“The feedback from the general public showed that 89 percent of those that responded supported the use of the UAS [unmanned aircraft system] platform for emergency or life-threatening situations,” according to a news release from the Sheriff’s Information Bureau.
The two-week online survey was conducted in early July and yielded 3,054 responses. Of those that responded, half were familiar with the UAS platform and the other half were unfamiliar with the program before learning about it through the survey, the news release states.
“Supportive comments from those surveyed included, ‘If it keeps people safe I’m all for it’ and ‘I feel it would allow the LASD [to] better assess how to help in a large variety of circumstances where human or helicopters are not available or able to safely assess needs or a dire situation,’” the sheriff’s news release states.
Eleven percent of the respondents did not approve of a sheriff drone, and cited concerns such as racial profiling and invasion of privacy, according to the sheriff’s department.
“Many of the concerns over issues such as personal privacy were addressed in the Department’s initial news conference and news release about the program… The system will only be used in a constitutionally and legally sound manner, and in compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations,” sheriff’s officials said in the news release. [View video from the initial news conference here.]
The unmanned aircraft system — a remote controlled unit with an on-board video camera — is assigned to the Special Enforcement Bureau, which comprises the Emergency Services, Special Enforcement, Arson/Explosives and HazMat details.
Sheriff Jim McDonnell announced the acquisition of the drone in January, saying the Federal Aviation Administration had also approved its use in hazardous materials incidents, disaster response, arson fires and with barricaded, armed suspects.
Since its acquisition, the sheriff’s drone has been used in five search and rescue operations and one incident involving an armed gunman, according to the sheriff’s department.
“We have always, from the very first day, wanted to be completely transparent,” stated Captain Ewell from the Sheriff’s Special Enforcement Bureau. “The UAS can be deployed quickly and provide close-up views of uncertain, isolated or hostile situations. This new tool will provide safety for deputy sheriffs and community members approaching the incident.”
According to the sheriff’s department, authorized missions for UAS rescue deployment include:
- Search and rescue missions
- Barricaded suspects
- Hostage situations
- High-risk tactical operations
- Hazardous material incidents
- Fire-related incidents.
The drone will not be used for random surveillance or and any other situation which would violate department policy or Fourth Amendment constitutional rights, sheriff’s officials said in the news release.
Previous related story:
LASD seeking public input on drone
Inspector general, civilian commission to review sheriff’s plan for drone
Activists ask county supervisors to ban use of drone by Sheriff’s Department
–
O. H. Please says
“The drone will not be used for random surveillance or and any other situation which would violate department policy or Fourth Amendment constitutional rights, sheriff’s officials said in the news release.”
if you believe ANYTHING the LASD says, I got some great swamp land in Florida to hook you up with…
Tim Scott says
If they’re gullible enough to believe what the LASD says you don’t need to go all the way to Florida. You could sell them swamp land in Pearblossom.
CW4-MVZ12a says
… bureaucratic egotism, duplication of effort, duplication of assets, a full-blown urban surveillance program already funded and well underway, for the better part of two decades DHS Fusion Centers monitor everything, our cell phone conversations, our on-line search queries, traffic signals and license plate scanners, and they routinely task satellites and stealth drones, into our neighborhoods. Community police nationwide, electronically tethered into their regional DHS Fusion Centers, LASD has no need surveillance drones, for search & rescue, or otherwise.
Anne says
… after their surveillance drones are surreptitiously funded, next on LASD’s wish list, in the interest of public safety: waterboarding –
Alby says
Them drones would serve more of a purpose delivering pizzas, etc.
Wendy says
… page one, straight out of the community police department playbook: Slap their “public safety” label, or their “search & rescue” label, on every new weapon they want funded –
Kevin says
Two decades, LASD long ceased being a community police department. Now a fully mechanized battalion outfitted stun grenades, chemical weapons, urban assault rifles, electronic eavesdropping gear, add surveillance drones to their arsenal, flush the rest of your Founding Fathers’ 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th amendment guarantee straight down the toilet.
Dr. Thomas says
… outside-looking-in, I see LASD as more indicative of an over-mechanized city-state militia, officers hopelessly isolated in a weird bureaucratic menagerie, who jockey amongst themselves, angling for elite, high status, over-specialized posts (e.g., SWAT; street-racing task-force; “the surveillance drone task force”). Once there, they cling to their elite, over-specialized police enclave, foisting up heavy resistance against regressing to perform rudimentary police functions. That none of them aspire to be rank-and file officers, those who are tend have really bad attitudes. Brazen, wanton disregard of our Founding Fathers’ constitution, these are not (NOT) people who could ever be entrusted surveillance drones –
Alby says
I guess my last comment didn’t show up due to some curse words. If the cops wanna fly their new toys around, it shouldn’t cost the taxpayers. It should come out of their lazy dirty fat @$$ wallets.
