""I am not sure why Utah believes it has the authority to allow local law enforcement to ‘neutralize’ a technology, which the FAA characterizes as an aircraft, out of the sky," Ryan Calo, a law professor at the University of Washington, told Ars. "Could they shoot down a remotely piloted Cessna?"
Beyond the safety issue, Calo also pointed to a possible First Amendment concern.
"Moreover, I am worried that the ability to take down drones—for instance, operated by the press—constitutes a threat to free speech. In many jurisdictions, courts have interpreted the First Amendment to protect the right to record the police and other officials," he added. "Could an officer ‘neutralize’ your camera? Why?""
- Date Published:03/03/2016
- Original Publication:Ars Technica