The Atlantic came out with an article yesterday about a man who refused to stop "drone-spying" on a woman in Seattle. "The man insisted that it is legal for him to fly an aerial drone over our yard and adjacent to our windows. He noted that the drone has a camera, which transmits images he viewed through a set of glasses. He purported to be doing "research". We are extremely concerned, as he could very easily be a criminal who plans to break into our house or a peeping-tom."
Our current laws state "'the air is a public highway,' the Supreme Court declared in 1946.". This appears to put some skepticism to the current laws, as a man could easily use a drone to violate others rights. It is important that the Supreme Court handle this with the utmost of care, as all future drone cases will most likely refer to the impending case. The future carries with it new interpretations of laws, and we must adapt our way of living to our new standard of living.
How can people lend credence to the idea of not using spy drones to break the law?
To view more daily Critical Thinking click to subscribe.