Laughing says
Just want to point out that if the money comes from their wallets it is still coming from tax payers. That is how they are paid.
Alby says
No duh sherlock. But it’s still their earnings for doing their job. If they want to venture into flying toys, they should pay from their earnings instead of having it issued to them just like their guns & ammo
Laughing says
Not sure if you meant they purchase their own side arms and ammo. They are provided with an approved sidearm and ammo, but have the option to purchase other sidearms from an approved list, partially funded with them making up the difference last time I checked.
Anyway, the drone is cheap, it does make the situation safer for all (officers, bystanders, victims, and criminals) and if anyone thinks they will be spied on perhaps they need to reevaluate what they are doing themselves, and/or realize the cops ignore most of the population just like politicians do.
Julia says
Funding has to come from somewhere. When police RADAR appeared in the 1970s, state police across the country had a hard-on for it. CHP had to have it, or die trying. So, they cooked up a marketing program, sold the idea to the policy community under the guise of “public safety,” while colluding with insurance conglomerates to fund it, clandestinely (e.g., “the Geico Gun”). If the policy community outfits LASD with surveillance drones, LASD has little choice, but monetize them. Your worst nightmare (e.g., fully armed RADAR & laser equipped surveillance drones), the only way LASD can break even on surveillance drones will be, traffic ticket revenue.
Brian says
what LASD will inevitably take aim at with these surveillance drones will be, (1) peeking into your bedrooms for a closer look at your mothers, wives and daughters, and (2) traffic ticket revenue
Edgar says
… theory of bureaucratic behavior, a bureaucracy is fundamentally incapable of altruism, at the expense of its status, power and prestige. A bureaucracy will seek strategic alliances, with other bureaucracies which serve to further insulate it, from oversight performed upon it by other bureaucracies encharged its constraint. Surveillance drones kills two bird with one stone, enhancing status, power and prestige of the LASD, while serving to better enable it to insulate itself, from accountability. The LASD bureaucracy will never (NEVER) altruistically deploy its surveillance drones, at the expense its status, power and prestige
K.B says
This outcome is not scientific. The poll should have been properly conducted with random calling. I think they did an online poll so they would obtain the results they desired.
Charles says
…fallacy of composition, a classic, textbook example of a cooked survey, LASD colored their surveillance drone survey, under false pretense of “public safety” (e.g., if you’re not for surveillance drones, then you must be against public safety”; “if you’re not for police surveillance drones, then you are a criminal, or a terrorist”). LASD biased their survey –
Dennis says
I never saw any survey but I did see the drones flying around over east Palmdale on the 4th of July with zero positive outcome. The idiots in my area were still setting off tons of illeagal fireworks and one landed on my roof! Even having the drone up for several hours no sherrifs cars ever came around. Waste!!! Although for fires or search and rescue they could be a great asset!
alex says
Completely transparent! You mean completely opaque, don’t you?
Turd Ferguson says
A drone would be better than LEAPS.A drone would be better than LEAPS.LEAPS costs $90,000.00 a month.LEAPS costs $90,000.00 a month.For ten years.For ten years.That is $10,800,000.00.That is $10,800,000.00.Of taxpayer money.Of taxpayer money.That goes to Rex’s political contributor.That goes to Rex’s political contributor.LEAPS is worthless.LEAPS is worthless.A drone is much cheaper.A drone is much cheaper.Better use of tax dollars.Better use of tax dollars.Use the savings more a homeless shelter.Use the savings for a homeless shelter.Quit giving money to Rex’s political contributor.Quit giving money to Rex’s political contributor.No to LEAPS.No to LEAPS.Yes to drones.Yes to drones.Yes to homeless shelter with LEAPS money.Yes to homeless shelter with LEAPS money.No to LEAPS.No to LEAPS.
Regan says
… ah! Here we go again, the crooks and scoundrels at the LASD, cooking the books on another public survey!
Tim Scott says
Yeah. The “half of the respondents” that were “familiar with the drone” no doubt work for the sheriff’s department. It’s like when the Valley Press did a survey about the CHP and the Public Affairs office issued a copy of their press release to every cop in the shop and encouraged them to “participate.”
Laughing says
I support the use of drones by the LASD. Hopefully they keep it locked down as promised. If not there are ways to prevent privacy invasion.
Tim Scott says
What we need are drones MONITORING the LASD and producing footage outside of their control.
Free says
Especially here in Lancaster, Tim Scott. Rex uses the LASD like his personal police force, following people, guarding him, and so on.
Tim Scott says
To be fair, if Wrecks weren’t well guarded every time he comes to Lancaster we would end up with a real mess on our hands, and we don’t need that.