draganfly.jpg
Seattle Police will begin testing an unmanned aircraft similar to this one, but insists the drone won't be used to violate any privacy rights. (image courtesy Draganfly Innovations Inc.)

SPD insists drones won't be used for spying

BY Josh Kerns  on April 24, 2012 @ 12:18 pm (Updated: 2:11 pm - 4/24/12 )

The Seattle Police Department insists it won't be using new remote controlled aircraft to spy on people, despite concerns raised by the ACLU.

"The idea that this is going to be used to infringe on people's privacy, that is simply not the case," says Sgt. Sean Whitcomb.

The ACLU raised red flags about the drones after it was reported last week the SPD would be deploying several unmanned aircraft thanks to a grant funded by the Urban Areas Security initiative.

But Whitcomb says the department is working with the FAA and developing "appropriate policies."

Whitcomb says the drones will be used for situations like crime scene photography, missing person searches, and barricaded person scenarios.

"What is consistent here is that these are very static scenarios. You're not going to see the drone going from one end of downtown to the next following a police pursuit," Whitcomb says.

The drones will be limited to 400 feet in altitude and must remain in sight of the operator, much like a remote control toy airplane frequently seen at local parks.

"The idea is that it is very similar to the bomb robot that we have. It's just a remote control device this one happens to be aerial," Whitcomb says.

Whitcomb says the drones will inexpensively help with public safety and improve crime scene investigations. Currently, officers have to rent King County's Guardian One helicopter or even climb ladders or borrow a fire truck in order to get an aerial view.

Josh Kerns, MyNorthwest.com Reporter
Josh Kerns is co-host of KIRO Radio's Seattle Sounds (Saturday nights 7-8) and a digital content producer for MyNorthwest.com.
More Local News
Top Stories
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (42)


  • Add A Comment

  • SeattleNative wrote...
    And I'll tell you what, chrisallen, X, HPD, et. al.
    April 25, 2012 8:30 am
    How about giving us your addresses, so we can all peak over your fences? You would have no problem with that, right?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • b1202 wrote...
    Where does it stop?
    April 25, 2012 8:41 am
    I understand the need to use these during a criminal investigation. They will be good for tracking a fleeing suspect...but where does it stop? Traffic cams, cell-phone tracking, TSA in our airports and highways, see something/say something, it just keeps going on and on. Im not paranoid, Im just awake... www.infowars.com
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • DesertRez wrote...
    On the plus side,
    April 25, 2012 9:40 am
    maybe they can use these to bust wanted fugitives OUTSIDE instead of SWAT raiding a house and shooting the suspect dead because he heard a noise and grabbed his weapon, like most of us would. The armored personnel carriers and millitary police bug me more than an RC helicopter. http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/16/marine-survives-two-tours-in-i
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Weiser Postban wrote...
    I didn't realize we had some much money! :)
    April 25, 2012 10:40 am
    Next time I hear tax raises or cuts to "vital services" (lol) Make sure to bring these toys to those meetings...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • b1202 wrote...
    We dont have money
    April 25, 2012 10:50 am
    FEMA is giving the SPD a grant for these. Which raises a whole set of new concerns. Why does FEMA in the surveillance business? seriously - www.infowars.com
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    what part of FEDERAL EMERGENCY
    April 25, 2012 11:38 am
    confuses you ? Just relax - it is just preparation for in case Beacon Hill floods or they need to find parking places for all their FEMA trailers. Nothing to see here. Big BroXXX (scratch) your friends are watching to protect you.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Tomain wrote...
    What can these do that a person can not do currently
    April 25, 2012 11:06 am
    If you look a Google Earth, there is a snapshot of you entire property. I can use a camera and stand in an alley or on a sidewalk or from an elevated position and legally view what is on the other side of a fence. As long as the camera never crosses a property line, it is perfectly legal and has been for years. My concern is who is going to be paying for these remote controlled mobile cameras? It will not be cheap.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • TheDefectiveNorwegian wrote...
    The thing I can't get over is,
    April 25, 2012 11:14 am
    where in the he11 are they getting the money for this. Isn't the state broke???
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • DesertRez wrote...
    4 Billion
    April 25, 2012 1:57 pm
    Federal debt per day my friend
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }