Thursday, January 17, 2013

Florida Senate Bill Bans Drones From Spying on Citizens

Wiki image
Activist Post

The Criminal Justice Committee of the Florida Senate voted unanimously to move a bill forward that seeks to ban the police from using drones to spy on citizens.

The summary of the bill (SB 92) titled Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act is as follows:
Searches and Seizures; Citing this act as the 'Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act'; prohibiting a law enforcement agency from using a drone to gather evidence or other information; authorizing an aggrieved party to initiate a civil action in order to prevent or remedy a violation of the act; prohibiting a law enforcement agency from using in any court of law in this state evidence obtained or collected in violation of the act, etc. (Source)
The bill originally prohibited police from using drones at all, but some concessions were made to accommodate law enforcement.

According to the Associated Press:
The panel amended the bill to make exceptions to the ban for search warrants signed by judges and for certain emergencies such as fires and hostage situations. 
The bill also includes an exception for terrorism-related searches.

The use of drones for terror-related searches will be at the discretion of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security:
EXCEPTIONS - This act does not prohibit the use of a drone to counter a high risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the United States Secretary of Homeland Security determines that credible intelligence indicates that there is such a risk. (Source)
The Act strictly prohibits the use of any evidence gained through drone surveillance, thus taking away some of the motivation for their use.  Additionally, the Act allows for citizens to seek civil action against law enforcement should a drone be wrongly used against them.

The bill still must go through a general vote in the Senate before becoming law.

Read other articles by Activist Post Here


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

Wow, Florida is close to actually being a good place to live for exactly one thing.

Anonymous said...

I hope it passes. Crazy we even have to create laws to stop Drones.

Anonymous said...

The vile snakes who run your government and your media sure are good at manipulating you.

The debate should be, and should have been from day one, whether to ALLOW drones in the USA or to BAN them.

The manipulative dogs who frame the debate in order to control it, offer up an entirely different debate, or several:

Armed drones or not?
Spy drones or not?
Military controlled or police controlled?
Special events, or all year round?

Those ENTIRELY FALSE AND MANUFACTURED debates about drone use replace the most important one, and in effect get us to roll over and accept the thing edge of the wedge.
Media who continually cooperate and play along with these false debates and avoid the real question, get a big fail for integrity.

Anonymous said...

The CIA probably wants to make sure all that cocaine can come in safely.

Anonymous said...

I really 'love' the part about making exceptions for 'terrorism-related searches'. And they conveniently leave the classification of those searches up to the DHS.

The DHS is corrupt to it's core because of the new privileges it has under the NDAA. All it has to do is claim that someone is involved with terrorism without providing any proof of that.

One more victory for our banking-controlled government if this bill becomes law.

Brendan R

Ian said...

Shoot the things out of the sky. Target practice for the bigger problem to come

Anonymous said...

The term terrorist is now so broadly interprated especially by the DHS that almost anything the government does not like can be labeled as such.

Should the people assemble for a protest, the government can call it terrorism, and use the drones, not only for survailence, but as weapons.

Some people may want to trust the government to do the right thing, but I do not.

Anonymous said...

I agree. Leaving the loophole for terrorism totally undermines the intent of the bill, because anything can be called terrorist if the banking elite who control the government don't like it.

Post a Comment