Benjamin Franklin once said,  “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” This debate over civil rights and privacy was recently sparked by the Seattle Police Department’s decision to implement drones in order to survey public streets and alleys.

Although many see a future in technological security and surveillance techniques, citizens feel that the unmanned drones too closely resemble those used in Pakistan and Yemen.  Images of police officers and security guards misusing their privileges and invading people’s privacy raises much warranted concern from Seattle residents.  There is no way to guarantee that the drones’ cameras would not transgress into people’s houses and yards.

In addition to potential privacy infringements, the drones would be an expensive surveillance technique.  According to http://www.reuters.com, “The drones could only remain aloft for 15 minutes before running out of battery and cost anywhere from $10,000 to $20,000 for a small system”.  This is not an efficient way to spend money, and with only fifteen minutes of flight time, the drones will not be able to cover more than a few miles of city.

Despite Seattle’s recent decision to terminate the program, police departments in Miami and Houston have begun to show interest in the technology.  In an interview with Click2 Houston news, county sheriff Tommy Gage explained how the drones “could be used in hunting criminals who are running from police or assessing a scene where SWAT team officers are facing an active shooter”.  Despite the irrefutable potential for the drones in such situations, their immense cost would outweigh the benefits.

Rather than drones which have yet to prove themselves applicable in civilian society, the Seattle PD and other perspective advocates of the drones should place security cameras in major streets and alleys instead to ensure safety, while also guaranteeing that the cameras only remain focused where they are wanted.