The Walnut Creek Police Department is considering the benefits, challenges & issues surrounding the use of drones.
They’re looking for community input on the Department’s use of drones in specific situations.
Take this brief survey to share your thoughts: http://ow.ly/HhEX50xSvft
It’s amazing how a resource can be ineffective then pray on your fears of its ineffectiveness so that people give up rights they would normally hold dear.
Nothing says safety like guard towers at Sunvalley and police drones flying all around like old East Berlin, right?
Yes- Drones with thermal imaging capabilities and missile launchers. Need to get the upper hand on these miscreants running amuck.
They don’t run amuck anymore,they are too lazy.They walk amuck now.
Using current technology so as not to put officers in certain risky situations is common sense. Off the shelf technology should be used, just like they use in other countries, so as not to spend stupid amounts of money on “custom” police branded products.
What kind of crime is happening in Walnut Creek to warrant the use of a drone?
Not just for crime: searching for lost people in Open Space, determining path of fires, searching for vehicles over cliff/off-road, etc., etc. Lots of usage other than just criminal activity and then there is criminal activity and if it was in your neighborhood or at your residence, you’d be very thankful for all the resources used to address the matter.
@ Mike
Exactly. There are so many important uses for the drone technology. And….no. Government is not out to spy on you. In fact, law enforcement, at least local law enforcement, is so paranoid about getting sued over civil rights issues, that they are very careful about how they use such equipment. I’m all for cameras, drones, or whatever new technology helps to put the worthless parasites among us into the cages where they belong!
@sign from above
Maybe look up what a stingray device is and how many are deployed that we know of. If you think the government isn’t interested in invading your privacy, then I have a bridge to sell you.
@ seriously
We’re talking drones here and Stingray is not a drone. Law enforcement is not using drones to “spy” on you.
These would make a very cost-effective and relatively quiet replacement for a helicopter during high-speed and suspect foot chases. All that aside even from offering law enforcement another tool for their own protection, much like robotics are used by the bomb squad.
Isn’t every city already doing this? They’re used to police fireworks use pretty often. The Consumer Electronics Show featured a drone security system for home use by Sunflower Labs, still pretty pricey for widespread use, but things like this will become mainstream, like doorbell cams. The home use drones patrol a geofenced area and return to docking stations to recharge.
Not just for crime: searching for lost people in Open Space, determining path of fires, searching for vehicles over cliff/off-road, etc., etc. Lots of usage other than just criminal activity and then there is criminal activity and if it was in your neighborhood or at your residence, you’d be very thankful for all the resources used to address the matter.
Why even entertain the public on this, they are going to do it anyway. As long as they don’t intend on violating civil rights and subverting our constitution go for it. Unfortunately I think we need more info such as their goals, their definition of unreasonable search and right to privacy for starters. As it is presented there is zero way to address this as the public.
“as long as they don’t intend” means that they can do whatever they want. Restrictions with severe sanctions for violating them might work.
I agree with Chuckie. Recall Ben Franklin said those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. This is one of those seemingly innocent first steps that can lead to less innocent behavior later. One should look at extremes to see what might happen and the possible consequences, and China is a good example with cameras and drones, face recognition tech and a surveillance state where citizens are given citizenship scores which impact where you work and can travel. If you believe the US government has not misbehaved in the past, then you have not read your history and should pick up a book once in a while. The list of reasons that the police give for their drones look fine (bombs, dangerous situations, rescue) until the last line of general investigation. Delete that and I would be more optimistic about it but that is a rather sinister phrase.
Fine. But understand for every advancement like this you give something up too. I don’t know exactly where the point of no return is, but we’ll blow right past it if I know us.
Valid point Atticus Thraxx. Government is always stretching their reach. That said, if they’re gonna use drones it should be limited to in-progress crimes or rescues. Not for surveillance unless there is an equivalent of a wire-tap warrant. And NEVER for routine patrol.
My only question is how do we tell the good drones from the bad drones? I’m sure there are both kinds.
Same way you differentiate between the good voices and the bad voices! Sorry, I couldn’t resist!
Drones are not used for patrol, so you won’t see them just flying around willy nilly. They’re usually used in conjunction with a major incident of some type. Since FAA regulations require them to only be flown in line of sight, there will usually be an officer somewhere in the vicinity.
The “if you have nothing to hide” argument is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard (and there’s some stiff competition for that title).
drones and license plate readers long long overdue in political liberal socialist walnut creek !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WCPD needs strong effective productive pro-active enforcement….. and leadership as well …….its a damn shame that ccc courts and DA can’t get on board as well !!
Agreement with my comments occurs if you sadly,have been a victim
Crime really pays these days
@ anon a very common attitude, and a very unfortunate one. Our history is nothing if not a long story about people doing the RIGHT thing, and being harassed, intimidated, and persecuted for it by amoral and corrupt governments. Including the good ol’ USA government. About Walnut Creek I cannot say. Being a good neighbor and law abiding citizen has NEVER been a guarantee against governmental abuse. Checking a government’s natural tendency to grant itself unlimited power is a never ending project. It involves civic engagement, push back, and sometimes disobedience. It may or may not involve telling the police you don’t want their flying cameras buzzing around suburbia looking in people’s backyards.
Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.
They may be helpful in thwarting some crime and keeping officers safe. However in the courts they will bring challenges. People like John Burris will bring suit claiming the drones are only following black people etc. etc. With those challenges their effectiveness will be marginalized. Sad but true.
Put a drone over Burris 24/7
You can’t make important decisions like this through fear of scum rats like Burris. You need to do what’s right and deal with him when the issue comes up.
Outfitted with a turret mounted laser guided 50 caliber machine gun. I’m all for it!
Walnut Creek has humans who volunteer to look for humans. CERT and VIPS. But if they want to continue to take away volunteer opportunities then drones could do the searching.
Maybe robots will soon be running the police departments?
And WCPD doesn’t need drones for fire spotting, that would be the county Fire Department.
You misread my post. The race card is played in the legal system and marginalizes the effectiveness of law enforcement and their tools of the trade. And that affects public safety and finance. It has to be addressed.
If drones make less noise and are less expensive to operate than a helicopter, I say go for it. Sounds like this could reduce injuries and deaths from high-speed pursuit, and make it easier to locate subjects on foot.
I wouldn’t want to see drones flying overhead spying on people for no good reason, ‘monitoring’ law-abiding citizens. So, I’m OK with the proposal, with restrictions and severe sanctions for anyone violating this ‘policy’.
Sure – what could go wrong? After all, our beloved government has never been guilty of over reaching, right?
Drones are already being flown legally and responsibly by commercial and institutional users. My big worry would be that Walnut Creek PD will do what Concord proposed, hiring a consultant who charged outrageously high prices. I believe that a drone would be an excellent tool for WCPD and would be used properly. There are plenty of Federal, State and local laws regulating drones, but at the moment a way has not been found to control the hobbyist who is ignorant of those regulations.
BTW the main reason for the FAA endeavoring to control every inch of airspace is preparation for the use of unmanned cargo aircraft sharing that airspace with other users.
Yes. Go for it but don’t charge us xtra for an outside vendor.
Well, OK, but security measures are in place:
https://giphy.com/gifs/bT8NkbpDm1rR6GD7DK