Survey on Policy and Effectiveness Assessments , 2010 .

[16]  Tom Mieczkowski,et al.  Police Use of Force , 2006 .

[17]  Eugene A. Paoline,et al.  Examining Less Lethal Force Policy and the Force Continuum , 2013 .

[18]  Josh Harguess,et al.  Vegetation versus man-made object detection from imagery for unmanned vehicles in off-road environments , 2013, Defense, Security, and Sensing.

[19]  John M. MacDonald,et al.  Police use of force: examining the relationship between calls for service and the balance of police force and suspect resistance , 2003 .

[20]  J. L. R. Davis,et al.  The (common) law of man over (civilian) vehicles unmanned , 2011 .

[21]  Eugene A. Paoline,et al.  Police Education, Experience, and the Use of Force , 2007 .

[22]  Robin R. Murphy,et al.  Beyond Asimov: The Three Laws of Responsible Robotics , 2009, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[23]  Dae-Hoon Kwak,et al.  Examining police use of force: a smaller agency perspective , 2008 .